Tracts on Liberty by the Levellers and their Critics Vol. 1 (1638-1643) (2nd ed)
Tracts on Liberty by the Levellers and their Critics, Volume 1 (1638–1643)
(2nd. revised and enlarged Edition)
[Note: This is a work in progress]
Revised: 25 May, 2018.
In vol. 1 (1638-43) there are 42 titles (36 corrected):
- 11 from the 1st edition all of which have been corrected
- 11 titles which appear elsewhere on the OLL and have been corrected but need rechecking
- 20 additional titles of which 14 have been corrected
Note: As corrections are made to the files, they will be made here first (the “Pages” section of the OLL </pages/leveller-tracts-summary>)) and then when completed the entire volume will be added to the main OLL collection (the “Titles” section of the OLL) </titles/2595>.
- Tracts which have not yet been corrected are indicated [UNCORRECTED] and the illegible words are marked as &illegible;. Some tracts have hundreds of illegible words and characters.
- As they are corrected against the facsimile version we indicate it with the date [CORRECTED - 03.03.16]. Where the text cannot be deciphered it is marked [Editor: illegible word].
- When a tract is composed of separate parts we indicate this where possible in the Table of Contents.
For more information see:
- Summary of the Leveller Tracts Project </pages/leveller-tracts-summary>
- The Complete Table of Contents </pages/leveller-tracts-table-of-contents>
Table of Contents
-
Introductory Matter (to be added later)
- Introduction to the Series
- Publishing and Biographical Information
- Copyright and Fair Use Statement
-
Editorial Matter (to be added later)
- Editor’s Introduction to Volume 1 (1638-1643)
- Chronology of Key Events
- Tracts in Volume 1 (1638-1643)
- [CORRECTED - July 2014 - 5 illegibles] T.2 [1638.??] (1.2) John Liburne, A Light for the Ignorant (1638).
- [CORRECTED - Sept. 2014 - 2 illegibles]T.3 [1638.??] (1.3) John Liburne, A Worke of the Beast (1638).
- The Publisher to the Reader
- A WORKE OF THE BEAST, OR A Relation of a most unchristian Censure, executed vpon IOHN LILBVRNE
- Lilburne’s poem "I Doe not feare the face nor power of any mortall man"
- [CORRECTED - Sept. 2014] T.1 [1638.03.12] (1.1) John Liburne, The Christian Mans Triall (12 March 1638, 2nd ed. December 1641).
- [CORRECTED - 06.01.16 - 10 illegibles] T.4 [1640.??] (8.1) John Selden, A Brief Discourse concerning the Power of the Peeres (1640).
- [CORRECTED - 04.02.16] T.282 [1640.11.3] (M1) Henry Parker, The Case of Shipmoney briefly discoursed (3 Nov. 1640)
- [CORRECTED - 18.12.15 - 5 illegibles] T.5 [1641.??] (10.1) [Richard Overton], A Dreame, or Newes from Hell (1641).
- [CORRECTED - 06.01.16 - 1 illegible] T.6 [1641.??] (8.2) John Davies, An Answer to those Printed Papers by the late Patentees of Salt (1641).
- [CORRECTED - 06.01.16]T.283 [1641.04.12] (M2) John Pym, The Speech or Declaration of John Pym (12 April, 1641)
- [CORRECTED - 03.03.16]T.7 [1641.05] (8.3) Anon., The Lamentable Complaints of Nick Froth the Tapster (May 1641). [INTRO - 03.07.16]
- [CORRECTED - 06.01.16] T.260 [1641.05] John Milton, Of Reformation Touching Church Discipline in England (May, 1641).
- [CORRECTED - 06.01.16] T.261 [1641.06] John Milton, Of Prelatical Episcopacy (June or July, 1641).
- [CORRECTED - 18.12.15 - 2 illegibles]T.8 [1641.06] (10.2) [Richard Overton or John Taylor], Old Newes newly Revived (June 1641).
- [CORRECTED - 06.01.16] T.262 [1641.07] John Milton, Animadversions upon The Remonstrants Defence against Smectymnuus (July, 1641).
- [CORRECTED - 18.12.15 - 2 illegibles ]T.9 [1641.08] (10.3) [Richard Overton], The Frogges of Egypt, or the Caterpillers of the Commonwealth (August, 1641).
- The Frogs of Egypt
- Poem: A Thanksfullness to God for his Mercy towards this KINGDOME
- [CORRECTED - Sept. 2014]T.10 [1641.09] (1.4) [William Walwyn], A New Petition of the Papists (September 1641).
- [UNCORRECTED - 31 illegibles] T.11 [1641.10] (8.4) Katherine Chidley, The Justification of the Independant Churches of Christ (October, 1641).
- [CORRECTED - Sept. 2014 - 10 illegibles]T.12 [1641.11] (1.5) Robert Greville, A Discourse opening the Nature of that Episcopacie (November 1641).
- [PREVIOUSLY CORRECTED - NEED TO RECHECK] T.263 [1642.01] John Milton, The Reason of Church-Government Urged against Prelaty (Jan. or Feb., 1642).
- [CORRECTED - 26 Jan. 2016 - 0 illegibles]T.13 [1642.01.06] (8.5). John Hare, The Marine Mercury (6 January, 1642).
- [PREVIOUSLY CORRECTED - NEED TO RECHECK] T.264 [1642.04] John Milton, An Apology against a Pamphlet (for Smectymnuus) (April, 1642).
- [CORRECTED - 26 Jan. 2016 - 0 illegibles] T.14 [1642.04.21] (8.6) Anon., A Question Answered (21 April, 1642).
- [RECHECKED - 26 Jan. 2016 - 0 illegibles]T.284 [1642.06.18] (M3) Charles I, His Majesties Answer to XIX Propositions made by both Houses of Parliament (18 June, 1642)
- [CORRECTED - 18.12.15 - 7 illegibles]T.15 [1642.07.02] (1.6) Henry Parker, Observations upon some of his Majesties late Answers and Expresses (2 July 1642).
- [PREVIOUSLY CORRECTED - RECHECKED 13.11.2017]T.285 [1642.08??] (M4) Henry Ferne, The Resolving of Conscience upon this Question (Autumn 1642)
- [CORRECTED - 15.11.2017 - 103 illegibles]T.16 [1642.09.30] (8.7) John Marsh, The Great Question concerning the Militia (30 September, 1642).
- [CORRECTED - 26.01.2018 - 21 illegibles]T.17 [1642.10.15] (8.8) Richard Ward, The Vindication of the Parliament (15 October, 1642).
- [CORRECTED - 17.02.15 - 9 illegibles]T.18 [1642.10.12] (1.7) John Goodwin, Anti-Cavalierism (21 October, 1642).
- [CORRECTED - 17.02.15]T.19 [1642.11.10] (1.8) [William Walwyn], Some Considerations Tending to the Undeceiving (10 November 1642).
- [UNCORRECTED - 110 illegibles] T.20 [1642.11.26] (8.9) Richard Ward, The Anatomy of Warre (26 November, 1642).
- [UNCORRECTED - 31 illegibles] T.21 [1642.12.06] (8.10) William Prynne, A Vindication of Psalme 105.15 (6 December, 1642).
- [PREVIOUSLY CORRECTED - NEED TO RECHECK] T.286 [1642.12.29] (M5) Charles Herle, A Fuller Answer to a Treatise written by Doctor Ferne (29 Dec. 1642)
- [UNCORRECTED - 6 illegibles] T.22 [1642.12.31] (8.11). Anon., The Privileges of the House of Commons (31 December, 1642).
- [CORRECTED - 21.01.16 - 8 illegibles] T.23 [1643.01.17] (8.12) John Norton, The Miseries of War (17 January, 1643).
- [CORRECTED - 21.01.16 - 3 illegibles] T.24 [1643.01.24] (8.13) Anon., The Actors Remonstrance (24 January, 1643).
- [CORRECTED - 21.01.16 - 31 illegibles] T.25 [1643.02.24] (8.14) Anon., Touching the Fundamentall Lawes of this Kingdome (24 February, 1643).
- [CORRECTED - 23.02.15 - 572 illegibles] T.26 [1643.04.15] (1.9) William Prynne, The Soveraigne Power of Parliaments and Kingdomes (15 April 1643).
- [UNCORRECTED - 1 illegible] T.27 [1643.05.19] (8.15) Anon., Briefe Collections out of Magna Charta (19 May, 1643).
- [UNCORRECTED - 42 illegibles] T.28 [1643.05.24] (8.16) Philip Hunton, A Treatise of Monarchy (24 May, 1643).
- [UNCORRECTED - 167 illegibles] T.29 [1643.06.14] (8.17) Anon., The Subject of Supremacie (14 June, 1643).
- [PREVIOUSLY CORRECTED - NEED TO RECHECK] T.265 [1643.08] John Milton, The Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce (August, 1643).
- [CORRECTED - 27.02.15] T.30 [1643.09.19] (1.10) [William Walwyn], The Power of Love (19 September 1643).
- [CORRECTED - 02.03.15 - 239 illegibles] T.31 [1643.10.07] (1.11) William Prynne, An Humble Remonstrance against The Tax of Ship-money (7 October 1643).
- To the Reader
- AN HUMBLE REMONSTRANCE To His MAJESTY AGAINST THE TAX OF SHIP-MONEY NOW IMPOSED
- THE OPENING OF The Great Seale OF ENGLAND
- The Kings and Parliaments Severall and joint Interests in, and power over the new-making, keeping, ordering of the Great Seale of England
- The Votes of the House of Commons, together with their reasons for the making of a new Great Seale of England, presented by them to the Lords at a Conference, Iuly 4. & 5. Anno 1643.
Introductory Matter↩
[Insert here]:
- intro image and quote
- Publishing History
- Introduction to the Series
- Publishing and Biographical Information
- Key to the Naming and Numbering of the Tracts
- Copyright and Fair Use Statement
- Further Reading and info
Key (revised 21 April 2016)↩
T.78 [1646.10.12] (3.18) Richard Overton, An Arrow against all Tyrants and Tyranny (12 October 1646).
Tract number; sorting ID number based on date of publication or acquisition by Thomason; volume number and location in 1st edition; author; abbreviated title; approximate date of publication according to Thomason.
- T = The unique “Tract number” in our collection.
- When the month of publication is not known it is indicated thus, 1638.??, and the item is placed at the top of the list for that year.
- If the author is not known but authorship is commonly attributed by scholars, it is indicated thus, [Lilburne].
- Some tracts are well known and are sometimes referred to by another name, such as [“The Petition of March”].
- For jointly written documents the authoriship is attributed to "Several Hands".
- Anon. means anonymous
- some tracts are made up of several separate parts which are indicated as sub-headings in the ToC
- The dating of some Tracts is uncertain because the Old Calendar (O.S.) was still in use.
- (1.6) - this indicates that the tract was the sixth tract in the original vol. 1 of the collection.
- Tracts which have not yet been corrected are indicated [UNCORRECTED] and the illegible words are marked as &illegible;. Some tracts have hundreds of illegible words and characters.
- As they are corrected against the facsimile version we indicate it with the date [CORRECTED - 03.03.16]. Where the text cannot be deciphered it is marked [Editor: illegible word].
- After the corrections have been made to the XML we wil put the corrected version online in the main OLL collection (the “Titles” section).
- [elsewhere in OLL] the document can be found in another book elsewhere on the OLL website.
Copyright and Fair Use Statement↩
The texts are in the public domain.
This material is put online to further the educational goals of Liberty Fund, Inc. Unless otherwise stated in the Copyright Information section, this material may be used freely for educational and academic purposes. It may not be used in any way for profit.
Editorial Matter↩
[Insert here]:
- Editor’s Introduction to this volume
- Chronology of Key Events for this year.
Tracts from 1638-1643 (Volume 1)
T.2 (1.2.) John Lilburne, A Light for the Ignorant (1638).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.2 [1638.??] (1.2) John Liburne, A Light for the Ignorant (1638).
Full titleJohn Lilburne, A Light for the Ignorant or A Treatise shewing, that in the new Testament, is set forth three Kingly States or Governments, that is, the Civill State, the true Ecclesiasticall State, and the false Ecclesiasticall State.
Mat. 15.13. Every plant which my Heavenly Father hath planted shall be rooted up.
Seene and allowed, Printed in the yeare, 1638.
Estimated date of publication1638 (no month given).
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationNot listed in TT.
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
The Epistle to the Reader,
VVell affectionated Reader. It is (as thou knowest) a divine precept, that we should giue Honour to whom honour is due: Jmplying therein, that no honour is due either to Persons or things, but in a lawfull and right way. And hence it is that many of Gods deare Servants both haue and still doe, refuse to yeeld any Reuerence, Honoor, Service, &c. vnto Archbishops Bishops: and their dependent Offices; I say, as they are Ecclesiasticall persons & doe administer in their Spirituall Courts as they terme them: in regard they have assumed such a State as is to speake properly and truely of it, neither Iure Divino nor jure Humano, warrented by the word of God. But of this I shall not need to say any more, in regard thou shalt find what here I say cleared & proved sufficiently: viz. that their calling is not from God, either in a divine or humane respect, but according to the scripturs after mentioned: altogether & every way from the Devill. And therfore look unto it whosoever thou art, that thou (like Mordecay) bow not the knee to any of these Amaleks, but on the contrarie Feare God and honour the King, and give reverence Only to such ordinances as God binds thy Conscience too, either in respect of nature or grace, and soe doeing thou shalt Give vnto Cæsar the things that are Cæsars, And give vnto God, those things that are Gods. And that thou mayst so doe, the Lord sanctifie both this and all other good meanes and helps to thee.
A LIGHT FOR THE IGNORANT OR A Treatise shevving, that in the nevv Testament, is set forth three Kingly States or Governments, that is, the Civill State, the true Ecclesiasticall-State, and the false Ecclesiasticall State.
THere are in the new Testement of Christ Iesus three Kinglie States or Governments. The Civill State. The true Ecclesiasticall State. And the false Ecclesiasticall State. Two of them are of God, and the third is of the Divill. They all consist of these Seven particulars following.
In the First, place these three pollitique Regiments hath each of them a King or Head over them.
Secondly, They haue each of them authoritie power or state pollitique.
Thirdly, They haue books and Charters, wherein their statutes, Lawes, and Cannons are writen.
Fourthly, Each of these make themselves Citties Corporations or bodies politique.
Fiftly, They haue Officers and deputies who are their seuerall Ministers to and in there bodies or Corporations.
Sixtly, They have Lawes, ordinances, and administrations for these officers to administer to their subjects, according to there severall functions in the name and by the power of their proper King, and head; from whom they haue received their authority & in whose name they administer.
Sevenlie, and lastlie, they haue subjects or members governed by and in their seuerall pollitique States and powers vnder their severall beads.
The First particular Handled.
These haue each of them a King or Head over them.
The Civill State.
The First is the State of Magistracie or civill State, that wherein Cesar is to haue his due as King and head, these Kings & heads are to be prayed for of all Gods people, as their Heads and gouernours Rom. 13. 1. 2 1. Tom. 2. 2.
The true Ecclesiasticall State:
This state is Christs the annointed Psa. 2. 6. Acts. 2. 26. whome God the Father hath set upon the Throne of David, Jsay, 9. 6. 7. and he is King of Saints Rev. 15, 3. Yea the King of Kings & Lord of Lords. Rev. 17. 14. & 19, 16.
The False Ecclesiasticall State.
The third is the helish state of the Beast, his Kingdome or state of Rome, which in the 13. Rev. v. 2. is said to haue his power from the Devill; also he is said to haue a Throne: therefore hee is a King 11. c. He is called the King of the Locusts which is there said to bee the Angell of the bottomleste pit. v. 11.
Secondly, these haue each of them a Kingly state or power pollitique
The Civill State.
This power or Civill state is of God, and is the Charracter of Gods soveraigntie over man; is displaid by his Communicating the same unto Kings & such as are in authority under them, for which cause hee hath said yee are Gods; and God must and is obeyed by stooping and submitting to this power and state, and he that resisteth this power resisteth the ordinance of God Rom. 13. c.
The true Ecclesiasticall State.
Likewise this state is of God; for it is the Kingdome of his deare Sonne, & is not the Civill state but the Ecclesiastical state of Christ his Church, or power which he received of his Father Mat 28. 18, after that he rose again from the dead, by which power he authorised his Apostles & sent them on his errand or message to al the world, Mat. 28. which power the Apostles vsed in planting Churchs and Church Officers, which power Christ gives to all the Churches of the Saints to the end of the world, it is the power given to them to bind and loose too, and from the Devill, and to right each others wrongs Mat. 18. it is the same power and state the Churches had comitted to them by the Apostles who reproved the Churches for not using it to suppresse sinne and sinners 1 Cor. 5. with the seuen Churches in Asia. Rev. 2. 3. c. these and many more are the severall vses the Lord hath made of this true Ecclesiasticall or Church state, and Goverment.
The False Ecclesiasticall State.
This Angell of the Bottemlesse pit Rev. 9. 11. the King of the Locusts hath a state, throne, power, and great authority. Rev. 13. 2. & in the same Chapter it is said, he hath power to continue 42 moneths, v. 5. that is 126. dayes as c. 12. 6. counting each day for a yeare (as the Lord doth in numbers, 14. 34. and Ezec. 4. 6,) it is 1260. yeares that is the length or time of his Raigne, that one and the same time which Christs Kingdome vnder the name of the holie City shal be trod under foot Rev. 11. 2. Likewise that is that power or state that the woman or great whore sits or aids uppon: whereby shee is able to Raigne Rev. 13. 16. & c. 17. as a Queene over the Kings of the earth. And Lastly, this state is soe great that it Captiuates all Kings Princes & Emperours, yea all the world of vngodly men Rev. 13. 7. 8. wonders, followes; and worships this state, or beast, and if they will not he hath such power and authority that hee will compell high and low, rich and poore, bond and free, to submit unto him, & to kill all those that are found refractory to his state and power. Rev. 13. 15. 16. 17. This is the False Ecclesiasticall state and power.
Thirdly, these haue each of them bookes and Charters to declare their minds to their Subjects.
The Civill State.
Thirdly, all Kings & governours haue Bookes, statutes, and Records, wherein are recorded their Lawes Articles, Acts of Parliament, likewise to Citties and townes Corporated they give Chartors whereby they haue power and preuilidge from their King, & head, in his name and power to instate themselves into divers previledges for their mutuall good.
The true Ecclesiasticall State.
Even soe in the next place Christ Jesus hath given his lawes vnto Iacob & his statutes to Israell, his statute Books are the Holie Scripture of the Old and New Testament, he is faithfull in all his house as was Moses Heb. 3. 2. 6. the acts of his last Parliament which hee called for the establishing of his Kingdome, when hee was 40. daies with his Disciples giving them lawes through the Holy Ghost, even till hee was taken vp into Heaven in their sight, as wee may see in Acts. 1. chapt. Those bookes called the Acts of the Apostles, with-all the Epistles and the Revelation, in these the Cities and Charters of the new Jerusalem is to be found with the previledges thereunto belonging.
The False Ecclesiasticall State.
This smoaky pollitique State of the Crowned Locusts or Roman Clergie Rev. 9. 3. 7. hath distinct bookes from the other two states that are of God, for this State or power hath Bookes of Cannons, Counsels; bookes of Articles, bookes of Ordination of Priests and Deacons; with the booke of Homilies, and the Booke of Common-prayer, and the power and state of this Beast, doth more narrowly looke that all be agreeable to these bookes then the other two states doth (as is manifest by that strict eye that is had ouer all in every parish) not onelie in forraigne Lands, but even in this our Kingdome of England, for they of this Kingdome of Darkenesse are wiser & more diligent in their generation them the children of light.
Fourthly, by vertue of these Charters, these three states make Citties and Corporations, according to their proper & distinct state & power pollitique.
The Civill State.
In the next place the loyall Subjects of this Regiment vnder their King & Head, by vertue of these Charters, become famous Citties, & other inferior corporations agreeable to the tenour of their severall Charters that they received from their Head, & when they received their Charters then & by that means they received the State & power to become a Citty or Corperation vnder that Head, & when they haue vnited or incorporated themselvs into a Bodie they are a Citty constituted, and this state & power they are entered into, is their for me and being, and nothing else doth distinguish them from their former state and condition but that power and state, that is, their state wherein they live moue and haue their being pollitiquely.
The true Ecclesiasticall State.
In like manner the Subjects of this heavenlie regiment or King dome of Christ, by power from him their Head, doe become visible Churches and bodies incorporated together in his name & power Mat. 18. therefore the Church hee left behind him of 120. were of one accord Acts 1. and to them were vnited or joyned 3000. in the next chapt. so the saints at Antioch, became a body or Church whose constitution or incorporation wee may see to bee a joyning themselves to the Lord Acts. 1. 2. 23. soe all the Churches of the Saints became bodies pollitique, and therefore Gods visible Churches are called Citties or the City of God Psal. 46. 4. Psal. 48. 1. 2. 8. & Psal. 87. 2. 3. Therefore the Saints are called Cittizens Ephes. 2. 19. Inhabitants of the Living God Heb. 12. 22. This holy Cittie is troden under foote 42. Moneths Re. 11. 2. the time of the Raigne of the Beast (Re. 13. 5.) whose Raigne is just so long & this Holy Citty is the new Jerusalem that comes downe from heaven in great glory Rev. 21. the forme or beeing of his divine Citty or spirituall Bodie is the state and power pollitique instituted by Christ and given to his Saints Jude, 3. v. Psal. 133. and thus under Christ as their King they live, moue and haue their being pollitiquelie.
The False Ecclesiasticall State.
So the power of Satan the Devil by hath the wisdome of the second Beast, or false Propher, not only made to himselfe a great Citty whose power killed Christ Rev. 11. 8. Thereby pointing vs to the Roman power that still kills his Saints, for this Citty is soe powerfull that she Raigns over the Kings of the earth, & maks them to drinke of the cup of her fornications, till they be so drunke thereby that they become her servants Rev. 17. 2. 18. & 18. 2. And by this false Ecclesiasticall power & state, there are made lesse Citties called the Citties of the nations of (nation Churches) & are of the same nature Re. 16. 9. as Daughters to the whore & Mother of fornication of the earth, this false great Catholique Church is distributed into nations, provinces, and into every diocesse and parrish, as liuely and apparent as the Civill state, is in every parrish and in every House therein, soe that they live moue and haue their beeing as Royallie from this Beastlike power as the Saints doe by Christ, or subjects under their King, this is plaine by the daily troubles the poore saints suffer in every parrish if they worship not as this power commands.
Fiftly These haue each of them proper and distinct officers belonging to each pollitique State.
The Civill State.
In the first place these Cities by vertue of their Chartors, injoy their owne officers, Majors, Shirrifes, Alderman, and other inferiour Officers as their Lord and King hath allotted them, and also inferiour corporations according as is granted to them in their Chartor, and they that obey these doe well and please God in keeping the first Commandement.
The true Ecclesiasticall State.
Likewise the Citty of God by vertue of their chartor haue right to enjoy their owne Bishops, ouerseeres or Elders Acts, 14. 23. and chap, 20. Titus, 1. 5. 7. Which are not many, yet Wisdome that hath built her house hath found them to be sufficient: which are these, Pastors, Teachers, Elders, Deacons, Widdowes, Rom. 12. 7. 8. Ephe. 4.-11. 12. Phi. 1. 1. 1 Tim. and they that obey these and these onely serve Christ and obey God in keeping the 2. and 3. Commandements, these only being the officers which God by his Holy Apostles hath set up, instituted and placed in his Church to the end of the world: therefore, in Hearing, and obeying these we heare & obey Christ that sent them Luke. 10. 16. Math. 10. 40.
The False Ecclesiasticall State.
In like manner hath this whorith City, or Citties, the False Prophet, or Body of false prophets attending upon their forged divises, & humane administrations, which are almost innumirable to reckon from the Pope to the parish clark or Parstor whosoever obyes these or any of these breaks the three first Commandements, for in hearing & obeying these they hear & obey the Dragon, Beast, & whore, that sent them and gaue them their authority and Office, that as Realie as wee Heare and obey the King by stooping and submitting to a Constable who sees not this.
These haue each of them proper and severall lawes, statutes, ordinances, and administrations for their severall officers to attend vpon.
The Civill State.
Sixtly, In this state or in these Citties are the lawes and ordinances of men, that the saints must obey in the Lord, for though in the time of Christ and his Apostels there were no Christian Kings, yet the Churches of the Saints were commanded to obey their Lawes, Religious Lawes they could not bee, Because the Magistrates were all infidells, therefore the Apostle Peter distingusheth them from the Divine, by calling them the Ordinances of men, due vnto Caesar as divine obedience is unto God,
The true Ecclesiastcall State.
Even so this Cittie of God with their officers are to obserue what soever Christ hath commanded them Math. 28. 20. the Church of Corinth kept them 1 Cor. 11. 2. and Paulls Charge to Timothy is to teach the Church to obserue all without prefering one before another, as he would answer it before Christ Iesus and his Elect Angells. These divine things are due to Christ Iesus, and to him & to him onely, belongs this visible worship Ioh. 4 21. 22. 23.
The false Ecclesiasticall State.
The Lawes & administrations of this whorish Church, are partly their owne Inventions, contained in the Bookes formerly named, with some divine truthes which vsurped they injoy, which truthes they vse as, a help to set a glose vpon their inventions: that they may passe with a better acceptation but both Divine and devised are consecrated & dedicated by the Beast, and are administred by his Officers and power.
Seauentlhy, All these three haue their subjects or people which their pollitique Bodies consist of.
The Civill State.
Lastly, this State hath Subjects, which are the Kings alleiged people, and are bound to him their Head, by the Oath of alleigence, & as any of them do purchase a Charter from him to become a Cittie or Corporation, they are bound by vertue of their Charters to walke submissiuely to him their pollitique head, and in that relation are by duty bound to keepe the Lawes of their Charters in his name & power, which is their pollitique obedience.
This Ciuill State is Gods Ordinance, and is here borrowed to Jllustrate, manifest, and set forth the other two in the former perticuler, and soe we leaue it.
The true Ecclesiasticall State,
Soe in the last place, the Subjects of this State are only Saints & noe other, that is such as by the Rule of the word are to be Judged one of another to be in Christ, otherwise they haue no right to this Kingdome 1 Cor. 4. 20. Chapt. 5. 13. But are intruders lud. 4. verse and soe not of the Kingdome, though in the Kingdome, 1 Iohn 2. 19 and the Saints are out of their places till they come within this Holy Citty.
To this State all Gods people are Called, both out of this world and all false Churches, especially from this Regiment of darkenesse there discribed 2. Cor. 6. 17. & Rev. 18. 4.
The False Ecclesiasticall State,
Lastly, the Subjects of this Kingdome of darkenes are all the Inbabitans of the Earth, Kings & subjects Rev. 13. 16. & Chap. 18. 3. Yea it, hath a commanding power, bond and free, to receive a mark of subjection and servitude, there is none soe bad but will serve his turne, if any proue too good hee casts them out, kills and destroys Rev. 11. 7.
This is the State and Kingdome of darkenes: with which the Devill hath deluded all nations from which all Gods people & Servants are bound in duty to seperate, that soe they may bee free from that wrath of God which shall fall upon the Kingdome of the beast to the Ruine & ouerthrow thereof Rev. 18. 4. 5. & 19. 20. & 14. 9. 10, 11.
Leaving the premises let every one note these ensuing differences or disproportions, that are betwene the Ecclesiasticall States, for thir different natures.
The true Ecclesiasticall State
The First disproportion betweene the true and False State is, in the Originall from whence they arise. The true State came from Heaven and is the house of wisdomes building Pro. 9. 1. wherin the sonne of God, the wisedome of his Father, Heb. 1. 3. hath beene as faithfull as was Moses in the former Heb. 3. 2. 6. & is that Heaven discribed Rev. 12. 1. and that Citty said to come downe from Heaven Rev. 21, and is an habitation for God to dwell in, and for all his people to come into: to dwell with God their Saviour, for the name of the Citty is, the Lord is there Ezec. last Chap. and last ver.
The False Ecclesiasticall State.
Likewise it is no hard Mistery to know the Originall of this False Ecclesiastical State, for the Clargie, (as Goodwins Catologue of Bishops Fox his Booke of martyrs, & Rev. 9. & 13 ch.) & by their Preaching & writing hath taught vs plainly that Antichrist the man of sinne, the sonne of perdition is seated in Rome, & the same Clergy doth also teach us: that their Ministery & Goverments of Bishops & Arch Bb. successiuely proceedes from thence, & for our confirmation here in we read that Gregory the first of that name, Pope of Rome about 1000 yeares since, sent Austin the Monke into Englund & consecrated him first Arch B. of Canterbury, and he consecrated the rest of the Bb. and established the Ecclesiastical state, which state & platforme remaines vnaltered to this day; notwithstanding the Head thereof be changed. This state then being the man of sinne, it is said to arise out of the Bottomles pitt Rev. 9. 1. & is called the King of the Locusts Rev. 9. 11. & is said to come by the effectuall working of Sathan 2 Thess. 2. 9. and as he is the sonne of perdition v. 3. and the Mistery of Iniquity v. 7. so shall he come to confusion by the mouth of the Lord v. 8. & go to perdition Rev. 17. 8. as the sonne & heire thereof, & he shall haue the company of his Fatther the great Dragon the Devill and Satan, with the yonger Brother the False Prophet, that deceiued them that worshipped him, these three shall dwell in the tormenting lake of Gods wrath forever and evermore Rev. 19. 20. & 20. 10. And thus wee see Originally from whence hee came and whither he must goe.
The true Ecclesiasticall State,
A Second disproportion is betweene the true power and the false. The true power which Christ our King hath received of his Father Math. 28. 18. and hath comunicated to his Saints 1 Cor. 5. 4, 12. and Psal. 119. and to them onely; This is that Dominion that the Antient of dayes hath giuen to his Saints Dan. 7. 14. compared with ver. 22. 27: and with Revel. 5. 10. & being lost hee will recover it againe vnto them as Daniell speakes, & in the New Testament is giuen to every Particuler visible Church or Assembly of Saints Math. 18. 17. 19. 20. and 1 Cor. 5. 12. In which point of Power, we are to note two things. Fust the Subject or place where it doth recide, that is in the Body or Assembly of the Saints, as the former scriptures largely declare. Secondly, that they were not forced nor compelled to submitt to their power, but as the loue of God shed abroade in their hearts, & the Doctrine of the Apostles by the power of the spirit caused them freely and willingly to submit themselves unto it Acts 2. 41. for Christ and his Apostles never used any means to bring his saints into his Kingdome.
The False Ecclesiasticall State.
Soe in Like manner the Dragon that Old Serpent Rev. 12. [Editor: illegible word] gave to his son of perdition the Beast, his power & throne & great authority Rev. 13. 2. And this man of sinne hath conveyed to all his Clergie his power; by vertue wherof, they are all rulers & men of authority in all nations where he hath established them, as is declared Rev. 9 Chapter & 10 First Verse: wher it is said, they haue Crownes upon their heads like gold, that is counterfit power and authoritie, & by vertue of this power pollitique; are made one intire body pollitique, under one head & King soe called vers. 11. and are distinct from the Layety, living in & by the practise of this power, with reference to that Head, though they bee never soe farre disperced or remote from him; this beeing observed, the disproportion will appeare in these two particulers.
First, the subject place where this power doth recide, it beeing in the body of the Clergy, the Layety being excluded though never so high or great in place, as Iudges, Iustices, Lords & Knights &c, they refusing it as a matter not belonging to them, but to the Clergy.
Secondly, this power compells all in all nations, will they nill they to come under this Government, and to obey his power and authority Rev. 13, 8. 16. where it is said, he made all great and small, rich and poore, free and bond, to submit to him, else they should not buy, nor sell nor live ver. 17. and ch. 11. 7.
The true Ecclesiasticall State:
A Third disproportion shall appeare in this, Every Kingdome or pollitique state whether Civill or Ecclesiasticall, hath their severall bookes and Charters: wherein is contayned the Platforme of there severall governments, soe every Church is knowne by its owne articles, Cannons, and Constitutions, so that they that will know what Church, Ministery and worship Christ and his Apostles hath planted in the new Testement after the Ceremoniall was abolished; they must read the Acts of the Apostles with the Epistles Acts, 6. 4. 1. Cor. 14. 37. Revel. 22. 18. 19. Yea the whole new Testement, and there they shall finde Jesus Christ our Lord and King, his Bookes of Cannons, Articles and Ordination, to guide and direct the Churches of the saints in his Kingdome vnto the end of the world.
The False Ecclesiasticall State
Also in the False State, they that would know what goverment, Church, Ministery, and worship, the man of sinne hath established, he must viewe his Platforme contayned in his Booke of Cannons, Articles, and Ordintion of the Priests & Deacons, his Bookes of homilies and Common Prayers, for in them is contayned those institutions, Lawes and ordinances that he hath established, but how contrary to the Scriptures of the Old and New Testement; they that are Spirituall in part doe know, and how obedience to them is inforced and divine Lawes omitted and laid aside, the poore saints doe finde, and [Editor: illegible word] to there smart.
The true Ecclesiasticall State
A Fourth Disproportion. This State makes not Nationall nor Provinciall pollitique Bodies, but only particuler Congregations or assemblies of Saints, as in Judea one Nation; yet divers Churches Gal. 1. 22. Soe Galatia one nation yet many Churches ver. 3. likewise Asia hath seaven seuerall Churches ver. 1. 11. and where there was but one the Holighost speakes in the singuler number, as the Church at Rome, another at Corinth, another at Collossia, another at Thessalonica, and the like.
Secondly, the Congregations of our Lord Christ come freely and willingly as so many living stones 1 Pet. 2. 4. 5. volluntarily vniting themselues together, whereby they become A Spirituall house and a Royall Priesthood ver. 9. and are hereby capable of performing the publique worship of the New Testament, wherein they are to offer as Living sacrifices their Soules and Bodies Rom. 12. 1. and by faith to haue Communion with their Mediator Heb. 12. 24. as he hath promised to all such assemblies gathered in his name and power Rev. 21. 3. Math. 18. 19. 20. which is the forme and beeing of this their visible and pollitique vnion & communion Eph. 2. 20. 21. 22. Coll. 2. 19. Thirdly, the visible Churches of Christ are independent Bodies; there is Equallity or apparity amongst them: that is, they are all a like in Iurisdiction & authority, they are all Golden Candlestickes Rev. 1. 20. they are every one of them a Ierusalem compact together within it selfe Psal. 122. 3. compared with Heb. 12. 22. hauing each of them whole Christ for their mediatour, that is, Priest, Prophet; and King; and thereby enjoy all his power and all his promises, and all his Lawes and ordinances, with all his liberties and previledges.
Fourthly and Lastly; in the vse of their liberty which they enjoy from and vnder Christ their Head, and dwels in the whole body, in the vse whereof they are inabled to exclude sinne and sinners and ought that offends God or them, 1. Cor. 5. 13. 2 Thes. 3. 14 Acts 3. and to establish among them such Officers, Ordinances, and Admistrations as their Lord & King hath given them for their comfort and profit, by this power they can examine and try False teachers Rev. 2. 2. they can reproue and admonish proud ones and exhort the negligent Cor. 4. 17, thus their power and liberty from Christ their head, becomes a great benefit and a great good to the whole body, in these and divers others perticulers of great weight.
The False Ecclesiasticall State.
But this False State brings ten Kingdomes into one pollitique body Rev. 17. 12. 13. 15. & hath set heads over nations to bring them into pollitique bodies Ecclesiasticall, as for example, England is one pollitique body Ecclesiasticall, (as well as Civil) vnder one Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, and Pope of Lambeth, and by the sinewes and bonds of his Ecclesiasticall power the whole hand as one body is knitt and bound to that Ecclesiasticall Head, by vertue of that Romish authority that hee successively doth exercise, and hath received from Austin the Monke, who consecrated, authorized & sent into this Land to establish this power according to Pope Gregorius his will wisdome and power.
Farther, this False State hath left noe liberty nor power to any person good or bad Rev. 13. 7. 8. but compels and forces all in the name and power of Antichrists successours; will they nill they, haue they faith or no, conscience or no conscience, this beast will be served and obeyed of all states degrees and conditions, of all people in the world ver. 15. 16. 17. soe that there is noe Ecclesiasticall body of his making whether it be the great Catholique Babylon, Revel. 16. 19. or Nationall, or Provinciall; or Perrochiall bodies, but this Beast first made or framed them, and still by the force of the same authority doth compell them to assemble and worship in his name and power, which power is the tome and being of their visible & pollitique vnion and Communion.
Againe the visible Churches which are in the Kingdome of the Beast, are neither independent nor free bodies, therefore the great Citty is called by the Holy ghost; Sodome & Egypt: for her filthynes & bondage Rev. 11. 8. so that there hath not in Europe one parrish beene found free from spirituall Egyptian bondage inflicted upon them by some taske Master of the Clergy, as the Person and Church-Wardens, who force and drive (by spirituall tyranny ouer the consciences of men) to their falsely so called spirituall Courts, to whom they are in bondage, and vpon whom they do essencially depend, & so are not independent, neither haue they any power, or liberty to procure truth or abandon Errour in their publicke worship.
And Lastly, these poore Captiuated slavish assemblies haue noe liberty or power of Christ among them; but a great power ouer them that keepes them in a spirituall bondage, and there assemblies consists of sinners of all sorts, for they haue noe power of reproving or excluding sinne or sinners, they must take such officers as the Bishops sends them be they never soe bad; and they have noe power to exclude or refuse them, and if they proue good they haue no power to keepe them neyther, canne they keepe themselves there, except they submit to, and practise such ordinances, Lawes & administration, as are the inventions of men and will worship, and so breake the second commandement, so that they haue no power to do themselves any spirituall good, or to exclude from themselves any spirituall evill or hurt, but being injoyned by there spirituall taske-masters to assemble to Church, they goe, and when they present them to their Courts, they runne, & being commanded to do this or that in there publick worship, they doe it, though it bee contrary to God and there own consciences. In these and divers other particulers this power, that is ouer them is to their exceding great hurt & damage.
The true Ecclesiasticall State.
The Fift Disproportionly sin their Officers or ministers, which we are to observe thus.
First in there number, Christ Iesus our Lord and King hath instituted and ordayned onely siue; which are specified Rom. 12. 7. 8. Phil. 1. 1. 1 Tim. 5. for though our Lord hath ordained in his Church for the Foundation thereof; himselfe being the Chiefe corner stone, Apostles, Prophets, and Evangelists, yet not successivelie continued; but these Five onelie are to continue to the End of the world.
Secondly, these Officers and Ministers of Iesus Christ, haue not onely there authority from the particuler congregation, but do originally and naturally arise out of the same Acts, 1. 23, 26, and 6. 3; & 14. 23. Note that in the new Translation the word Election is left out of the 23. verse. For before there be any Officers in the Church there is instituted by the Holy Ghost divine offices; functions or odministrations; as voyd and empty roomes. Psa. 122. 5. Rev. 4. 4, & cha. 20. 4. for the saints which dwell in that Citty of God to supply with fit & able persons, to performe those severall administrations, which God hath ordayned and commanded them, and for the authorising of their Officers, they haue Christ walking amongst them as in one of his golden Candlesticks, holding them in the right hand of his Kingly authority, Rev. 1. 16. by these divine deputies he rules them as a King, teacheth them as a Prophet, and feedes them as a Priest with his most sacred body and bloud.
The false Ecclesiasticall State.
But the officers of this false state are the whole body of the Clergy almost innumerable if we should reckon their severall orders & distinction of degres, as Pope, Cardinals, Patriarchs, Primates, Metrapolitans, Arch-bishops, Lord-bishops, Deanes, Chancellars, Vicar-Generals, Praebendes, Arch-deacons, Subdeacons, Doctors, of the Civill Law, Doctors of Divinity, Proctors Registers, Cannons, Petty-Cannons, Chanters, Preists, Iesuits, Parish-Preists, Parsons, Vicars, Curats, Deacons, Vestremen, Church Wardens, Swornemen, Sidemen, Parish Clarks, Sextons, Pursonants, Summinours, Apparitors, with a-multitude more which would tire a man to reckon them al up their being well nie sixscore in all of this rabble, and as Iesus Christ & his Apostles never knew them nor approvedly spoke of them, but rather gave warning to the Saints that they should take heede of such, for such were to come 2 Pet. 2. 1. Mat. 24. 24. and the Saints haue wofull experience that they are come: for they haue been plagued with them this thousand yeares & more, Yet the time approcheth and is neere when they shall bee consumed with the Breath of his mouth and brightnesse of his comming 2 Thess. 2. 8, that rides vpon the white Horse Rev. 19. 11, 12, 15, for their Kingdome is momentary, and his is Everlasting.
Likewise these offices rise not out of the particuler assemblies, neither haue the assemblies any offices or functions, properly in them nor any power or authority to produce or raise officers out of them selves, for the Clergy are a perticuler body distinct from the Layety hauing their consecrations; Offices and authority from and amongst themselves, and soe sent by their Ecclesiasticall Heads, and bring their Office and authority with them, as matters not belonging to the assemblyes, and so by vertue of that Ecclesiasticall power rule ouer them as Lords and teacheth them as that power allowes, and commands them, vsurpedly administreth spirituall foode vnto them, and soe by Imitation beguileth the simple and affronts the Administration of the mediatourship of Christ Iesus.
The true Ecclesiasticall State.
A Sixt Disproportion is the difference betweene there Lawes and Administrations, as euery Citty and Corporation haue there Lawes amongst themselues by vertue of their Charters from their King, Even soe hath every [Editor: illegible word] Church from Christ there King, by vertue of their Charter, which is the New Testament, in possession amongst themselves all Lawes & ordinances as Christ by his Apostles Mat. 28. 20. hath committed to them, Charging them vnder acurse to keep from adding or diminishing to or from these divine Lawes Act. 1. 2. 2. 1 Cor. 1 1. 3. 2 Thes. 2. 15 Rev. 22. 18. 19.
Secondly, as the difference is great in the number of there Officers, the true being few & the False being innumerable, so of necesity must the difference be in the lawes and administrations agreeable to the number of Officers; which particulers I must omitt as a matter to large for this place, yet note this by the way: that one of the first laws in Christs Church is the ordinance of Prophecie 1 Cor. 14. 1. to the end of the chap. that is, that it is not only the liberty, but the duty of every man in the Church that is able to teach & preach to the edifying of the body, so to do (provided he keep the proposition of faith; that is the boundes of his owne knowledge Rom. 12. 6.
The False Ecclesiasticall State.
But as hath beene formerly said; the false Church hath no power nor Charter nor office, for all these things are locked up within the body of the Clergie, soe is it as true that they are distitute of all lawes or administrations, amongst themselves, so that all they haue at any time is brought to them by these Crowned Stinging messengers of that authority, as Commonsence and reason proveth: that the Clergie being apollitique and distinct body of themselves from the Layety; hauing all power and authority Ecclesiasticall in themselues, must of necessity haue all lawes ordinances and administrations in themselves, whether they bee divine, (which they haue by vsurpatõ) or humane, by their own Inventiõ, they only posesse them and haue power to vse them not fearing adding, or detracting, the Lay congregations being altogether passive herein til their Jnjuntion make them active.
Soe the lawes and ordinances of this state being innumerable (as their officers are) J must omit for to name them, as their severall false holy things: Kneeling in the & of receiving, Signeing with, the Crosse in Baptisme, Churching of women, Reading Prayers, with the Consecrating of Dayes, Times, Places, Persons, Garments, with their Anoynting of the Sicke and unholy. Orders of consecration, with other innumerable inventions, not worthy a-place in Christians thoughts, onely note the opposition of their law against the law of Christ, in vehement prohibiting and strongly barring all (Lay men as they call them) from preaching, that let Christ giue never soe great abillities or guifts to lay men: they are never suffered to make any publique vse of them, but it is horrible prophanesse and sacrelegious presumption soe to doe, and this prohibition of the Clergie is and hath been so vniuersall: that it reacheth to the foure Corners of the earth, and with holdeth this spirituall winde of Christ Jesus in the mouth of his Saints that it shall not blow upon them that are in the earth Revel. 7.
The true Ecclesiasticall State
A Sevevth Disproportion is betwixt their subjects or members, the subjects or members of Christs Kingdome or Church must, be beleeving Disciples, they must bee Saints by Calling & sanctified in Christ Iesus 1 Cor. 1. 2. they must be liuing stones to build his house withall 1 Pet. 2. 5. such as these and these onely are enjoyned to observes whatsoever he commands them, to these only is his Kingdome and dominion given, these be they that are crowned as Kings, anoynted as Priests, the mediatour himselfe being theirs, & he hath committed the administration of his mediatorship in his Church to them. But to the Wicked saith God, what hast thou to do with these things. Psa 50. 16. Thou hast not a wedding garment therefore binde him hand & foote & cast him out as leaven dangerous to hurt the body 1 Cor. 5. 7. For without shall be & dogges inchanters and those that loue & make lyes Rev. 22. 15. But within there shall be noe vncleane thing. Revel. 21. 27.
The False Ecclesiasticall State.
But the Subjects of this foule body are all vncleane and hatefull birds, Revel. 18. 2. the Cage that holds them being the Ecclesiasticall state of Rome, is become the habitations of Devils & the hold of every foul spirit, so that the vnfittests members which they can least indure or suffer amongst them, are the conscious saints, they are the soonest turned out, cut of and killed by them Revel. 13. 15, but yet if the saints; or Christ himselfe can by temptations or compulsion bee drawn to worship the Devill, he will haue it of them Mat. 4. 9. for he will haue all the world to worship him, if high and low, rich and poore, bond and free, be all the world, he will compell them to bee subjects or members in his black Regiment Revel. 13. 16. 17.
For these dwell and rule make & change lawes and times in this their habition which is the bottemlesse pit, as the Father Sonne & holy Ghost do in their habitation, which is the New Jerusalem.
The true definition of a true visible Church of Iesus Christ.
1. THat every true visible Church of Christ, are a company of people called and seperated out of the world, (a) By the word of God, Ioyned (b) together in the fellowship of the Gospell by volentary (c) profession of fayth and obedience of Christ (a) Levit. 20. 26. Nehe. 10, 18. Ezeche. 44; 7. 9. 1 Pet. 2. 9. 10. Act, 2. 40. Act, 19. 9. 1 Cor. 1. 12 2 Cor. 6. 17. Revel. 18. 4. (b) Act. 11. 21. 23. Ier. 50. 4, 5 (c) Act. 2. 41.
2 That every true visible Church of Christ, is an independent body of it selfe Revel. 1. 3. chapt. & hath power from Christ her head Coll. 1. 18. 24. to bind & loose; to receive in & cast out by the Keys of the Kingdome Mat. 18. 17. 18. Psa. 149. 8. 9. 1 Cor. 5. 4. 5. 12. 2 Cor. 2. 7. 8.
3 That Jesus Christ hath by his Last wil and Testament given vnto and sett in his Church, sufficient ordinary Officers: with their quallifications Callings and worke, for the Administration of his holy things, and for the sufficient ordinary Instruction, Guidance and service of his Church to the end of the world. Rom. 12. 6. 7. 8. Ephe. 4. 11. 12. 13. Heb. 3. 2. 6. 1 Tim. 3. 2. 8. & Chapt. 5. 9. 10. Act. 6. 3. And that all the Officers in the Church are but onely five and noe more namely Pastor, Teacher, Elder, Deacons,
Widdows. Rom. 12. 7. 8. Ephe. 4. 11. Phil. 1. 1.
1 Tim. 3. 1. & Ch. 5. Tit. 1. 5. 7.
T.3 (1.3.) John Lilburne, A Worke of the Beast (1638).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.3 [1638.??] (1.3) John Liburne, A Worke of the Beast (1638).
Full titleJohn Lilburne, A Worke of the Beast, or A Relation of a most unchristian Censure, Executed upon John Lilburne, (Now prisoner in the fleet) the 18 April 1638. With the heavenly speech uttered by him at the time of his suffering. Very usefull for these times both for the encouragement of the Godly to suffer, And for the terrour and shame of the Lords Adversaries.
Heb. 10.36. For you have neede of patience, that after you have done the will of God, you might receive the promises.
Heb. 11.36. And others had triall of cruell mockings, and scourgings yea moreover of bonds and imprisonments.
Printed in the yeare the Beast was Wounded 1638.
Estimated date of publication1638 (no month given).
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationNot listed in TT.
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
The Publisher to the Reader.
Tender hearted Reader.
OF The wicked it is truely said in Iob. their Light shalbee Put out: Now wee see, in a Candle, beeing almost extinguished, that after it hath glimmered a while, it rayseth some few blazing flashes, and soe suddenly vanisheth.
To speake what I thinke, my minde gives me, that the Lord is now vpon extinguishing the bloody Prelates out of our Land: For whereas they have not, in some late yeares shewed the cruelty which they did before, but now increase in persecution: me thinkes this is a cleere foregoing signe, that (like a snuffe in the socket) their end and ruine is at hand.
I write this, to have thee the more patient, contented, and comforted, when thou either hearest, seest, or readest of their barbarous crueltie; besure their condemnation sleepeth not, but when their wickednes is full, I say when they haue once filled up the measure of their iniquity (the which I trust they haue allmost don) then will the Lord send back’ these locusts to the Bottomlesse pitt, from whence they came.
In the meane time feare not their faces, but stand in the trueth, and let Gods house and his ordinances bee deare to thy soule; And know, that as the Lord gaue strength to this his Servant to suffer joyfully for Christs cause; soe he will to thee and me and all others of his saints,
if he count us worthy to be called thereto.
A WORKE OF THE BEAST, OR A Relation of a most unchristian Censure, executed vpon IOHN LILBVRNE, (Novv prisoner in the fleet) the 18. of Aprill 1638 vvith the heavenly speech vtter by him at the time of his suffering
VPon Wednesday the said 18 of Aprill, Hauing noe certaine notice of the execution of my Censure, till this present morning, I prepared my selfe by prayer unto God, that he would make good his promise, to be vvith me & enable me to undergoe my Affliction vvith joyfullnes & courage: and that he vvould bee a mouth and vtterance vnto mee to enable me to speake that vvhich might make for his greatest honour. And in any meditations my soule did principally pitch vpon these Three places of Scripture.
First, That in Jsay. 41. 10. 11. 12. 13. Feare thou not for I am with thee, be not dismaid for I am thy God, I will strengthen thee, yea I will helpe thee, yea I will uphold thee with the right hand of my righteousnes. Behold all they that were incenced against thee shall be ashamed and confounded, they shall be as nothing, and they that striue with thee shall perrish. Thou shalt seeke them & shall not finde them, even them that contended with thee, they that warr against thee shall be as nothing & as a thing of nought. For I the Lord thy God will hold thee by thy right hand, saying vnto thee, feare not, J will helpe thee, Feare not thou worme Jacob, and yee men of Israell, I will helpe, thus sayth the Lord and thy Redeemer the Holy one of Israell. &c.
Secondly, that place in Isay. 43. 1. 2. Where God speaks thus to his Elect. Feare not for J have Redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy name thou art mine. When thou passest through the waters J wilbe with thee, and though the rivers they shall not over flow thee, when thou walkest through the fire thou shalt not bee burnt, neither shall the flame kindell vpon thee.
Thirdly, that in Heb. 13. 5. 6. In these words For he hath sayd I will never leave thee nor for sake thee, Soe that we may boldly say the Lord is my helper, J will not feare what man can doe to me.
With the consideration of these and other gratious promises, made to his people, I being one of his chosen ones, did claime my share & interest in them, and the Lord of his infinite goodnes enabled me to cast my selfe upon and rest in them, knowing and stedfastly beleeving that he is a God of faithfullnes and power, whoe is able and willing to make good these his promises to the vtmost, and (to his praise be it spoken I desire to speake it) my soule was that morning exceedingly listed up with spiritual consolation: and J felt within me such a divine supportation, that the basenesse of my punishment J was to undergoe did seem as a matter of nothing to me. And I went to my suffering with as willing and joy full a heart as if J had been going to solemnize the day of my maraige with one of the choysest Creatures this world could afford. The Warden of the Fleete hauing sent his men for my old fellow souldler Mr. Iohn Wharton, and my selfe being both in one Chamber, wee made our selues readie to goe to the place of execution. I tooke the old man by the hand and led him downe three payre of stayers, and soe along the yard till we came to the Gate. And when we came there George Harrington the Porter told me J must stay alitle, and after our parting (commending one another to the protection of our alsufficient God) I was bid goe to the Porters Lodge, noe sooner was I gone in, but came Iohn Hawes, the other Porter to me vsing these words.
Mr. Lilburne, I am very sorie for your punishment, you are now to undergoe, you must stripp you, and be whipt from hence to Westminster.
I replied, the will of my God be done, for I knowe he will carry me through it with an vndaunted Spirit; But I must confesse it seemed at the first a little strange to me, in regard I had no more notice given me for my preperation for soe sore a punishment. For I thought I should not haue been whipt through the streete but onely at the Pillory: And soe passing a long the Lane being attended with many Staves and Halberts, as Christ was when he was apprehended by his Enimies and led to the High Priests Hall. Mat.-26, we came to Fleete-bridge where was a Cart standing ready for me. And I being commanded to stripp me, I did it with all willingnes and cheerefullnes, where upon the executioner tooke out a Corde and tyed my hands to the Carts Arsse, which caused me to vtter these words, Wellcome be the Crosse of Christ,
With that there drew neere a Yong man of my acquentance, and bid me put on a Couragious resolution to suffer cheerfully & not to dishonor my cause for you suffer (said he) for a good cause, I gaue him thanks, for his christian incouragement, J replying I know the cause is good, for it is Gods cause, & for my own part I am cheerful & merry in the Lord, & am as well contented with this my present portion as if I were to receiue my present liberty. For I knowe my God that hath gone along with me hither to, will carry me though to the end. And for the affliction itself, though it be the punishment inflicted upon Rogues. yet I esteeme it not the least disgrace, but the greatest honour that can be done unto me, that the Lord counts me worthy to suffer any thing for his great name;
And you my Brethren that doe now here behold my present condition this day, be not discouraged, be not discouraged at the waies of Godlinesse by reason of the Crosse which accompanies it, for it is the lot and portion of all which will lius Godly in Christ, Iesus to suffer persecution,
The Cart being readie to goe forward. I spake to the executioner (when I saw him pull out his Corded whipp out of his pocket) after this manner, Well my friend doe thy office. To which he replyed I haue whipt many a Rogue but now I shall whip an honest man. but be not discouraged (said he) it will be soon over.
To which I replyed, J knowe my God hath not onely enabled me to beleeve in his name, but alsoe to suffer for his sake, Soe the Carman drove forward his Cart, and I laboured with my God for strength to submit my back with cheerfullnes unto the smiter. And he heard my desire & granted my request, for when the first stripe was giuen I felt not the leaft paine but said; Blessed be thy name O Lord my God that hast counted mee worthy to suffer for thy glorious names sake; And at the giving of the second, I cried out with a loud voice Hallelujah, Hallelujah, Glory, Honour, and Praise, bee given to thee O Lord forever, and to the Lambe that sitts vpon the Throne. Soe wee vvent vp Fleetstreete, the Lord enabling me to endure the stripes vvith luch patience and cherefullnes, that J did not in the least manner shevv the least discontent at them; for my God hardened my backe, and steeled my reynes, and tooke a vvay the smart and payne of the stripes from mee.
But J must confesse, if I had had no more but my owne naturall strength, I had suncke vnder the burden of my punishement; for to the flesh the paine was uery grevious & heavy: But my God in whom I did trust was higher and stronger then my selfe, whoe strengthened and enabled mee not onely to undergoe the punishment with cherefullnes: but made me Triumph & with a holy disdaine to insult over my torments.
And as we went along the Strand, many friends spoke to me & asked how I did, & bid me be cherfull, to whom I replied, I was merry and cheerfull: and was upheld with a diuine and heauenly supportation, comforted with the sweet consolations of Gods spirit. And about the middle of the Strand, there came a Friend and bid me speake with boldnesse. To whom I replied, when the time comes soe I will. for then if I should haue spoken and spent my strength, it would haue been but as water spilt on the ground, in regard of the noyse and presse of people. And alsoe at that time I was not in a fitt temper to speake: because the dust much troubled mee, and the Sunne shined very hot vpon mee. And the Tipstaffe man at the first vvould not let mee haue my hatt to keepe the vehement heate of the Sunne from my head: Alsoe hee many times spake to the Cart man to driue softly, Soe that the heate of the Sunne exceedingly peirced my head: and made me somwhat faint. But yet my God vpheld me vvith courage, and made me vndergoe it vvith a joyfull heart. And vvhen J came to Chearing Crosse some Christian friends spake to me and bid me be of good cheere.
Soe I am (said I) for I rest not in my ovvne strength. but J fight vnder the Banner of my great and mightie Captaine the Lord Jesus Christ who hath conquered all his Enemies, and I doubt not but through his strength I shall conquer and over come all my sufferings, for his power upholdes mee, his strength enables mee, his presence cheeres mee, and his Spirit comforts mee, and I looke for an immortall Crowne which never shall fade nor decay, the assured hope and expectation where of makes, mee to contemne my sufferings, and count them as nothing, ffor my momentany affliction will worke for me a farre more exceeding Crowne and weight of glory. And as I went by the Kings pallace a great Multitude of people came to looke vpon me. And passing through the gate vnto Westminster, Many demanded what was the matter.
To whom I replied, my Brethren, against the Law of God, against the law of the Land, against the King or State haue J not committed the least offence that deserves this punishment, but only J suffer as an object of the Prelates cruelty and malice; and hereupon, one of the Warden of the Fleets-officers, beganne to interrupt me, and tells mee my suffering was just and therefore I should hold my tongue; Whom J bidd meddle with his owne businesse, for I would speake come what would, for my cause was good for which I suffered, and here I was ready to sheb my dearest blood for it.
And as we went through Kings Street many encouraged me, and bidd me be cheerefull; O thers whose faces (to my knowledge) I never sawe before; and who J verilie thinke knew not the cause of my suffering, but seeing my cheerefullnes vnder it, beseeched the Lord to blesse me and strenthen mee.
At the last wee came to the Pillary, where I was unloosed from the Cart, and having put one some of my cloathes wee went to the Taverne, vvhere J staid a prittie vvhile vvaiting for my Surgeon.
vvhoe vvas not yet come to dresse mee. Where vvere many of my Friends, whoe exceedingly rejoyced to see my courage. that the Lord had enabled me to vndergoe my punishment soe willingly.
Whoe asked me how I did. I tould them, as well as ever I was in my life I blesse my God for it. for I felt such inward joy and comfort, chearing vp my soule, that I lightly esteemed my sufferings.
And this I counted my weding day in which I was married to the Lord Iesus Christ: for now I knowe he loues me in that he hath bestowed soe rich apparrell this day upon me, and counted me worthie to suffer for his sake. I hauing a desire to retire into a private roome from the multitude of people that were about me, which made me like to faint: I had not been ther long but Mr. Lightburne the Tipstaffe of the Star-Chamber, came to me saying the Lords sent him to me, to knowe if I would acknowledge my selfe to be in a fault and then be knew what to say unto me. To whom I replied, Haue their Honours caused me to be whipt from the Fleet to Westminster; and doe they now send to knowe if I wil acknowledge a fault. They should have done this before I had beene whipt; for now seeing I have vndergone the greatest part of my punishment, I hope the Lord will assist me to goe through it all, and besides, if I would haue done this at the first I needed not to haue come to this, But as I tould the Lords when J was before them at the Barre. Soe I desire you to tell them againe, that I am not conscious to my selfe of doing any thing that deserues a submission, but yet I doe willingly submit to their Lordships pleasures in my Censure. He told me if I would confesse, a fault it would saue me astanding on the Pillary otherwise I must undergoe the burden of it.
Wel, (Said I) J regard not alittle out ward disgrace for the cause of my God, I haue found alreadie that sweetnesse in him in whom I haue beleeued, that through his strength I am able to undergoe any thing that shalbee inflicted on me; But me thinks that J had verie hard measure that I should be condemned and thus punished vpon two Oaths, in which the party hath most falslie soresworne himselfe: and because I would not take an Oath to betray mine owne innocency; Why Paul found more favour and mercy from the Heathen Roman-Governors, for they would not put him to an Oath to accuse himselfe, but suffered him to make the best defence he could for himselfe, neither would they condemne him before his accusers and he were brought face to face, to justifie and fully to proue their accusation: But the Lords haue not dealt so with me, for my accusers and I were neuer brought face to face to justifie their accusation against me: it is true two false Oathes were Sworne against mee: and I was therevpon condemned. and because I would not accuse my selfe. It is true (said hee) it was soe with Paul but the Lawes of this Land, are otherwise then their Lawes were in those dayes. Then said I, they are vvorse and more cruell, then the Lawes of the Pagans and Heathen Romans were. whoe would condemne no man without wittnesses and they should be brought face to face; to justifie their accusation. And so hee went away, & I prepared my selfe for the Pillary, to which J went with a joyfull courage. and when I was vpon it, I made obeysance to the Lords, some of them as (J suppose) looking out at the Starr-Chamber-window, towards mee. And so I putt my neck into the hole, which beeing a great deale to low for me, it was very painfull to me in regard of the continuance of time that I stood on the Pillary: which was a bout two houres, my back also being very sore, and the Sunne shining exceeding hot. And the Tipstaffe man, not suffering mee to keepe on my hat, to defend my head from the heat of the Sunne. So that I stood there in great paine. Yet through the strength of my God I vndorwent it with courage: to the very last minute. And lifting vp my heart and spirit vnto my God,
While I was thus standing on the Pillary. J craued his Powerfull assistance: with the spirit of wisdome and courage, that I might open my mouth with boldnesse: and speake those things that might make for his greatest glory, and the good of his people, and soe casting my eyes on the multitude, I beganne to speake after this manner.
My Christean Brethren, to all you that loue the Lord Iesus Christ. and desire that hee should raigne and rule in your hearts and liues, to you especially: and to as many as heare me this day: I direct my speech.
J stand here in the place of ignominy and shame. Yet to mee it is not so, but I owne and imbrace it, as the Wellcome Crosse of Christ. And as a badge of my Christian Profession. I haue been already whipt from the Fleet to this place, by vertue of a Censure: from the Honourable Lords of the Starr Chamber hereunto, The Cause of my Censure I shall declare unto you as briefly as I canne.
The Lord by his speciall hand of providence so ordered it, that Not long agoe I was in Holland. Where I was like to haue settled my selfe in a Course of trading, that might haue brought me in a pretty large portion of earthlie things; (after which my heart did too much runne) but the Lord hauing a better portion in store for mee, and more durable riches to bestow vpon my soule. By the same hand of providence: brought me back a gaine. And cast me into easie affliction, that there by I might be weaned from the world, and see the vanitie and emptines of all things therein. And he hath now pitched my soule vpon such an object of beautie, amiablenessc: & excelencie, as is as permanent and endurable as eternitie it selfe, Namely the personall excelencie of the Lord Iesus Christ, the sweetnesse of whose presence, no affliction can ever be able to wrest out of my soule.
Now while J was in Holland, it seemes ther were divers Bookes, of that Noble and Renowned Dr. Iohn Bastwicks sent into England, which came to the hands of one Edmond Chillington, for the sending over which I was taken, and apprehended, the plot being before laid, by one Iohn Chilliburne (whom I supposed) & tooke to be my friend) servant to my old fellow souldier Mr. John Wharton living in Bow-lane (after this manner.)
I walking in the Street, with the said Iohn Chilliburne, was taken by the Pursevant and his men, the said Iohn as I verily beleeve, hauing given direction to them: where to stand, and he himselfe was the third man that laid hands on me to hold mee.
Now at my Censure before the Lords: I there declared vpon the word of a Christian that I sent not over those Bookes, neither did I know the Shipp that brought them, nor any of the men that belonged to the Shipp, nor to my knowledge did I ever see, either Shipp: or any appertaining to it, in all my dayes.
Besides this, I was accused at my examination before, the Kings Atturny at his Chamber, by the said Edmond Chillington Button Seller Iiving in Canon street neere Abchurch Lane, and late Prisoner in Bridewell & Newgate, for printing 10. or 12. thousand Bookes in Holland, and that J would haue printed the Vnmasking the mistery of iniquitie if I could haue gott a true Copie of it, and that I had a Chamber in Mr. John Foots house at Delfe where hee thinkes the bookes were kept. Now here I declare before you all, vpon the word of a suffering Christian: that hee might haue as well accused mee of printing a hundred thousand bookes, and the on been as true as the other; And for the printing the Vnmasking the Mistery of Iniquity, vpon the word of an honest man I never saw, nor to my knowledge heard of the Booke, till I came back againe into England: And for my having a Chamber in Mr. John Foots house at Delfe, where he thinkes the Bookes were kept. J was soe farre from having a Chamber there, as I never lay in his house, but twice or thrice at the most, and upon the last Friday of the last Tearme I was brought to the Star-Chamber Barre, where before mee was read the said Edmond Chillingtons Affidavit, vpon Oath, against Mr. John Wharton and my selfe. The Summe of which Oath was, That hee and I had Printed (at Rotterdam in Holland,) Dr. Bastwicks Answer, and his Letany, with divers other scandalous Bookes.
Now here againe I speake it in the presence of God, & all you that heare mee, that Mr. Wharton, and I never joyned together in printing, either these or any other Bookes whatsoever. Neither did I receive any mony from him, toward the printing any.
Withall, in his first Oath, hee peremtorilie swore that wee had printed them at Rotterdam. Vnto which I likewise say, That hee hath in this particular forsworne himselfe, for my owne part, I never in all my daies either printed, or caused to be printed, either for my selfe or Mr. Wharton any Bookes at Rotterdam. Neither did I come into any Printing house there all the time I was in the Citty.
And then vpon the Twesday after he swore, against both of us againe. The summe of which Oaths was, that I had confessed to him (which is most false) that I had Printed Dr. Bastwicks Answer to Sr. John Banks his Information, and his Letany; & another Booke called Certaine answers to certaine Objections; And another Booke called The vanity & impiety of the old Letany; & that J had divers other Bookes of the said Dr. Bastwicks in Printing, & that Mr. Wharton, had beene at the charges of Printing a Booke called A Breviae of the Bishops late proceeding; and another Booke called 16. new Queries, and in this his Oath hath sworne they were Printed at Rotterdam, or some where else in Holland; & that on James Oldam, a Turner keping Shop at Westminster hall-gate disperced divers of these bookes. Now in this Oath he hath againe forsworne himselfe in a high degree, for wheras he took his Oath that I had printed the Booke called The Vanitie and impiety of the old Letany, I here speake it before you all, that I never in all my daies did see one of them in print, but I must confess, I haue seen & read it, in written hand, before the Dr. was censured, & as for other books, of which he saith I haue diverse in printing. To that I answer, that for mine owne perticuler I never read nor saw any of the Drs. Bookes: but the forenamed foure in English, and one little thing more of about; two sheetes of paper, which is annexed to the Vanity of the Old Letany, And as for his Lattine Bookes J never saw any but two: Namely his Flagellam, for which he was first censured in the High-Commission Court: and his Apologeticus, which were both in print long before J knew the Dr. But it is true, there is a second edition of his Flagellam, but that was at the presse aboue two yeares agoe: namly Anno 1634. And some of this impression was in England before J came out of Holland,
And these are the maine things for which I was Censured and Condemned. Being two Oaths in which the said Chillington, hath palpably forsworne himselfe. And if hee had not forsworne himselfe. Yet by the law (as I am given to vnderstand) I might have excepted against him, being a guilty person himselfe and a Prisoner, and did that which hee did against thee for pvrchasing his owne liberty which hee hath by such Iudasly meanes gott and obtained. Who is also knowne to bee a lying fellow, as J told the Lords I was able to proue and make good.
But besides all this, there was an inquisition Oath tendered vnto mee (which J refused to take) on foure severall daies; the summe of which Oath is thus much. You shall sweare that you shall make true answer to all things that shall be asked of you: So helpe you God. Now this Oath I refused as a sinfull and vnlawfull Oath: it being the High-Commission Oath, with which the Prelates euer haue and still do so butcherly torment, afflict and vndoe, the deare Saints and Servants of God, It is also an Oath against the Law of the Land, As Mr. Nicholas Fuller in his Argument doth proue, And also it is expressly against the Petition of Right an Act of Parlament Enacted in the second yeare of our King. Againe, it is absolutely against the Law of God, for that law requires noe man to accuse himselfe, but if any thing be laid to his charge: there must come two or three witnesses at the least to proue it. It is also against the practise of Christ himselfe, who in all his examinations before the High Priest would not accuse himselfe: but vpon their demands, returned this answer: Why aske jea mee, go to them that heard mee.
With all this Oath is against the uery law of nature, for nature is alwaies a preserver of it selfe and not a distroyer. But if a man takes this wicked Oath he distroyes and vndoes himselfe, as daily experience doth witnesse. Nay it is worse then the Law of the Heathen Romans, as we may reade Act. 25. 16. For when Paull stood before the Pagan Governours, and the Iews required Judgement against him, the Governour replyed, it is not the manner of the Romans to condemne any man before his accusers & hee were brought face to face to justify their accusation. But for my owne part, if I had beene proceeded against by a Bill, J would haue answered & justified all that they coulde have proved against me, & by the strength of my God would have sealed whatsoever I have don with my bloud, for I am privy to mine own actions, & my conscience beares me witnes that I have laboured ever since the Lord in mercy made the riches of his grace known to my Soule, to keep a good conscience and to walke inoffensably both towards God, & man. But as for that Oath that was put unto me I did refuse to take it, as a sinfull and unlawfull Oath, & by the strength of my God enabling me I wil never take it though I be puld in peices with wilde horses as the ancient Chritians were by the bloudy Tirants, in the Primitive Church; neither shall I thinke that man a faithfull Subject, of Christs Kingdome, that shall at any time hereafter take it, seeing the wickednes of it hath been so apparently laid open by so many, for the refusall wherof many doe suffer cruell persecution to this day. Thus have J as briefly as I could; declared unto you, the whole cause of my standing here this day, I being upon these grounds censured by the Lords at the Starr-chamber on the last Court day of the last tearme to pay 500. põ. to the King and to receive the punishment which with rejoicing I hane undergon, vnto whose censure I do with willingnes & cheeresulnes submit, my selfe.
But seeing I now stand here at this present, I intend the Lord assisting me with his power, and guiding me by his spirit, to declare my minde unto you.
I haue nothing to say to any mans person, and therefore will not meddle with that. Onlie the things that I have to say in the first place, are concerning the Bishops & their calling. They challeng their callings to be Iure Divino, & for the oppugning of which, those three renovvned living marters of the Lord, Dr. Bastwick M. Burton & M. Prinne: did suffer in this place, and they have sufficientlie proved, that their, Calling is not from God, which men I love and honour, and doe perswade my selfe their soules are deere and precious in the sight of God, though they were so cruellie and butcherlie dealt with by the Prelates, and as for Mr. Burton and Mr. Prynne they are worthie and learned men, but yet did not in manie things write so fullie as the Dr. did, who hath sufficientlie & plentifullie set forth the wickednes, both of the Prelates themselves & of their callings. (as you may reade in his Bookes) that they are not Jure Divino, which noble and reverend Dr. I love with my Soule, and as he is a man that stands for the truth and Glorie of God, my verie life and hart blood I will lay downe for his honour, and the maintaining of his cause, for which he Suffered, it being Gods cause. As for the Bishops, they vsed in former times to challeng their jurisdiction, Callings, and power from the King. But they haue now openly in the High Commission Court renounced that, as was heard by many, at the Censure of that Noble Dr. And as you may fullie read in his Apollogeticus. And in his Answer to Sr. Iohn Bankes his Jnformation. Novv J will here mantaine it before them all. That their Calling is so farre from being Iure Diuino (as they say they are) that they are rather Iure Diabollico. Which if I be not able to proue, let me be hanged vp at the Hall Gate. But my Brethren, for your better satisfaction, read the 9. & 13. Chapters of the Reuelation, and there you shall see, that there came Locust out of the Bottomlesse Pitt, part of vvhom they are, and they are ther liuely discirbed. Also yon shall there finde, that the Beast (which is the Pope, or Roman State and Goverment,) hath given to him by the Dragon (the Devill) his Power and Seate, and great authoritie, Soe that the Popes authoritie comes from the Devill, and the Prelates, and their Creatures in their printed Bookes, do challenge their authoritie jurisdiction and Power, (that they exercise over all sorts of people) is from Rome.
And for proving of the Church of England to be a true Church, their best & strongest argument is: that the Bb. are lineally discended from his Holines (or impiousnes) of Rome: as you may read in Pocklingtons Booke, called Sunday no Sabboth. So that by their own confession they stand by that same power and authoritie that they haue receaved from the Pope. Soe that their calling is not from God but from the Divill. For the Pope cannot give a better authoritie or calling to them, then he himselfe hath. But his Authoritie and Calling is from the Devill: Therefore the Prelates Calling and authoritie is from the Devill alsoe. Revel. 9. 3. And there came out of the smoake, Locusts upon the earth: and unto them was given power as the Scorpions of the earth haue power to hurt: and vndoe men, as the Prelates dailie doe. And also Revel. 13. 2. And the Beast which I sawe (saith S. Iohn) was like unto a Leopard, and his seete were as the seete of a Beare, and his mouth as the mouth of a Lion, and the Dragon (that is to say the Devill) gaue him his power, his seat, and great authority. and ver. 15. 16. 17. And whether the Prelates as well as the Pope, do not daily the same things: let every man that hath but common reason judge.
For do not their daily practises and cruell burdens, imposed on all sorts of people, high and low, rich and poore: witnesse that their discent is from the Beast, part of his state and kingdome. Soe also Revel. 16. 13. 14. All which places do declare, that their Power and authority being from the Pope, (as they themselues confesse) Therefore it must needes originally come from the Devill For their power & callings, must of necessitie proceede either from God, or else from the Divill, But it proceeds not from God, as the Scriptures sufficiently declares: Therefore there calling and power proceeds from the Devill, as both Scripture and there owne daily practises doe demonstrate and prove. And as for that last place cited Rev. 16. 13. 14. Jf you please to reade the Second, and third parts of Dr. Bastwicks Letany, you shall finde, he their proves that the Prelates practises doe every way suite with, and make good that portion of Scripture to the vtmost. For in their Sermons that they preach before his Majestie: how doe they incense the King & nobles against the people of God, labouring to make them odious in his sight & stirring him up to execute vengance vpon them, though they be the most harmelesse generation of all others.
And as for all these officers that are vnder them & made by them, for mine own particular I cannot se but that their callings are as unlawfull as the Bishops themselves, and in particular for the callings of the ministers, J do not, nor will not speake against their persons, for I know some of them to be very able men, and men of excellent guiftes and quallifications, and I perswade my selfe their souls are very deare and pretious in the fight of God.
Yet not withstanding, this proves not their Callings to be ever the better. As it is in civill government. If the King (whom God hath made a lawfull Majestrate) make a wicked man an officer, hee is as true an officer and as well to be obeyed, comming in the Kings name, as the best man in the world comming with the same atthoritie, for in such a case, he that is a wicked man hath his calling from as good authority as the godliest man hath: And therefore his calling is as good as the others.
But on the other side, if he that hath noe authoritie make officers, though the men themselues be never so good and holie. Yet their holines makes their calling never a whitt the truer, but still is a false a calling: in regard his authority was not good nor lawful that made [Editor: illegible word] & [Editor: illegible word] so the ministers, be they never so holy men: yet they haue one and the same calling with the wickedest that is amongest them, their holines proues not their callings to be ever the truer: seeing their authority that made them ministers is false, and therefore they haue more to answer for then any of the rest: by how much the more God hath bestowed greater guifts vpon them then vpon others, and yet they detaine the truth in vnrighteousnesse from Gods people: and do not make knowne to them as they ought, the whole will and counsell of God.
And againe, the greater is their sinne if their callings be vnlawfull, (as J verily beleeve they are) in that they still hold them and doe not willingly lay them downe & renounce them, for they do but deceiue the people and highly dishonour God, and sinne against their owne soules, while they preach vnto the people by vertue of an Antichristian and vnlawfull Calling, and the more godlie audable the Minister is that still preaches by vertue of this calling, the more hurt he doth, for the people that haue such a Minister will not be perswaded of the truth of things, though one speake & informe them in the name of the Lord; but will be ready to reply, Our Minister that preaches still by vertue of this Calling, is so holy a man, that were not his calling right & good: I do assure my selfe be would no longer preach by vertue thereof, And thus the holines of the minister is a Cloake to couer the unlawfulnes of his calling, and make the people continue rebells against Christs his Scepter and Kingdome, which is an agreuation of his sinne. for by this meanes the people are kept off from receiving the whole truth into their soules, & rest in being but almost Christians, or but Christians in part. But Oh my Brethren, it behoues all you that feare God, and tender the Salvation of your owne Soules, to looke about you & to shake of that long security & formality in Religion, that you have layne in. For God of all things cannot indure Lukewarmenes Revel 3. 16. And search out diligently the truth of things, and try them in the Ballance of the Sanctuary. I beseech you take things no more vpon trust, as hitherto you haue done, but take paines to search and finde out those Spirituall and hidden truthes that God hath enwraped in his sacred Booke, and finde out a bottom for your owne soules. For if you will haue the comforts of them, you must bestow some labour for the getting of them, and you must search dilligently before you finde them Pro. 2. Labour also to withdraw your neckes from vnder that Spirituall and Antichristian bondage, (unto which you haue for a long time subjected your soules) least the Lord cause his plagues and the fearcenesse of his wrath to seize both vpon your bodies and soules: seeing you are now warned of the danger of these things.
For hee himselfe hath said Revel. 14. 9. 10. 11. That if any man worship the Beast and his Image, and receiue his marke in his forehead or in his hand. The same shall drinke of the wine of his wrath: which is powered out without mixture into the cup of his indignation, and he shal be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy Angels, & in the presence of the Lambe, and the smoake of their Torment ascended, vp for ever and ever, and they have noe rest day nor night, who worship the Beast & his Image, and whosoever receiveith the marke of his name. Therefore as you loue your owne soules and looke for that immortall Crowne of happines in the world to come, looke that you with draw your selves from that Antichristian power & slavery that you are now vnder, even as God himselfe hath commanded and injoyned you in Rev. 18. 4. saying Come one of her my people that you bee not pertaker of her sinns and that yee receive not of her Plagues, for her sinnes have reached vnto heaven; and God hath remembred her mignities. Here is the voyce of God himselfe commanding all his chosen ones, though they have lived vnder this Antichristian slavish power and estate along time; yet at last to withdraw their obedience, and subjection from it. My Brethren, wee are all at this present in a very dangerous and fearefull condition; vnder the Idolatrous and spirituall bondage of the Prelates, in regard wee have turned Traytours vnto our God, in seing his Almighty great name and his Heavenly truth troden under foote, and soe highlie dishonoured by them, and yet wee not onely let them alone in holding our peace, but most slavishlie & wickedly, subject our selves unto them; fearing the face of a peece of durt more then the Almightie great God of Heaven and earth, who is able to cast both body & Soule in to everlasting damnation.
Oh repent; I beseech you therefore repent, for that great dishonour you have suffered to bee done unto God by your fearfullnes, and cowardlines, & for the time to come, put on couragious resolutions like valiant souldiers of Iesus Christ; and fight manfullie in this his spirituall battell, in which battell some of his souldiers haue allready lost part of their blood, and withall; Study this Booke of the Revelation; and there you shall finde the mistery of iniquitie fullie vnfolded and explaned; and also you shall se what great spirituall battels haue beene fought betwixt the Lambe & his Servants, and the Dragon (the Devill) and his vassals, and some are yet to fight.
Therefore gird on your Spirituall armour Spoken of Ephes. 6. that you may quit your selves like good & faithfull Souldiers, and feare no coulors the victory and conquest is ours allready; for wee are sure to have it, (I do not speake of any bodily and temporall battell but onelie of a spirituall one) and be not discouraged and knoct of from the study of it, because of the obscurity and darkenes of it, for the Lord hath promised his enlightening Spirit unto all his people that are laborous and studious to know him aright, and also he hath promised a blessing and pronounced a blessednes vnto all that read and labour to keape the things contayned in this booke Rev. 1. 3. My Christian Brethren, in the bowels of Iesus Christ I beseech you doe not contemne the things that are delivered to you, in regard of the meanesse and weaknesse of mee the instrument, being but one of the meanest and unworthiest of the Servants of Jesus Christ, for the Lord many times doth great things by weake meanes, that his power may be more seene, for wee are to ready to cast our eye vpon the meanes and instrument: not looking up unto that Almighty power that is in God, who is able to doe the greatest things by the weakest meanes, and therefore out of the mouthes of Babes & Sucklings he hath ordayned strength Psal. 8. 2. And hee hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise, and God hath chosen the weake things of the world to confound the things which are mighty, & base things of the world, & things which are dispised hath God chosen; Yea things which are not, to bring to nought things that are 1. Cor. 1. 27. 28. And he giues the reason wherefore he is pleased so to do. That no flesh should glory in his presence.
So you se God is not tyed to any instrument & means to effect his own glory, but hee by the least instrument is able to bring to passe the greatest things.
It is true, J am a yong man and noe Scoller; according to that which the world counts Scollership, yet I have obtayned mercie of the Lord to be faithfull, & hee by a divine prouidence hath brought me hither this day, & I speak to you in the name of the Lord, being assisted with the spirit & power of the God of Heaven and earth, & I speake not the words of rashnes or inconsideratenesse; but the words of sobernes, and mature deliberation, for I did consult with my God before I came hither, and desired him that he would direct and enable me to speake that which might be for his glory and the good of his people, And as I am a Souldier fighting under the banner of the great and mightie Captaine the Lord Iesus Christ, and as J looke for that Crowne of immortality which one day I know shall bee set upon my temples, being in the condition that I am in, I dare not hold my peace, but speake unto you with boldnes in the might and strength of my God, the things which the Lord in mercy hath made knowne unto my Soule, come life come death.
When I was here about, there came a fat Lawier, I do not know his name, & commanded me to hold my peace & leave my preaching. To whom I replied and said, Sr. I will not hold my peace but speake my minde freely though I be hanged at Tiburne for my paines. It seemes he himselfe was gauled and toucht as the Lawiers were in Christ time, when hee spake against the Scribes & Pharisees, which made them say, Master in saying thus thou reutlest us alsoe. Soe he went away and (I thinke) complained to the Lords, but J went on with my speech and said,
My Brethren, be not discouraged at the waies of God for the affliction and Crosse that doth accompany them, for it is sweete & comfortable drawing in the Yoake of Christ for all that, and I haue found it soe by experience, for my soule is fild so full of spirituall and heavenlie joy, that with my tongue J am not able to expresse it, neither are any capeable (J thinke) to partake of soe great a degre of consolation but onelie those upon whom the Lords gracious afflicting hand is.
And for mine owne part I stand this day in the place of an evill doer, but my conscience witnesseth that I am not soe. And here about I put my hand in my pocket, and puld out Three of worthie Dr. Bastwicks Bookes and threw them among the people and said. There is part of the bookes for which I suffer; take them among you, and read them, and see if you finde any thing in them, against the Law of God, the Law of the Land, the glory of God, the honour of the King or state.
I am the Sonne of a Gentleman, and my Friends are of rancke and quality in the Countrie where they live, which is 200. miles from this place, and I am in my present condition deserted of them all, for I know not one of them dare meddle with me in my present estate, being J am stung by the Scorpions (the Prelates) and for anything I know, it may bee J shall never haue a fauourable countenance from any of them againe, and withall, I am a yong man and likelie to haue lived well and in plentie, according to the fashion of the world. Yet notwithstanding, for the cause of Christ, and to doe him service, I haue and doe bid adue to Father, Friends, Riches, pleasures, case, contented life and bloud, and lay all downe at the Footstoole of Iesus Christ, being willing to part with all rather then I will dishonour him, or in the least measure part with the peace of a good conscience, & that sweetnesse and joy which I haue found in him, for in naked Christ is the quintisence of swetnes & I am so farr from thinking my affliction and punishment which this day I haue endured and still doe indure and groane under (a disgrace) that I receive it as the welcome Crosse of Christ, and doe thinke my selfe this day more honoured by my sufferings then if a Crowne of gold had beene set upon my head, for I haue in some part beene made conformable to my Lord and Master, and have in some measure drunke of the same Cupp which he himselfe drank of, while he was in this sinfull world, for he shed his most precious bloud for the salvation of my poore soul, that so I might be reconsiled to his father, therfor am I willing to undergo any thing for his sake; & that in ward joy & consolation within me that carries mee high aboue all my pains & torments, & you (My Brethren) if you be willing to haue Christ, you must owne him and take him upon his own tearmes, & know that Christ and the Crosse is inseperable, for he that will live godlie in Christ Iesus must suffer persecution and affliction, it is the lott and portion of all his chosen ones, through many afflictions & trials we must enter into glorie and the Apostell saith, that if we be without afflictions whereof all are partakers, then are yee Bastards and, not Sonnes. And therfore if you will haue Christ sit down & reckon before ever you make profession of him what he will cost you; least when you come to the triall you dishonour him, and if you bee not willing and contented to part withall; and let all goe for his sake, you are not worthy of him.
If Parents, husband, wife or children, lands or livings, riches, or honours, pleasure, or ease, life or blood, stand in the way, you must be willing to parte with all these and to entertaine Christ naked & alone, though you haue nothing but the Crosse, or else you are not worthy of him Math. 10. 37. 38.
Oh my Brethren there is such sweetnes and contentednes in enjoying the Lord Iesus alone, that it is able where it is felt, to make a man goe through all difficulties & endure all hardshipps that may possiblie come vpon him. Therefore if hee call you to it, doe not deny him nor his truth in the least manner, for he hath said, Hee that denies him before men, him will hee denie before his Father which is in Heaven. And now is the time that wee must shew our selves good Souldiers of Jesus Christ, for his truth, his cause and glorie lies at stake in a high degree, therefore put one couragious resolutions, and withdraw your necks and soules from all false power and worship, and fight with courage and boldnes in this spirituall Battell, in which Battell the Lord befor your eyes hath raised vp some valiant Champions that fought up to the eares in bloud, therefore be couragious Souldiers and fight it out bravely, that your God may be glorified by you, and let him onelie have the service, both of your inward and outward man, and stand to his cause, and loue your owne Soules, and feare not the face of any mortall man, for God hath promised to bee with you and uphold you that they shall not preuaile against you, Isay 10. 111. But alas, how fewe are there that dare shew any courage for God and his cause, though his glorie lies at the Stake, but thinke themselves happy and well, and count themselves wise men if they can sleepe in a whole skinn, when Christ hath said, "Hee that will saue his life shall loose it, and hee that will loose his life for his sake shall finde it, What shall it profit a man if he gaine the whole world & loose his owne Soule?"
Therefore is it better for a man to bee willing and contented to let all goe for the enjoying of Christ and doing him service, then to sit downe and sleepe in a whole skinne, though in soe doeing hee gaine all the world and see him dishonoured, his glorie and truth troden under foot and the bloud of his Servants shed and Split?
Yes without doubt it is. But many are in these times so far from suffering valientlie for Christ, that they rather disswade men from it, and count it a point of singularitie and pride, and selfe ends for a man to put himselfe forward to doe God service; asking, what calling and warrant any private man hath thereunto, seeing it belongs to the Ministers to speake of these things. Yes soe it doth, But alas they are so cowardly and fearfull that they dare not speake;
And therfore it belongs also to thee, or mee, or any other man, if thou beest a Souldier of Iesus Christ, whatsoever by place or Calling thy rancke or degree bee, bee it higher or lower, yet if hee call for thy service, thou art bound though others stand still, to mainetaine his power and glory to the utmost of thy power and strength, yea to the shedding the last drop of thy blood; for he hath not loued his life vnto the death for thy sake, but shed his precious blood for the redemption of thy soule, hath hee done this for thee, and darest thou see him dishonoured and his glory lie at the stake, and not speake on his behalfe, or doe him the best service thou canst?
If out of a base and cowardlie Spirit thus thou dost, Let me tell thee here and that truly to thy face, thou hast a Dalila in thy heart which thou louest more then God, and that thou shalt on day certainly finde by wofull experience. Alas if men should hold their peace in such times as these, the Lord would cause the verie Stones to speake to convince man of his cowardlie basenesse.
Having proceeded in amanner thus farre by the strength of my God, with boldnes and courage in my speech, The Warden of the Fleete came with the fatt Lawier, and commanded mee to hold my peace. To whom I replied, I would speake and declare my cause and minde, though J were to bee Hanged at the gate for my speaking. And he caused proclamation to be maid upon the Pillary: for bringing to him the Bookes. So then he commanded me to be gagged, and if I spake any more that then J should bee whipt againe upon the Pillary.
So I remained about an houre & a halfe gagged, being intercepted of much matter which by Gods assistance I intended to haue spoken, But yet with their cruelty I was nothing at all daunted, for I was full of comfort and courage, beeing mightily strengthned with the power of the Almightie which made me with cheerefullnesse triumph umph over all my sufferings, not shewing one sad countenance or a disconted heart.
And when I was to come downe having taken out my head out of the Pillarie, I looked about mee upon the people and said. I am more then a conquerer though him that loved me. Vivat Rex. Let the King live for ever, and soe I came downe, and was had backe againe to the Tavern, where I to gether with Mr. Wharton, staid a while till one went to the Warden to know what should be done with me, who gaue order wee should be carried back againe to the Fleete, and as I went by land through the streetes, greate store of people stood all along to behold me, and many of them blessed God for enabling me to undergoe my sufferings with such cheerefullnes and courage as I did, for I was mightily filled with the sweete presence of Gods Spirit, which caused me notwitstanding the paines of my sufferings to go along the streets with a joyfull countenance not shewing the least discontentednes, as if I had beene going to take possession of some great treasures.
After J came back to the prison, none were suffered to come at me but the Surgiõ to dresse me, & I feeling my self somwhat Fevorish I went to bed, & my Surgion doubting the same also, gaue me a Glister, and appointed to come the next morning & let me blood, but when he came, he could not be permitted to come at me: nor any else, for the Porter kept the key, and lockt me vp very close: saying the Warden gaue him straight command so to doe. Wherevp on I desired the Surgion to go to Westminster to the Warden & certifie him how it was with me, (being very ill) & that he might haue liberty to come at me to let me blood and dresse mee, which could not be obtained till the Warden himself came home. About one of the clock John Hawes the Porter came to me, to knowe what I had to say to the warden, to whom I said, Mr. Hawes, this is very cruell & harsh dealing, that after so sore whipping my Surgion shal not be admitted to come & dresse me; nor any other be suffered to administer to my necessities, having not eaten all this day nor the last evening but a little Candle, I hope the Lords will be more mercifull then after the undergoeing the extremity of my Censure to take my life from me, by letting mee perish for want of looking to, therefore J pray speake to Mr. Warden, that he would be pleased to give leave to my Chirurgion to come dresse me and let mee bloud; otherwise I was in danger of a Feaver, which might take away my life; So he wished me to have written to the Warden; J told him, if he would helpe me to Penne Inke and Paper, so I would. No (said hee) I dare not doe that; Then I desired him to deliver my mind to the Warden by word of mouth; who then went away, and after I was in my bedd, he came to me againe, and said thus unto me: Mr. Lilburne I have one suite to you. What is that, said J? It is this, said he, that you would helpe me to one of those Books that you threw abroad at the Pillary, that I might reade it, for J never read any of them; I speake not for it to doe you any hurt, only I have a great desire to reade on: of them. Sir, I thinke you doe not (said J) but I cannot satisfie your desire, for if I had had more of them; they should yesterday have all gone. J verily beleeve you, said he, and so we parted.
And in a very little while after, came the Warden himselfe with the Porter, and J being in my bedd, hee asked me how J did? Said J, I am well, I blesse my God for it, and am very merry and cheerfull. Well (said hee) you have undone your selfe with speaking what you did yesterday, Sir (said I) I am not sorry for what I said, but am hartely gladd that the Lord gave mee strength and courage to speake what I did, and were I to speake againe, I would speak twice as much as I did, if J could have liberty, though I were immediatly to loose my life after it, wouldst thou so, said he? Ey indeed Sir would I, with the Lords assistãce, said I, for I fear not the face of Man; And concerning what I yesterday spake, J did not in the least manner speake against any of the Lords, but did openly declare, that I did willingly with all contentednes submitt my selfe to their Censure; and as for the Bishops, I said nothing against any of their persons, but only against their callings. Ey, said the Warden, and thou saidst their calling was from the Devill. Yes Sir so I did, said I, and J will prove it, and make it good, or else I wil be willing to loose my dearest blood; For if you please to reade the 9. & 13. chap. of Rev. you shall there finde, that the Beast which ascended out of the bottomlesse Pitt (which is the Pope and Roman State, hath his power and authority given him by the Dragon; (the Devill) So that all the power which the Pope hath and doth exercise, originally comes from the Devill: If you reade also some Bookes lately set forth by the Prelates themselves and their Creatures, you shall there finde, that they claime their jurisdiction, standing, and power from the Pope: Now, if their power and calling be from the Pope, (as they themselves say it is) then it must needs be from the Devill also; For the Popes power and calling is from the Devill; And he cannot give a better power and calling to them then he himselfe hath; and I pray Sir, if the Bishop of Canterbury be offended at that which J spake yesterday, tell him I will seale it with my bloud; And if he please to send for me, I will justifie it to his face, and if I be not able to make it good before any noble man in the Kingdome, let mee loose my life. By, but it had been a great deale better, said he, for thine owne particular good to have beene more sparing of thy speech at that time. No Sir, said I, nothing at all, for my life and bloud is not deare and precious to me, so I may glorifie God, and doe him any service therewith, I assure thee, said he, I was exceedingly chidd about thee; and also there were old businesses rubd up against mee concerning Dr. Laiton and Mr. Burton, for that Liberty that they had. Wherefore were you chidd for me, said I? About the Bookes, said he, that you threw abroade, in regard you were close Prisoner, and yet had those Bookes about you; I would aske you one question: Did you bring those Bookes to the Fleete with you or were they since brought to you by any other? I beseech you Sir pardon me for revealing that said I. Then he would have knowne who they were that most resorted to me. I desired I might be excused in that also. By, but you must give me an answer, said hee, for I must certifie the Lords thereof. Then, said I, I pray you tell their Honours, I am unwilling to tell you. What were those Bookes, said he, that you threw abroade, were they all of one sort? Those that have them, said I, can certifie you of that. I my selfe have one of them, said he, and have read it, and I can finde no wit in it, there is nothing but railing in it. Sir, said I, J conceive you are mistaken, for the Booke is all full of wit; it is true, this Booke which you lighted on, is not so full of soliditie as other of his Bookes are; but you must understand, that at that time when the Dr. made that Booke, hee was full of heavines and in danger of a great punishment, for the Prelates had breathed out more crueltie against him for writing his Apology; And at that time also he was compassed about on every side with the Pestilence; Therefore he made that Books to make himselfe merrie. But, said he, hee doth not write any thing in it to the purpose against the Bishops callings. Sir, said I, I must confesse, you lighted on the worst of the 3. And it is true, there is not much soliditie and force of argument in it but only mirth; But the other two are as full of soliditie as this is of mirth. What, were they of 3. lotts said he? Yes Sir, that they were, said I. What were the other two called, said he? The one (said I) was his Answer to Sr. John Banks his Information; The other is an Answer to some Objections that are made against that Booke which you have; But if ever you reade his Latine Bookes, you shall there finde soliditie enough, and the wickednes and unlawfulnes of the Bishops Callings and practises set forth to the full. What Latine Bookes be they, said he? His Flagellum, for which hee was first Censured, said I. What, hath hee been twice Censured, said he? Yes, said I, he was Censured in the High-Commission Court, for writing his Flagellum; And after that he wrote his Apology; and that little Booke which you have, which were the cause of his Censure in the Starr-Chamber. But hast thou any more of those Bookes, said he? Sir, said I, if I had had 20. of them more, they should all have gone yesterday. But, hast thou any more of them now, said he? Sir, said I, I verily thinke, that if I should tell you, I had not, you would not beleeve me, and therefore if you please, you may search my Chamber. So I must (said he) for the Lords have commaunded me so to doe, therefore open your Trunke. Sir, said I, it is open alreadie. Search it John Hawes, said he. So he search it, and found nothing there. Open the Cubbard, said he. So I gave the Porter the key of my Cubbard, to search it, and he found nothing there but my victuals. Search his pocket said the Warden. Indeed Sir, said I, there is none in them; Yet he searched them, and found as I said. Then he searched all my Chamber over, but found nothing at all. Well Sir, said I, now you can certifie the Lords how you finde things with me; But I pray Sir, must I still be kept close Prisoner? I hope, now the Lords have inflicted their Censure on me, they will not still keepe me close. No, said hee, within a little time you wilbe eased of it; So we tooke our leaves each of other, and hee went away.
And the next day, being Fryday, and a Starr-Chamber-day, J hoped I should have had the Libertie of the Prison; But in stead thereof, newes was brought me at evening, that I must be removed to the Common Gayte, or a worse place, and that J must bee put in Irons. Well, for all this my God enabled me to keep my hold still, and not to let my confidence goe; For (blessed be his name for it) this newes did not in the least manner trouble me.
And upon Saterday morning Iohn Hawes the Porter came with the Woman that looked to mee to my Chamber, to stand by her that none might speake with me till she had made my bedd, and done other things for me; And he told me, hee was sorrie to heare such newes as he did concerning me. VVhat is it, said J? I heare, said he, that the Lords have ordered, that you must be put into the Wards, and kept close Prisoner there, and lie in irons, and none must be suffered to come at you to bring you any thing; but you must live upon the Poore Mans Box. Sir, that’s verie hard, said J, but the will of my God be done; For mine owne part, it nothing at all troubles me; For I know in whom I have beleeved, and I know, not one Haire of my Head shall fall to the ground without his providence; And I have cast up my account alreadie what it will cost me; Therfore J waigh not any thing that can be inflicted on me; For I knovv, that God, that made Paul and Silas to singe in the Stocks at midnight, will also make me rejoyce in my Chaines; But it is verie much that they wil let none com to me, to bring me any thing; it seemes, they wilbe more cruell to me then the verie Heathens and Pagan Romans were to Paul; who when he was in Prison, did never refuse to let any come to him, to administer to his necessities; But I vvaigh it not, for I knovv my God is and vvill be with me, to make me goe through all my afflictions with cheerefulnes, for I feele his power within me so mightily supporting and upholding me, that no condition in this World can make me miserable; And for mine owne part, I doe no more sett by my life and blood in this cause, then J doe a peece of bread when I have newly dyned.
Afterwards the VVoman telling mee shee hoped I should not have so sore a punishment laid on me, but that I might have things brought me from my Freinds, J told her I did not much care how it went with me, for Ieremies Dungeon, or Daniels Denn, or the 3. Childrens Fornace, is as pleasant and welcome to me as a Pallace; For wheresoever I am I shall finde God there, and if I have him, that is enough to me; And for victuals, J told her J did not doubt but that God that fed the Prophet Eliah by a Raven, would preserve me, and fill me to the full by the way of his providence; And if no meate should be brought me, I knew, if they take away my meate, God would take away my stomack; Therefore I wayed not their crueltie; And thereupon uttered to her these 4. Verses:
- I doe not feare nor dread the face of any mortall man,
- Let him against me bend his povver, and doe the vvorst he can,
- For my vvhole trust, strength, confidence, My hope, and all my aide
- Is in the Lord IEHOUAHS, sence, vvhich Heaven and Earth hath made.
The rest that I intended by the strength of my God to have spoken (if J had not beene prevented by the Gag) I now forbeare to set downe, in regard I heare J am to come into the Feild againe to fight a second battell, unto which time I reserve it, if the Lord so order it that I may have Libertie to speake; I doubt not but by the might and power of my God, in whom I rest and trust, valiantly to display the weapons of a good Souldier of Iesus Christ; Come life, come death; And in the meane time to what I have here said and written, I set to my name, by me JOHN LILBVRN, being written with part of my owne bloud; The rest of which by the Lords assistance I will willingly shed, if hee call for it, in the maintaining of his Truth and Glory; and that which I have here said and written by me
- I Doe not (a) feare the face nor power of any mortall man,
- Though he against me rise, to doe the worst he can,
- Because my (b) trust, my hope my strength, my confidence and aide’
- Is in the Lord Iehovahs power, both now and ever staide.
- Therefore my soule shall never cease, Triumphantly to sing,
- Thou art my Fort, (c) my sure defence, my Saviour and my King,
- For in my (d) strayts and trials all, thou well with me hast delt,
- Thy mercies and (e) upbearing hand, most sweetly I have felt.
- Thou hast in my (f) distresses great, my stripes and bitter smart
- So held my soule as from thy truth, I never once did start.
- But to thy truth with cheerfulnesse, and courage have I stood,
- Though tortur’d for it were my flesh, and lost my dearest blood,
- When from Fleet-bridg to Westminster, at Carts Arsse I was whipt,
- Then thou with joy my soule (g) upheldst, so that I never wept.
- Likewise when I on Pillary, in Pallace-yeard did stand,
- Then by thy helpe against my foes, J had the upper-hand,
- For openly I to their face, did there truely declare,
- That from the Pope our Prelates all, descended still they are,
- And that I might for what I said, make confirmation;
- J nam’d Chapters the 9. and 13. of Revelation.
- Likewise I then did fearelesly, unto the people shew
- That what Pocklington hath writ, is sound now very true
- Namely, that they com lineally, from (h) Antichrist his Chaire,
- Even to him that now doth raigne, the great Arch-Bishop here.
- All which I did on Pillary, there offer to make good,
- Or else I would loose willingly, my best and dearest blood;
- Moreover there to Gods people, I did most plainly shew
- That we have been, and so are still, rul’d by a Popish crew;
- Therefore against them valiantly, we must (i) fight in the feild
- And to their Lawes at any hand, not ever once to yeild,
- But from their (k) Yoake without delay, we must our neckes outdraw;
- If that we will true Subjects bee, unto our Saviours Law; (l)
- Therefore my Freinds, it that you will, Christ Iesus here (m) enjoy,
- Withdraw your selves from these vile men, and every Popish toy,
- And (n) naked Christ be willing still, and ready to embrace;
- Though for the same you suffer shame, and wicked mens (o) disgrace
- Because in him is more content, more full and (p) sweeter blesse
- Then can be sound in any (q) thing; that in the world now is
- And this I have by (r) triall found, what here I doe declare
- That to the comforts of our God, the Earthly nothing are,
- And he that will not(s) quite denie, all things for Iesus sake,
- The joyes of Christ he neither heare, nor(t) after shall partake;
- Therefore my freinds if you, your Soules, will Reallie preserve,
- (v) Reject their Antichristian Lawes, and from Christ never swerve,
- Because the Lord hath said on those, his(x) wrath shall surely come,
- His sorest ire, his greatest stroakes, his deepest plagues and doome,
- That doe on hand or head receive, the Hell-marke of the Houre,
- Or doe the Beast and his image, not cease for to adore
- Thus and much more on Pillarie, there openlie I saide,
- Till at the last my mouth was gagd, and by them baselie staide;
- And threatened there once againe, that my backe should be wipt,
- If that my tongue but one word more, against Romes Preists let slipt
- Thus with a straight Gagg in my mouth, about an houre stood I,
- Having my God to comfort mee, in all my miserie;
- And having stood a long time there, J was at length downe brought,
- Most sweetly cheered with(y) his blood, that had my poore soul bought;
- And when I was come downe, J cheerefully did lay,
- I am more then a Conquerer,(z) through Christ that is my stay.
- Hallelujah,(a) all blessing, glorie, honour, laud and praise,
- Be rendered to thee my God, of mee(b) and thine alwaies,
- For though that I was in my selfe, a Creature poore and(c) weake,
- Yet was J made through thy great strength, with boldnes for to speake
- It was(d) thou Lord, that didst uphold, with mercie and thy grace,
- My feeble(e) flesh so that I did, rejoyce in my disgrace,
- Thou fildst my soule so full of joy, and inward feeling peace
- As that my tongue thy praise to tell, no time shall ever cease,
- And now, O Lord, keepe thou my(g) soule, most humblie I thee pray,
- That from thy just(h) Commandements, I never runne a stray,
- But unto thee, and to thy Truth, my heart may still be fast,
- And not offend in any(i) thing, so long as life doth last,
- And as thou hast in mee(j) begunne, the saving worke of grace,
- So grant, that I thy poore servant, may still therein increase,
- And when I shall lay downe this House, of fraile mortalitie,
- Then let thy Angels bring my soule, sweet Iesus unto thee.
These Verses were my Meditation the next day, after the Executio of my Censure; after the Warden of the Fleet had been with me; from the Lords of the Counsell; and had searched my Chamber, it being after noone, and I being not well, writ them in my bedd.
T.1 (1.1.) John Lilburne, The Christian Mans Triall (12 March 1638, 2nd ed. December 1641).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.1 [1638.03.12] (1.1) John Liburne, The Christian Mans Triall (12 March 1638, 2nd ed. December 1641).
Full titleJohn Lilburne, The Christian Mans Triall: or, a True Revelation of the first apprehension and severall examinations of John Lilburne, With his Censure in Star-Chamber, and the manner of his cruell whipping through the Streets: whereunto is annexed his Speech in the Pillory, and their gagging of him: Also the severe Order of the Lords made the same day for fettering his hands and feet in yrons, and for keeping his friends and monies from him, which was accordingly executed upon him for a long time together by the Wardens of the Fleet, with a great deale of barbarous cruelty and inhumanity, etc.
Rev. 2.10. Behold, the Divell shall cast some of you into prison, that you may be tryed, and you shall have tribulation ten dayes: be thou faithfull unto death, and I will give thee a Crowne of life.
Matth. 10.19. But when they deliver you up, take no thought how, or what you shall speake, for it shall be given you in that houre what you shall saye.
The second Edition, with an addition.
London, Printed for William Larnar, and are to be sold at his Shop at the Signe of the Golden Anchor, neere Pauls-Chaine, 1641.
Estimated date of publication12 March 1638, 2nd ed. December 1641.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationThe Thomason Tracts collection begins in 1640. There is information about the 2nd edition of this work in 1641. TT1, p. 52; Thomason E. 181. (7.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
TO THE READER.
CHristian Reader, here is presented to thy view, a part of these cruell and grievous sufferings imposed upon this Author, by the malignant malice of the Prelacy and that faction, wherein thou mayest likewise see the wonderfull gracious dealings of a good God, carrying this Author through them all, with boldnesse and courage, being not daunted, neither at their frownes nor whippings, nor pillories, nor close prisons, no nor yrons; so that we may see the faithfull promises of our God before our eyes made good in this young man, who hath promised to be with his people in six troubles, and seven; and to hew himselfe strong in the behalfe of all those whose hearts are perfect before him, that so hee might out of the mouthes of Babes and Sucklings perfect his owne praise, to the astonishment of all those who shall lift up heart or hand against him, or the least of his holy ones; and to the comfort and encouragement of all the Saints, who, from the consideration of the sweet, supporting power of God, appearing to others in their bonds, are the more encouraged publiquely to hold forth their profession of the truths of the Lord Iesus with much more boldnesse and confidence, as knowing that that God which hath appeared to others of the Saints in times of offerings, even before their eyes, will also appeare to them in the like condition; and therefore wee may a little see and take notice of the follyes of wicked mens wisdomes, who thinke by their hellish wits, to raze downe Syon and the truth of God to the ground, and therefore they labour by the imprisonments and tortures of some to dash the rest out of heart, that they should feare to shew any countenance to such a persecuted way, whereas indeed the Saints have by this meanes a fairer object to pitch their faith and confidence upon, namely, the power and wisedome and grace and mercy of their God appearing in a more fuller vision before their eyes; for the afflictions and persecution that are imposed by wicked men upon the Saints, causeth them to see a Spirit of glory resting upon them, even in this condition: here 1 Pet. 4. 13. 14. and a massive weight of glory provided for them hereafter, 1 Cor. 4. 18. So that we may daily see the God of heaven fulfilling of his owne Word, even in this thing, which is that hee will confound the wisedome of the wise, and bring to nought the understanding of the prudent, and catch the wicked in their owne snares, making the rage of man turne to his owne praise his peoples comforts and their ruins, wherefore let the servants of God comfort one another with these words: That we may not feare the feares of men, which, that we may be the more strengthened against them, let us consider the cloud of witnesses which hath gone before in a way of suffering, even in these our times, amongst whom the Author of this booke hath had his share with the deepest of them, and therefore to this end hath he published to the world this Truth, that he might keepe alive to all posterities the goodnesse, and mercy and love of God manifested to him under those cruell barbarous and tyrannical dealings of the prelaticall hierarchie, that so all the Saints of God may hate that wicked calling and power of theirs, and never give over crying to God and men, till it be razed downe to the ground, that so the Lord Iesus may be set up as Lord and King, which ought to be the desire and endeavour of all the chosen ones of God, and is the desire of him who desires the good of the servants of God, in all things, love for Christ.
This is the first Part.
A CHRISTIAN MANS TRIALL.
VPon Tuesday last the 11 or 12 of December, 1637 I was treacherously and Judasly betraied (by one that I supposed to be my friend) into the hands of the Pursevant with foure of his assistants, as I was walking in a narrow lane, called Super-lane, being walking with one Iohn Chilliburne, servant to old Mr. Iohn Wharton, in Bow-lane a Hotpresser. Which Iohn had laid the plot before for my apprehension, as I am able for to prove and make good, that he shall not be able with truth to deny it. And at my taking the Pursevants were very violent cries and having by force got me into a shop, they threw me over a Sugar-chest, to take my Sword from me, and cried out for helpe, and said he had taken one of the notoriousest dispersers of scandalous bookes that was in the Kingdome, for (saith he) he hath dispersed them from one end of the Land to the other.
And from thence I was had to the Bole-head Taverne neere to the Dr. Commons, where the Pursevants called freely for wine to make themselves merry, thinking they had got a great prise; Being not long there with my Pursevant Flamsted, who apprehended me, in came Bonntrange, the great Prelates Pursevant, and he looking upon me, said Mr. Lilburne, I am glad with all my heart that wee are met, for you are the man that I have much desired for a long time to see. To which I replied are you so? And for my owne part, I am not much unglad, But you thinke, you have got a great purchase in taking me, but it may be you may be deceived. Come (saith he) give us some wine, and with that he swore an Oath, he would give me a quart of Sacke, for joyfulnesse of our meeting, and so he called for it and dranke to me: And I told him, I would drinke no wine. To which hee replied, and said in these words: Come (said he) be not sad, you are but fallen into the Knaves hands. To which I said, I am not sad in the least, and for my falling into Knaves hands, I verily beleeve without any questioning, that which you have said. And then he swore another Oath, and said, it was true enough.
(So good Christian Reader, take notice of thus much by the way, that the Prelates and their Creatures are a company of Knaves by Bonntrange his own Confession.)
That night I was kept at Hamstedds house where I blesse God, I was merry and cherefull, and nothing at all danted at that which had befalne me. And about twelve of the clocke the next day, I was committed to the Gatehouse, by Sir John the Prelate of Canterburies Chancellour with others without any examination at all, for sending of factious and scandalous Bookes out of Holland into England. And having not beene at the foresaid prison above three dayes, I was removed, by a Warrant from the Lords of the Counsell to the Fleet, where I now remaine. And after my being there some time, I drew a Petition to the Lords of the Counsell for my liberty: and their answer to it was, that I should be examined before Sir John Bankes, the Kings Atturney: The Coppy of which examination thus followes.
Upon Tuesday, the 14 of Ianuary, 1637 I was had to Sir John Bankes the Attorney General’s Chamber (now Lord chiefe Justice of the Court of Pleas) and was referred to be examined by Mr. Coilibey his chief Clerke; And at our first comming together, he did kindly intreat me; and made me sit downe by him, and put on my hat, and began with me after this manner: Mr. Lilburne, what is your Christian name? I said, Iohn, Did you live in London before you went into Holland? Yes, that I did. Where? Neare Londonstone. With whom there? With Mr. Thomas Hewson. What Trade is he? A dealer in Cloath, I told him. How long did you serve him? About five yeares. How come you to part? After this manner: I perceiving my Master had an intention to desist his Trade, I often moved him that I might have my liberty, to provide for my selfe, and at the last hee condescended unto it; and so I went into the Country, to have the consent of my friends; and after that departed into Holland. Where were you there? At Rotterdam. And from thence you went to Amsterdam? Yes, I was at Amsterdam. What Bookes did you see in Holland? Great store of Bookes, for in every Bookesellers shop as I came in, there were greate store of Bookes. I know that, but I aske you, if you did see Dr. Bastwicks Answer to my Masters Information and a Book called his Letany? yes, I saw them there, and if you please to goe thither. you may buy an hundred of them at the Bookesellers, if you have a minde to them Have you seene the Unbishopping of Timothy and Titus, the Looking glasse, and a Breviate of the Bishops late proceedings. Yes, I have, and those also you may have there, if you please to send for them. Who Printed all those Bookes? I doe not know. Who was at the charges of Printing of them? Of that I am ignorant. But did you not send over some of these Books? I sent not any of them over. Doe you know one Hargust there? Yes, I did see such a man. Where did you see him? I met with him one day accidentally at Amsterdam. How oft did you see him there? Twise upon one day. But did not he send over Bookes? If he did, it is nothing to me, for his doings is unknowne to me. But he wrote a Letter over by your directions, did he not? What he writ, I know no more than you. But did you see him nowhere else there? Yes, I saw him at Rotterdam. What conference had you with him? Very little; But why doe you aske me all these questions; These are besides the matter of my imprisonment, I pray come to the thing for which I am accused, and imprisoned. No, these are not besides the businesse, but doe belong to the thing for which you are imprisoned. But doe you know of any that sent over any Bookes? What other men did, doth not belong to me to know or search into, sufficient it is for me to looke well to my owne occasions. Well, here is the examination of one Edmond Chilington, doe you know such a one? Yes. How long have you beene acquainted with him? A little before I went away, but how long I doe not certainely know: Doe you know one Iohn Wharton? No. Doe you not, he is a Hot-presser: I know him, but I doe not well remember his other name: How long have you beene acquainted with him: And how came you acquainted? I cannot well tell you: How long doe you thinke? I doe not know: What speeches had you with Chillington since you came to Towne? I am not bound to tell you: But Sir (as I said before) why doe you aske me all these questions, these are nothing pertinent to my imprisonment for I am not imprisoned for knowing and talking with such and such men: But for sending over Bookes: And therefore I am not willing to answer you to any more of these questions because I see you goe about by this examination to insnare mee, for seeing the things for which I am imprisoned cannot be proved against me, you would get other matter out of my examination, and therefore if you will not aske me about the thing laid to my charge, I shall answer no more: but if you will aske me of that I shall then answer you, and doe answer, that for the thing for which I am imprisoned, which is for sending over Bookes, I am cleare for I sent none. And of any other matter that you have to accuse me of, I know it is warrantable, by the Law of God, and I thinke by the Law of the Land, that I may stand upon my just defence, and not answer to your intergatorie; and that my accusers ought to be brought face to face to justifie what they accuse me of; And this is all the answer that for the present I am willing to make: And if you aske me of any more things I shall answer you with silence. At this he was exceeding angry, and said: There would be course taken with me to make me answer. I told him, I did not way what course they would take with me; onely this I desire you to take notice of: that I doe not refuse to answer out of any contempt but onely because I am ignorant what belongs to an examination, (for this is the first time that ever I was examined) and therefore I am unwilling to answer to any impertinent questions for feare that with my answer I may doe my selfe hurt. This is not the way to get liberty. I had thought you would have answered punctually that so you might have beene dispatched as shortly as might be. So I have answered punctually to the thing for which I am imprisoned and more I am not bound to answer, and for my liberty I must waite Gods time. You had better answer, for I have two examinations wherein you are accused. Of what am I accused? Chillington hath accused you for printing ten or twelve thousands of Books in Holland, and that they stand you in about eighty pound, and that you had a Chamber at Mr. Iohnfoots at Delft, where he thinks the Bookes were kept, and that you would have printed the Vnmasking of the Mystery of Iniquity, if you could have got a true Copy of it. I doe not beleeve that Chillington said any such things and if he did, I know, and am sure, that they are all of them lies. You received money of Mr. Wharton since you came to Towne, did you not? What if I did? It was for Bookes? I doe not say so. For what sorts of bookes was it? I doe not say it was for any, and I have already answered you all, that for the present I have to answer and if that will give you content, well and good, if not, doe what you please. If you will not answer no more (here I told him if I had thought you would have insisted upon such impertinent questions, I would not have given him so many answers) wee have power to send you to the place from whence you came. You may doe your pleasure, said I. So hee called in anger for my Keeper, and gave him a strict charge to looke well to me. I said they should not feare my running away. And so I was sent down to Sir Iohn Bankes himself. And after that he had read over what his man had writ he called me in, and said, I conceive you are unwilling to confesse the Truth. No Sir, I have spoken the Truth. This is your Examination, is it not? What your man hath writ I doe not know. Come neare and see that I read it right. Sir, I doe not owne it for my Examination for your man hath writ what it pleased him, and hath got writ my answer, for my answer was to him, and so is to you, that for the thing for which I am imprisoned (which is for sending over bookes) I am cleare, for I did not send any, and for any other matter that is laid to my charge, I know it is warrantable by the Law of God, and I thinke by the Law of the Land, for me to stand upon my just defence, and that my accusers ought to be brought face to face, to justifie what they accuse me of. And this is all that I have to say for the present. You must set your hand to this your Examination. I beseech you Sir pardon me, I will set my hand to nothing but what I have now said. So he tooke the Pen and writ, the examined is unwilling to answer to any thing but that for which hee is imprisoned. Now you will set your hand to it? I am not willing in regard I doe not owne that which your man hath writ, but if it please you to lend me the Pen, I will write my Answer, and set my hand to it. So he gave mee the Pen, and I begun to write thus: The Answer of me Iohn Lilburne is, And here hee tooke the Pen from me, and said he could not stay, that was sufficient. Then one of my Keepers asked him if they might have me backe againe? And he said yea: for he had no Order for my inlargement, and so I tooke my leave of him, and desired the Lord to blesse and keepe him, and came away.
And then about ten or twelve dayes after, I was had forth to Grayes Inne againe, but when I went, I did not know what they would doe with me there: And when I came there, I was had to the Starre-Chamber Office; and being there, as the Order is, I must enter my appearance, they told me, I said, to what, for I was never served with any Subpoena; neither was there any Bill preferred against me that I did heare of. One of the Clarkes told me, I must first be examined, and then Sir Iohn would make the Bill: it seemes they had no grounded matter against me for to write a Bill, and therefore they went about to make me betray my owne innocency, that so they might ground the Bill upon my owne words: but my God shewed his goodnesse to me, in keeping me, (a poore weake worme) that they could not in the least intangle mee, though I was altogether ignorant of the manner of their proceedings: And at the entrance of my appearance, the Clarke and I had a deale of pritty discourse; the particulars whereof for brevity sake I now pretermit but in the conclusion he demanded mony of me for entring of my appearance: and I told him I was but a young man, and a prisoner, and money was not very plentifull with me and therefore I would not part with any money upon such termes. At which answer the man began to wonder that I should speake so to him and with that the whole company of the Clarkes in the Office began to looke and gaze at me. Well (said he) if you will not pay your fee I will dash out your name againe. Doe what you please (said I) I care not if you doe. So he made a complaint to Mr. Goad, the Master of the Office, that I refused to enter my appearance. And then I was brought before him, and he demanded of me what my businesse was? I told him, I had no businesse with him, but I was a prisoner in the Fleete, and was sent for but to whom and to what end I doe not know, and therefore if he had nothing to say to me, I had no businesse with him. And then one of the Clarks said, I was to be examined. Then Mr. Goad said, tender him the booke. So I looked another way, as though I did not give eare to what he said; and then he bid me pull off my glove, and lay my hand upon the booke, What to doe Sir? said I. You must sweare said he. To what? That you shall make true answer to all things that is asked you. Must I so Sir? But before I sweare, I will know to what I must sweare. As soon as you have sworne, you shall, but not before: To that I answered. Sir, I am but a young man, and doe not well know what belongs to the nature of an Oath, and therefore before I sweare, I will be better advised. Saith he, how old are you? About twenty yeares old, I told him. You have received the Sacrament, have you not? Yes that I have. And you have heard the Ministers deliver Gods Word, have you not? Yes, I have heard Sermons. Well then, you know the holy Evangelist? Yes that I doe. But Sir, though I have received the Sacrament, and have heard Sermons, yet it doth not therefore follow that I am bound to take an Oath, which I doubt of the lawfulnesse of. Looke you here, said he; and with that he opened the booke, we desire you to sweare by no forraigne thing, but to sweare by the holy Evangelist. Sir, I doe not doubt or question that onely I question how lawfull it is for me to sweare to I do not know what. So some of the Clarks began to reason with me, and told me everyone tooke that Oath; and would I be wiser than all other men? I told them, it made no matter to me what other men doe; but before I sweare, I will know better grounds and reasons than other mens practises to convince mee of the lawfulnesse of such an Oath, to sweare I doe not know to what. So Mr. Goad bid them hold their peace, he was not to convince any mans conscience of the lawfulnesse of it, but onely to offer and tender it; Will you take it or no, saith he? Sir, I will be better advised first; with this there was such looking upon mee, and censuring me for a singular man, for the refusing of that which was never refused before: whereupon there was a Messenger sent to Sir Iohn Bankes, to certifie him, that I would not take the Star-Chamber Oath. And also to know of him what should be done with me. So I looked I should be committed close prisoner or worse. And about an houre after came Mr. Cockshey, Sir Iohns chiefe Clarke, what (said he) Mr. Lilburne, it seems you will not take your Oath, to make true answer? I told him, I would be better advised before I took such an Oath, Well then (saith he) you must goe from whence you came and then I spoke merrily to my Keepers, and bid them, let us be gone, we have beene long enough here. Thus have I made a true Relation of that dayes worke.
But before I proceede, I desire to declare unto you, the Lords goodnesse manifested unto me in being my counsellour and director in my great straights. The Prelates intendment towards me was carried so close that I could not learne what they would doe with me, onely I supposed they would have mee into the Star-chamber, in regard I was removed by the Lords of the Counsell; and also tidings was brought unto me by some friends, what cruelty their Creatures did breath out against me, but I incouraged my selfe in my God, and did not feare what man could doe unto me, Esay 51, 12, 13, for I had the peace of a good conscience within me, and the assurance of Gods love reconciled unto me in the precious blood of his Sonne JESVS CHRIST: which was as good as Shield and Buckler unto me, to keepe off all the assaults of my enemies, and I was, as it were, in a strong walled Towne, nothing dreading but lightly esteeming the cruelty of my Adversaries, for I knew God was my God, and would be with me, and inable me to undergoe whatsoever, by his permission they could inflict upon me, and to his praise I desire to speak it: I found his gracious goodnesse and loving kindnes so exceedingly made known unto me, that he enabled me to undergoe my captivity with contentednesse, joyfulnesse, and cherefulnesse: And also was pleased, according to his promise, to be a mouth unto me, whensoever I was brought before them, and gave me courage and boldnesse to speake unto them, his holy and blessed name be praised and magnified for it.
Vpon the Fryday next, after this, in the morning, one of the Officers of the Fleete came to my Chamber, and bid mee get up and make mee ready to goe to the Star-Chamber barre forthwith, I having no time to fit my selfe, made me ready in all haste to goe; (yet when I came there, the Lord according to his promise was pleased to be present with me by his speciall assistance, that I was inabled without any dantednesse of spirit, to speake unto that great and noble Assembly, as though they had beene but my equalls;) And being at the barre, Sir Iohn Bankes laid a verball accusation against me, which was, that I refused to answer, and also to enter my appearance, and that I refused to take the Star-Chamber Oath: and then was read the Affidavit of one Edmond Chillington, Buttonseller, made against Mr. Iohn Warton and my selfe; The summe of which was, that he and I had Printed at Rotterdam in Holland Dr. Bastwickes answer, and his Letany, and divers other scandalous Bookes. And then after I had obtained leave to speake, I said: My noble Lords, as for that Affidavit, it is a most false lie, and untruth. Well, said the Lord-keeper, why will you not answer? My Honorable Lord (said I) I have answered fully, before Sir Iohn Bankes to all things that belongs to me to answer unto, and for other things, which concerne other men, I have nothing to doe with them. But why doe you refuse to take the Star-Chamber Oath? Most Noble Lord, I refused upon this ground, because that when I was examined, though I had fully answered all things that belonged to me to answer unto, and had cleared my selfe of the thing for which I am imprisoned, which was for sending bookes out of Holland, yet that would not satisfie and give content, but other things was put unto me, concerning other men, to insnare me, and get further matter against me, which I perceiving refused, being not bound to answer to such things as doe not belong unto me; and withall I perceived the Oath to be an Oath of inquiry; and for the lawfulnesse of which Oath I have no warrant, and upon these grounds I did, and doe still refuse the Oath: with this some of the Kings Counsell, and some of the Lords spoke, would I condemne and contradict the Lawes of the Lands and be wiser than all other men to refuse that, which is the Oath of the Court, administred unto all that come there? Well, said my Lord-Keeper, render him the booke. I standing against the Prelate of Canterburies backe, he looked over his shoulder at me & bid me pull off my glove, and lay my hand upon the book. Unto whom I replied, Sir, I will not sweare; and then directing my speech unto the Lords, I said: Most Honorable and Noble Lords, with all reverence and submission unto your Honours, submitting my body unto your Lordships pleasure, and whatsoever you please to inflict upon it yet must I refuse the Oath. My Lords, said the Arch Prelate (in a deriding manner) doe you heare him, hee saith, with all reverence and submission he refuseth the Oath. Well, come come (said my Lord Keeper) submit your selfe unto the Court. Most Noble Lords, with all willingnesse I submit my body unto your Honours pleasure, but for any other submission, most Honourable Lords, I am conscious unto my selfe, that I have done nothing, that doth deserve a convention before this illustrious Assembly and therefore for me to submit is to submit I doe not know wherefore. With that up stood the Earle of Dorset, and said: My Lords, this is one of their private spirits; Doe you heare him, how he stands in his owne justification? Well my Lords, said the great Prelate; this fellow (meaning me) hath been one of the notoriousest disperser of Libellous bookes that is in the Kingdome, and that is the Father of them all (pointing to old Mr. Wharton.) Then I replied, and said, Sir, I know you are not able to prove and to make that good which you have said. I have testimony of it, said he. Then said I produce them in the face of the open Court, that wee may see what they have to accuse me of; And I am ready here to answer for my selfe, and to make my just defence. With this he was silent and said not one word more to me: and then they asked my fellow Souldiour old Mr. Wharton, whether he would take the Oath, which hee refused, and began to tell them of the Bishops cruelty towards him, and that they had had him in five severall prisons within this two yeares, for refusing the Oath. And then there was silence, after which was read a long peece of businesse how the Court had proceeded against some that had harboured Jesuits and Seminary Priests (those Traitors) who refused to be examined upon Oath, and in regard that we refused likewise to be examined upon Oath, it was fit they said, that we should be proceeded against, as they were, so they were the president by which we were censured, though their cause and ours be much unlike, in regard theirs were little better than Treason; but our crime was so farre from Treason, that it was neither against the glory of God, the honour of the King, the Lawes of the Land, nor the good of the Commonwealth: but rather for the maintaining of the honour of them all, as all those that read the bookes without partiall affections, and prejudicate hearts, can witnesse and declare, and if the bookes had had any Treason, or any thing against the Law of the Land in them, yet we were but subposedly guilty, for the things were never fully proved against us; indeed there was two Oathes read in court, which they said was sworne against us by one man but he was never brought face to face, and in both his Oathes he hath forsworne himselfe, as in many particulars thereof wee both are able to make good. In the conclusion, my Lord Keeper stood up and said, My Lords, I hold it fit, that they should be both for their contempt committed close prisoners till Tuesday next; and if they doe not conforme themselves betwixt this and then to take the Oath, and yeeld to be examined by Mr. Goad, then that they shall be brought hither againe, and censured, and made an Example; Unto which they all agreed; and so we were committed close prisoners, and no friends admitted to come unto us.
And upon Munday after we were had to Grayes Inne, and I being the first there, Mr. Goad said to me, according to the Lords Order upon Friday last, I have sent for you to tender the Oath unto you. Sir, I beseech you, let me heare the Lords Order. So he caused it to be read unto mee, and then tendered mee the Booke. Well Sir, said I, I am of the same minde I was, and withall I understand, that this Oath is one and the same with the High Commission Oath, which Oath I know to be both against the Law of God, and the Law of the Land; and therefore in briefe I dare not take the Oath, though I suffer death for the refusall of it. Well, said he, I did not send for you to dispute with you about the lawfulnesse of it, but onely according to my place to tender it unto you. Sir, I dare not take it, though I loose my life for the refusall of it. So he said, he had no more to say to me; and I tooke my leave of him and came away. And after that came the old Man, and it was tendered unto him, which he refused to take: (and as he hath told me) he declared unto him how the Bishops had him eight times in prison for the refusall of it, and he had suffered the Bishops mercilesse cruelty for many yeares together, and he would now never take it as long as he lived; and withall told him, that if there were a Cart ready at the doore to carry him to Tiburne, he would be hanged, before ever hee would take it. And this was that dayes businesse.
Upon the next morning about seven a clocke, we were had to the Star-Chamber-bar againe to receive our Censure; and stood at the Bar about two houres before Sir Iohn Bancks came; but at the last hee began his accusation against us, that we did still continue in our former stubbornenesse: and also there was another Affidavit of the foresaid Edmond Chillingtons read against us, the summe of which was that I had confessed to him that I had printed Dr. Bastwickes Answer to Sir Iohn Bancks his Information, and his Letany; and an other booke, called, An Answer unto certaine Objections; and another booke of his, called the Vanitie and Impiety of the old Letany; and that I had divers other bookes of Dr. Bastwickes a Printing; and that Mr. Iohn Wharton had beene at the charges of Printing a booke called A breviate of the Bishops late proceedings; and an other booke, called Sixteene new Queries, and divers other factious bookes; and that one James Ouldam, a Turner in Westminster-Hall, had dispersed divers of these bookes. So it came to me to speake; and I said after this manner: Most Noble Lords, I beseech your Honours, that you would be pleased to give me leave to speake for my selfe, and to make my just defence; and I shall labour so to Order my speeches, as that I shall not give your Honours any just distaste; and withall shall doe it with as much brevitie as I can. So having obtained my desire, I began, and said, My Lords, it seemes there was divers bookes sent out of Holland, which came to the hands of one Edmond Chillinton, which made this affidavit against us: and as I understand, he delivered divers of these bookes unto one Iohn Chilliburne, servant to this old Man Mr. Wharton (I, said he, my Lords, and I had given him a strict charge, that he should not meddle with any,) and his Master being in Prison, he dispersed divers of them for the foresaid Chillingtons use, whereupon the bookes were taken in his Custody, and he being found dispersing of them, gos to one Smith, a Taylor in Bridewell (as I am informed) & desires him to get his peace made with the Bishops, whereupon he covenants with some of the Bishops Creatures, to betray me into their hands, being newly come out of Holland, which (as he said) did send over these bookes. So my Lords, he having purchased his owne libertie, layes the plot for betraying me, and I was taken by a Pursevant and foure others of his assistance, walking in the streets with the foresaid Iohn Chilliburne, who had laid and contrived the plot before (as I am able to make good) and the next morning I was committed by Sir Iohn Lamb to the Gate-house, (now my Lords, I doe protest before your Honours in the word of a Christian, that I did not send over these bookes, neither did J know the Ship that brought them, nor any that belongs to the ship, nor to my knowledge did never see with my eyes, either the ship or any that belongs unto it.
(But before I proceede with my Speech, I desire to digresse a little, in regard that Iohn Chilliburne doth yet stifly maintaine, that he did not betray me, nor laid the plot, and therefore I doe him wrong for accusing him, he saith. To which I answer, and say, in this, he is worse than Iudas himselfe; for after he had betrayed Christ, he came and confessed his sinne, and said, I have sinned in betraying the innocent blood; and this man hath betraied Christ in betraying me his member, for what is done to his servant he takes it as done to himselfe: but he is not so good as Iudas, who confessed his fault, but he hides and justifies his sinne, and therefore I will declare my Grounds and Demonstrations, whereupon I am sure he was the Judas: The first is thus, He and I appointed to meete one day upon the Exchange at two a clocke, unto which place I came, and staid long for his comming, but hee came not: and I verily thinke, he sent two or three in his place, two of them being Arminians, living in Cornehill, which J my selfe knew, who passed againe and again by me, vewing very narrowly my apparell, visage and countenance, as J thinke for that end that they might know mee againe: and when J sat downe, they would passe by, and goe a little from me and sit downe and fix their eyes upon me, insomuch that J was afraid that J should there have been taken, which forced me to depart. And at our next meeting J told him of it, and how that (unlesse J had knowne him well) J should have beleeved he had betrayed me. Unto which hee gave me no satisfactory answer, but put it off, and said his libertie was as precious as mine; and if he should betray me, he must betray himselfe, and therefore J needed not to doubt any such thing: the Lord having blinded my eyes. J could not see into his treacherous heart, but tooke this for a currant answer, J knowing that he had had a deepe hand in the dispersing of bookes, and therefore J gave credite to that which he had said, as being a reall Truth, the Lord having a secret hand of providence in it. (J hope at the last for his glorie and my good) did so Order it, that I should not take notice, or perceive his perfidiousnesse, though I had an incling given me of it before by some friends, yet J could not beleeve it till the event manifested it, for that day J was taken, he hearing (by what meanes I doe not know) that I was to meete one at the Temple, and understanding that I had a desire to see his Master at his owne houre (being newly let out of prison) we came towards the Temple, and had some discourse there, in which he put me forward to goe see and speake with his Master, unto whom I declared, how fearefull I was to goe thither (in regard I heard they laid waite for me) least I should be taken; but he made all things cleare, and contrived a way, by meanes of which he said, I might without any feare goe speake with him. So we parted, and appointed to meete at the staires that goes from Bridewell to Black-Fryers. I came to the Staires, and stood a great while, but he came not, till I was a comming away; and I expecting him to come out of Bridewell, I having sent him in thither, to speake with one, unto whom I thinke he did not goe, but yet he told me, he was with him; but rather he went to Flamsted the Pursevant to get him in a readinesse, for he came to me from Flamsteds-houseward, downe from Black-Fryers, being a cleane contrary way to that I sent him. So we went towards his Masters house, and parted againe, and appointed to meet at Tantlins-Church; and when I came there, I saw one walking with him, which I verily beleeve was one of the five that tooke me; and when I came to him, I declared unto him that comming downe Soper-lane, I saw a fellow stand in a corner, very suspiciously, who looked very wishfully at me, and I at him; and therefore I desired him to goe, and see who it was, and whether I might goe safely to his Masters or no. So he went, and came backe, and told me his Master was come to the doore, and I might goe without any danger, and as we went, I declared unto him my fearefulnesse, to goe to his Masters; and I told him, I would halfe draw my sword, that I might be in a readinesse; and he went before towards his Masters; and I doe verily thinke acquainted them how it was with me; and I going after him in the narrow Lane, I passed by two great fellowes suspecting nothing; and by and by they seazed upon my backe and shoulders, and cried out in the Kings Name for helpe, they had taken the Rogues Whartons men, and Iohn was the third man that seized upon me, laying fast hold of my left shoulder, and they three pulled my cloake crosse over my armes, that so, though I had my sword halfe drawne, yet by no meanes could I get it out; which if I had, and got my backe against the wall, I doe not doubt but I should have made them be willing to let me alone; for though they had fast hold of me, they quaked and trembled for feare, and though they were five or sixe, yet they cryed out for more helpe to assist them, I being but one, and when they all seased on me, then they called me by my name, and though we were in the darke, yet they knew my habit, that I was in as well as my selfe, and shewed me their warrant with my name in it I have beene forced of necessity to recite these things in regard of his dayly speeches against me, and his writing to me in justification of his innocency, though as you for all I have sent for him, hee would never come face to face: Tart Letters likewise I have received from Smith and Chillington, for speaking that which I have said in publique of them: and as for Smith, take notice what I said of him, and I here give my reasons for that I said, it is knowne that at the last time the bookes were taken at Mr. Whartons, part of them was not taken; which Iohn can not deny, but he carried them unto Smith, and what passed betwixt them, they themselves best knows but this is sure, Iohn was never troubled for the bookes, though hee was taken dispersing of them; and I am sure, his libertie was obtained by Smiths and Sam Bakers the Prelate of Londons Chaplaines meanes. Also Smith is not ignorant, but doth very well know that promise that Iohn made to Mr. Baker about twelve moneths agoe, to doe him speciall service about such things, which promise I doe verily beleeve he hath faithfully kept; for he hath confessed to his Master since the beginning of my trouble, that he hath used to carry to Baker all new bookes he could get, as soone as they came out, and how for the which he gave him money, but how much he best knowes.
Also, what free and familiar accesse Iohn hath had to him, and he and Iohn to Baker, and for those secrets which Iohn from time to time hath revealed to him and Baker, what they are I name not, but appeale to their owne consciences: for it is too manifest that hee is a darling both to Smith and Baker, in regard they stand so stoutly for him as they doe; for Mr. Wharton, being not long since with Baker, he told him hee heard he was about to put away his Man Iohn, Yea (said he) what should I do with him else? Well (said he) if you doe it, and put him away, the Chamberlaine will make you take him againe. Will he so (said he) he can not doe it, for he is a Iudas, and a Theefe, for he hath stolne money from me, and I can prove it said the Old Man; and therefore he can not make me take him againe. Baker could not well tell what to say to it; but yet did perswade him to keepe him.
This the Old man told me himselfe, it seemes they have kept him at his Masters, as a private and secret servant for their owne turnes above this fourteene Moneths, and they would still, if they could keepe him there. But what secret mischiefe hee hath done by his so frequent resorting to Baker and Smith, is not yet fully knowne, but I hope it will come out by degrees: Therefore, let all that heares of it take notice of it, and let some of those that were in the information with the three Worthies, cast back their eyes and see if they can finde and spie out who was their Originall Accuser and Betrayer. These things may be worth the making knowne, though I may incurre hatred and spite from them for it, yet I weigh not that, for I have not declared these things out of any revenge, for I commit that unto God.
And for that wrong they have done unto mee, I freely forgive them; and if any of them belong to God, I pray him to call them home unto him. But these things I have set downe, being forced thereunto for vindicating my good name from their bitter reproaches and calumniations, and all you that read this, judge and censure what I have said. But now after my Digression I will returne againe to our former matter.
And being at the Gatehouse I was removed by (sixe of your Honours) to the Fleete, at which time the said Chillington was removed from Bridewell to Newgate, and being kept close there: then he by their threats and perswasions and the procuring of his owne liberty, goes and accuses me for printing ten or twelve thousand Bookes in Holland. And at my Examination before Sir Iohn Bankes I cleared my selfe of that, and upon Fryday last he made an Affidavit against me, in which hee hath most falsly forsworne himselfe, and today he hath made another, which is also a most false untruth: And withall my Lords, he is knowne to be a notorious lying fellow, and hath accused mee for the purchasing of his owne liberty, which he hath got. And therefore, I beseech your Honours, to take into your serious consideration, and see whether I am to be censured upon such a fellowes Affidavits or no. Then said the Lord Keeper, thou art a mad fellow, seeing things are thus, that thou wilt not take thine Oath, and answer truely. My Honourable Lord, I have declared unto you the reall Truth, but for the Oath, it is an Oath of Inquiry, and of the same nature of the High-Commission-Oath; Which Oath I know to be unlawfull; and withall, I finde no warrant in the Word of God, for an Oath of Inquiry, and it ought to be the director of mee in all things that I doe, and therefore my Lords at no hand, I dare not take the Oath (when I named the Word of God, the Court began to laugh, as though they had had nothing to doe with it) my Lords (said Mr. Goad) he told me yesterday, he durst not take the Oath, though he suffered death for the refusall of it. And with that my Lord Privy Seal spoke: Will you (said he) take your Oath, that that which you have said is true? My Lord (said I) I am but a young Man, and doe not well know what belongs to the nature of an Oath (but that which I have said is a reall truth) but thus much by Gods appointment, I know an Oath ought to be the end of all controversie and strife, Heb. 6. 16. And if it might be so in this my present cause, I would safely take my Oath, that what I have said is true. So, they spoke to the Old man my fellow partner, and asked him whether he would take the Oath. So he desired them to give him leave to speake; and he begun to thunder it out against the Bishops, and told them they required three Oathes of the Kings Subjects; namely, the Oath of Churchwardenship, and the Oath of Canonicall Obedience, and the Oath Ex Officio; Which (said he) are all against the Law of the Land, and by which they deceive and perjure thousands of the Kings Subjects in a yeare, And withall, my Lords, (said he) there is a Maxime in Divinity, that we should prefer the glory of God, the good of our King and Country, before our owne lives: but the Lords wondering to heare the Old Man begin to talke after this manner, commanded him to hold his peace, and to answer them, whether he would take the Oath or no? To which he replied, and desired them to let him talke a little, and he would tell them by and by. At which all the Court burst out of a laughing; but they would not let him goe on, but commanded silence, which if they would have let him proceed, he would so have peppered the Bishops, as they were never in their lives in an open Court of Iudicature. So they asked us againe, whether we would take the Oath? which we both againe refused; and withall I told them, that for the reasons before I durst not take it. Then they said, they would proceed to Censure. I bid them doe as they pleased, for I knew my selfe innocent of the thing for which I was imprisoned and accused; but yet notwithstanding did submit my body to their Honours pleasure. So they censured us 500 pound a peece; and then stood up Judge Joans, and said: It was fit that I being a young man for example sake, should have some corporall punishment inflicted upon me. So my Censure was to be whipt, but neither time nor place allotted. And for the Old Man, in regard of his age, being 85. yeares old, they would spare his corporall punishment, though (said they) hee deserves it as well as the other (meaning me) yet he should stand upon the Pillory; but I could not understand or perceive by Censure, that I was to stand upon the Pillory. So we tooke our leaves of them. And when I came from the Bar, I spoke in an audible voice, and said: My Lords, I beseech God to blesse your Honours, and to discover and make knowne unto you the wickednesse and cruelty of the Prelates.
So here is an end of my publike proceedings, as yet, which I have had since I came into my troubles, the Lord sanctifie them unto me, and make me the better by them, and put an end to them in his due time, and make way for my deliverance, as I hope he will.
After our Censure we had the libertie of the prison for a few dayes; but the Old Man, my fellow partner, went to the Warden of the Fleete; and told him the summe of that which he intended in the Star-Chamber, to have spoken against the Bishops, if the Lords would have let him; So he told the Warden, how the Bishops were the greatest Tyrants that ever were since Adams Creation; and that they were more crueller than the Cannibals, those Men-eaters, for (said he) they presently devoured men, and put an end to their paine, but the Bishops doe it by degrees, and are many yeares in exercising their cruelty and tyranny upon those that stand out against them; and therefore are worse than the very Canibals; (and in this he saith very true) for the Holy Ghost saith: They that be slaine with the Sword, are better than they that be slaine with Hunger; and he gives the reason of it: For those pine away, striken through, for want of the fruit of the field, Lamen 4. 9. Whereas those that are slaine out-right, are soone out of their paine.) and said he, they have persecuted mee about forty yeares, and cast mee into eight severall Prisons, and all to undoe me, and waste my estate, that so I might not be worth a penny to buy me meate, but starve in prison, for want of food, and yet were never able to lay any thing to my charge, that I had done either against Gods Law, or the Law of the land, and (said he) they are the wickedest men that are in the Kingdome; and I can prove them (saith he) to be enemies of God, and of the Lord Iesus Christ, and of the King and Common-wealth; Or else I will be willing to loose my life; and also told him that they did thrust the Lord Jesus Christ out of his Priestly, Propheticall and Kingly Offices, and hath set up a willworship of their own invention, contrary to the Holy Scriptures; and that they led by their wicked practises the greater halfe of the Kingdome to Hell with them; and that they rob the King of a million of money in a yeare, and the subjects of as much by their powling, sinfull wicked Courts; and that their living by which they lived was got by lying and cozning of poore ignorant Children; for (said he) the Pope and the Priest did promise the Children of deceased Parents, if they would give so much to the Church, they would pray their Parents out of Purgatory, and so cozened them of their estates; & (said he) by such dissemblings and cozening wayes and meanes as this, were their livings at the first raised. Yea, but Sir, (saith the Warden) what is that to them, that was in time of Popery? Yea, but Sir, (said he) their livings hath continued ever since, and they live still to this day upon the sweetnesse and fatnesse of them.
This and much more he then told the Warden, as Mr. Wharton himselfe since then hath told me. And there being a Papist with foure or five more in the roome, the Warden said; Papist come hither, and heare what the Old Man saith. So it came to the Lords of the Counsels eares, whereupon we were the next Munday after brought both together and locked upclose prisoners in one Chamber, without any Order or Warrant at all, but only Warden INGRAMS bare Command and Pleasure; But the Old Man, about three weekes after, made a Petition to the Lords of the Counsell, that he might have some liberty, and being very weake, more likely to dye than to live, hee had his libertie granted till the Tearme; but I doe still remain close Prisoner; but for my own part, I am as cheerefull and merry, and as well contented with my present condition (in regard I see the over-ruling hand of my good God in it) as ever I was with any condition in my life. I blesse his holy name for it, for in all my troubles I have had such sweete and comfortable refreshings from my God, that though my imprisonment, and those straights that I have beene in, might seeme to the World, to be a great and heavy burthen, yet to me it hath beene a happy condition, and a cause of exceeding joy and rejoycing.
From the Fleete, the place of my joy and rejoycing the 12 of March 1637
By me JOHN LILBURNE
Being close Imprisoned by James Ingram the Warden of the Fleete, who locked me up within few dayes after my Sentence, untill the day of my suffering, and would never suffer me to walke in the Prison yard with a Keeper, though I often sent to him, and desired it of him, but told me all was little enough, because I was so refractory.
T.4 (8.1.) John Selden, A Brief Discourse concerning the Power of the Peeres (1640).↩
Editing History- Corrections to HTML: 6 Jan. 2016
- Corrections to XML: 6 Jan. 2016


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.4 [1640.??] (8.1) John Selden, A Brief Discourse concerning the Power of the Peeres (1640).
Full titleJohn Selden, A Briefe Discourse, concerning the Power of the Peeres, and Commons of Parliament, in point of Judicature. Written by a learned Antiquerie, at the request of a Peere of this Realme.
Printed in the yeere, 1640.
1640 (no month given).
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationNot listed in TT.
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
SIR, to give you as short an account of your desires as I can, I must crave leave to lay you as a ground, the frame or first modell of this state.
When after the period of the Saxon time, Harold had lifted himselfe into the Royall Seat; the Great men, to whom but lately hee was no more then equall either in fortune or power, disdaining this Act, of arrogancy, called in William then Duke of Normandy, a Prince more active then any in these Westerne parts, and renowned for many victories he had fortunately archieved against the French King, then the most potent Monarch in Europe.
This Duke led along with him to this worke of glory, many of the younger sons of the best families of Normandy, Picardy and Flanders, who as undertakers, accompanied the undertaking of this fortunate man.
The Usurper slaine, and the Crowne by warre gained, to secure certaine to his posterity, what he had so suddenly gotten, he shared out his purchase retaining in each County a portion to support the Dignity Soveraigne, which was stiled Demenia Regni; now the ancient Demeanes, and assigning to others his adventurers such portions as suited to their quality and expence, retaining to himselfe dependancy of their personall seruice, except such Lands as in free Almes were the portion of the Church, these were stiled Barones Regis, the Kings immediate Freeholders, for the word Baro imported then no more.
As the King to these, so these to their followers subdivided part of their shares into Knights fees, and their Tennants were called Barones Comites, or the like; for we finde, as in the Kings Writ in their Writs Baronibus suis & Francois & Anglois, the soveraigne gifts, for the most part extending to whole Counties or Hundreds, an Earle being Lord of the one, and a Baron of the inferiour donations to Lords of Towne-ships or Mannors.
As thus the Land, so was all course of Judicature divided even from the meanest to the highest portion, each severall had his Court of Law, preserving still the Mannor of our Ancestours the Saxons, who jura per pages reddebant; and these are still tearmed Court-Barons, or the Freeholders Court, twelue usually in number, who with the Thame or chiefe Lord were Judges.
The Hundred was next, where the Hundredus or Aldermanus Lord of the Hundred, with the cheife Lord of each Townshippe within their lymits judged; Gods people observed this forme in the publike Centureonis & decam Judicabant plebem omni tempore.
The County or Generale placitum was the next, this was so to supply the defect, or remedy the corruption of the inferior, Vbi Curiæ Dominorum probantur defecisse, pertinet ad vice comitem Provinciarum; the Iudges here were Comites, vice comites & Barones Comitatus qui liberas in hoterras habeant.
The last & supreme, & proper to our question, was generale placitum aupud London universalis Synodus in Charters of the Conquerour, Capitalis curia by Glanvile, Magnum & Commune consilium coram Rege et magnatibus snis.
In the Rolles of Henry the 3. It is not stative, but summoned by Proclamation, Edicitur generale placitum apud London, saith the Booke of Abingdon, whether Epium Duces principes, Satrapæ Rectores, & Causidici ex omni parte confluxerunt ad istam curiam, saith Glanvile: Causes were referred, Propter aliquam dubitationem quæ Emergit in comitatu, cum Comitatus nescit dijudicare. Thus did Ethelweld Bishop of Winchester transferre his suit against Leostine, from the County ad generale placitum, in the time of King Etheldred, Queene Edgine against Goda; from the County appealed to King Etheldred at London. Congregatis principibus & sapaientibus Angliæ, a suit between the Bishops of Winchester and Durham in the time of Saint Edward. Coram Episcopis & principibus Regni in presentia Regis ventilate & finita. In the tenth yeere of the Conquerour, Episcopi, Comites & Barones Regni potestate adversis provinciis ad universalem Synodum pro causis audiendis & tractandis Convocati, saith the Book of Westminster. And this continued all along in the succeeding Kings raigne, untill towards the end of Henry the third.
AS this great Court or Councell consisting of the King and Barons, ruled the great affaires of State and controlled all inferiour Courts, so were there certaine Officers, whose transcendent power seemed to bee set to bound in the execution of Princes wills, as the Steward, Constable, and Marshall fixed upon Families in fee for many ages: They as Tribunes of the people, or ex plori among the Athenians, growne by unmanly courage fearefull to Monarchy, fell at the feete and mercy of the King, when the daring Earle of Leicester was slaine at Evesham.
This chance and the deare experience Hen. the 3. himselfe had made at the Parliament at Oxford in the 40. yeare of his raigne, and the memory of the many straights his Father was driven unto, especially at Rumny-mead neare Stanes, brought this King wisely to beginne what his successour fortunately finished, in lessoning the strength and power of his great Lords; and this was wrought by searching into the Regality they had usurped over their peculiar Soveraignes, wherby they were (as the Booke of Saint Albans termeth them.) Quot Dominum tot Tiranni.) and by the weakning that hand of power which they carried in the Parliaments by commanding the service of many Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses to that great Councell.
Now began the frequent sending of Writs to the Commons, their assent not onely used in money, charge, and making Lawes, for before all ordinances passed by the King and Peeres, but their consent in judgements of all natures whether civill or criminall: In proofe whereof I will produce some few succeeding Presidents out of Record.
Liber S. Alban, so. 20. [Editor: illegible word] An. 44. H. 3.When Adamor that proud Prelate of Winchester the Kings halfe brother had grieved the State by his daring power, he was exiled by joynt sentence of the King, the Lords & Commons, and this appeareth expressely by the Letter sent to Pope Alexander the fourth, expostulating a revocation of him from banishment, because he was a Church-man, and so not subject to any censure, in this the answer is, Si Dominus Rex & Regni majores hoc vellent, meaning his revocation, Communitas tamen ipsius ingressũ in Angliã iam nullatemus sustineret. The Peeres subsigne this Answer with their names and Petrus de Mountford vice totius Communitatis, as speaker or proctor of the cõmons.
Charta orig. sub sigil. An. [Editor: illegible word] H. [Editor: illegible word]For by that stile Sir John Tiptofe, Prolocutor, affirmeth under his Armes the Deed of Intaile of the Crowne by King Henry the 4. in the 8. year of his raigne for all the Commons.
The banishment of the two Spencers in the 15. of Edward the second, Prelati Comites & Barones et les autres Peeres de la terre & Communes de Roialme give consent and sentence to the revocation and reversement of the former sentence the Lords and Commons accord, and so it is expressed in the Roll.
In the first of Edw. the 3.Rot. Parl. [Editor: illegible word] E. 3. vel. [Editor: illegible word] when Elizabeth the widdow of Sir John de Burgo complained in Parliament, that Hugh Spencer the yonger, Robert Boldock and William Cliffe his instruments had by duresse forced her to make a Writing to the King, whereby shee was despoiled of all her inheritance, sentence is given for her in these words, Pur ceo que avis est al Evesques Counts & Barones & autres grandes & a tout Cominalte de la terre, que le dit escript est fait contre ley, & tout manere de raison si fuist le dit escript per agard del Parliam. dampue elloques al livre a la dit Eliz.
In An. 4. Edw. 3.Prelationrs Parliam. 1. Ed. 3. Rot. 11. it appeareth by a Letter to the Pope, that to the sentence given against the Earle of Kent, the Commons were parties aswell as well as the Lords & Peeres, for the King directed their proceedings in these words, Comitibus, Magnatibus, Baronibus, & aliis de Communitate dicti Regni ad Parliamentum illud congregatis injunximus ut super his discernerent & judicarent quod rationi et justitiæ, conveniret, habere præ oculis, solum Deum qui eum concordi unanimi sententia tanquam reum criminis læsœ majestatis morti adjudicarent ejus sententia, &c.
[Editor: illegible word] Ann. 5. [Editor: illegible word]When in the 50. yeere of Ed. 3. the Lords had pronounced the sentence against Richard Lions, otherwise then the Commons agreed they appealed to the King, and had redresse, and the sentence entred to their desires.
[Editor: illegible word] Ann 1. [Editor: illegible word] 11. 3. [Editor: illegible word]When in the first yeere of Richard the second, William Weston and John Jennings were arraigned in Parliament for surrendring certaine Forts of the Kings, the Commons were parties to the sentence against them given, as appeareth by a Memorandum ãnexed to that Record. In the first of Hen. the 4, although the Commons referre by protestation, the pronouncing of the sentence of deposition against King Rich. the 2. unto the Lords, yet are they equally interessed in it, as it appeareth by the Record, for there are made Proctors or Commissioners for the whole Parliament, one B. one Abbot, one E. one Baron, & 2. Knights, Gray and Erpingham for the Commons, and to inferre that because the Lords pronounced the sentence, the point of judgement should be onely theirs, were as absurd as to conclude, that no authority was best in any other Commissioner of Oyer and Terminer then in the person of that man solely that speaketh the sentence.
The following marginalia text is unreadable and Liberty Fund has made no effort to partially transcribe it.In 2. Hen. 5. the Petition of the Commons importeth no lesse then a right they had to act and assent to all things in Parliament, and so it is answered by the King; and had not the adjournall Roll of the higher house beene left to the sole entry of the Clarke of the upper House, who, either out of the neglect to observe due forme, or out of purpose to obscure the Commons right & to flatter the power of those he immediately served, there would have bin frequent examples of al times to cleer this doubt, and to preserve a just interest to the Cõmon-wealth, and how conveniently it suites with Monarchy to maintaine this forme, left others of that well framed body knit under one head, should swell too great and monstrous. It may be easily thought for; Monarchy againe may sooner groane under the weight of an Aristocracie as it once did, then under Democracie which it never yet either felt or fear’d.
FINIS.
T.282 [1640.11.3] Henry Parker, The Case of Shipmoney briefly discoursed (3 Nov. 1640)
Editing History
- Text added: from Malcolm The Struggle for Sovereignty (28.01.16)
- Checked agains the facs. PDF: 4 Feb. 2016
- Introduction: 4 Feb. 2016
- Draft online: date


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.282 [1640.11.3] (M1) Henry Parker, The Case of Shipmoney briefly discoursed (3 Nov. 1640).
This tract was originally published as part of The Struggle for Sovereignty: Seventeenth-Century English Political Tracts, 2 vols, ed. Joyce Lee Malcolm (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1999). Vol. 1. </titles/810#lfMalcolmV1_head_1559>.
Full title[Henry Parker], The Case of Shipmony briefly discoursed, according to the Grounds of Law, Policy, and Conscience. And most humbly presented to the Censure and Correction of the High Court of Parliament, Nov. 3. 1640. Printed Anno Dom. 1640.
3 November, 1640.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 2; E.204 [4]
Joyce Lee Malcolm’s Introduction
[Henry Parker, 1604-1652]
Henry Parker, one of the most prolific writers in the cause of Parliament in the civil war era, has also been dubbed the clearest and most realistic. A graduate of St. Edmund Hall, Oxford, he was called to the bar at Lincoln’s Inn in 1637. Parker quickly put his talents to work in support of the Presbyterian, and later the Independent, opponents of the Crown. During the civil war and Interregnum Parker held a series of important posts for Parliament. He served as secretary to Parliament’s army under the Earl of Essex, then in 1645 as secretary to the House of Commons where he prepared various declarations, and finally as secretary to Cromwell’s army in Ireland. He died in Ireland late in 1652, aged forty-eight.
Parker was renowned among his contemporaries and is recognized among modern historians as one of Parliament’s most important theorists. His first published tract, the anonymous “The Case of Shipmony Briefly Discoursed” reprinted here, was prepared for presentation to the Long Parliament on the day it convened. Three editions appeared. It is not only a vigorous denunciation of a levy widely condemned as an abuse of the royal prerogative but underlines for us the grave constitutional threat contemporaries saw in shipmoney itself and, even more, in the legal reasoning with which the royal judges had upheld it. With crystal clarity Parker forges the link between political grievance and constitutional menace. The Long Parliament went on to outlaw shipmoney.
Editor’s Introduction
"Shipmoney" was a medieval tax which was levied on coastal towns and port cities to raise money in time of war. It had largely fallen into disuse by the early 17th century when King Charles I after 1634 began to impose it in order to raise money in peace-tme without having to get the approval of Parliament. He also attempted to extend its range by imposing it on inland counties for the first time. This attempt to raise money caused outrage and became one of the causes of the Civil War which broke out in 1642. A newly elected Parliament in 1640 refused to grant Charles any additional money for his war gainst Scotland which led to the King dissolving Parliament in May. As Charles' financial postion worsened he was forced to recall Parliament in November 1640 but was unable to bend it to his will. In fact, the new Parliament passed laws restricting the power of the king to dissolve Parliament or to impose taxes without its consent.
Henry Parker's pamphlet from November 1640 should be seen in the light of these struggles between the King and Parliament over taxing powers. Parker takes the issue of shipmoney to explore not only the specific rights and wrongs of the King's attempt to revive the old tax (as often is the case in these pamphlets, there are some technical historical and legalistic arguments which get presented to the reader), but also the general relationship between the King, Parliament, and the people, which is of a more general nature. Some of these more general matters include the idea that the king cannot use the law for his own personal gain or profit, that the king cannot be the sole judge of his own actions, that there is a need for several "checks and balances" (such as the courts and parliament) to prevent the king from misusing his power, that the supreme law is not the king's will by the "salus populi" (the health or welfare of the people), that there are many historical examples of kings misusing their power, that power tends to corrupt those who wield it, that war is often used to frighten the people and thus enable the introduction of new taxes or restrictions on their liberties, and that kings can be mislead or corrupted by "court parasites" who seek privileges for themselves at the peoples' expense. Towards the end of the pamphlet there is a hint that if this question is not resolved it might lead to civil war.
Text of Pamphlet
The Case of Ship-Money Briefly Discoursed.
Great Fires happening in Townes or Cities, are sometimes the cause that other contiguous houses are spoiled and demolisht, besides those which the flame itselfe seizes. So now, in the case of Shipmoney, not only the judgement itselfe which hath been given against the subject, doth make a great gap and breach in the rights and Franchises of England, but the arguments and pleadings also, which conduced to that judgement, have extended the mischiefe further, and scarce left anything unviolated. Such strange contradiction there hath been amongst the pleaders, and dissent amongst the Judges, even in those Lawes which are most fundamentall, that we are left in a more confused uncertainty of our highest priviledges, and those customes which are most essentiall to Freedome, than we were before. To introduce the legality of the Ship-scot,1 such a prerogative hath been maintained, as destroyes altogether Law, and is incompatible with popular liberty: and such Art hath been used to deny, traverse, avoid, or frustrate the true force, or meaning of all our Lawes and Charters, that if wee grant Ship-money upon these grounds, with Ship-money wee grant all besides. To remove therefore this uncertainty, which is the mother of all injustice, confusion, and publicke dissention, it is most requisite that this grand Councell and Treshault Court2 (of which none ought to thinke dishonourably) would take these Arduis Regni, these weighty and dangerous difficulties, into serious debate, and solemnly end that strife, which no other place of Judicature can so effectually extinguish.
That the King ought to have aid of his subjects in times of danger, and common aid in case of common danger, is laid downe for a ground, and agreed upon by all sides. But about this aid there remaines much variety and contrariety of opinion amongst the greatest Sages of our Law; and the principall points therein controverted, are these foure: First, by what Law the King may compell aid. Secondly, when it is to bee levied. Thirdly, how it is to bee levied. Fourthly, what kinde of aid it must be.
1. Some of the Judges argue from the Law of Nature, that since the King is head, and bound to protect, therefore he must have wherewithall to protect: but this proves only that which no man denies. The next Law insisted upon, is Prerogative; but it is not punctually explained what Prerogative, whether the Prerogative naturall of all Kings, or the Prerogative legall of the Kings of England. Some of the Judges urge, that by Law there is naturall allegeance due to the King from the subject, and it doth not stand with that allegeance that our Princes cannot compell aid, but must require the common consent therein. Others presse, that the Law hath setled a property of goods in the subject, and it doth not stand with that property, that the King may demand them without consent. Some take it for granted, that by Royall prerogative, as it is part of the Lawes of England, the King may charge the Nation without publick consent; and therefore it being part of the Law, it is no invasion upon Law. Others take it for granted, that to levie money without consent, is unjust, and that the King’s prerogative cannot extend to any unjust thing. So many contrary points of warre doe our Trumpets sound at once, and in such confusion doe our Judges leave us, whilest either side takes that for granted, which by the other is utterly denied. By these grounds Royall prerogative, and popular liberty may seeme things irreconcileable, though indeed they are not; neither doth either side in words affirme so much, though their proofes bee so contradictory. King Charles his Maxime is, that the people’s liberty strengthen the King’s prerogative, and the King’s prerogative is to maintaine the people’s liberty; and by this it seemes that both are compatible, and that prerogative is the more subordinate of the two. The King’s words also since have been upon another occasion, That he ever intended his people should enjoy property of goods, and liberty of persons, holding no King so great, as he that was King of a rich and free people: and if they had not property of goods, and liberty of persons, they could bee neither rich nor free. Here we see, that the liberty of the subject is a thing which makes a King great; and that the King’s prerogative hath only for its ends to maintaine the people’s liberty. Wherefore it is manifest, that in nature there is more favour due to the liberty of the subject, than to the Prerogative of the King, since the one is ordained only for the preservation of the other; and then to solve these knots, our dispute must be, what prerogative the people’s good and profit will beare, not what liberty the King’s absolutenes or prerogative may admit: and in this dispute it is more just that wee appeale to written lawes, than to the breasts of Kings themselves. For we know Nationall lawes are made by consent of Prince and people both, and so cannot bee conceived to be prejudiciall to either side; but where the meere will of the Prince is law, or where some few Ministers of his, may alledge what they will for law in his behalfe, no mediocrity or justice is to be expected. We all know that no slave or villaine, can be subjected to more miserable bondage than to be left meerly to his Lord’s absolute discretion: and wee all see that the thraldome of such is most grievous, which have no bounds set to their Lord’s discretion. Let us then see what Fortescue writes, not regard what Court dependents doe interpret, and his words are for 84. Cap. 36. Rex Anglia nec per se nec per suos Ministros Tollagia subsidia aut quavis onera alta imponit legis suis, aut leges corum mutat, aut nova condit sine concessione vel assensu totius regni sui in Parliamento sui expresso.3 These words are full, and generall, and plaine, and in direct affirmance of the ancient Law and usage of England, and it is not sufficient for the King’s Counsell to say that these words extend not to Ship-money: for if there were any doubt, the interpretation ought rather to favour liberty, than prerogative.
It is not sufficient for Judge Jones to say that it is proprium quarto modo4 to a King, and an inseparable naturall prerogative of the Crowne to raise monies without assent, unlesse he first prove that such prerogative bee good and profitable for the people, and such as the people cannot subsist at all without it: nay such as no Nation can subsist without it. This word Prerogative has divers acceptions: sometimes it is taken for the altitude of Honour, sometimes for the latitude of Power. So wee say the prerogative of an Emperour is greater, than that of a King and that of a King, greater than that of a Duke, or petty Potentate: and yet of Kings we say that the King of Denmarke has not so great a Prerogative as the King of England, nor the King of England, as the King of France, &c. For here though their honor and title be the same, yet their power is not. Sometimes Prerogative signifies as much as Soveraignty, and in this generall consideration, wee say, that all supreame commanders are equall, and that they all have this essentiall inseparable Prerogative, that their power ought to be ample enough for the perfection, and good of the people, and no ampler: because the supreame of all human lawes is salus populi. To this law all lawes almost stoope, God dispences with many of his lawes, rather than salus populi shall bee endangered, and that iron law which wee call necessity itselfe, is but subservient to this law: for rather than a Nation shall perish, any thing shall be held necessary, and legal by necessity. But to come to the Prerogative of England, and to speake of it in generall, and comparatively; wee say it is a harmonious composure of policy, scarce to be parralled in all the world, it is neither so boundlesse as to oppresse the people in unjust things, nor so straite as to disable the King in just thinges. By the true fundamentall constitutions of England, the beame hangs even between the King and the Subject: the King’s power doth not tread under foot the people’s liberty, nor the people’s liberty the King’s power. All other Countries almost in Christendome, differ from us in this module of policy: some, but very few, allow a greater sphere of Soveraignty to their Princes; but for the most part now adays the world is given to republists, or to conditionate and restrained forms of government. Howsoever wee ought not to condemne any Nation as unjust herein, though differing from us; for though they seem perhaps very unpolitick, yet it is hard to bee affirmed that God and Nature ever ordained the same method of rule, or scope of royalty to all States whatsoever. Besides what dislike soever wee take at other regiments, yet except it bee in very great excesses or defects, wee must not thinke change always necessary, since custome in those great and generall points obtaines the force of another nature & nature is not to be changed. Divines of late have been much to blame here in preaching one universall forme of government as necessary to all Nations, and that not the moderate, & equall neither, but such as ascribes all to Soveraignty, nothing at all to popular libertie. Some Lawyers also and Statesmen have deserved as ill of late, partly by suggesting that our English lawes are too injurious to our King; and partly by informing, that this King is more limited by law than his Progenitors were, & that till hee be as the King of France is Rex Asinorum,5 hee is but a subject to his subjects, and as a Minor under the command of guardians: but what hath ensued out of the King’s jealousy of his subjects, and overstraining his prerogative? Nothing but irreparable losse, and mischiefe both to King and Commonwealth. And indeed the often and great defections, and insurrections, which have happened of late, almost all over Europe,6 may suffice to warne all wise Princes, not to overstrain their Prerogatives too high; nor to give care to such Counsellors as some of our Judges are, who affirme our King’s Prerogative to be in all points unalterable, and by consequence not depending upon law at all. By an other exception of this word Prerogative in England, we mean such law here establisht as gives the King such and such preeminences, and priviledges: before any subject, such as are not essentiall to royalty, but may be annulled by the same power, by which they were created. That a King shall defend and maintaine his subjects, is a duty belonging to the Office, not a priviledge belonging to the Crowne of a King; this obligation nature lays upon him, and no other power can dissolve it. Also that subjects shall afforde aide, and joine with their Princes in common defence, is a duty arising from the allegiance of the people, and not an honor redounding only to the Prince; nature’s law hath made this a tie not to be changed, or infringed: for that which is annexed by an eternall superiour power cannot be made severable, by a temporall human power. But that such an Emperour, King or Potentate, shall have such or such aid, and compell it by such or such meanes, at such or such times, as to the particular modes and circumstances of his aid, particular municipall Lawes must direct; and these it would be as dangerous to alter, as it is absurd to hold unalterable. In a Parliament held by King James, it was debated, whether or no Tenures in Capite,7 and allowance of Perveyors8 might bee repealed and divided from the Crowne; and it was held that by no Act or Statute they could bee taken away, because they were naturally inherent to the Crowne.
This resolution seemes very strange to me, since the Law of Tenures and Purveyors is not so naturall and essentiall to Monarchy, that it cannot or may not subsist without it. For if in other Countries it bee held a meere politicall way, perhaps an inconvenient thing, then why may not the Prince’s Royalty, and the people’s safety bee preserved intire without it in England? And if so, then why shall not the same authority have vigor to repeale it, which wanted not vigor to inforce it? I cannot conceive that the Parliament herein reflected upon what was formall in Law to bee done, but rather upon what was convenient. Such insignia suprema Majestatis as these, I doe not hold it fit to bee dismembred from the Crowne in policie; I only hold it a thing possible in Law, nay though the King enjoy divers such like prerogatives more, as J. Jones thinkes, than any Prince in Christendome, yet should not I desire or advise to plucke away one the least Flower out of the Regal Garland, nor would it be (perhaps) profitable for the State, to suffer the least diminution thereof. Wee know also, that in England the prerogative hath been bound in many cases, by Statute-Law, and restrained of divers such priviledges as were not essentiall, but meerly politicall. Nullum tempus occurrit Regi:9 This was one of the English Royalties, and very beneficiall many wayes; yet wee know this is in divers cases limited by Act of Parliament, and that very justly, as J. Hutton argues. The great and ancient Tax of Dangelt, it was a Subsidie taken by the Kings of England, for the common defence of the Kingdome; yet this was first released by King Stephen, and after abolished for ever by the Statutes of Edward the first: and there is no reason why an Act of Parliament should not bee as valid in our case, as it was in that. Wherefore it is to bee admired, that J. Jones should account this way of aid by Ship-money, or any other, without publicke consent, to bee Proprium quarto modo10 to the Kings of England, and so unrepealeable, since our Kings have in all ages, done such noble acts without it; and not only defended, but also enlarged their dominions. The last kinde of acception of this word Prerogative, is improper. Thus to pardon malefactors, to dispence with penall Lawes, to grant Non obstantes, to bee free from attainders, to call or discontinue, to prorogue or dissolve Parliaments, &c. are not truely and properly called Prerogatives: these all in some sense may bee called Munities, or indemnities, belonging to the sacred person of the King, as hee is inviolable, and subject to no force and compulsion of any other. And as he is the soule of Law, in whose power alone it is to execute Law, and yet not to bee constrained thereto. To grant a pardon to some malefactors for some crimes, may perhaps bee as heinous as to commit them; and that which drawes a guilt upon the King, cannot bee said to bee his priviledge. If it might bee tearmed a Royalty, that the King is not questionable, or punishable, or to bee forced in such acts as tend to the obstruction of justice, it might as well be so tearmed in acts tending to the transgression of Law: for in both hee is alike free from any coercive, or vindicative force. For it is out of necessity, not honour, or benefit, that the King hath a freedome from constraint, or restraint in these cases; and that this freedome is inseparable, because no force can be used but by superiours, or equals, and hee which hath either superiors or equals, is no King. If a King should shut up the Courts or ordinary Justice, and prohibit all pleadings and proceedings betwixt man and man, and refuse to authorise Judges for the determining of suits, hee would bee held to doe a most unkingly thing: and yet this may be as truly called a Prerogative, as to disuse and dissolve Parliaments. But it may bee objected, that the King besides such negative priviledge and freedome from force, hath also a positive of seizing subjects’ lands, &c. in divers cases, as in making Bulwarkes upon any man’s land for common defence &c. To this it may be answered, That to such power the King is not intitled by his Prerogative, nor is it any benefite to him, necessitie herein is his only warrant: for either this private inconvenience must happen, or a publick ruine follow and in nature the lesse and private evill is to bee chosen: and here the party trespassed, enjoyes safety by it, and shall after receive satisfaction for his detriment. Were there such apparant unavoidable necessity in the Ship-scot, that either that course must bee taken, or the community inevitably perish, or were the King wholly disinterested in point of profit, or were there hope of restitution, it could not bee without consent, and so not against Law. So then, for ought that is yet alledged, Prerogative, except that which is essentiall to all Kings, without which they cannot bee Kings, is alterable, and it ought to be deduced out of the written and knowne Lawes of the Kingdome, and Law is not to be inferred out of that; wee ought not to presume a Prerogative, and thence conclude it to be Law, but we ought to cite the Law, and thence prove it to be Prerogative. To descend then to our owne Lawes, yet there our Judges vary too. What the Common Law was in this point is doubted by some, and some say if the Common Law did allow the King such a prerogative to lay a generall charge without consent, then Statutes cannot alter it.
Some doe not except against the force of Statute Law, but avoid our particular Statutes by divers several evasive answers. Some say our Great Charter was but a grant of the King, extorted by force; some except against the 25. of Ed. I. because there is a salvo in it; some against the 34. of Ed. I. as made in the King’s absence; some object against the 14. of Ed. 3. as if it were temporary, and because it is not particularly recited in the Petition of Right. And the common evasion of all beneficiall Statutes, and of the Petition of right, is, that they binde the King from imposing pecuniary charges for the replenishing of his owne coffers, but not from imposing such personall services, as this Ship-scot is, in time of danger and necessity. J. Crawly maintains this Ship-scot to bee good by Prerogative at the Common Law, and not to be altered by Statute. What the Common Law was, this Court can best determine; but it is obvious to all men, that no Prerogative can be at the Common Law, but it had some beginning, and that must bee from either King or Subject, or both: and in this, it is not superiour to our Statute Law, and by consequence not unalterable. The Medes and Persians had a Law, that no Law once past, should ever bee repealed; but doubtlesse this Law being repealed first, all others might after suffer the same alteration, and it is most absurd to think that this Law might not bee repealed by the same authority by which it was at first enacted. J. Jones sayes, our Statutes restraine tollages in generall termes, and cites divers cases, that a speciall interest shall not passe from the King, but in special termes. But his cases are put of private grantees, over whom the King ought to retaine a great preheminence: but the Law is, that where the whole state is grantee, that grant shall have the force of a Statute, because it is pro bono publico, and because the whole state is in value and dignity as much to be preferred before the King, as the King is before any private grantee. But J. Jones sayes further, if generall words shall extend to these extraordinary publick levies, then they may as well extend to his ordinary private rights, and intradoes, & so cut off Aide pur faire filz Chivaleir, &c. The contrary hereof is manifest, for the intent of all our Statutes is to defend the subject against such publick tollages and impositions, as every man is equally liable to, and as are not due in Law otherwise, or recoverable by ordinary action. Now these aides, &c. and the King’s ordinary revenues and services, are not such as are due from every man, but recoverable by ordinary action. Howsoever in all these doubts the Law would now bee made cleare, and not only the vertue of Statutes in generall, but also the true meaning of our particular Charters would be vindicated from all these exceptions.
2. I come now to our second difficulty, when a publicke charge may bee laid. Here the favourers of Ship-money yet agree, that the King may not charge the subject meerly to fill his owne coffers, or annually, or when he will invade a forraigne enemy, or when Pirates rob, or burn Townes and Burroughs, for these ordinary defence is sufficient: and when there is imminent and eminent danger of publick invasion, we agree that the subject may be charged.
The Quaere then is, whether the King bee sole Judge of the danger, and of the remedy, or rather whether he be so sole Judge, that his meere affirmation and notification of a danger foreseene by him at a distance, or pretended only to be foreseene, shall be so unquestionable, that he may charge the Kingdome thereupon at his discretion, though they assent not, nor apprehend the danger as it is forewarned. J. Crooke proves the contrary thus: If danger, sayes he, be far distant, if it be in report only of French armadoes, and Spanish preparations, &c. though it bee certaine, and not pretensive, yet Parliamentary Aid may be speedy enough: and if it be imminent, then this way of Ship-scot will not bee speedy enough; for either the designe is really to have new Ships built, and that will require longer time than a Parliament; or else money only is aimed at, whereby to arme other Ships, and for this the Law hath provided a more expedite way than by Ship-scot, in case of imminent danger.
If then the King have power to presse all men’s persons and ships, and all are bound exponere se, & sua,11 and to serve propriis sumptibus,12 when imminent danger is, and this defence hath alwayes beene held effectuall enough, it is consequent that if hee be not destitute of competent Aid in present distresses, he cannot pretend a greater necessity in dangers more remote, when they are but suspected or perhaps pretended only.
My Lord Bramston sayes here, that there is a necessity of preventing a necessity: and that the Sea is part of the Kingdome, and therefore of necessity to bee guarded as the kingdome. The answer is, That the safety of the Kingdome does not necessarily depend upon the Ship-scot, and so this necessity being removed, the necessity grounded upon this, falls off of itselfe. For if the Kingdome may escape ruine at hand when it is a storme, without Ship-money, it may much more escape it afar off, being but a cloud. But grant the Sea to be a part of the Kingdome to some purposes, yet how is it a part essentiall, or equally valuable, or how does it appeare that the fate of the Land depends wholly upon the dominion of the Sea? France subsists now without the regiment of the Sea, and why may not we as well want the same? If England quite spend itselfe, and poure out all its treasure to preserve the Seigniory of the Seas, it is not certaine to exceed the Navall force of France, Spaine, Holland, &c. And if it content itselfe with its ancient strength of shipping, it may remaine as safe as it hath formerly done. Nay I cannot see that either necessity of ruine, or necessity of dishonour can bee truly pretended out of this, that France, Spaine, Holland, &c. are too potent at Sea for us.
The dominion of the seas may be considered as a meer right, or as an honour, or as a profit to us. As a right it is a theme fitter for schollers to whet their wits upon, than for Christians to fight and spill bloud about: and since it doth not manifestly appeare, how or when it was first purchased, or by what law conveyed to us, wee take notice of it only as matter of wit and disputation. As it is an honour to bee masters of the sea, and to make others strike saile to us as they passe; it’s a glory fitter for women and children to wonder at; than for Statesmen to contend about. It may bee compared to a chaplet of flowers, not to a diadem of gold: but as it is a profit to us to fence and inclose the sea, that our neighbours shall not surprise us unawares, it’s matter of moment, yet it concernes us but as it doth other Nations. By too insolent contestations hereupon, wee may provoke God, and dishonour ourselves; we may more probably incense our friends, than quell our enemies, wee may make the land a slave to the sea, rather than the sea a servant to the land. But I pray Master Selden to pardon me for this transition, and I returne my matter. If the Kingdome could not possibly subsist without Ship-money in such a danger, yet there is no necessity that the King should be so sole Judge of that danger, as that he may judge therein contrary to the opinion, and perhaps knowledge of other men. I allow the King to be supreame, and consequently sole Judge in all cases whatsoever, as to the right, and as to the diffusion of Judgement; but as to the exercise, and restraint of judgment, he is not, nor ought not to be accounted sole Judge. In matters of Law the King must create Judges, and swear them to judge uprightly, and impartially, and for the subject against himself, if law so require; yea though hee bee of contrary judgement himselfe, and by his Letters sollicite the contrary. The King’s power is as the disgestive faculty in nature, all parts of the body contribute heat to it for their owne benefit, that they may receive backe againe from it a better concocted and prepared supply of nourishment, as it is their office to contribute, so it is the stomacke’s to distribute.
And questionlesse sole judgement in matters of State, does no otherwise belong to the King, than in matters of Law, or points of Theology. Besides, as sole judgement is here ascribed to the King, hee may affirme dangers to be foreseene when he will, and of what nature he will: if he say only, Datum est nobis intelligi,13 as he does in this Writ, &c. To his sole indisputable judgement it is left to lay charges as often and as great as he pleases. And by this meanes, if he regard not his word more than his profit, hee may in one yeare draine all the Kingdome of all its treasure, and leave us the most despicable slaves in the whole world.
It is ridiculous also to alledge, as J. Jones does, that it is contrary to presumption of Law to suspect falsity in the King: for if Law presume that the King will not falsly pretend danger to vexe his subjects, of his owne meere motion, yet no Law nor reason nor policy will presume, that the King may not be induced by misinformation to grieve the people without cause. The Sunne is not more visible than this truth, our best Kings, King Charles, King James, Queene Elizabeth, and all the whole ascending line, have done undue illegall things at some times, contrary to the rights and Franchises of England, being misinformed, but having consulted with the Judges, or States in Parliament, they have all retracted, and confessed their error. Nay there is nothing more knowne, or universally assented to than this, that Kings may be bad; and it is more probable and naturall that evill may bee expected from good Princes, than good from bad. Wherefore since it is all one to the State, whether evill proceed from the King mediately or immediately, out of malice, or ignorance. And since wee know that of all kindes of government Monarchicall is the worst, when the Scepter is weilded by an unjust or unskilfull Prince, though it bee the best, when such Princes as are not seduceable (a thing most rare) reigne, it will bee great discretion in us not to desert our right in those Lawes which regulate and confine Monarchy, meerly out of Law-presumption, if wee must presume well of our Princes, to what purpose are Lawes made? and if Lawes are frustrate and absurd, wherein doe we differ in condition from the most abject of all bondslaves?
There is no Tyranny more abhorred than that which hath a controlling power over all Law, and knowes no bounds but its owne will: if this be not the utmost of Tyranny, the Turkes are not more servile than we are and if this be Tyranny, this invention of ship-money makes us as servile as the Turkes. We must of necessity admit, that our Princes are not to be misse-led, and then our Lawes are needlesse; or that they may be misse-led, and then our Lawes are useless. For if they will listen to ill counsell, they may be moved to pretend danger causlesly; and by this pretence defeate all our lawes and liberties, and those being defeated, what doth the English hold, but at the King’s meere discretion, wherein doth he excell the Captive’s condition? If we shall examine why the Mohametan slaves are more miserably treated, than the Germans, or why the French Pesants are so beggarly, wretched, and beastially used more than the Hollanders, or why the people of Milan, Naples, Sicily are more oppressed, trampled upon, and inthralled than the Natives of Spaine? there is no other reason will appeare but that they are subject to more immoderate power, and have lesse benefit of law to releeve them.
In nature there is no reason, why the meanest wretches should not enjoy freedome, and demand justice in as ample measure, as those whom law hath provided for: or why Lords which are above law should bee more cruell than those which are more conditionate. Yet we see it is a fatall kind of necessity only incident to immoderate power, that it must be immoderately used: and certainly this was well known to our ancestors, or else they would not have purchased their charters of freedome with so great an expence of bloud as they did, and have endured so much so many yeares, rather than to bee betrayed to immoderate power, and prerogative. Let us therefore not bee too carelesse of that, which they were so jealous of, but let us look narrowly into the true consequence of this ship-scot, whatsoever the face of it appeare to be. It is vaine to stop twenty leakes in a ship, and then to leave one open, or to make lawes for the restraint of royalty all other ways, that it may not overflow the estates of the Commonalty at pleasure, and yet to leave one great breach for its irruption.
All our Kings hitherto have been so circumscribed by law, that they could not command the goods of their subjects at pleasure without common consent. But now if the King bee but perswaded to pretend danger, hee is uncontroleable Master of all we have, one datum est intelligi, shall make our English Statutes like the politick hedge of Goteham, and no better. I doe not say that this King will falsifie, it is enough that we all, and all that we have are at his discretion if he will falsifie, though vast power be not abused, yet it is a great mischiefe that it may, and therefore vast power itselfe is justly odious, for divers reasons. First, because it may fall into the hands of ill disposed Princes, such as were King John, Henry the third, Edward the second, Richard the second. These all in their times made England miserable, and certainly had their power beene more unconfineable, they had made it more miserable. The alterations of times doe not depend upon the alteration of the people, but of Princes: when Princes are good it fares well with the people, when bad ill. Princes often vary, but the people is always the same in all ages, and capable of small, or no variations. If Princes would endure to heare this truth it would bee profitable for them, for flatterers always raise jealousies against the people; but the truth is, the people as the sea have no turbulent motion of their owne, if Princes like the windes doe not raise them into rage. Secondly, vast power if it finde not bad Princes it often made Princes bad. It hath often changed Princes, as it did Nero from good to bad, from bad to worse: but Vespasian is the only noted man which by the Empire was in melius mutatus: daily experience teaches this. Dangelt in England within twenty yeares increased to a fourefold proportion.
Subsidies were in former times seldome granted, and few at a time, now Parliaments are held by some to bee of no other use than to grant them. The Fox in Aesop observed that of all the beasts which had gone to visite the Lion, few of their footesteps were to be seene retrorsum: they were all printed Adversum. And we finde at this day that it is farre more easie for a King to gaine undue things from the people, than it is for the people to regaine its due from the King. This King hath larger dominions, and hath raigned yet fewer yeares and enjoyed quieter times than Queen Elizabeth; and yet his taxations have been farre greater, and his exploits lesse honorable, and the people is still held in more jealousy. To deny ship-money which sweeps all, is held a rejection of naturall allegiance. I speake not this to render odious the King’s blessed government, I hold him one of the mildest, and most gracious of our Kings; and I instance in him the rather, that wee may see, what a bewitching thing flattery is, when it touches upon this string of unlimitable power. If this ambition and desire of vast power were not the most naturall and forcible of all sinnes, Angels in heaven, and man in Paradise had not fallen by it; but since it is, Princes themselves ought to be more cautious of it. Thirdly, vast power if it neither finde nor make bad Princes, yet it makes the good government of good Princes the lesse pleasing, and the lesse effectuall, for publick good: and therefore it is a rule both in law and policy, and nature, Non recurrendum est ad extraordinaria, in iis quae fieri possunt per ordinaria.14 All extraordinary aides are horrid to the people, but most especially such as the ship-scot is, whereby all liberty is overthrowne, and all law subjected to the King’s meer discretion.
Queen Elizabeth in 88. was victorious without this taxation, and I am perswaded she was therefore victorious the rather, because shee used it not. Her art was to account her subjects’ hearts as her unfailing Exchequer, and to purchase them by doing legall just things, and this art never deceived her, and in that dismall gust of danger it was good for her and the State, both that she did not rely upon forced aides of money, or the words of grieved souldiers; for this Ship money nothing can bee pretended but necessity, and certainly necessity is ill pretended, when the meer doing of the thing, is as dangerous as that for which it is done. Did not this Ship-scot over-throw all popular liberty, and so threaten as great a mischife as any conquest can? and were not the people justly averse from it? Yet meerly for the people’s disaffection to it, it is dangerous to bee relied upon in case of great danger.
We know Nature teacheth us all, of two evils to chuse that which wee thinke the least, though it bee not so; therefore if the people apprehend this remedy as a thing worse than the disease, though they be mistaken therein, yet that very mistake may prove fatall. The Roman Army being harshly treated by the Senators, and their proud Generall, did refuse to charge upon the enemy, or to resist the charge of the enemie, they chose rather to bee slaughtered by strangers, than enthralled by their countreymen. The English also in the late Scotch invasion, by reason of this and many other causes of discontent, made so faint resistance, that they did in a manner confesse, that they held themselves as miserable already as the Scots could make them. Thus we see there is no necessity of levying Ship-money, there is rather necessity of repealing it: and wee see that presumption of Law doth not abet this necessity, but rather crosse it. And whereas J. Jones further saith, That the King hath no benefite by Ship-money, and therefore presumption is the stronger, that the King will not take it causelesly; wee may answer: The Ship-money is a very great benefite to the King for if not immediatly, yet mediatly it is become a revenue, inasmuch as by this addition all other revenues of the Crowne, nay and Tunnage and Poundage, which were not designed only for ordinary expences, but for extraordinary imployments, and publicke charges also, are now become discharged of that tie, & the Common-wealth hath lost all its interest and property in them. In point of benefit therefore it is all one to the King, and in point of burthen it is all one to the subject, whether Ship-money bee accounted of as part of the King’s annuall rents, or no, since by it his rents are enlarged: and as to the subject there is no obligation, that this levie shall not hereafter incorporate with the rest of the King’s In-traders and be swallowed up as Tunnage and Poundage now are. Thus we see what the necessitie is, and presumption of Law, which was so much insisted upon; and yet for a further confutation of both, Time, the mother of Truth, hath now given us more light. Now that great danger which was pretended so many years together for the necessity of raising so great supplies of treasure, is as a small cloud blown over, making it apparant that Kings may bee mis-informed; and by mis-information take Molehils for Mountaines, and cast heavie burthens upon their subjects.
3. But I come now to my 3d Difficultie, How a publick charge is to be laid upon the kingdome. The Law runs generally, that in England no Tollage or pecuniary charge may bee imposed Fors que per common assent de tout la Realme, or, Sinon per common consent de Parliament. Some presidents, or matters of fact appeare, wherein some Kings have divers times invaded this right of the subject, but upon conference had with the Judges, or petition in Parliament, redresse was ever made, and the subject’s right re-established. All the colour which can be brought to answer the Law in our case, is, that the words of the law are general of Taxes & Tollages, but do not by special mention restrain extraordinary danger. But wee know the Petition of Right, 3. Car. is grounded upon former Statutes, and recites divers of them, and is a cleare affirmance of the common right of England; and yet by that the commissions for Loanes were damned. And it is evident that those Loanes were demanded for the generall defence of the Kingdome in time of imminent danger; and by the same Statute, not only Loanes, but all other levies of money upon what pretence of danger soever, Si non per common consent, are condemned as illegall, and contrary to the Lawes and Rights of England. Two things therefore are objected against Parliaments: First, that they are of slow motion, and so most of the Judges alledge. Secondly, that they may be perverse, and refuse due aid to the King, and so J. Crawly boldly suggests. For answer we say in generall: First, that it is the wisdome of the Kings to be alwayes vigilant, and to have their eyes so open upon forraigne Princes, and to maintaine such intelligence that no preparation from abroad may surprize them before recourse had to Parliament; and this is very easie to Insular Princes, who have a competent strength of shipping, Secondly, to have alwayes in readinesse against all sudden surprizes, a sufficient store of amunition and arms both for sea and land-service: and the revenues of the Crowne of England are sufficient for this purpose, and have been held more than sufficient in former times, when hostility was greater, and the Kingdome smaller. Thirdly, to seek advice and assistance from Parliaments, frequently in times of quiet, as well as of danger, as well when war is but smoking, or kindling, as when it is blowne into a flame. Before the conquest this was held policie, and since in Edward the third’s time, a statute past to this purpose; and if Parliaments of late be growne into dislike, it is not because their vertue is decayed, it is because the corruption of the times cannot endure such sharp remedies. Fourthly, to speak particularly of this case of ship-mony, we say that it is a course more slow than by Parliament: there was more expedition used in Parliament to supply King Charles, since he came to the Crowne, than can this way. And we say moreover, that as the extremity of the Kingdom was when Ship-money was demanded, whatsoever was pretended to the contrary, a Parliament might have beene timely enough called, and seasonably enough supplied the King. As to the second objection of J. Crawly, too unfit to come out of any honest wise man’s mouth, but much more for a Judge’s, Judge Crooke replies, that as there is nullum iniquum in Lege, so neither in Parliamento.15 The three noted factions which are adverse to Parliaments, are the Papists, the Prelates, and Court Parasites; and these may be therefore supposed to hate Parliaments, because they know themselves hatefull to Parliaments. It is scarce possible for the King to finde out any other that thinkes ill of Parliaments or is ill thought of by Parliaments. Of Papists little need to bee said, their enmity is confest, they have little to pretend for themselves, but that Parliaments are grown Puritanicall. The Prelates thinke themselves not to have jurisdiction and power enough; and they know that Parliaments think they have too much, and abuse that which they have much more: therefore to uphold themselves, and to crush their ill-willers, they not only tax Parliaments of Puritanisme, but all Puritans of sedition. As much as in them lies, they wed the King to their quarrell, perswading him that Parliaments out of Puritanisme, doe not so much aime at the fall of Episcopacie, as Monarchy: and that Episcopacie is the support of Monarchy, so that both must stand and fall together. Howbeit because they cannot upbraid Parliaments of attempting anything against Monarchy further than to maintaine due liberty, therefore they preach an unlimitable prerogative, and condemne all law of liberty as injurious to Kings, and incompatible with Monarchy. Manwarring denies Parliamentary power and honour, Cowel16 denies propriety of goods, further than at the King’s discretion, and Harrison17 accuses Judge Hutton of delivering law against God’s Law, in the case of Ship-money. And the common Court doctrine is that Kings are boundlesse in authority, and that they only are Cesar’s friends which justifie that doctrine; and from this doctrine hath grown all the jealousies of late betweene the King and his best Subjects; and this is that venemous matter which hath lain burning, and ulcerating inwardly in the bowels of the common-wealth so long. The other enemies of Parliaments, are Court dependants, and projectors, which have taken advantage of this unnaturall dissention betwixt the King and his Subjects; and have found out meanes to live upon the spoile of both, by siding with the King, and being instruments to extend his Prerogative to the purchasing of preferment to themselves, disaffection to the King, and vexation to the common-wealth. These three factions excepted, and some few Courtiers which are carried with the current of example, or are left to speake unpleasing truths, there is scarce any man in all the King’s dominions, which doth not wish for Parliaments, as the State’s best physick, nay almost as its naturall necessary food: but I will instance in three thinges wherein Parliaments excell all other Counsells whatsoever.
1. For wisdome, no advice can be given so prudent, so profound, so universally comprehending, from any other author; it is truly said by Sir Robert Cotton, that all private single persons may deceive and bee deceived; but all cannot deceive one, nor one all.
That an inconsiderable number of Privadoes should see or know more than whole Kingdomes, is incredible: vox populi was ever reverenced as vox Dei, and Parliaments are infallible, and their acts indisputable to all but Parliaments. It is a just law, that no private man must bee wiser than Law publickly made. Our wisest Kings in England, have ever most relied upon the wisdome of Parliaments.
Secondly, no advice can bee so faithfull, so loyall, so religious and sincere, as that which proceeds from Parliaments, where so many are gathered together for God’s service in such a devout manner, we cannot but expect that God should bee amongst them: and as they have a more especiall blessing promised them; so their ends cannot be so sinister. Private men may thrive by alterations: and common calamities, but the common body can affect nothing but the common good, because nothing else can be commodious for them. Sir Robert Cotton in the life of Hen. 3. according to the Court Doctrine at this present, sayes, that in Parliament Kings are ever lesse than they should be, and the people more. If this bee spoken of irregular Kings, which will endure to heare of nothing but Prerogative government, it may carry some semblance of truth: but sure it is, good and wise Kings are ever greatest when they sit immured, as it were, in that honorable assembly: as the History of Queen Elizabeth and many of her Progenitors testifies. Tis true, Hen. the third, met with divers oppositions in Parliament. He was there upbraided, and called dilapidator regni;18 it was true that he was so, and the most unworthy of rule, that ever sate in this Throne; yet those words became not subjects. I doe not justifie, but in some part extenuate such misdemeanours; for the chiefe blame of those times is not to bee throwne upon the Peeres and Commons, but upon the King and his outlandish Parasites. It is without all question also that in those bloudy unjust times, had it not been for frequent Parliaments, and that soveraigne remedy which thereby was applied to the bleeding wounds of the Kingdome, no other helpe could have stanched them.
Even then, when Parliaments were most prevalent, and when they had so much provocation from so variable and uncapable a Prince, they did not seeke to conditionate prerogative, or to depresse Monarchy for the future, though they were a little too injurious to him in person for the present.
Since that time also many Parliaments have had to struggle for due liberty with insolent Princes, and have had power to clip the wings of Royalty; and the custome of all Europe almost besides hath seemed to give some countenance to such attempts; but the deepe wisdome, and inviolable loyalty of Parliaments to this composure of government hath beene such, that they never made any invasion upon it. As it was in all former ages, so it now remaines intire with all its glorious ensignes of honour, and all the complements of power; and may he be as odious which seekes to alter or diminish Monarchicall government for the future, as he which seekes to make it infinite, and slanders Parliaments as enemies to it, or indeavours to blow such jealousies into the King’s eares.
3. No advice can be so fit, so forcible, so effectuall for the publicke welfare, as that which is given in Parliament: if any Cabinet Counsellors could give as wise and sincere advice as Parliaments, yet it could not be so profitable, because the hearts of the people doe not goe along with any other, as with that.
That King which is potent in Parliament, as any good King may, is as it were so insconsed in the hearts of his subjects, that he is almost beyond the traines or aimes of treason and rebellion at home, nay forraigne hostility cannot pierce him, but through the sides of all his people.
It ought to be noted also, that as the English have ever beene the most devoted servants of equall, sweetly-moderate Soveraignty; so in our English Parliaments, where the Nobility is not too prevalent, as in Denmark, nor the Comminalty, as in the Netherlands, nor the King, as in France, Justice and Policie kisse and embrace more lovingly than elsewhere. And as all the three States have alwayes more harmoniously borne their just proportionable parts in England than elsewhere, so now in these times, in these learned, knowing, religious times, we may expect more blessed counsell from Parliaments than ever, wee received heretofore. May it therefore sinke into the heart of our King to adhere to Parliaments, and to abhorre the grosse delusive suggestions of such as disparage that kinde of Councell. May he rather confide in that Community which can have no other end but their owne happinesse in his greatnesse, than in Papists, Prelates, and Projectors, to whom the publick disunion is advantagious. May hee affect that gentle Prerogative which stands with the happinesse, freedome, and riches of his people; and not that terrible Scepter which does as much avert the hearts, as it does debilitate the hands, and exhaust the purses of his Subjects. May he at last learne by experience, that the grievance of all grievances, that that mischiefe which makes all mischiefes irremediable, and almost hopelesse in England at this day, is that Parliaments are clouded, and disused, and suffered to be calumniated by the ill boding incendiaries of our State. May it lastly enter into his beleefe, that it is impossible for any Kingdome to deny publicke assent for their Prince’s aid, either in Parliament or out, when publicke danger is truly imminent, and when it is fairely required, and not by projects extorted: that no Nation can unnaturally seeke its owne ruine, but that all Kings, like Constantine, may make their Subjects’ purses their owne private coffers, if they will demand due things, at due times, and by due meanes.
4. I come now to the last difficulty about the condition and nature of such aides as are due by Law from the Subject to the King. Though much hath beene argued both at the barre and on the Bench, for the King, that he may raise monies from his Subjects, without consent by law, prerogative, and necessity. Yet at last, because the Petition of Right absolutely crosses this tenet, it is restored to us backe againe, and yeelded, that the King may not impose a pecuniary charge by way of Tollage, but only a personall one by way of service. And now all our controversie ends in this, that we must contest, whether the Ship-scot be a pecuniary, or a personall charge. For though the intent of the Writ, and the office of the Sheriffe be to raise monies only, yet the words of the Writ, and the pretence of State, is to build and prepare Ships of warre. The Kingdome generally takes this to bee a meere delusion and imposture, and doubtlesse it is but a picklock tricke, to overthrow all liberty and propriety of goods, and it is a great shame that so many Judges should be abetters to such fraudulent practice contrived against the State. It is not lawfull for the King to demand monies as monies, but it is lawfull to demand monies under another wrong name, and under this wrong name all former Lawes and Liberties shall be as absolutely cancelled, as if they had beene meere cobwebs, or enacted only out of meere derision. If former laws made to guard propriety of goods were just, and grounded upon good reason, why are they by this grosse fallacy, or childish abuse defeated. If they were not just, or reasonable, what needs such a fond subtiltie as this? Why should not they bee fairely avoided by Law? Why were they made at all? But be this invention what it will, yet wee see it is new; if it be quashed, the State is but where it was, we are still as our Ancestors left us; and since our preceeding Kings never heretofore put it in use in the most necessitous calamitous times, we may from hence infer, that the plea of State necessitie falls off of itselfe; if we admit not of this innovation, then the State suffers not; but if wee admit it, no necessity being of it, wee can frame no other reason for our so doing, but that our former franchises and priviledges were unjust, and therefore this way they must bee annulled. Some of our Judges doe prove, that if this were a personall service, yet it were void; and they cite the case of Barges, and Ballingers vessells, built truly for warre in time of imminent danger, and yet these charges upon complaint made by the Subject, were revoked, and disclaimed. But here in this case many other enormities and defects in Law are, for if ships bee intended to be built in Inland Countries, a thing impossible is injoined; and if monies be aimed at, that very aime is against Law: and if the Kingdome were to be disfranchised, it were not to bee done by an illegall way.
Besides, in the Writ, in the Assessement, in the Sheriffe’s remedie against recusants of it, in the execution of Law, by, or after Judgement, many inconveniences, errors, and mischiefes arise many wayes: and sure take the whole case as it is, and since the Creation no whole Kingdome was ever cast in such a cause before.
Besides, though the Judges ought wholly to have bent themselves upon this, to have proved this a personall service, and no pecuniary charge, they have roved after necessity, presumption of Law, and Prerogative, and scarce said anything at all hereof.
My Lord Bramston argues very eagerly, that personall services by Sea and Land are due to the King in cases of extremity, and all their records, cases, and precedents prove no more, and that men may be arrayed, and ships pressed, and that sumptibus populi;19 but there is nothing proved that the meere raising of monies in this case, is a personall service. J. Jones indeed argues to this purpose: If the Law intrust the King with so great a power over men’s persons, why not over their estates? There is cleare reason for the contrary: because the King, if he should abuse men’s personall aides, could not inrich or profit himselfe thereby, and we know it is gaine and profit, it is Auri sacra fames20 which hath power over the breasts of men. It is not ordinary for Tyrants to imbattaile hoasts of men, and make them charge upon the Sea-billowes, and then to gather up Cockles and Piwinckle shells in lieu of spoile, as one did once. But the world abounds with stories of such Princes, as have offended in abusing their power over men’s estates, and have violated all right divine and human, to attaine to such a boundless power.
Good Kings are sometimes weake in coveting boundlesse power; some affect rivality with God himselfe in power, and yet places that power in doing evill, not good: for few Kings want power to doe good, and therefore it misbecomes not sometimes good Subjects to be jealous in some things of good Kings. But J. Jones farther sayes, that Ships must be built, and without money that cannot be done: ergo. This necessity hath beene answered, and disproved already: and I now adde, that for the good of the Kingdome there is more necessity that Ship-money bee damned than maintained. Such unnaturall slavery seems to mee to bee attendant upon this all-devouring project, and such infamy to our Ancestors, our Lawes, and ourselves, nay and such danger to the King and his posterity, that I cannot imagine how any forraigne conquest should induce anything more to be detested and abhorred.
Those Kings which have beene most covetous of unconfined immoderate power, have beene the weakest in judgement, and commonly their lives have beene poore and toilsome, and their ends miserable, and violent: so that if Kings did rightly understand their owne good, none would more shunne uncontrollable absolutenesse than themselves.
How is the King of France happy in his great Prerogative? or in that terrible style of the King of Asses? Wee see that his immoderate power makes him oppresse his poore Pesants, for their condition is most deplorable, and yet set his power aside, and there is no reason why he should not be as a father to cherish them, as a God to comfort them, not as an enemy to impoverish them, as a tormentor to afflict them.
2. His oppression makes him culpable before God: he must one day render a sad account for all the evill which hee hath imposed, for all the good which he hath not procured to them. That the Vicegerent of God should doe the office of a tyrant, will be no light thing one day.
3. His sinne makes him poore: for were his Pesants suffered to get wealth and enjoy it, the whole land would be his treasury, and that treasury would containe twice as much as now it doth.
4. His poverty makes him impotent, for money being the sinewes of warre, how strong would his joints be, if all his subjects were abounding in money, as doubtlesse they would, if they wanted not liberty, and propriety? Besides, poverty depresses the spirit of a Nation: and were the King of France, King of an Infantery, as he is only of a Cavalry, were he a King of men, as he is only of beasts, had he a power over hearts as he hath over hands, that Country would be twice as puissant as it is.
5. His impotence, together with all other irregularities, and abuses is like to make his Monarchy the lesse durable. Civill wars have ever hitherto infected and macerated that goodly Country, and many times it hath been near its ruine. It now enjoys inward peace, but it doth no great exploits abroad, nor is ever likely to doe, unlesse by practising upon the distemper of other Nations. Should some other Prince practise in the like manner upon that, and propose liberty to the grieved people, much advantage might be taken: but these avisoes would better proceed from that most heroick, most terrible, most armipotent Churchman, which effects such great wonders here. Wee see hence that Princes by some gaine lose, as the whole body pines by the swelling of the spleene. We see that Rehoboam catcht at immoderate power, as the dog in the fable at a shadow, but instead of an uncertain nothing, he let fall and lost a certaine substance; and yet flatterers have scarce any other baite than this shadow of immoderate power, whereby to poison the phantasies of weake humours, undiscerning rash Princes.
My humble motion therefore is: First, that the judgement given in the Chequer Chamber for Ship-money, may bee reversed, and damned, as contrary to the right of the Subject.
Secondly, that those Judges which adhered to equity and integrity in this case, might have some honourable guerdon21 designed them.
Thirdly, that some dishonourable penalty may bee imposed upon those Judges which ill advised the King herein, and then argued as Pleaders, not as Judges; especially if any shall appeare to have solicited the betraying of the Kingdome.
Fourthly, that the meaning of our Lawes & Charters, may bee fully and expresly declared, and the force and vertue of Statutes and publicke Grants, may be vindicated from all such exceptions and objections as have beene particularly or generally made against them.
Fifthly, that a clearer solution may bee given in the foure maine points stirred, how farre prerogative is arbitrary and above Law; and how farre naturall allegeance bindes to yeeld to all demands not of Parliament: next, how the King is sole Judge of danger, as that his meere cognizance thereof shall be sufficient, though there be no appearance or probability thereof. Next, how a necessity of publicke ruine must bee concluded now, if Ship-money be not levied, when no such ruine hath been formerly, when this new plot was not devised. Lastly, how this Ship-scot pretending ships, but intending money, and really raising the same, can bee said to bee no pecuniary tollage within our Statutes, but a meere personall service.
Sixthly, that any Officers, or Ministers of State, which shall attempt to lay the like taxes hereafter upon the Subject, by vertue of the like void warrants, may be held and taken as Felons, or Traitors, or forcible Intruders.
Seventhly, that something may be inacted against forraigne or domesticall Forces also, if they shall be congregated for the like purposes; and that the subject may bee inabled by some fit and timely remedy to bee given against a military kinde of government.
Eighthly, that the due way of publicke defence, in case of imminent and eminent danger, or actuall necessary warre, for the pressing of men, and other charges of warre, such as Cote and Conduct money,22 and all doubts thereabouts, may be made more certaine, and settled for the time to come.
Ninthly, that if the King’s ordinary Revenues now taken for the Crowne, be not sufficient to maintaine him, as our great Master, some legall order may be taken therefore, and that he may be sensible of his Subjects’ loyalty, and his Subjects live safe under him, that his enemies may finde him considerable, and his true friends usefull.
“Ship-scot” refers to ship levy or so-called ship money.
“Treshault court” is a very high court.
The king of England neither by himself nor by his ministers imposes tax subsidies or any other duties or changes their laws, or establishes novelties without the concession or the assent of his entire kingdom expressed in his Parliament.
Proper in the fourth way.
King of the jackasses.
Parker probably has in mind not only the so-called Bishops’ Wars with Scotland but insurrections such as the revolt of the Netherlands and the devastating Thirty Years War in Europe. Moreover, during 1640 the Spanish empire was shaken by revolt in Catalonia and Portugal.
Tenure in Capite refers to land held immediately of the king.
Purveyance refers to provision to be furnished to the Crown. In 1604 the Commons claimed this prerogative had been abused.
Time does not run against the King.
Proper in the fourth way.
To risk himself and his belongings.
By their own expenses; at their own expense.
It is given us to be understood.
One is not to have recourse to the extraordinary things in those matters in which it can be done by the ordinary things.
There is nothing unfair in the law, so neither in Parliament.
See John Cowell, The Interpreter: Or Book Containing the Signification of Words . . . (Cambridge, 1607), a provocative dictionary containing definitions that seemed to enhance royal power. Two further editions appeared in 1637. See STC 5900, 5901, 5902.
Thomas Harrison upbraided Judge Hutton for his decision in the case of ship-money.
Dismantler of the kingdom.
At the expense of the people.
Sacred hunger for gold.
Reward.
“Coat and Conduct money” was a special military tax to provide men pressed into the royal army with any necessary clothing and for appointed conductors who were paid for delivering them to their rendezvous.
T.5 [1641.??] (10.1) [Richard Overton], A Dreame, or Newes from Hell (1641).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.5 [1641.??] (10.1) [Richard Overton], A Dreame, or Newes from Hell (1641).
Full title[Richard Overton], A Dreame: or Newes from Hell. With a Relation of the great God Pluto suddenly falling sicke by reason of this present Parliament.
Printed in Sicilia on the back-side of the Cyclopean Mountaines. 1641
Estimated date of publication1641, no month given.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationNot listed in TT.
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
A DREAME Or Nevves FROM HELL.
NOT long since an honest Yeoman comming up to London, to petition to the most honourable High Court of Parliament in his own behalfe, for an especiall wrong he had received from certaine Projectors, who had encroached upon a parcell of his Free-hold, neere to the Common where he dwelt, by direction of some well-minded people, came into Westminster Hall, where having walked a long time up and down, & not knowing unto whom to deliver his petition, among so many hundreds that he met withall, at last being desirous to take some repast, wherewith he might revive & comfort himselfe, he came to a place neere adjoyning, which was tearmed by the name of Hell, and having well satisfied himselfe with such a portion of meat & drunke as he thought might content his appetite, he demanded what might be to pay, and finding the reckoning to be beyond his expectation, he grew very much discontented at the payment thereof, and repairing presently to his Lodging, being not farre off, and being very much perplexed at his former Reckoning, he resolved at the last to betake himselfe to his Bed, and not long after falling into a slumbring sleepe (divers Whimzies and diversities of Motions, swimming in his braine of the supposed Hell where he had formerly beene) he dream’d he was in the true and locall Hell indeed:
Where being affrighted with the apparitions of divers hideous and ugly deformed diabolicall Fiends, who were by his cogitation numberlesse, he was transported by his fancie to the great Court of Grand Pluto, who being attended with a multitude of his blacke Guard, and other his stigmaticall Officers, there was an instant hurly-burly and combustion in the Court, about the suddennesse of Grand-Pluto falling into a greevous sicknesse; wherefore all the Court Doctors of Hell being summoned to appeare (with an infinit company of Witches, Conjurers, & Sorcerers, fetcht from all other places, to give their best advice therein, were admitted into his princely Chamber, and having cast his water, and debated the matter a long time about the difficulty of his Disease, at length they all agreed, that he fell sick of a Parliament.
Whereupon Proclamation being made in Pluto’s name throughout all his Hellish Dominions, to any whatsoever to repaire unto his Court, with promises of great reward and favour from him, that could by any wayes comfort him in this behalfe. Upon a sudden there appeared a multitude in long button’d cassacks, high collars, and square Caps, with small falling bands about their Necks, who seemed to strive, against all others, to be the first that might be admitted into his presence; and these were reported to be a company of Iesuites, who were the deere children of Pluto, who hearing that their Father was sicke, came in all submissive manner to visit him, and to offer their service unto him, and withall informed him, that if there were any Designe, Practice, Plot, Device, Study, or other stratagem whatsoever, that could administer him any comfort, or wherein they might any wayes expresse their duty unto him, or further enlarge his Kingdome, they would ride, runne, goe, trot, or what not to performe his pleasure therein, and withall, desired him to be of good cheere, and to be comforted in his Children, who were ready at all times to waite his will and pleasure, and to execute whatsoever he should command.
Hereupon they desired their Father Pluto to take notice of the former care they had to enlarge his Kingdome, by animating the great Metropolitan to be a meanes to bring in Popery, and to doe the best service he could therein.
And withall shewing how they had sowed sedition and discord amongst the English Hereticks, and provoked the Scottish Hereticks to rebell against their lawfull King, and to intrude into the Territories of this Land; and also had animated their beloved Brother Cardinall de Richlieu to raise a puissant Army for the invasion of this Land in two severall places, (viz.) at Dover and Portsmouth, at such times as the King was supposed to be most deeply employed in his Warre against the Scots; and likewise have wee not procured your great Secretary of State, Don Antonio Demonibus to make an especiall inrolement of all their names in your Kalendar, amongst those your deare Servants, the Plotters of the Gun-powder Treason, and those renowned Complotters of the former invasion into this Land in 88. and have not onely animated many noble personages, and others, to asist vs in our great Designe of bringing in of Popery into this Land, but have also procured divers Popish Books to be printed openly, thereby the better to encourage your Highnesse, deere Father, and the more to enlarge your Kingdome.
And for Courts of Justice, have we not also by our power and authority joyned with our dreadfull and High Commission, brought to passe, that if any Heretike, under the degree of a Lord, should but put on his Hat in the time of Divine Service, we kept him in our Ecclesiasticall clutches fiue or sixe yeares together. And have we not likewise in the Courts of Chancery, Kings-Beach, or common Pleas, procured diuers wayes and meanes wherby many men (though their cause were never so just) have beene either by continuall delayes wearied in their Suites, or by extorted Fees, Bribery, or other Devices, driven to sell and morgage their lands, goods, and whatsoever they have bin possessed off, that a man might have worne out Buff jerkins in that space, & yet they seldom or never had an end of their suites, but have bin fleeced and jeered out of their demeanes, so long as they could procure either mony or friends, and yet it hath bin carryed so neatly and cunningly, as if the course of Iustice had bin exactly performed.
And for the Court of Exchequer, we are able further to testifie unto you (deare Father) out of our owne knowledge, that it is one of the best Courts belonging to your infernall Kingdome, for if a suite be once commenced there, they have so many delayes by putting in of Pleas, making of Motions, putting off a suite from Terme to Terme, after a verdict given, or framing some excuses to arise from the Bench, when a Cause appointed for the day should be heard, or to cause Motion vpon Motion to be made, whereby so many Orders of the Court must be drawne vp, or pretending the Court not to be full, with other sinister devices and sleights there vsed; that wee have knowne some men to have served an Apprenticeship, and bin made Free-men, and also to have married Wives, and had children, and yet the suit formerly commenced not ended. Therefore, deare Father Pluto, be of good comfort, and take it not so much to heart, so long as you have such dutifull children, and loving subjects; assuring your selfe, that we will doe our best endeavours to recover you of this Disease.
Presently after this, there came a company of fellowes with broad Seales about their necks, who were nominated to be Pluto’s Iourney-men, and had the title of Patentees, who also hearing that their Grand-Master was suddenly falne sick, presented themselves in all humble manner, the further to expresse their duty and obedience vnto him; Relating unto their hellish Master, that according to their power and his appointment, they had ever bin obedient and faithfull servants unto him, in oppressing and squeezing the Common-wealth, and that they intended to continue therein, to the end of their dayes, and by what meanes they could possibly invent or devise, they would shew themselves to be dutifull servants unto him, in racking, poling, and pinching the poore both in city and country, vnder pretence of doing good in generall to the whole Common-wealth; and further declared vnto their Grand-Master, that in all their projects whatsoever, they had sheltred themselves vnder some great Patron, the better to colour their fraud and deceit: and likewise, that in case they had any colour of setting the poore on worke, for a generall good, they might with authority and strictnesse the more covertly hide their cunning and knavery, and withall assured their great Master, that they would sit up late, rise early, and spare no paines to encrease his Kingdome, and humbly craved his approbation, that they might bee further imployed either herein, or in what other businesse, in that nature it pleased him to command.
Whereunto Pluto replyed, that they had all done well, and left them at their owne disposing to doe what they found to be convenient, and so they were dispatched for the present.
Not long after, Cerberus the Porter of Hell, brought tydings vnto the palace of Pluto, that there was a post arrived with a packet of Letters from little Will; whereupon Don Antonio Demonibus, his chiefe Secretarie of State, was presently sent for to read them vnto Pluto, the contents whereof, as farre as could be gathered by those that were neere about him, was to this effect, That the said little Will, with divers other great personages of the State, would with all convenient speed that might bee, come in person to visit his greatnesse, and there to remaine with him in his Court. Whereat Pluto being very glad, began to be somewhat chearefull at the hearing of this newes, calling him by name the Sonne of his love, and further said, he had not thought to have seene him so soone, as now by his letters directed vnto him he did expect: and thereupon Pluto’s chiefe Secretarie of state was commanded to send an answer of the said packet of Letters by the same post to little Will, and the other great personages of State aforesaid, how glad he would be of their appearance in his Court, and what courteous entertainment they should have when they came there. Then Pluto gave command, that the post should be Royally rewarded for his paines, and called the post to him, & asked him what diet little Will did delight in, because the place where I keepe Court, is of a hotter Climate then he hath beene in heretofore, the post made answer that little Will formerly, did desire tips of eares, but the Cooke dressed them with the blood in them, and so he tooke a surfet; and ever since lived at a sparing diet. And further told his Highnesse that he need not be at too much charge for little Wills dyet, he tooke delight but in two dishes especially, and they were Lamb and Duck, and those he meant to bring with him. And suddainly vpon the departure of the post with this answer, Pluto gave strict charge and command vnto his infernall attendants, that divers faire Roomes should be presently trimmed vp, and hanged round about with Tapistry and Cloth of Arras, for the better entertainment of little Will and his fellowes, or any that came along with him. Then I was very desirous to know what this little Will was, at the first I could by no meanes learne, but at last I asked one that I supposed to be of Pluto’s neere attendants, if he knew him or no, he informed me, that he did not know him, but surely it was one that as yet had never been in Pluto’s Court before, and verily beleeved that he had performed some extraordinary businesse in Pluto’s behalfe, and deserved to be highly advanced in his infernall Court, and also supposed him to be some great personage, otherwise he would never have received the Packet of Letters which he sent him, with such cheerefulnesse, nor have given such a strict command to his chiefe Secretary, and others his infernall servants, for his speedy and present entertainment to his Court.
And notwithstanding the suddain expectation of little Wills comming into Pluto’s Court and the rest of his fellowes, which did not a little comfort and revive him in this his lingring sicknesse, yet Pluto found not all to be well in himselfe, but grew more and more to be perplexed and so wonderfully out of patience, that his ordinary attendants could hardly keepe him in his Bed, insomuch, that all his Hellish Doctors were once againe sent for to come with all speed vnto him, who being come there, they found that he was very dangerously sick indeed, and that he was fallen into a grievous relapse, and that there was no meanes left to recover Pluto’s health, and to restore him to his former strength againe, or to enlarge his infernall Kingdome, but that by some device or other this present Parliament might be dissolved and broken vp, which being fully agreed vpon by all his Doctors they informed his Highnesse. That if ever he expected to regaine his former estate, or to get any footing in England, he must with all speed call a generall Councill of all his infernall and wel-beloved Subjects, that they might advise and consult what way were best that this present Parliament might be dissolved as aforesaid.
Whereupon Cerberus by speciall command and appointment of Grand Pluto, had authority to set the gates of Hell wide open, and that all passengers whatsoever, (none to be denyed) might freely have accesse to come and heare the will and pleasure of Pluto, and also Charon was commanded with all possible speed to provide himselfe of as many Boats as he could to ferry them from all parts and places to this purpose, and when there was a huge multitude of all sorts gathered together in a large and spacious place, one of the chiefe Heraulds belonging to the internall court cryed out vnto the assembly with a loud voice, to crave a generall silence, after which, Pluto thus began:
My deare children, Servants, Iourneymen, and well approved Subjects, you see into what a low and weake estate I am brought, and as you have beene dutifull and obedient with all diligence hitherto to execute my commands, so my desire is, that you would alwaies continue vnto the end, I cannot forget your care, true love, industry, and paines you have taken in generall, for the enlargement of my Kingdome, and you my beloved Doctors, in endeavouring to performe your best skill, to recover my former health, as also you my dearest children whose Sanctity, we reverence, whose persons we adore, whose policies we wonder at, whose power we muse at, whose invincible Stratagems we stand amazed at, and whose Wisdomes we admire, neither can we but in the first place extoll, applaud, and highly commend you, for your extraordinary care in advancing our infernall Dominions.
And we are also pleased of our infernall grace and favour, to take notice of your great service done, in working the dissolution of the last Parliament, by which meanes nothing was effected for the good of the Hereticks, either concerning the church or common wealth, but thereby the Nobles of England were male-content, the Gentry discouraged, the Commons divided, the number of our servants, the Roman Catholikes infinitly encreased, and the whole Realme of England mightily oppressed; so as the successe of our designe was thereby no waies hindered.
Now my wel-beloved children, servants, Iourneymen, subjects, Allies, & all my well-willers whomsoever, if you could by any Device, Stratagem, Policy, Money, Friendship, or any other delusive or sinister means, study to dissolve or break up this present Parljament, w ch would be the onely way, as we conceive in our Diabolicall Princely Wisdome, to breake the bond of peace & vnity amongst them, and thereby to move God to leave them to themselves, you should not onely be enrolled in our everlasting Kalendar for our dearest children and Subjects, but also be placed neere us in our favour for ever; and then also, to our great comfort, our infernall Stratagem might speedily be executed vpon them, & our Kingdome mightily encreased and enlarged.
Therefore all you my deare children, subjects, attendants, and Allyes, who are willing to doe your best endeavours for the performing of this Enterprize; we require you to be ready to take the Oath ex officio, & to lay your hands vpon the Book. Whereupon with a generall acclumation & consent, they all promised to doe what possible in them lay to performe his request, and affirmed, that they all were willing to conset to his demand, & therepon they layd their hands vpon the Booke. Then Pluto causing his principall attendants to raise him a little higher on his Pillow, proceeded on this manner: You my loving Subjects who have stept aside, and made your legges your best protection, you also that are vnder the command of the Black Rod, and you that much feare you shall be questioned this present Parliament, and you my Iourneymen Patentees, and the rest of my loving Subjects here present, are you all willing to take the oath aforesaid for the breaking vp of this Parliament, then they all cryed with one voice; Willing, most willing, long live your Hellish Majestie, I beleeve you (said Pluto) take your hands from the Booke, I dare take your bare words. Whereupon Pluto’s great Counsell was called before his infernall Highnesse, and being assembled together, they all cõcluded, that forthwith a Proclamation should be sent abroad into all places in great Pluto’s name, the tenour whereof followeth.
TO the Pope, our right Trusty and wel-beloved Sonne, and all the Iesuiticall Rabble, our adopted Children, to the Spaniard, Italian, French, Dutch, or what Nation people, or in what parts soever this shall come, these are to give notice, that whosoever can by any fraud, friendship, money, or any other means whatsoever, dissolve & breake vp this present Parliament, That thereby great Pluto may recover not onely his former health, but that his Kingdomes and Dominions may also be enlarged, he shall for so memorable an Act, be seated inplace of Iudicature with his chiefe Iustice Rhadamantus; or next to Pluto himselfe, and forth with be made Vice-Roy of Hell, prince of this world, Arch-Duke of Styx, Acheron; & Phlegeton; Marquesse of Cosytus and Lethe; and sole Commander (vnder him) of all Infernall Spirits and Furies.
And herevnto, we, the sayd Grand Pluto have set our Hand and Seale Royall, in the presence of all our Children, Friends and servants aforenamed.
This being proclaimed with thundring Drums, and sound of Trumpets, awaked the honest Country-man, who having seen and observed in his Dreame, all these passages and occurrents, lay for a while as it were in a trance, trembling and in a great extasie, at last recollecting his senses, he arose, and going from his chamber to goe about his businesse, he met by chance with two of his owne Countrey-men, who had beene a long time encombred with Law-suites, vnto whom he related this his Dreame, with all the passages aforesaid, whereat they wondering, and much astonished, desired him to deliver vnto them a Copie thereof in writing, which he promised, and performed the next day following.
FINIS.
T.6 [1641.??] (8.2) John Davies, An Answer to those Printed Papers by the late Patentees of Salt (1641).↩
Editing History- Corrections to HTML: 6 Jan. 2016
- Corrections to XML: 6 Jan. 2016
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.6 [1641.??] (8.2) John Davies, An Answer to those Printed Papers by the late Patentees of Salt (1641).
Full titleAn Answer To Those Printed Papers published in March last, 1640. by the late Patentees of Salt, in their pretended defence, and against free trade. Composed by IOHN DAVIES Citizen and Fishmonger of London, a well-wisher to the Common-wealth in generall.
Sal sapit omnia. Ne scit quid valeat.
Printed in the yeare, 1641.
Estimated date of publication1641 (no month given).
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationNot listed in TT.
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
THe ensuing Treatise, concerning the opposing of the project and Patents for Salt, tending to the good of his Majesty, and of the Subjects in generall, (wherein all faithfull endeavours on the Authours part are performed) is most humbly presented, praying, that if any error is therein committed, (whereof he is not conscious) may by this Honourable Assembly be pardoned.
An Answer to those Papers (falsly intituled, A true Remonstrance of the state of the Salt businesse, &c.) lately published in print in March. 1640. by the Projectors of the first and second Patents for Salt, in their owne pretended defence, and against the free trade of all Merchants, Navigators, and Traders for Fish and Salt of the City of London, and all other Ports, and of all Salt makers and Salt refiners, and of all other his Majesties Subjects within the extent of their severall Patents betweene Barwicke and Weymouth, as followeth.
IN this Answer it will not be necessary to bee limited within the strict time where the Projectors began which was in Anno 1627. thereby to serve their own occasions, but is intended to declare the truth of the most usuall and constant prices of Salt at the City of London; as, it hath beene sold for 40. yeares last past, as in the sequell shall appeare.
That in Anno 1600. even till the latter part of the yeare, 1627. the most usuall price either of white or bay Salt, was neare about 50. s. or 3. l. a Wey, and often sold under that price, as can be sufficiently proved.
That in the said yeare 1627. the Warres began betweene the Kings Majesty of Great Britaine, and the French King, and the King of Spaine; in which time, till the peace was concluded betwixt those Kings, the commoditie of Salt was very deare and scarce, especially French Salt, which was at 6. s. or 7. s. a bushell at the City of London, which came to passe in regard the Salt-workes in France were destroyed.
First, at the Ile of Ree by the Duke of Buckinghams designe.
Secondly, by the French King himselfe in the warres when he tooke in Rochel.
And thirdly, by intemperate Raine which fell that time in France. So that the Kingdome of France it selfe, which was wont to supply many other parts, as England, Ireland, Holland, the Eastland, and Germany, was thereby necessitated with want of that commodity for its owne occasion. And therefore not to be admired, that the French King made an Edict in Anno 1630. that no Salt should bee exported out of his Kingdome, (untill his store should bee supplyed againe.) Which scarcity in France for that present, forced all men to send into Spaine for Salt, and thereupon a great number of Ships from all parts arriving there at one time, gave the King of Spaine occasion to make use of the present necessity, and layd a great Impost on the Salt that should bee transported from thence.
The very same cause also moved the Kings Majesty of Great Britaine, and the Lords of the Councell, to order in that time of scarcity of Salt, by meanes of a Petition exhibited to the Lords by the Lord Maior of the City of London, and divers other Ports in Anno 1630. that no Salt should be transported into any forraigne parts, which was effectually granted them by the Lords. But when in one or two yeares after, and that in France there were erected Salt-workes, and Salt was made plentifully againe, as in the yeare 1632. then by the Edicts of the said Kings, the great imposition of Salt in Spaine and France ceased, and Salt became cheape againe, and Trade free as in former yeares, as about 3. l. or 3. li. 10. s. per Wey, for English or French, and 4. l. per Wey for Spanish Salt at most, which continued till December, 1634.
So that the cause of the dearth of Salt in France, Anno 1628. till Anno 1632. hapned through Warre and intemperate Weather, as before is specified, and not by the pleasure of Princes, by laying of a great Impost upon it, as they the Patentees falsly pretended; but the Projectors were desirous to make that an occasion of bringing their covetous desires to effect, and about that time they beganne to devise to bring an Impost on the English native Salt, which was and is dearer to the makers of it then any other salt spent in this Kingdome. For French and Spanish Salt being made onely by the heat of the Sunne, stands not the makers of it in above 10. s. or 20. s. or 30. s. a London Wey at the most, according to the drinesse, or the wetnesse of the Summer, whereas the English Shields Salt at 1. d. per Gallon, (which is the cheap price the Patentees boast of stands the makers of it in 53. s. 4. s. the like Wey at least, being also the weakest Salt of all other by one third part, and therefore cannot beare any Impost, without destroying the English manufactures, as these Projectors have all this time practised, to the destruction thereof, although they pretended the contrary.
It is to be observed, that a Wey of Salt at the City of London, containeth 40. Bushels, and every Bushell 10. Gallons, which is the right measure according to the Statute; from which, in most other Ports it much differeth.
That in December, 1634. the first Projectors, consisting of twenty two in number, (whereof five were Knights, the other seventeene had the titles of Esquires and Gentlemen) having determined and practised formerly to doe mischiefe in this Land wherein they were borne and bred, and being all or most of them unexperienced in the matter they tooke in hand, devised and obtained this Monopoly of Salt, mis-informing his Majesty, and the Lords of the Councell, that it would be a great benefit to this Kingdome of England, and that of Scotland, to erect workes for the making a sufficient quantity of Salt, &c. and at a certaine moderate price, (as they so termed it) not exceeding 3. l. a Shields Wey, which is after the rate of 5. l. 12. s. for a Wey delivered at London, which is an intolerable exaction upon a native manufacture, made and spent in this Kingdome, as by their Patent more fully doth appeare; (although the Salt pannes in those places were erected long before, and not by these Patentees.) Which Patent being obtained by them, they practised to oppresse the Subject from January 1635. untill August 1638. all which time the first Patentees having made a Monopoly, in taking all the old Workes and Pannes at the Shields into their hands, forced white Salt at the City of London to the price of 4. l. 15. s. per Wey, and for the most part to 5. l. per Wey, and so in all other Ports according to that rate.
And Bay Salt by reason of their great Impost of 48. s. 6. d. per Wey, which was raised by a privy Seale, procured by Edward Nattall, and others his associates, (but nothing brought to accompt for his Majesty, as yet appears) was not all that time sold at London under 5. l. 10. s. per Wey, at least, but commonly at 5. l. 13. s. 4. d. per Wey, or 6. l. whereas the Westerne parts, which were free of their Patent, as Southampton, Exeter, Plimouth, Bristol, &c. had it in that time at or about 3. l. the like Wey, and sometimes under that price, which was most unjust and unequall, that the Easterne parts should suffer so much thereby, not onely in the price, but also in hindrance of Navigation, and losse of Trade.
That about July, 1638. the first Patentees having difference with Master Murford of Yarmouth, who had a Patent granted before theirs at Shields, prevailed against them, and some of them of the first Patent being wearied with the designe, voluntarily laid downe their Patent.
That after the first Patentees gave over their Patent, the Salt-makers at Shields in August, 1638. reassumed their Pannes, and sold Salt there cheape againe, and thereby both Scottish and Shields Salt was sold at London for 3. l. per Wey, or near thereabout, untill January following, that Thomas Horth and his associates obtained a grant of their Patent, which they presently after put in execution, yet Horth and his associates of the second Patent had no time to raise the price of white Salt at Shields to that height as they desired, for the Scots presently after the first Pacification in August, 1639. brought it downe at London to 2. l. 17. s. per Wey, whereas Horth and his Associates in June and July 1639. would sell none at London under 4. l. 10. s. per Wey.
That whereas the first and second Projectors of both Patents, to cleare themselves of the great wrong done by them to his Majesty and his Subjects, doe in their printed Papers lay the blame on the traders in Salt of the City of London, seeking therby to glosse over their oppressing the Subjects even in the face of this Honourable Parliament, still pretending as formerly, that what they did was for his Majesties profit, benefit of Navigation, support of home manufacture, and generall good of the subject, and many such like things, all which pretences are meere falshoods and suggestions.
For first his Majesties Revenew is no way increased, as doth appeare by their payments into his Majesties Exchequer, being in all but 700. l. whereas they have received Impost, and remaine debtors to his Majesty many thousands, as by further examination and proofe of their accompts will appeare.
Secondly, Navigation hath beene much hindred thereby, as by a former Petition of the Trinity house to his Majesty and the Lords of the privy Councell appeareth, as also it hath beene sufficiently proved before the Committee for the Salt businesse, by the Master and Wardens of the Trinity Company, who are most sensible of the destruction and advancement of the Shipping and Navigation of this Kingdome.
Thirdly, they have so cherished the home manufacture, by laying a heavy Impost upon it, that those that had 240. Pannes of their own, and were thriving people at the Shields, before their Patents were of force, and were the makers there of Salt, are by the meanes of these Patentees become so poore, that the greater part of them are not able to buy coals to set their Pannes on worke. And those the Patentees who bought 34. Pannes of the old traders, did cease working for the most part of the years 1639. and 1640. by reason they could not attaine to their intended price of 56. s. 8. d. per Wey at the Shields. So that whereas there was formerly made at the Shields before their Patents began about 16000. Wey per annum, they made in the time of the first Patent, which continued about three yeares and a halfe, not above 10000. Wey per annum. And in the time of the latter Patent but 8000. Wey per annum, even before the comming in of the Scottish Army into those parts: by all which appeares how much they have destroyed the native manufacture, and have no wayes advanced or increased it, as they pretended.
Fourthly, for their pretences of the generall good of the Subject, in place whereof they have so oppressed the Subject in generall, that not onely the traders in Salt of the City of London, have justly complained of their grievances to the Honourable Court of Parliament, but also Salt-refiners of Essex and Suffolke, also many Merchants in the West parts as far as Weymouth, as also from Yarmouth, and many other ports North as farre as Newcastle, that came up to London onely to informe the Court of Parliament of the great burden they have beene forced to lye under, even to many of their undoings: And many more would come up, had they not beene so impoverished by them the Patentees, that they are not able to beare their charges in comming so farre to complaine of their grievances. In generall, they have been the oppressors of Fishermen, and all the subjects of these North East parts of England, to the value of many thousand pounds in estimation, above fourescore thousand pounds since the time of their entring into these Patents, which can be made plainly to appeare by one yeares importation for forraigne and Scottish Salt, collected out of the Custome-house bookes, and Meters bookes of London, and for native Salt out of their owne bookes.
Viz.
In the yeare 1637. (which was in the time of their first Patent) of Bay and Spanish Salt there was imported but 1364. Wey, which at 48. s. 6 d. per Wey, is impost 3307. l. 14. s. whereas in the yeare 1634. when the trade was free there was 4620. Wey of forraigne Salt imported, by which may be observed the decay of forraigne Trade during the time of their Impost.
That the Impost of forraigne Salt was received and taken of all the Subjects between Barwicke and Southampton, by vertue of Privy Seale dated in May 1636. procured by Edward Nattall, and others his associates, but nothing brought to accompt by them, nor paid to his Majesties use for the two yeares and 6. moneths, (as can yet appeare.)
That of Scottish and native white Salt Shields measure, there were expended for land use about 16000. Weyes, which at 10. s. per Wey Impost, and 10. s. per Wey increase of price, which came to passe by the Patentees contracting with the Scotch for deare selling, and can appeare to be damage to the subjects at least in one yeare, in the price of the white Salt 16000. l.
That for Fishers use of Scottish and native Salt, an estimate of 3000. Shields Wey, and upwards, at 3. s. 4. d. per Wey Impost, and 6. s. 8. d. increase of price, is at least 1500. l.
Whereby it appeares that the subjects suffered in one yeare by the first Salt Patents, 25807 l. 15. s.
That the Patentees for Salt continued their first and second Patents above 5. yeares.
By all which it is manifest how profitable these Patents have beene to the Patentees, how little benefit hath accrued to his Majesty thereby, how great a burden to the Subjects in generall, and to the old Salt makers, and the Merchants for forraigne Salt, and all Fishermen, who use great quantities thereof, and to all traders in the same in their particulars. But if any trader in Salt hath either joyned with those Patentees in any indirect way, thereby to uphold them, or the extreme price of Salt, they are not hereby intended to be excused, but to be left to the consideration of the Honourable House of Parliament.
And whereas Horth and his Associates seek to justifie their Patent, comparing it with that which Master Murford intended (which would also have beene alike illegall with theirs, by laying an Impost on native Salt (as they have practised.)
For answer thereunto is said, that the unlawfulnesse of Murfords Patent intended, cannot make that of Horths to bee lawfull which was practised by him. For as well that of Horths, as also the first Patent, have beene sufficiently discussed by the Committee appointed by the Honourable House of Commons now assembled in Parliament, for the hearing of that businesse, and is by them most justly condemned to be illegall, a Monopoly, and prejudiciall to the Commonwealth. For so it is, that a Monopoly is a kinde of commerce in buying and selling usurped by a few, and sometimes by one person, and forestalled by them or him from all others, to the gaine of the Monopolist, and to the detriment of other men.
That the latter Patentees further proceed in their justification, declaring the low rates the subjects have beene served at since the time of the settlement of their Patent, which is (as they say) at 1. d. ob. per Gallon at the most, which in truth is a most intolerable exaction on the subject. For 1. d. ob. per gallon is no lesse then 50. s. a Shields Wey, which is but five eight parts of a London Wey, and so the fraught being added, which is 10. s. a Shields Wey, without Impost, it will stand the Adventurer in no lesse then 4. l. 16. s. a Wey London measure, whereas it may bee afforded, delivered at London, for 3. l. 12. s. per Wey, which is after the rate of 35. s. per Wey to the Salt makers at Shields for their Wey, at which said price of 35. s. per Wey, the old Salt makers say, they can afford it, but not under.
And for the rate of 1. d. per Gallon, which is the cheape price they so much boast on, it being but 33. s. 4. d. a Wey Shields measure, at which price, if they sold any so cheape, it was much against their wills, for they desired and alwayes sought to settle it at 56. s. 8. d. per Wey Shields measure for land use, and 46. s. 8. d. for the fishing Sea expence, which are the prices laid downe in the latter Patent: yet it is true, that they sold some at lower rates: but they were forced thereto by meanes of the great plenty that was brought in by the Scots, who sold it at London, Yarmouth, and some other Ports at 3. l. a Wey, in Anne 1639. and some under that price, as aforesaid, whereupon the Patentees gave over making Salt at Shields in their 34 pannes, in regard they could not attaine to their intended price of 56. s. 8. d. a Shields Wey, yet some of the old Salt makers still wrought, (though to their great losse, and some of their undoings) selling it not for above 30. s. per Wey, yet notwithstanding they the Patentees took of them the old Saltmakers, without any moderation or compassion, the full impost of 10. s. for every Shields Wey, for Land use, and 3. s. 4. d. per Wey, for the fisliery expence. For they had forced the old Saltmakers and Salt refiners to enter into bond, for the payment therof unto them, which if they refused to do, they violently forced them of the Sheilds, of great Yarmouth, and Salt Refiners of Essex and Suffolke thereunto by imprisoning of some, committing of others into Pursuivants hands, and causing others to come up and answer at the Councell Table, to their great expence both of money and time, which extreamity Horth used in that time he was governour more then any other either of the first or second Patentees.
That in the Months of September, October and November last, Salt became deerer then it was in eight or nine yeares before, which came to passe partly by reason of the great impost continued by the Patentees of the last Patent, both on the native and forraigne Salt, and partly by reason of the imbarring of the Scottish trade, and the comming in of the Scottish Army, at that time into Newcastle and Shields, so that white Salt was sold in October last at the port of London at 6. l. 10. s. per Wey, and Bay Salt in November last, was sold at the port of London for 8. l. per Wey, in regard Master Strickson, Master Nuttall, and Master Duke, three of the last Patentees continued the taking impost even untill this present Parliament, which three were also chiefe of the Projectors of the first Patent.
That the 23. of November last, the Honourable Assembly of Parliament upon a Petition of the traders in Salt of London, injoyned the Patentees to bring in their Patents & cease taking impost, and thereupon the price both of White and Bay Salt did fall at the port of London to 3. l. a Wey, and some for lesse: but the windes proving contrary in the latter part of December, January and February last, for above ten weekes together: And also small store of Salt having been laid up in London, or made at Shields by reason of the troubles in those parts with the Scottish Army, the store of white Salt for want of supply was soone spent here at London: and had it not beene that the Parliament before that time had taken off the Impost of forraigne Bay and Spanish Salt, whereby there was good quantities of forraigne Salt brought in, this City of London had been so necessitated for Salt, as the like hath not been knowne. Yet from the Kings Store house, and the East India Company, and other such like places, there was some small quantities of white Salt found, which supplyed the present want thereof, and was sold in those deerest times at or neere Billingsgate by some of the Traders in Salt for 6. s. 8. d. per Bushell at most, but Bay Salt all that time was sold for 22. d. or 2. s. a bushell, and not above all that time, which was in the Moneth of February, but before that Moneth was expired, and ever since it hath beene sold for 2. s. per Bushell, and five peckes to the Bushell, at or neare Billingsgate.
And whereas the Patentees alledge that white Salt was sold for 2. s. a pecke, at that instant day, when they published their printed papers, it is manifestly to bee proved that ten or twelve daies before they published them, white Salt was cryed in London streets at 5. d. a pecke, and so ever since, which proves their printed papers to be scandalous and false, in laying forth so many imputations upon the Traders in Salt, as though they were the cause of deare selling, which was only their continued impositions, and the occasion of the time as afore is shewed.
That before the Patentees had obtained their Patent for Salt there was imported yearly to London great quantities of Spanish, Straits, and French Salt, by Merchants, Navigators and Traders. And that many hundred Weyes thereof were from thence yearly transported for Flanders, Holland, Denmarke, and the East Countrie, whereby ships had their imployments both inwards and outwards, his Majesties Customes improved, and many poore people, as Porters and Labourers had their maintenance thereby; which trade of Importation is in a manner wholly decayed since the time these severall Patents were obtained.
THat their Patents are found by the Committee appointed by the Parliament for hearing the Salt businesses to be illegall, and a Monopoly, by reason they brought an impost on the native Manufacture, and many other oppressions to the Subject.
That the prosecution hath beene most violent by imprisonments, and forcing many out of their Trades, and also Salt Refiners and Saltmakers, at Shields and great Yarmouth from their works; and the first Patentees forced divers at Shields to let them their Pannes at a Rent, which after two yeares and sixe monthes use, they returned into their hands much decayed, and not satisfied for Rent.
That they would have forced his Majesties Subjects to the only use of white Salt, which is not so sufficient for fishing Voiages and many other uses, as the forraigne.
That they forced the price both of white & Bay Salt, in the time of their Patents, to one third part more then otherwise it would have beene sold for.
That there was a far greater quantity of Salt made in England before their Patents began, then in the time of the continuance of their Patents.
That Horth at a hearing at Councell Table the 19. of December, 1638. to maintaine his unjust cause in taking his Patent, and upon some speech, which was moved about the insufficiency of white Salt for preserving of Fish, and an ancient Trader there saying, that the very scales fell off through the weaknesse of the white Salt; he the said Horth did most falsly reply and affirme, that Codde and Ling Fish had no scales, which he did to convince them of error who came to oppose him: and he with others (whose names are well knowne) did then and there before his Majesty and the Lords of the Councell so farre maintaine it, that they were believed, and that the others that spake the truth, were rejected, whereby the King and Lords were abused by the said Horth and others, by denying that to the creature which it had received in the creation either for defence or ornament.
That it is and hath beene proved both before his Majesty and the Lords, and also before the Committee by the Trinity house Masters, that if forraigne Salt be prohibited, or some heavy impost be laid upon it, Navigation will be much hindred and decaied.
That Horth alone above the rest of his partners obtained a Commission out of the Exchequer, and did thereby put men to their corporall oaths, to confesse what Salt of their owne or of others, they knew to be imported, and told the Commissioners hee was at Councel about that particular, and his Councell advised him, it must bee so, and to bee sure, would bee with the Commissioners himselfe, and urge it.
That the settled moderate rate (as the Patentees pleased to call it) of 56. s. 8. d. per Wey Shields measure, will stand the Adventurer delivered at London in 5. l. 6. s. 8. d. per wey, which is now since their Patent ceased sold at this City of London for 3. l. 10. s. per wey, and long before their Patents began, it was sold cheaper, (that time of three or foure yeares of hostility with France and Spaine, when there could be little forraigne Salt imported, onely excepted.) And Bay Salt at present is sold at 3. l. per wey.
That beyond the power of the Patents, Horth constrained the Salt refiners of divers Counties to pay a double Impost.
That if the commodity of Salt be free for all men to import, or make it, there cannot be that ingrossing, forestalling, or regrating made which may be done by a few monopolizing Patentees, who having the command of it all, may conferre the commodity upon some few particular Traders, for some sinister respects, to the destruction of others in their Trades, (as the late times of their Patents have made manifest.) And for those 27. yeares afore specified, the commodity of Salt being then free of Impost, the price was alwayes reasonable, and would be so now, and so continue, without the helpe of any Projector.
That a free trade which is now so much desired of the subject, and a settled price, desired of the Patentee, cannot consist, for a constant price forced upon a native manufacture is a principall part of a Monopoly.
That forraigne Salt being absolutely necessary for speciall uses, the inhibition thereof cannot be admitted, but to the great prejudice of the subject.
That these Projectors, which pretend so much of supporting the home manufacture of Salt, have in a maner destroyed it, by laying so heavy an Impost upon it, as 16. s. for every London Wey. And if it be not supported by taking off the foresaid Impost, it is like utterly to decay, and then indeed (the Salt Wiches onely excepted) this Kingdome must wholly depend upon forraigne parts, for all the Salt shall be therein expended.
(The premises considered) the humble request to the Honourable House of Commons now assembled in PARLIAMENT, is, That they would be pleased, that the Projectors and late Patentees for Salt may be brought to an account upon the premisses, that so it may appeare what profits have accrued to his Majesty, and what disadvantage to the Subject, and what persons have beene molested and vexed by reason of them, that so reparations and redresse may be made to the parties so vexed and grieved, as in the judgement of the Honourable Assembly shall be thought expedient.
FINIS.
T.283 [1641.04.12] John Pym, The Speech or Declaration of John Pym (12 April, 1641)↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (no corrections necesaary; date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date

Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.283 [1641.04.12] John Pym, The Speech or Declaration of John Pym (12 April, 1641).
Full titleJohn Pym, 1584-1643
THE
SPEECH
OR
DECLARATION
OF
JOHN PYM, Esquire:
After the Recapitulation or summing up of the Charge of High-Treason,
AGAINST
THOMAS,
Earle of Strafford,
12. April, 1641.
Published by Order of the Commons House.
LONDON,
Printed for John Bartlet. 1641.
12 April, 1641.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 9.
Malcolm/Editor’s Introduction
The renowned parliamentary leader and politician John Pym was an outspoken critic of the Court. He opposed Arminianism and Catholic influences in the Church of England, and he staunchly upheld what he saw as England’s ancient constitution. Pym was educated at Oxford and entered the Middle Temple, although he was never called to the bar. His long parliamentary career began in 1614 in the reign of James I. Pym actively supported the Petition of Right in the Parliament of 1628 and later in that session conducted the Commons’ case against Roger Maynwaring. He was a leading member of the Commons in the Short Parliament and, even more important, in the Long Parliament.
Pym was convinced there was a plot to destroy parliamentary institutions and the Protestant religion. When the Long Parliament convened he demanded that those guilty of this conspiracy be punished. Prominent among those he believed culpable was Charles’s leading councillor and loyal minister, Thomas Wentworth, Earl of Strafford. Strafford’s willingness to resort to extraordinary means on behalf of his master and his high-handed administration as president of the Council of the North and lord-deputy of Ireland had made him notorious. Beyond this Strafford was believed to have urged the king to use an Irish army against the English parliament and was preparing to charge parliamentary leaders with treasonous conspiracy with the Scots.
Pym played the leading role in Strafford’s fall. He moved that a subcommittee investigate Strafford’s conduct in Ireland and later that he be impeached on a charge of high treason. This meant a trial before the House of Lords. Pym led the attack at every stage, from the collection of evidence and preparation of charges to the presentation of the case. Strafford’s trial began on 22 March 1641. The chief difficulty was that despite his overbearing tactics and possible transgressing of the royal prerogative on behalf of Charles, Strafford had not committed any act of treason against the king. Pym attempted to get around this by arguing that to endeavour the subversion of the laws of the kingdom was treason; that to come between the king and his people was treason; that the culmination of many small, perfidious acts, none of which was in itself treasonous, could constitute treason.
Strafford defended himself so ably that on 10 April with the Lords reluctant to convict, a bill of attainder was introduced into the Commons. This would simply declare Strafford guilty without the necessity of a trial. As the bill of attainder moved through the legislative process the original impeachment continued with Pym chosen by the Commons to deliver its reply to Strafford’s defense. Pym’s speech to the Lords on that occasion, published as a tract and reprinted here, sets out the Commons’ constitutional position succinctly and eloquently. He explains their notion of treason as a subversion of the laws, an introduction of an arbitrary and tyrannical government. This speech has been acclaimed as the best of Pym’s career. At least nine editions of it were printed in 1641.
Despite Pym’s efforts the impeachment was dropped. The bill of attainder, however, passed, and on 12 May Strafford was executed. Despite Charles’s promise to Strafford that he would pardon him, the king made no move to save his loyal minister. It would be one of his lasting regrets. With the onset of civil war Pym served as a leader of the parliamentary party. He would never live to see its outcome. He died in December 1643.
Text of Pamphlet
The Speech or Declaration of John Pym, Esq: &c.
My Lords,
Many dayes have been spent in maintenance of the Impeachment of the Earle of Strafford, by the House of Commons, whereby he stands charged with High Treason. And your Lordships have heard his Defence with Patience, and with as much favour as Justice would allow. We have passed through our Evidence, and the Result of all this is, that it remaines clearly proved, That the Earle of Strafford hath indeavoured by his words, actions, and counsels, to subvert the Fundamentall Lawes of England and Ireland, and to introduce an Arbitrary and Tyrannicall Government.
This is the envenomed Arrow for which he inquired in the beginning of his Replication this day, which hath infected all his Bloud. This is that Intoxicating Cup, (to use his owne Metaphor) which hath tainted his Judgement, and poisoned his Heart. From hence was infused that Specificall Difference which turned his Speeches, his Actions, his Counsels into Treason; Not Cumulative, as he exprest it, as if many Misdemeanours could make one Treason; but Formally and Essentially. It is the End that doth informe Actions, and doth specificate the nature of them, making not only criminall, but even indifferent words and actions to be Treason, being done and spoken with a Treasonable intention.
That which is given me in charge, is, to shew the quality of the offence, how hainous it is in the nature, how mischievous in the effect of it; which will best appeare if it be examined by that Law, to which he himselfe appealed, that universall, that Supreme Law, Salus populi. This is the Element of all Laws, out of which they are derived; the End of all Laws, to which they are designed, and in which they are perfected. How far it stands in opposition to this Law, I shall endeavour to shew in some Considerations which I shall present to your Lordships, all arising out of the Evidence which hath been opened.
The first is this: It is an offence comprehending all other offences; here you shall finde severall Treasons, Murders, Rapines, Oppressions, Perjuries.
The Earth hath a Seminarie vertue, whereby it doth produce all Hearbs, and Plants, and other Vegetables. There is in this Crime, a Seminarie of all evils hurtfull to a State; and if you consider the reasons of it, it must needs be so. The Law is that which puts a difference betwixt good and evill, betwixt just and unjust. If you take away the Law, all things will fall into a confusion, every man will become a Law to himselfe, which in the depraved condition of human nature, must needs produce many great enormities. Lust will become a Law, and Envie will become a Law, Covetousnesse and Ambition will become Lawes; and what dictates, what decisions such Laws will produce, may easily be discerned in the late Government of Ireland.1 The Law hath a power to prevent, to restraine, to repaire evils; without this all kind of mischiefs and distempers will break in upon a State.
It is the Law that doth intitle the King to the Allegeance and service of his people; it intitles the people to the protection and justice of the King. It is God alone who subsists by himselfe, all other things subsist in a mutuall dependence and relation. He was a wise man that said, that the King subsisted by the field that is tilled. It is the labour of the people that supports the Crowne. If you take away the protection of the King, the vigour and cheerfulness of Allegeance will be taken away, though the Obligation remaine.
The Law is the Boundarie, the Measure betwixt the King’s Prerogative, and the People’s Liberty. Whiles these move in their owne Orbe, they are a support and security to one another; The Prerogative a cover and defence to the Liberty of the people, and the people by their liberty are enabled to be a foundation to the Prerogative; but if these bounds be so removed, that they enter into contestation and conflict, one of these mischiefes must needs ensue. If the Prerogative of the King overwhelm the liberty of the people, it will be turned into Tyrannie; if liberty undermine the Prerogative, it will grow into Anarchie.
The Law is the safeguard, the custody of all private interest. Your Honours, your Lives, your Liberties and Estates are all in the keeping of the Law; without this, every man hath a like right to anything, and this is the condition into which the Irish were brought by the E. of Strafford. And the reason which he gave for it, hath more mischiefe in it than the thing itselfe, They were a Conquered Nation. There cannot be a word more pregnant, and fruitfull in Treason, than that word is. There are few Nations in the world that have not been conquered; and no doubt but the Conquerour may give what Lawes he please to those that are conquered. But if the succeeding Pacts and Agreements doe not limit and restraine that Right, what people can be secure? England hath been conquered, and Wales hath been conquered, and by this reason will be in little better case than Ireland. If the King by the Right of a Conquerour gives Lawes to his People, shall not the people by the same reason be restored to the Right of the conquered, to recover their liberty if they can? What can be more hurtfull, more pernicious to both, than such Propositions as these? And in these particulars is determined the first Consideration.
The second Consideration is this: This Arbitrary power is dangerous to the King’s Person, and dangerous to his Crown. It is apt to cherish Ambition, usurpation, and oppression in great men, and to beget sedition and discontent in the People; and both these have beene, and in reason must ever be causes of great trouble and alteration to Princes and States.
If the Histories of those Easterne Countries be perused, where Princes order their affaires according to the mischievous principles of the E. of Strafford, loose and absolved from all Rules of Government, they will be found to be frequent in combustions, full of Massacres, and of the tragicall ends of Princes. If any man shall look into our owne stories, in the times when the Laws were most neglected, he shall find them full of Commotions, of Civill distempers; whereby the Kings that then reigned, were alwayes kept in want and distresse; the people consumed with Civill wars: and by such wicked counsels as these, some of our Princes have beene brought to such miserable ends, as no honest heart can remember without horrour, and earnest Prayer, that it may never be so againe.
The third Consideration is this, The subversion of the Lawes. And this Arbitrary power, as it is dangerous to the King’s Person and to his Crowne, so is it in other respects very prejudiciall to his Majesty in his Honour, Profit, and Greatnesse; and yet these are the gildings and paintings that are put upon such counsels. These are for your Honour, for your service; whereas in truth they are contrary to both. But if I shall take off this varnish, I hope they shall then appeare in their owne native deformity, and therefore I desire to consider them by these Rules.
It cannot be for the Honour of a King, that his sacred Authority should be used in the practice of injustice and oppression; that his Name should be applied to patronize such horrid crimes, as have beene represented in Evidence against the Earle of Strafford; and yet how frequently, how presumptuously his Commands, his Letters have beene vouched throughout the course of this Defence, your Lordships have heard. When the Judges doe justice, it is the King’s justice, and this is for his honour, because he is the Fountaine of justice; but when they doe injustice, the offence is their owne. But those Officers and Ministers of the King, who are most officious in the exercise of this Arbitrarie power, they doe it commonly for their advantage; and when they are questioned for it, then they fly to the King’s interest; to his Direction. And truly my Lords, this is a very unequall distribution for the King, that the dishonour of evill courses should be cast upon him, and they to have the advantage.
The prejudice which it brings to him in regard of his profit, is no lesse apparent. It deprives him of the most beneficiall, and most certaine Revenue of his Crowne, that is, the voluntary aids and supplies of his people; his other Revenues, consisting of goodly Demeanes, and great Manors, have by Grants been alienated from the Crowne, and are now exceedingly diminished and impaired. But this Revenue it cannot be sold, it cannot be burdened with any Pensions or Annuities, but comes intirely to the Crowne. It is now almost fifteene years since his Majesty had any assistance from his people;2 and these illegall wayes of supplying the King were never prest with more violence, and art, than they have been in this time; and yet I may upon very good grounds affirm, that in the last fifteene years of Queen Elizabeth, she received more by the Bounty and Affection of her Subjects, than hath come to His Majestie’s Coffers by all the inordinate and rigorous courses which have beene taken. And as those Supplies were more beneficiall in the Receipt of them, so were they like in the use and imployment of them.
Another way of prejudice to his Majestie’s profit, is this: Such Arbitrary courses exhaust the people, and disable them, when there shall be occasion, to give such plentifull supplies, as otherwise they would doe. I shall need no other proofe of this, than the Irish Government under my E. of Strafford, where the wealth of the Kingdome is so consumed by those horrible exactions, and burdens, that it is thought the Subsidies lately granted will amount to little more than halfe the proportion of the last Subsidies. The two former wayes are hurtfull to the King’s profit, in that respect which they call Lucrum Cessans,3 by diminishing his receipts. But there is a third, fuller of mischiefe, and it is in that respect which they call Damnum emergens,4 by increasing his Disbursements. Such irregular and exorbitant attempts upon the Libertie of the people, are apt to produce such miserable distractions and distempers, as will put the King and Kingdome to such vast expences and losses in a short time, as will not be recovered in many yeares. Wee need not goe farre to seeke a proofe of this, these two last yeares will be a sufficient evidence, within which time I assure myselfe, it may be proved, that more Treasure hath beene wasted, more losse sustained by his Majesty and his Subjects, than was spent by Queene Elizabeth in all the War of Tyrone,5 and in those many brave Attempts against the King of Spaine, and the royall assistance which she gave to France, and the Low-Countries, during all her Reigne.
As for Greatnesse, this Arbitrary power is apt to hinder and impaire it, not only at home, but abroad. A Kingdome is a society of men conjoyned under one Government, for the common good. The world is a society of Kingdomes and States. The King’s greatnesse consists not only in his Dominion over his Subjects at home, but in the influence which he hath upon States abroad; That he should be great even among Kings, and by his wisdome and authority so to incline and dispose the affaires of other States and Nations, and those great events which fall out in the world, as shall be for the good of Mankind, and for the peculiar advantage of his owne people. This is the most glorious, and magnificent greatness, to be able to relieve distressed Princes, to support his owne friends and Allies, to prevent the ambitious designes of other Kings; and how much this Kingdome hath been impaired in this kinde, by the late mischievous counsels your Lordships best know, who at a neerer distance, and with a more cleare sight, doe apprehend these publique and great affaires, than I can doe. Yet thus much I dare boldly say, that if his Majestie had not with great wisdome and goodness forsaken that way wherein the Earle of Strafford had put him, we should within a short time have been brought into that miserable condition, as to have been uselesse to our friends, contemptible to our enemies, and uncapable of undertaking any great designe either at home or abroad.
A fourth Consideration is, That this Arbitrary, and Tyrannicall Power, which the E. of Strafford did excercise in his own person, and to which he did advise his Majesty, is inconsistent with the Peace, the Wealth, the Prosperity of a Nation. It is destructive to Justice, the Mother of Peace; to Industry, the spring of Wealth; to Valour, which is the active vertue whereby the prosperity of a Nation can only be procured, confirmed, and inlarged.
It is not only apt to take away Peace, and so intangle the Nation with Warres, but doth corrupt Peace, and puts such a malignity into it, as produceth the Effects of warre. We need seek no other proofe of this, but the E. of Strafford’s Government, where the Irish, both Nobility and others, had as little security of their Persons or Estates in this peaceable time, as if the Kingdome had been under the rage and fury of warre.
And as for Industrie, and Valour, who will take pains for that, which when he hath gotten, is not his own? Or who fight for that wherein he hath no other interest, but such as is subject to the will of another? The Ancient encouragement to men that were to defend their Countries was this, That they were to hazard their Persons, pro Aris & Focis, for their Religion, and for their Houses. But by this Arbitrary way which was practiced in Ireland, and counselled here, no man had any certainty, either of Religion, or of his House, or anything else to be his own. But besides this, such Arbitrary courses have an ill operation upon the courage of a Nation, by embasing the hearts of the people. A servile condition doth for the most part beget in men a slavish temper and disposition. Those that live so much under the Whip and the Pillory, and such servile Engines, as were frequently used by the E. of Strafford, they may have the dregges of valour, sullennesse, & stubbornesse, which may make them prone to Mutinies, and discontents; but those Noble and gallant affections, which put men on brave Designes and Attempts for the preservation or inlargement of a Kingdome, they are hardly capable of. Shall it be Treason to embase the King’s Coine, though but a piece of twelve-pence, or sixe-pence, and must it not needs be the effect of a greater Treason, to embase the spirits of his Subjects, and to set a stamp and Character of Servitude upon them, whereby they shall be disabled to doe anything for the service of the King or Commonwealth?
The fifth Consideration is this, That the exercise of this Arbitrary Government, in times of sudden danger, by the invasion of an enemy, will disable his Majesty to preserve himselfe and his Subjects from that danger. This is the only pretence by which the E. of Strafford, and such other mischievous Counsellors would induce his Majesty to make use of it; and if it be unfit for such an occasion, I know nothing that can be alledged in maintenance of it.
When warre threatens a Kingdome by the comming of a forrain Enemy, it is no time then to discontent the people, to make them weary of the present Government, and more inclinable to a Change. The supplies which are to come in this way, will be unready, uncertain; there can be no assurance of them, no dependence upon them, either for time or proportion. And if some money be gotten in such a way, the Distractions, Divisions, Distempers, which this course is apt to produce, will be more prejudiciall to the publique safety, than the supply can be advantagious to it; and of this we have had sufficient experience the last Summer.
The sixth, That this crime of subverting the Laws, and introducing an Arbitrary and Tyrannicall Government, is contrary to the Pact and Covenant betwixt the King and his people. That which was spoken of before, was the legall union of Allegeance and Protection; this is a personall union by mutuall agreement and stipulation, confirmed by oath on both sides. The King and his people are obliged to one another in the nearest relations; He is a Father, and a childe is called in Law, Pars Patris.6 Hee is the Husband of the Commonwealth, they have the same interests, they are inseparable in their condition, be it good or evill. He is the Head, they are the Body; there is such an incorporation as cannot be dissolved without the destruction of both.
When Justice Thorpe, in Edward the third’s time, was by the Parliament condemned to death for Bribery, the reason of that Judgement is given, because he had broken the King’s Oath, not that he had broken his own oath, but that he had broken the King’s oath, that solemne and great obligation, which is the security of the whole Kingdome. If for a Judge to take a small summe in a private cause, was adjudged Capitall, how much greater was this offence, whereby the E. of Strafford hath broken the King’s Oath in the whole course of his Government in Ireland, to the prejudice of so many of his Majestie’s Subjects, in their Lives, Liberties, and Estates, and to the danger of all the rest?
The Doctrine of the Papists, Fides non est servanda cum Haereticis,7 is an abominable Doctrine: yet that other Tenet more peculiar to the Jesuites is more pernicious, whereby Subjects are discharged from their Oath of Allegeance to their Prince whensoever the Pope pleaseth. This may be added to make the third no lesse mischievous and destructive to human society, than either of the rest: That the King is not bound by that Oath which he hath taken to observe the Laws of the Kingdome, but may when he sees cause, lay Taxes and burdens upon them without their consent, contrary to the Laws and Liberties of the Kingdome. This hath been preached and published by divers; And this is that which hath been practised in Ireland by the E. of Strafford, in his Government there, and indeavoured to be brought into England, by his Counsell here.
The seventh is this; It is an offence that is contrary to the end of Government. The end of Government was to prevent oppressions, to limit and restrain the excessive power and violence of great men, to open the passages of Justice with indifferency towards all. This Arbitrary power is apt to induce and incourage all kind of insolencies.
Another end of Government is to preserve men in their estates, to secure them in their Lives and Liberties; but if this Designe had taken effect, and could have been setled in England, as it was practiced in Ireland, no man would have had more certainty in his own, than power would have allowed him. But these two have beene spoken of before, there are two behind more important, which have not yet been touched.
It is the end of Government, that vertue should be cherisht, vice supprest; but where this Arbitrary and unlimited power is set up, a way is open not only for the security, but for the advancement and incouragement of evill. Such men as are aptest for the execution and maintenance of this Power, are only capable of preferment; and others who will not be instruments of any unjust commands, who make a conscience to doe nothing against the Laws of the Kingdome, and Liberties of the Subject, are not only not passable for imployment, but subject to much jealousie and danger.
It is the end of Government, that all accidents and events, all Counsels and Designes should be improved to the publique good. But this Arbitrary Power is apt to dispose all to the maintenance of itselfe. The wisdome of the Councell-Table, the Authority of the Courts of Justice, the industry of all the Officers of the Crown have been most carefully exercised in this; the Learning of our Divines, the Jurisdiction of our Bishops have been moulded and disposed to the same effect, which though it were begun before the E. of Strafford’s Imployment, yet it hath beene exceedingly furthered and advanced by him.
Under this colour and pretence of maintaining the King’s Power and Prerogative many dangerous practices against the peace and safety of this Kingdome have been undertaken and promoted. The increase of Popery, and the favours and incouragement of Papists have been, and still are a great grievance and danger to the Kingdome. The Innovations in matters of Religion, the usurpations of the Clergie, the manifold burdens and taxations upon the people, have been a great cause of our present distempers and disorders; and yet those who have been chiefe Furtherers and Actors of such Mischiefes, have had their Credit and Authority from this, That they were forward to maintain this Power. The E. of Strafford had the first rise of his greatnesse from this, and in his Apologie and Defence, as your Lordships have heard, this hath had a maine part.
The Royall Power, and Majesty of Kings, is most glorious in the prosperity and happinesse of the people. The perfection of all things consists in the end for which they were ordained, God only is his own end, all other things have a further end beyond themselves, in attaining whereof their own happinesse consists. If the means and the end be set in opposition to one another, it must needs cause an impotency and defect of both.
The eighth Consideration is, The vanity and absurdity of those excuses and justifications which he made for himself, whereof divers particulars have been mentioned in the course of his Defence.
1. That he is a Counsellor, and might not be questioned for anything which he advised according to his conscience. The ground is true, there is a liberty belongs to Counsellors, and nothing corrupts Counsels more than fear. He that will have the priviledge of a Counsellor, must keep within the just bounds of a Counsellor; those matters are the proper subjects of Counsell, which in their times and occasions, may be good or beneficiall to the King or Common-wealth. But such Treasons as these, the subversion of the Laws, violation of Liberties, they can never be good, or justifiable by any circumstance, or occasion; and therefore his being a Counsellor, makes his fault much more hainous, as being committed against a greater Trust, and in a way of much mischiefe and danger, lest his Majestie’s conscience and judgment (upon which the whole course and frame of his Government do much depend) should be poisoned and infected with such wicked principles and designes. And this he hath endeavoured to doe, which by all Lawes, and in all times hath in this Kingdome beene reckoned a Crime of an high Nature.
2. He labours to interest your Lordships in his cause, by alledging, It may be dangerous to yourselves, and your Posterity, who by your birth are fittest to be near his Majesty, in places of Trust and Authority, if you should be subject to be questioned for matters delivered in Counsell. To this was answered, that it was hoped their Lordships would rather labour to secure themselves, and their posterity, in the exercise of their vertues, than of their vices, that so they might together with their own honour and greatnesse, preserve the honour and greatnesse, both of the King and Kingdome.
3. Another excuse was this, that whatsoever he hath spoken was out of a good intention. Sometimes good and evill, truth and falshood lie so near together, that they are hardly to be distinguished. Matters hurtfull and dangerous may be accompanied with such circumstances as may make it appeare usefull and convenient, and in all such cases, good intentions will justifie evill Counsell. But where the matters propounded are evill in their own nature, such as the matters are wherewith the E. of Strafford is charged, to break a publique faith, to subvert Laws and Government, they can never be justified by any intentions, how specious, or good soever they be pretended.
4. He alledgeth it was a time of great necessity and danger, when such counsels were necessary for preservation of the State. Necessity hath been spoken of before, as it relates to the Cause; now it is considered as it relates to the Person; if there were any necessity, it was of his own making; he by his evil counsell had brought the King into a necessity, and by no Rules of Justice, can be allowed to gain this advantage by his own fault, as to make that a ground of his justification, which is a great part of his offence.
5. He hath often insinuated this, That it was for his Majestie’s service in maintenance of the Soveraign Power with which he is intrusted by God for the good of his people. The Answer is this, No doubt but that Soveraign Power wherewith his Majesty is intrusted for the publique good, hath many glorious effects, the better to inable him thereunto. But without doubt this is none of them, That by his own will he may lay any Taxe or Imposition upon his people without their consent in Parliament. This hath now been five times adjudged by both Houses. In the Case of the Loanes, In condemning the Commission of Excise, In the Resolution upon the Saving8 offered to be added to the Petition of Right, In the sentence against Manwaring, and now lately, In condemning the Shipmoney. And if the Soveraigne Power of the King can produce no such effect as this, the Allegation of it is an Aggravation, and no Diminution of his offence, because thereby he doth labour to interest the King against the just grievance and complaint of the People.
6. This Counsell was propounded with divers limitations, and Provisions; for securing and repairing the liberty of the people. This implies a contradiction to maintain an Arbitrary & absolute Power, and yet to restrain it with limitations, and provisions; for even those limitations and provisions will be subject to the same absolute Power, and to be dispensed in such manner, and at such time, as itself shall determine; let the grievances and oppressions be never so heavy, the Subject is left without all remedy, but at his Majestie’s own pleasure.
7. He alledgeth, they were but words, and no effect followed. This needs no answer, but that the miserable distempers into which he hath brought all the three Kingdomes, will be evidence sufficient that his wicked Counsels have had such mischievous effects within these two or three last years, that many years’ peace will hardly repaire those losses, and other great mischiefes which the Common-wealth hath sustained.
These excuses have been collected out of the severall parts of his Defence; perchance some others are omitted, which I doubt not have been answered by some of my Colleagues, and are of no importance, either to perplex or to hinder your Lordships’ judgement, touching the hainousnesse of this Crime.
The ninth Consideration is this, That if this be Treason, in the nature of it, it doth exceed all other Treasons in this, That in the Design, and endeavour of the Author, it was to be a constant and a permanent Treason; other Treasons are transient, as being confined within those particular actions and proportions wherein they did consist, and those being past, the Treason ceaseth.
The Powder Treason9 was full of horror and malignity, yet it is past many years since. The murder of that Magnanimous and glorious King, Henry the fourth of France, was a great and horrid Treason. And so were those manifold attempts against Queen Elizabeth of blessed memory; but they are long since past, the Detestation of them only remains in Histories, and in the minds of men; and will ever remain. But this Treason, if it had taken effect, was to be a standing, perpetuall Treason, which would have been in continuall act, not determined within one time or age, but transmitted to Posterity, even from generation to generation.
The tenth Consideration is this, That as it is a Crime odious in the nature of it, so it is odious in the judgement and estimation of the Law. To alter the setled frame and constitution of Government, is Treason in any estate. The Laws whereby all other parts of a Kingdome are preserved, should be very vain and defective, if they had not a power to secure and preserve themselves.
The forfeitures inflicted for Treason by our Law, are of Life, Honour, and Estate, even all that can be forfeited, and this Prisoner having committed so many Treasons, although he should pay all these forfeitures, will be still a Debtor to the Common-wealth. Nothing can be more equall than that he should perish by the Justice of that Law which he would have subverted. Neither will this be a new way of bloud. There are marks enough to trace this Law to the very originall of this Kingdome. And if it hath not been put in execution, as he alledgeth, this 240 years, it was not for want of Law, but that all that time hath not bred a man bold enough to commit such Crimes as these; which is a circumstance much aggravating his offence, and making him no whit lesse liable to punishment, because he is the only man that in so long a time hath ventured upon such a Treason as this.
It belongs to the charge of another to make it appear to your Lordships, that the Crimes and Offences proved against the Earle of Strafford, are High Treason by the Lawes and Statutes of this Realm, whose learning and other abilities are much better for that service. But for the time and manner of performing this, we are to resort to the Direction of the House of Commons, having in this which is already done, dispatched all those instructions which wee have received; and concerning further proceedings, for clearing all Questions and Objections in Law, your Lordships will hear from the House of Commons in convenient time.
The Earl of Strafford governed Ireland as lord deputy, a post to which he was appointed in 1632.
Charles had agreed to the Petition of Right in 1628 in order to convince Parliament to grant him a subsidy. He got his subsidy although he found the amount disappointing.
The ceasing of gain or profit.
The rising loss.
Hugh O’Neill, Earl of Tyrone, led an Irish rebellion against the English in 1595. He was vanquished, but after three years of negotiations, hostilities broke out again in 1598. Tyrone suffered a serious defeat in 1601 and finally surrendered on 30 March 1603.
The part or portion of the father.
One is not to be loyal or faithful when it comes to heretics.
The “Resolution upon the Saving” refers to the proposal of the Lords, rejected by the Commons, to add to the Petition of Right the phrase “to leave entire that sovereign Power, wherewith your Majesty is trusted for the protection, safety, and happiness of your people.”
The reference is to the “gunpowder plot” of 1605 in which a group of Catholic conspirators attempted to blow up the king and members of Parliament in order to overthrow the Protestant government.
T.7 (8.3.) Anon., The Lamentable Complaints of Nick Froth the Tapster (May 1641).↩
Editing History
- First edition [uncorrected]
- Corrections to HTML: 6 Jan. 2016
- Corrections to XML: 6 Jan. 2016
- Introduction written for pamphlet: Jan. 7, 2016


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.7 [1641.05] (8.3) Anon., The Lamentable Complaints of Nick Froth the Tapster (May 1641).
Full titleAnon., The Lamentable Complaints of Nick Froth the Tapster, and Rulerost the Cooke. Concerning the restraint lately set forth against drinking, potting and piping on the Sabbath Day, and against selling meate.
Printed in the yeare, 1641.
May, 1641.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 14; Thomason E. 156. (4.)
Editor’s Introduction
Short Description: Here we have an example of small pub and restaurant owners who object to the new Puritan laws which banned economic activity on Sundays. "Nick Froth" who ran the bar and "Rulerost" who roasted the meat to serve with lunch objected to the new laws which restricted or banned the selling of food and drink on Sundays. A crude woodcut illustrates this cheaply produced pamphlet which features a conversation between the two about the law's impact on their freedom to trade.
During the period of conflict between Parliament and the Crown in England during the 1640s the political authorities began to lose control of the system of censorship which had kept criticism of the regime to a minimum or even completely absent. Many people inside and outside Parliament began to question the power of the government, including ordinary people whose opinions had never been consulted before. What is interesting is how many of these pamphlets dealt with liberty broadly understood, not just with religious liberty and relations between Parliament and the King, such as high taxes, economic regulation, monopoly privileges, and the economic impact of war and revolution.
Here we have an example of small pub and restaurant owners who object to the new Puritan laws which banned economic activity on Sundays. "Nick Froth" who ran the bar and "Rulerost" who roasted the meat to serve with lunch objected to the new laws which restricted or banned the selling of food and drink on Sundays. A crude woodcut illustrates this cheaply produced pamphlet which features a conversation between the two about the law's impact on their trade. They point out that most of the week's profits come from the busy trade on Sunday, especially during the hours of the church service when many people vote with their feet and seek a pint of beer and a roast joint rather than listen to the minister. Closing down their business will have a flow on effect to other people who supply them with food, such as the butcher. They wonder how they will be able to pay off their debts if they cannot work a full week. They also point out that they provide a much needed service to their customers and there is an amusing line or two about the considerable virtues of drinking. A final point they make is that they have always had to pay bribes to the government officials ("Apparitors") who regulate their business and the religious fanatics who are imposing the new rules are going to upset them as well as their Sunday bribe-taking begins to dry up.
Text of Pamphlet
Concerning the restraint lately set forth, against drinking, potting, and piping on the Sabbath-day, and against selling meate.
MY honest friend Cooke Ruffin well met, I pray thee what good newes is stirring.
Good news (said you?) I, where is’t? there is such newes in the world, will anger thee to heare of, it is as bad, as bad may be.
Is there so? I pray thee what is it, tell me whatsoever it be.
Have you not heard of the restraint lately come out against us, from the higher Powers; whereby we are commanded not to sell meat nor draw drink upon Sundays, as we wil answer the contrary at our perils.
I have heard that some such thing was intended to be done, but never before now, that it was under black and white: I hope there is no such matter: Art thou sure this thy news is true?
Am I sure, I ever roasted a fat Pig on a Sunday untill the eyes dropt out, thinke you. S’foot, shall I not credit my owne eyes.
I would thine had dropt out too, before ever thou hadst seen this, and if this be your news, you might have kept it, with a pox to you.
Nay, why so chollerick my friend, you told me you would heare me with patience, whatsoever it were.
I cry thee heartily mercy, honest Rulerost, I am sorry for what I said, it was my passion made me forget my self so much: but I hope this command as you speake, will not continue long, will it thinke you Master Cooke?
Too long to our greife I feare, the Church-Wardens, Side-men, and Constables, will so look to our red Lattices, that we shall not dare to put our heads out of doors on a Sunday hereafter. What think you neighbour, is it not like to prove so?
Truely it is much to be feared; but what do you think will become of us then, if these times hold?
Faith, Master Froth, we must shut up our doors and hang padlocks on them, and never so much as take leave of our Land-lords.
Master Rulerost, I jumpe with you in opinion for if I tarry in my house till quarter-day, my Land-lord, I feare, will provide me a house gratis. I am very unwilling to trust him, he was alwayes wonderfull kind, and ready to help any of his debtors to such a curtisie; to be plaine with you, I know not in which of the Compters I shall keep my Christmas, if I doe not wisely by running away prevent him.
Thou hast spoke my owne thoughts, but I stand not so much in danger of my griping Land-lord, as I doe of Master Kill-calfe my Butcher, I am run into almost halfe a yeares arrerages with him; I do owe him neare ninety pounds for meat, which I have had of him at divers and sundry times, as by his Tally, may more at large appeare.
I my selfe am almost as farre in debt to my Brewer, as you are to your Butcher; I had almost forgotten that, I see I am no man of this World; if I tarry in England: He hath often threatned to make dice of my bones already, but ile prevent him; ile shew him the bagg, I warrant him.
He had rather you would shew him the money and keep the bagge to your selfe.
I much wonder, Master Rulerost why my trade should be put downe, it being so necessary in a Common-wealth: why, the noble art of drinking, it is the soule of all good fellowship, the marrow of a Poets Minervs, it makes a man as valiant as Hercules, though he were as cowardly as a French man; besides, I could prove it necessary for any man sometimes to be drunk, for suppose you should kill a man when you are drunk, you shall never be hanged for it untill you are sober; therefore I thinke it good for a man to be alwayes drunk: and besides it is the kindest companion, and friendliest sin of all the seven; for most sins leave a man by some accident or other, before his death. But this will never forsake him till the breath be out of his body: and lastly, a full bowle of strong beere will drowne all sorrowes.
Master Nick, you are mistaken, your trade is not put downe as you seeme to say; what is done, is done to a good intent; to the end that poore men that worke hard all the weeke for a little money, should not spend it all on the Sunday while they should be at some Church, and so consequently there will not be so many Beggers.
Alack you know all my profit doth arise onely upon Sundays, let them but allow me that priviledge, and abridge me all the weeke besides: S’foot, I could have so scowred my young sparks up for a peny a demy Can, or a halfe pint, heapt with froth. I got more by uttering halfe a Barrell in time of Divine service, then I could by a whole Barrell at any other time, for my customers were glad to take any thing for money, and thinke themselves much ingaged to me; but now the case is altered.
Truely Master Froth, you are a man of a light constitution, and not so much to be blamed as I that am more solid: O what will become of me! I now thinke of the lusty Surloines of roast Beefe which I with much policy divided into an innumerable company of semy slices, by which, with my provident wife, I used to make eighteene pence of that which cost me but a groat (provided that I sold it in service time,) I could tell you too, how I used my halfe Cans and my Bloomesbury Pots, when occasion served; and my Smoak which I sold dearer then any Apothecary doth his Physick: but those happy dayes are now past, and therefore no more of that.
Well, I am rid of one charge which did continually vex me by this meanes.
I pry thee what was that?
Why Master Rulerost, I was wont to be in fee with the Apparitors, because they should not bring me into the Bawdy Court for selling drinke on Sundayes. Ile assure you they used to have a Noble a quarter of me, but now they shall excuse me, they are like to have no more quartridge of me, and indeed the truth is, their trade begins to be out of request as well as ours.
I, trust me neighbour, I pity them; I was as much troubled with those kind of Rascals as your self, onely I confesse I paid them no quartridge, but they tickled my beefe, a stone of beef was no more in one of their bellies, then a man in Pauls; but now I must take occasion to ease my self of that charge; and with confidence I will now bid them, Walke knave, walke.
Truely Master Rulerost, it doth something ease my mind when I thinke that we have companions in misery. Authority I perceive is quick sighted, it can quickly espie a hole in a knaves coate. But Master Cooke we forget our selves, it groweth neare supper time, and we must part, I would tell you what I intend to doe, but time prevents me, therefore ile refer it untill the next time we meet; And so farewell.
FINIS.
T.260 John Milton, Of Reformation Touching Church Discipline in England (May, 1641).↩
This Text is available elsewhere in the OLL Collection
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date
Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.260 [1641.05] John Milton, Of Reformation Touching Church Discipline in England (May, 1641).
Full titleOf Reformation touching Church-Discipline in England: And the Causes that hitherto have hindred it. Two Bookes, Written to a Friend. Printed for Thomas Undersell 1641.
In John Milton, The Prose Works of John Milton: With a Biographical Introduction by Rufus Wilmot Griswold. In Two Volumes (Philadelphia: John W. Moore, 1847). Vol. 1., pp. 1-34. .
Estimated date of publicationJune 1641.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 18; E. 208. (3.).
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
OF REFORMATION IN ENGLAND,
AND THE CAUSES THAT HITHERTO HAVE HINDERED IT.
IN TWO BOOKS.
WRITTEN TO A FRIEND.
[FIRST PUBLISHED 1641.]
THE FIRST BOOK.
Sir,—Amidst those deep and retired thoughts, which, with every man Christianly instructed, ought to be most frequent, of God and of his miraculous ways and works amongst men, and of our religion and works, to be performed to him; after the story of our Saviour Christ, suffering to the lowest bent of weakness in the flesh, and presently triumphing to the highest pitch of glory in the spirit, which drew up his body also; till we in both be united to him in the revelation of his kingdom, I do not know of any thing more worthy to take up the whole passion of pity on the one side, and joy on the other, than to consider first the foul and sudden corruption, and then, after many a tedious age, the long deferred, but much more wonderful and happy reformation of the church in these latter days. Sad it is to think how that doctrine of the gospel, planted by teachers divinely inspired, and by them winnowed and sifted from the chaff of overdated ceremonies, and refined to such a spiritual height and temper of purity, and knowledge of the Creator, that the body, with all the circumstances of time and place, were purified by the affections of the regenerate soul, and nothing left impure but sin; faith needing not the weak and fallible office of the senses, to be either the ushers or interpreters of heavenly mysteries, save where our Lord himself in his sacraments ordained; that such a doctrine should, through the grossness and blindness of her professors, and the fraud of deceivable traditions, drag so downwards, as to backslide into the Jewish beggary of old cast rudiments, and stumble forward another way into the new-vomited paganism of sensual idolatry, attributing purity or impurity to things indifferent, that they might bring the inward acts of the spirit to the outward and customary eye-service of the body, as if they could make God earthly and fleshly, because they could not make themselves heavenly and spiritual; they began to draw down all the divine intercourse betwixt God and the soul, yea, the very shape of God himself, into an exterior and bodily form, urgently pretending a necessity and obligement of joining the body in a formal reverence, and worship circumscribed; they hallowed it, they fumed it, they sprinkled it, they bedecked it, not in robes of pure innocency, but of pure linen, with other deformed and fantastic dresses, in palls and mitres, gold and gewgaws fetched from Aaron’s old wardrobe, or the flamins vestry: then was the priest set to con his Edition: current; Page: [2] motions and his postures, his liturgies and his lurries, till the soul by this means of overbodying herself, given up justly to fleshly delights, bated her wing apace downward: and finding the ease she had from her visible and sensuous colleague the body, in performance of religious duties, her pinions now broken, and flagging, shifted off from herself the labour of high soaring any more, forgot her heavenly flight, and left the dull and droiling carcase to plod on in the old road, and drudging trade of outward conformity. And here, out of question, from her perverse conceiting of God and holy things, she had fallen to believe no God at all, had not custom and the worm of conscience nipped her incredulity: hence to all the duties of evangelical grace, instead of the adoptive and cheerful boldness which our new alliance with God requires, came servile and thrallike fear: for in very deed, the superstitious man by his good will is an atheist; but being scared from thence by the pangs and gripes of a boiling conscience, all in a pudder shuffles up to himself such a God and such a worship as is most agreeable to remedy his fear; which fear of his, as also is his hope, fixed only upon the flesh, renders likewise the whole faculty of his apprehension carnal; and all the inward acts of worship, issuing from the native strength of the soul, run out lavishly to the upper skin, and there harden into a crust of formality. Hence men came to scan the Scriptures by the letter, and in the covenant of our redemption, magnified the external signs more than the quickening power of the Spirit; and yet looking on them through their own guiltiness with a servile fear, and finding as little comfort, or rather terror from them again, they knew not how to hide their slavish approach to God’s behests, by them not understood, nor worthily received, but by cloaking their servile crouching to all religious presentments, sometimes lawful, sometimes idolatrous, under the name of humility, and terming the piebald frippery and ostentation of ceremonies, decency.
Then was baptism, changed into a kind of exorcism and water, sanctified by Christ’s institute, thought little enough to wash off the original spot, without the scratch or cross impression of a priest’s forefinger: and that feast of free grace and adoption to which Christ invited his disciples to sit as brethren, and coheirs of the happy covenant, which at that table was to be sealed to them, even that feast of love and heavenly-admitted fellowship, the seal of filial grace, became the subject of horror, and glouting adoration, pageanted about like a dreadful idol; which sometimes deceives well-meaning men, and beguiles them of their reward, by their voluntary humility; which indeed is fleshly pride preferring a foolish sacrifice, and the rudiments of the world, as Saint Paul to the Colossians explaineth, before a savoury obedience to Christ’s example. Such was Peter’s unseasonable humility, as then his knowledge was small, when Christ came to wash his feet; who at an impertinent time would needs strain courtesy with his master, and falling troublesomely upon the lowly, all-wise, and unexaminable intention of Christ, in what he went with resolution to do, so provoked by his interruption the meek Lord, that he threatened to exclude him from his heavenly portion, unless he could be content to be less arrogant and stiffnecked in his humility.
But to dwell no longer in characterizing the depravities of the church, and how they sprung, and how they took increase; when I recall to mind at last, after so many dark ages, wherein the huge overshadowing train of error had almost swept all the stars out of the firmament of the church; how the bright and blissful reformation (by divine power) struck through the black and settled night of ignorance and antichristian tyranny, methinks a sovereign and reviving joy must needs rush into the bosom of him that Edition: current; Page: [3] reads or hears; and the sweet odour of the returning gospel imbathe his soul with the fragrancy of heaven. Then was the sacred Bible sought out of the dusty corners where profane falsehood and neglect had thrown it, the schools opened, divine and human learning raked out of the embers of forgotten tongues, the princes and cities trooping apace to the new-erected banner of salvation; the martyrs, with the unresistible might of weakness shaking the powers of darkness, and scorning the fiery rage of the old red dragon.
The pleasing pursuit of these thoughts hath ofttimes led me into a serious question and debatement with myself, how it should come to pass that England (having had this grace and honour from God, to be the first that should set up a standard for the recovery of lost truth, and blow the first evangelic trumpet to the nations, holding up, as from a hill, the new lamp of saving light to all Christendom) should now be last, and most unsettled in the enjoyment of that peace, whereof she taught the way to others; although indeed our Wickliffe’s preaching, at which all the succeeding reformers more effectually lighted their tapers, was to his countrymen but a short blaze, soon damped and stifled by the pope and prelates for six or seven kings’ reigns; yet methinks the precedency which God gave this island, to be first restorer of buried truth, should have been followed with more happy success, and sooner attained perfection; in which as yet we are amongst the last: for, albeit in purity of doctrine we agree with our brethren; yet in discipline, which is the execution and applying of doctrine home, and laying the salve to the very orifice of the wound, yea, tenting and searching to the core, without which pulpit preaching is but shooting at rovers; in this we are no better than a schism from all the reformation, and a sore scandal to them; for while we hold ordination to belong only to bishops, as our prelates do, we must of necessity hold also their ministers to be no ministers, and shortly after, their church to be no church. Not to speak of those senseless ceremonies which we only retain, as a dangerous earnest of sliding back to Rome, and serving merely, either as a mist to cover nakedness where true grace is extinguished, or as an interlude to set out the pomp of prelatism. Certainly it would be worth the while therefore, and the pains, to inquire more particularly, what, and how many the chief causes have been, that have still hindered our uniform consent to the rest of the churches abroad, at this time especially when the kingdom is in a good propensity thereto, and all men in prayers, in hopes, or in disputes, either for or against it.
Yet I will not insist on that which may seem to be the cause on God’s part; as his judgment on our sins, the trial of his own, the unmasking of hypocrites: nor shall I stay to speak of the continual eagerness and extreme diligence of the pope and papists to stop the furtherance of reformation, which know they have no hold or hope of England their lost darling, longer than the government of bishops bolsters them out; and therefore plot all they can to uphold them, as may be seen by the book of Santa Clara, the popish priest, in defence of bishops, which came out piping hot much about the time that one of our own prelates, out of an ominous fear, had writ on the same argument; as if they had joined their forces, like good confederates, to support one falling Babel.
But I shall chiefly endeavour to declare those causes that hinder the forwarding of true discipline, which are among ourselves. Orderly proceeding will divide our inquiry into our forefathers’ days, and into our times. Henry VIII. was the first that rent this kingdom from the pope’s subjection totally; but his quarrel being more about supremacy, than other faultiness Edition: current; Page: [4] in religion that he regarded, it is no marvel if he stuck where he did. The next default was in the bishops, who though they had renounced the pope, they still hugged the popedom, and shared the authority among themselves, by their six bloody articles, persecuting the protestants no slacker than the pope would have done. And doubtless, whenever the pope shall fall, if his ruin be not like the sudden downcome of a tower, the bishops, when they see him tottering, will leave him, and fall to scrambling, catch who may, he a patriarchdom, and another what comes next hand; as the French cardinal of late and the see of Canterbury hath plainly affected.
In Edward the Sixth’s days, why a complete reformation was not effected, to any considerate man may appear. First, he no sooner entered into his kingdom, but into a war with Scotland; from whence the protector returning with victory, had but newly put his hand to repeal the six articles, and throw the images out of churches, but rebellions on all sides, stirred up by obdurate papists, and other tumults, with a plain war in Norfolk, holding tack against two of the king’s generals, made them of force content themselves with what they had already done. Hereupon followed ambitious contentions among the peers, which ceased not but with the protector’s death, who was the most zealous in this point: and then Northumberland was he that could do most in England; who, little minding religion, (as his apostacy well showed at his death,) bent all his wit how to bring the right of the crown into his own line. And for the bishops, they were so far from any such worthy attempts, as that they suffered themselves to be the common stales, to countenance with their prostitued gravities every politic fetch that was then on foot, as oft as the potent statists pleased to employ them. Never do we read that they made use of their authority and high place of access, to bring the jarring nobility to Christian peace, or to withstand their disloyal projects: but if a toleration for mass were to be begged of the king for his sister Mary, lest Charles the Fifth should be angry; who but the grave prelates, Cranmer and Ridley, must be sent to extort it from the young king? But out of the mouth of that godly and royal child, Christ himself returned such an awful repulse to those halting and time-serving prelates, that after much bold importunity, they went their way not without shame and tears.
Nor was this the first time that they discovered to be followers of this world; for when the protector’s brother, Lord Sudley, the admiral, through private malice and malengine was to lose his life, no man could be found fitter than bishop Latimer (like another Dr. Shaw) to divulge in his sermon the forged accusations laid to his charge, thereby to defame him with the people, who else it was thought would take ill the innocent man’s death, unless the reverend bishop could warrant them there was no foul play. What could be more impious than to debar the children of the king from their right to the crown? To comply with the ambitious usurpation of a traitor, and to make void the last will of Henry VIII., to which the breakers had sworn observance? Yet bishop Cranmer, one of the executors, and the other bishops, none refusing, (lest they should resist the duke of Northumberland,) could find in their consciences to set their hands to the disenabling and defeating not only of Princess Mary the papist, but of Elizabeth the protestant, and (by the bishops’ judgment) the lawful issue of King Henry.
Who then can think (though these prelates had sought a further reformation) that the least wry face of a politician would not have hushed them? But it will be said, these men were martyrs: what then? though every true Christian will be a martyr when he is called to it, not presently does it follow, Edition: current; Page: [5] that every one suffering for religion is, without exception. Saint Paul writes, that “a man may give his body to be burnt, (meaning for religion,) and yet not have charity:” he is not therefore above all possibility of erring, because he burns for some points of truth.
Witness the* Arians and Pelagians, which were slain by the heathen for Christ’s sake, yet we take both these for no true friends of Christ. If the martyrs (saith Cyprian in his 30th epistle) decree one thing, and the gospel another, either the martyrs must lose their crown by not observing the gospel for which they are martyrs, or the majesty of the gospel must be broken and lie flat, if it can be overtopped by the novelty of any other decree.
And here withal I invoke the Immortal Deity, revealer and judge of secrets, that wherever I have in this book plainly and roundly (though worthily and truly) laid open the faults and blemishes of fathers, martyrs, or Christian emperors, or have otherwise inveighed against error and superstition with vehement expressions; I have done it neither out of malice, nor list to speak evil, nor any vain glory, but, of mere necessity to vindicate the spotless truth from an ignominious bondage, whose native worth is now become of such a low esteem, that she is like to find small credit with us for what she can say, unless she can bring a ticket from Cranmer, Latimer, and Ridley; or prove herself a retainer to Constantine, and wear his badge. More tolerable it were for the church of God, that all these names were utterly abolished like the brazen serpent, than that men’s fond opinion should thus idolize them, and the heavenly truth be thus captivated.
Now to proceed, whatsoever the bishops were, it seems they themselves were unsatisfied in matters of religion as they then stood, by that commission granted to eight bishops, eight other divines, eight civilians, eight common lawyers, to frame ecclesiastical constitutions; which no wonder if it came to nothing, for (as Hayward relates) both their professions and their ends were different. Lastly, we all know by example, that exact reformation is not perfected at the first push, and those unwieldy times of Edward VI. may hold some plea by his excuse. Now let any reasonable man judge whether that king’s reign be a fit time from whence to pattern out the constitution of a church discipline, much less that it should yield occasion from whence to foster and establish the continuance of imperfection, with the commendatory subscriptions of confessors and martyrs, to entitle and engage a glorious name to a gross corruption. It was not episcopacy that wrought in them the heavenly fortitude of martyrdom; as little is it that martyrdom can make good episcopacy; but it was episcopacy that led the good and holy men through the temptation of the enemy, and the snare of this present world, to many blameworthy and opprobrious actions. And it is still episcopacy that before all our eyes worsens and slugs the most learned and seeming religious of our ministers, who no sooner advanced to it, but like a seething pot set to cool, sensibly exhale and reek out the greatest part of that zeal, and those gifts which were formerly in them, settling in a skinny congealment of ease and sloth at the top: and if they keep their learning by some potent sway of nature, it is a rare chance; but their devotion most commonly comes to that queazy temper of lukewarmness, that gives a vomit to God himself.
But what do we suffer misshapen and enormous prelatism, as we do, thus to blanch and varnish her deformities with the fair colours, as before of Edition: current; Page: [6] martyrdom, so now of episcopacy? They are not bishops, God and all good men know they are not, that have filled this land with late confusion and violence; but a tyrannical crew and corporation of impostors, that have blinded and abused the world so long under that name. He that, enabled with gifts from God, and the lawful and primitive choice of the church assembled in convenient number, faithfully from that time forward feeds his parochial flock, has his coequal and compresbyterial power to ordain ministers and deacons by public prayer, and vote of Christ’s congregation in like sort as he himself was ordained, and is a true apostolic bishop. But when he steps up into the chair of pontifical pride, and changes a moderate and exemplary house for a misgoverned and haughty palace, spiritual dignity for carnal precedence, and secular high office and employment for the high negotiations of his heavenly embassage: then he degrades, then he unbishops himself; he that makes him bishop, makes him no bishop. No marvel therefore if St. Martin complained to Sulpitius Severus, that since he was a bishop, he felt inwardly a sensible decay of those virtues and graces that God had given him in great measure before; although the same Sulpitius writes that he was nothing tainted or altered in his habit, diet, or personal demeanour from that simple plainness to which he first betook himself. It was not therefore that thing alone which God took displeasure at in the bishops of those times, but rather an universal rottenness and gangrene in the whole function.
From hence then I pass to Queen Elizabeth, the next protestant princess, in whose days why religion attained not a perfect reducement in the beginning of her reign, I suppose the hindering causes will be found to be common with some formerly alleged for King Edward VI.; the greenness of the times, the weak estate which Queen Mary left the realm in, the great places and offices executed by papists, the judges, the lawyers, the justices of peace for the most part popish, the bishops firm to Rome; from whence was to be expected the furious flashing of excommunications, and absolving the people from their obedience. Next, her private counsellors, whoever they were, persuaded her (as Camden writes) that the altering of ecclesiastical policy would move sedition. Then was the liturgy given to a number of moderate divines, and Sir Thomas Smith, a statesman, to be purged and physicked: and surely they were moderate divines indeed, neither hot nor cold; and Grindal the best of them, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, lost favour in the court, and I think was discharged the government of his see, for favouring the ministers, though Camden seemed willing to find another cause: therefore about her second year, in a parliament, of men and minds some scarce well grounded, others belching the sour crudities of yesterday’s popery, those constitutions of Edward VI., which as you heard before, no way satisfied the men that made them, are now established for best, and not to be mended. From that time followed nothing but imprisonments, troubles, disgraces on all those that found fault with the decrees of the convocation, and straight were they branded with the name of puritans. As for the queen herself, she was made believe that by putting down bishops, her prerogative would be infringed, of which shall be spoken anon as the course of method brings it in: and why the prelates laboured it should be so thought, ask not them, but ask their bellies. They had found a good tabernacle, they sate under a spreading vine, their lot was fallen in a fair inheritance. And these, perhaps, were the chief impeachments of a more sound rectifying the church in the queen’s time.
From this period I count to begin our times, which because they concern us more nearly, and our own eyes and ears can give us the ampler scope Edition: current; Page: [7] to judge, will require a more exact search; and to effect this the speedier, I shall distinguish such as I esteem to be the hinderers of reformation into three sorts, Antiquitarians (for so I had rather call them than antiquaries, whose labours are useful and laudable). 2. Libertines. 3. Politicians.
To the votarists of antiquity, I shall think to have fully answered, if I shall be able to prove out of antiquity, First, that if they will conform our bishops to the purer times, they must mew their feathers, and their pounces, and make but curtailed bishops of them; and we know they hate to be docked and clipped, as much as to be put down outright. Secondly, that those purer times were corrupt, and their books corrupted soon after. Thirdly, that the best of those that then wrote, disclaim that any man should repose on them, and send all to the Scriptures.
First therefore, if those that overaffect antiquity will follow the square thereof, their bishops must be elected by the hands of the whole church. The ancientest of the extant fathers, Ignatius, writing to the Philadelphians, saith, “that it belongs to them as to the church of God to choose a bishop.” Let no man cavil, but take the church of God as meaning the whole consistence of orders and members, as St. Paul’s epistles express, and this likewise being read over: besides this, it is there to be marked, that those Philadelphians are exhorted to choose a bishop of Antioch. Whence it seems by the way that there was not that wary limitation of diocese in those times, which is confirmed even by a fast friend of episcopacy, Camden, who cannot but love bishops as well as old coins, and his much lamented monasteries, for antiquity’s sake. He writes in his description of Scotland, “That over all the world bishops had no certain diocese till pope Dionysius about the year 268 did cut them out; and that the bishops of Scotland executed their function in what place soever they came indifferently, and without distinction, till King Malcolm the Third, about the year 1070.” Whence may be guessed what their function was: was it to go about circled with a band of rooking officials, with cloakbags full of citations, and processes to be served by a corporality of griffonlike promoters and apparitors? Did he go about to pitch down his court, as an empiric does his bank, to inveigle in all the money of the country? No, certainly, it would not have been permitted him to exercise any such function indifferently wherever he came. And verily some such matter it was as want of a fat diocese that kept our Britain bishops so poor in the primitive times, that being called to the council of Ariminum in the year 359, they had not wherewithal to defray the charges of their journey, but were fed and lodged upon the emperor’s cost; which must needs be no accidental but usual poverty in them: for the author, Sulpitius Severus, in his 2d book of Church History, praises them, and avouches it praiseworthy in a bishop to be so poor as to have nothing of his own. But to return to the ancient election of bishops, that it could not lawfully be without the consent of the people is so express in Cyprian, and so often to be met with, that to cite each place at large, were to translate a good part of the volume; therefore touching the chief passages, I refer the rest to whom so list peruse the author himself: in the 24th epistle, “If a bishop,” saith he, “be once made and allowed by the testimony and judgment of his colleagues and the people, no other can be made.” In the 55th, “When a bishop is made by the suffrage of all the people in peace.” In the 68th mark but what he says; “The people chiefly hath power either of choosing worthy ones, or refusing unworthy: this he there proves by authorities out of the Old and New Testament, and with solid reasons: these were his an tiquities.
Edition: current; Page: [8]This voice of the people, to be had ever in episcopal elections, was so well known before Cyprian’s time, even to those that were without the church, that the emperor Alexander Severus desired to have his governors of provinces chosen in the same manner, as Lampridius can tell; so little thought he it offensive to monarchy. And if single authorities persuade not, hearken what the whole general council of Nicæa, the first and famousest of all the rest, determines, writing a synodical epistle to the African churches, to warn them of Arianism; it exhorts them to choose orthodox bishops in the place of the dead, so they be worthy, and the people choose them; whereby they seem to make the people’s assent so necessary, that merit, without their free choice, were not sufficient to make a bishop. What would ye say now, grave fathers, if you should wake and see unworthy bishops, or rather no bishops, but Egyptian taskmasters of ceremonies thrust purposely upon the groaning church, to the affliction and vexation of God’s people? It was not of old that a conspiracy of bishops could frustrate and fob off the right of the people; for we may read how St. Martin, soon after Constantine, was made bishop of Turin in France, by the people’s consent from all places thereabout, maugre all the opposition that the bishops could make. Thus went matters of the church almost 400 years after Christ, and very probably far lower: for Nicephorus Phocas the Greek emperor, whose reign fell near the 1000 year of our Lord, having done many things tyrannically, is said by Cedrenus to have done nothing more grievous and displeasing to the people, than to have enacted that no bishop should be chosen without his will; so long did this right remain to the people in the midst of other palpable corruptions. Now for episcopal dignity, what it was, see out of Ignatius, who in his epistle to those of Trallis, confesseth, “That the presbyters are his fellow-counsellors and fellow-benchers.” And Cyprian in many places, as in the 6th, 41st, 52d epistle, speaking of presbyters, calls them his compresbyters, as if he deemed himself no other, whenas by the same place it appears he was a bishop; he calls them brethren, but that will be thought his meekness: yea, but the presbyters and deacons writing to him think they do him honour enough, when they phrase him no higher than brother Cyprian, and dear Cyprian in the 26th epistle. For their authority it is evident not to have been single, but depending on the counsel of the presbyters as from Ignatius was erewhile alleged; and the same Cyprian acknowledges as much in the 6th epistle, and adds thereto, that he had determined, from his entrance into the office of bishop, to do nothing without the consent of his people, and so in the 31st epistle, for it were tedious to course through all his writings, which are so full of the like assertions, insomuch that even in the womb and center of apostacy, Rome itself, there yet remains a glimpse of this truth; for the pope himself, as a learned English writer notes well, performeth all ecclesiastical jurisdiction as in consistory among his cardinals, which were originally but the parish priests of Rome. Thus then did the spirit of unity and meekness inspire and animate every joint and sinew of the mystical body; but now the gravest and worthiest minister, a true bishop of his fold, shall be reviled and ruffled by an insulting and only canon-wise prelate, as if he were some slight paltry companion: and the people of God, redeemed and washed with Christ’s blood, and dignified with so many glorious titles of saints and sons in the gospel, are now no better reputed than impure ethnics and lay dogs; stones, and pillars, and crucifixes, have now the honour and the alms due to Christ’s living members; the table of communion, now become a table of separation, stands like an exalted platform upon the brow of the quire, fortified with bulwark and barricado, to keep Edition: current; Page: [9] off the profane touch of the laics, whilst the obscene and surfeited priest scruples not to paw and mammoc the sacramental bread, as familarly as his tavern biscuit. And thus the people, vilified and rejected by them, give over the earnest study of virtue and godliness, as a thing of greater purity that they need, and the search of divine knowledge as a mystery too high for their capacities, and only for churchmen to meddle with; which is what the prelates desire, that when they have brought us back to popish blindness, we might commit to their dispose the whole managing of our salvation, for they think it was never fair world with them since that time. But he that will mould a modern bishop into a primitive, must yield him to be elected by the popular voice, undiocesed, unrevenued, unlorded, and leave him nothing but brotherly equality, matchless temperance, frequent fasting, incessant prayer and preaching, continual watchings and labours in his ministry; which what a rich booty it would be, what a plump endowment to the many-benefice-gaping-mouth of a prelate, what a relish it would give to his canary-sucking and swan-eating palate, let old bishop Mountain judge for me.
How little therefore those ancient times make for modern bishops, hath been plainly discoursed; but let them make for them as much as they will, yet why we ought not to stand to their arbitrement, shall now appear by a threefold corruption which will be found upon them. 1. The best times were spreadingly infected. 2. The best men of those times foully tainted. 3. The best writings of those men dangerously adulterated. These positions are to be made good out of those times witnessing of themselves. First, Ignatius in his early days testifies to the churches of Asia, that even then heresies were sprung up, and rise every where, as Eusebius relates in his 3d book, 35th chap. after the Greek number. And Hegesippus, a grave church writer of prime antiquity, affirms in the same book of Eusebius, c. 32: “That while the apostles were on earth, the depravers of doctrine did but lurk; but they once gone, with open forehead they durst preach down the truth with falsities.” Yea, those that are reckoned for orthodox, began to make sad and shameful rents in the church about the trivial celebration of feasts, not agreeing when to keep Easter-day; which controversy grew so hot, that Victor the bishop of Rome excommunicated all the churches of Asia for no other cause, and was worthily thereof reproved by Irenæus. For can any sound theologer think, that these great fathers understood what was gospel, or what was excommunication? Doubtless that which led the good men into fraud and error was, that they attended more to the near tradition of what they heard the appostles some times did, than to what they had left written, not considering that many things which they did were by the apostles themselves professed to be done only for the present, and of mere indulgence to some scrupulous converts of the circumcision; but what they writ was of firm decree to all future ages. Look but a century lower in the 1st cap. of Eusebius 8th book. What a universal tetter of impurity had envenomed every part, order, and degree of the church to omit the lay herd, which will be little regarded, “those that seem to be our pastors,” saith he, “overturning the law of God’s worship, burnt in contentions one towards another, and increasing in hatred and bitterness, outrageously sought to uphold lordship, and command as it were a tyranny.” Stay but a little, magnanimous bishops, suppress your aspiring thoughts, for there is nothing wanting but Constantine to reign, and then tyranny herself shall give up all her citadels into your hands, and count ye thence forward her trustiest agents. Such were these that must be called the ancientest and most virgin times between Christ and Constantine. Nor Edition: current; Page: [10] was this general contagion in their actions, and not in their writings: who is ignorant of the foul errors, the ridiculous wresting of Scripture, the heresies, the vanities thick sown through the volumes of Justin Martyr, Clemens, Origen, Tertullian, and others of eldest time? Who would think him fit to write an apology for Christian faith to the Roman senate, that would tell them “how of the angels,” which he must needs mean those in Genesis called the sons of God, “mixing with women were begotten the devils,” as good Justin Martyr in his Apology told them? But more indignation would it move to any Christian that shall read Tertullian, terming St. Paul a novice, and raw in grace, for reproving St. Peter at Antioch, worthy to be blamed if we believe the epistle to the Galatians: perhaps from this hint the blasphemous Jesuits presumed in Italy to give their judgment of St. Paul, as of a hotheaded person, as Sandys in his relations tells us.
Now besides all this, who knows not how many superstitious works are ingraffed into the legitimate writings of the fathers? And of those books that pass for authentic, who knows what hath been tampered withal, what hath been razed out, what hath been inserted? Besides the late legerdemain of the papists, that which Sulpitius writes concerning Origen’s books, gives us cause vehemently to suspect, there hath been packing of old. In the third chap. of his 1st Dialogue we may read what wrangling the bishops and monks had about the reading or not reading of Origen; some objecting that he was corrupted by heretics; others answering that all such books had been so dealt with. How then shall I trust these times to lead me, that testify so ill of leading themselves? Certainly of their defects their own witness may be best received, but of the rectitude and sincerity of their life and doctrine, to judge rightly, we must judge by that which was to be their rule.
But it will be objected, that this was an unsettled state of the church, wanting the temporal magistrate to suppress the licence of false brethern, and the extravagancy of still new opinions; a time not imitable for church government, where the temporal and spiritual power did not close in one belief, as under Constantine. I am not of opinion to think the church a vine in this respect, because, as they take it, she cannot subsist without clasping about the elm of worldly strength and felicity, as if the heavenly city could not support itself without the props and buttresses of secular authority. They extol Constantine because he extolled them; as our homebred monks in their histories blanch the kings their benefactors, and brand those that went about to be their correctors. If he had curbed the growing pride, avarice, and luxury of the clergy, then every page of his story should have swelled with his faults, and that which Zozimus the heathen writes of him should have come in to boot: we should have heard then in every declamation how he slew his nephew Commodus, a worthy man; his noble and eldest son Crispus, his wife Fausta, besides numbers of his friends; then his cruel exactions, his unsoundness in religion, favouring the Arians that had been condemned in a council, of which himself sat as it were president; his hard measure and banishment of the faithful and invincible Athanasius; his living unbaptised almost to his dying day; these blurs are too apparent in his life. But since he must needs be the loadstar of reformation, as some men clatter, it will be good to see further his knowledge of religion what it was, and by that we may likewise guess at the sincerity of his times in those that were not heretical, it being likely that he would converse with the famousest prelates (for so he had made them) that were to be found for learning.
Edition: current; Page: [11]Of his Arianism we heard, and for the rest a pretty scantling of his knowledge may be taken by his deferring to be baptized so many years, a thing not usual, and repugnant to the tenor of Scripture; Philip knowing nothing that should hinder the eunuch to be baptized after profession of his belief. Next, by the excessive devotion, that I may not say superstition, both of him and his mother Helena, to find out the cross on which Christ suffered, that had long lain under the rubbish of old ruins; (a thing which the disciples and kindred of our Saviour might with more ease have done, if they had thought it a pious duty;) some of the nails whereof he put into his helmet, to bear off blows in battle, others he fastened among the studs of his bridle, to fulfil (as he thought, or his court bishops persuaded him) the prophecy of Zechariah; “And it shall be that which is in the bridle, shall be holy to the Lord.” Part of the cross, in which he thought such virtue to reside, as would prove a kind of Palladium to save the city wherever it remained, he caused to be laid up in a pillar of porphyry by his statue. How he or his teachers could trifle thus with half an eye open upon St. Paul’s principles, I know not how to imagine.
How should then the dim taper of this emperor’s age, that had such need of snuffing, extend any beam to our times, wherewith we might hope to be better lighted, than by those luminaries that God hath set up to shine to us far nearer hand. And what reformation he wrought for his own time, it will not be amiss to consider; he appointed certain times for fasts and feasts, built stately churches, gave large immunities to the clergy, great riches and promotions to bishops, gave and ministered occasion to bring in a deluge of ceremonies, thereby either to draw in the heathen by a resemblance of their rites, or to set a gloss upon the simplicity and plainness of Christianity; which, to the gorgeous solemnities of paganism, and the sense of the world’s children, seemed but a homely and yeomanly religion; for the beauty of inward sanctity was not within their prospect.
So that in this manner the prelates, both then and ever since, coming from a mean and plebeian life on a sudden to be lords of stately palaces, rich furniture, delicious fare, and princely attendance, thought the plain and homespun verity of Christ’s gospel unfit any longer to hold their lordships’ acquaintance, unless the poor threadbare matron were put into better clothes; her chaste and modest vail, surrounded with celestial beams, they overlaid with wanton tresses, and in a staring tire bespeckled her with all the gaudy allurements of a whore.
Thus flourished the church with Constantine’s wealth, and thereafter were the effects that followed; his son Constantius proved a flat Arian, and his nephew Julian an apostate, and there his race ended: the church that before by insensible degrees welked and impaired, now with large steps went down hill decaying: at this time Antichrist began first to put forth his horn, and that saying was common, that former times had wooden chalices and golden priests; but they, golden chalices and wooden priests. “Formerly,” saith Sulpitius, “martyrdom by glorious death was sought more greedily than now bishoprics by vile ambition are hunted after,” speaking of these times: and in another place, “they gape after possessions, they tend lands and livings, they cower over their gold, they buy and sell: and if there be any that neither possess nor traffic, that which is worse, they set still, and expect gifts, and prostitute every endowment of grace, every holy thing, to sale.” And in the end of his history thus he concludes. “All things went to wrack by the faction, wilfulness, and avarice of the bishops; and by this means God’s people, and every good man, was had in scorn and derision;” which St. Martin found truly to be said by his friend Sulpitius; for, being Edition: current; Page: [12] held in admiration of all men, he had only the bishops his enemies, found God less favourable to him after he was bishop than before, and for his last sixteen years would come at no bishop’s meeting. Thus you see sir, what Constantine’s doings in the church brought forth, either in his own or in his son’s reign.
Now, lest it should be thought that something else might ail this author thus to hamper the bishops of those days, I will bring you the opinion of three the famousest men for wit and learning that Italy at this day glories of, whereby it may be concluded for a received opinion, even among men professing the Romish faith, that Constantine marred all in the church. Dante, in his 19th Canto of Inferno, hath thus, as I will render it you in English blank verse:
- Ah Constantine! of how much ill was cause
- Not thy conversion, but those rich domains
- That the first wealthy pope receiv’d of thee!
So, in his 20th Canto of Paradise, he makes the like complaint, and Petrarch seconds him in the same mind in his 108th sonnet, which is wiped out by the inquisitor in some editions; speaking of the Roman Antichrist as merely bred up by Constantine.
- Founded in chaste and humble poverty,
- ’Gainst them that rais’d thee dost thou lift thy horn,
- Impudent whore, where hast thou plac’d thy hope?
- In thy adulterers, or thy ill-got wealth?
- Another Constantine comes not in haste.
Ariosto of Ferrara, after both these in time, but equal in fame, following the scope of his poem in a difficult knot how to restore Orlando his chief hero to his lost senses, brings Astolfo the English knight up into the moon, where St. John, as he feigns, met him. Cant. 34.
- And to be short, at last his guide him brings
- Into a goodly valley, where he sees
- A mighty mass of things strangely confus’d,
- Things that on earth were lost, or were abus’d.
And amongst these so abused things, listen what he met withal, under the conduct of the Evangelist.
- Then past he to a flowery mountain green,
- Which once smelt sweet, now stinks as odiously:
- This was that gift (if you the truth will have)
- That Constantine to good Sylvestro gave.
And this was a truth well known in England before this poet was born, as our Chaucer’s Ploughman shall tell you by and by upon another occasion. By all these circumstances laid together, I do not see how it can be disputed what good this emperor Constantine wrought to the church, but rather whether ever any, though perhaps not wittingly, set open a door to more mischief in Christendom. There is just cause therefore, that when the prelates cry out, Let the church be reformed according to Constantine, it should sound to a judicious ear no otherwise, than if they should say, Make us rich, make us lofty, make us lawless; for if any under him were not so, thanks to those ancient remains of integrity, which were not yet quite worn out, and not to his government.
Thus finally it appears, that those purer times were not such as they are cried up, and not to be followed without suspicion, doubt, and danger. The last point wherein the antiquary is to be dealt with at his own weapon, is, Edition: current; Page: [13] to make it manifest that the ancientest and best of the fathers have disclaimed all sufficiency in themselves that men should rely on, and sent all comers to the Scriptures, as all-sufficient: that this is true, will not be unduly gathered, by showing what esteem they had of antiquity themselves, and what validity they thought in it to prove doctrine or discipline. I must of necessity begin from the second rank of fathers, because till then antiquity could have no plea. Cyprian in his 63d Epistle: “If any,” saith he, “of our ancestors, either ignorantly or out of simplicity, hath not observed that which the Lord taught us by example,” speaking of the Lord’s supper, “his simplicity God may pardon of his mercy; but we cannot be excused for following him, being instructed by the Lord.” And have not we the same instructions; and will not this holy man, with all the whole consistory of saints and martyrs that lived of old, rise up and stop our mouths in judgment, when we shall go about to father our errors and opinions upon their authority? In the 73d Epist. he adds, “In vain do they oppose custom to us, if they be overcome by reason; as if custom were greater than truth, or that in spiritual things that were not to be followed, which is revealed for the better by the Holy Ghost.” In the 74th, “Neither ought custom to hinder that truth should not prevail; for custom without truth is but agedness of error.”
Next Lactantius, he that was preferred to have the bringing up of Constantine’s children, in his second book of Institutions, chap. 7 and 8, disputes against the vain trust in antiquity, as being the chiefest argument of the Heathen against the Christians: “They do not consider,” saith he, “what religion is, but they are confident it is true, because the ancients delivered it; they count it a trespass to examine it.” And in the eighth: “Not because they went before us in time, therefore in wisdom; which being given alike to all ages, cannot be prepossessed by the ancients wherefore, seeing that to seek the truth is inbred to all, they bereave themselves of wisdom, the gift of God, who without judgment follow the ancients, and are led by others like brute beasts.” St. Austin writes to Fortunatian, that “he counts it lawful, in the books of whomsoever, to reject that which he finds otherwise than true; and so he would have others deal by him.” He neither accounted, as it seems, those fathers that went before, nor himself, nor others of his rank, for men of more than ordinary spirit, that might equally deceive, and be deceived: and ofttimes setting our servile humours aside, yea, God so ordering we may find truth with one man, as soon as in a council, as Cyprian agrees, 71st Epist. “Many things,” saith he, “are better revealed to single persons.” At Nicæ, in the first and best-reputed council of all the world, there had gone out a canon to divorce married priests, had not one old man, Paphnutius, stood up and reasoned against it.
Now remains it to show clearly that the fathers refer all decision of controversy to the Scriptures, as all-sufficient to direct, to resolve, and to determine. Ignatius, taking his last leave of the Asian churches, as he went to martyrdom, exhorted them to adhere close to the written doctrine of the apostles, necessarily written for posterity: so far was he from unwritten traditions, as may be read in the 36th chap. of Eusebius, 3d b. In the 74th Epist. of Cyprian against Stefan, bishop of Rome, imposing upon him a tradition; “Whence,” quoth he, “is this tradition? Is it fetched from the authority of Christ in the gospel, or of the apostles in their epistles? for God testifies that those things are to be done which are written.” And then thus, “What obstinacy, what presumption is this, to prefer human tradition before divine ordinance?” And in the same epist. “if we shall Edition: current; Page: [14] return to the head, and beginning of divine tradition, (which we all know he means the Bible,) human error ceases; and the reason of heavenly mysteries unfolded, whatsoever was obscure becomes clear.” And in the 14th distinct of the same epist. directly against our modern fantasies of a still visible church, he teaches, “that succession of truth may fail; to renew which, we must have recourse to the fountains;” using this excellent similitude, “if a channel, or conduit-pipe which brought in water plentifully before, suddenly fail, do we not go to the fountain to know the cause, whether the spring affords no more, or whether the vein be stopped, or turned aside in the midcourse? Thus ought we to do, keeping God’s precepts, that if in aught the truth shall be changed, we may repair to the gospel and to the apostles, that thence may arise the reason of our doings, from whence our order and beginning arose.” In the 75th he inveighs bitterly against pope Stephanus, “for that he could boast his succession from Peter, and yet foist in traditions that were not apostolical.” And in his book of the unity of the church, he compares those that, neglecting God’s word, follow the doctrines of men, to Corah, Dathan, and Abiram. The very first page of Athanasius against the gentiles, avers the scriptures to be sufficient of themselves for the declaration of truth; and that if his friend Macarius read other religious writers, it was but φιλοϰάλος come un vertuoso, (as the Italians say,) as a lover of elegance: and in his second tome, the 39th page, after he hath reckoned up the canonical books, “in these only,” saith he, “is the doctrine of godliness taught; let no man add to these, or take from these.” And in his Synopsis, having again set down all the writers of the Old and New Testament, “these,” saith he, “be the anchors and props of our faith.” Besides these, millions of other books have been written by great and wise men according to rule, and agreement with these, of which I will not now speak, as being of infinite number, and mere dependence on the canonical books. Basil, in his 2d tome, writing of true faith, tells his auditors, he is bound to teach them that which he hath learned out of the Bible: and in the same treatise he saith, “that seeing the commandments of the Lord are faithful, and sure for ever, it is a plain falling from the faith, and a high pride, either to make void any thing therein, or to introduce any thing not there to be found:” and he gives the reason, “for Christ saith, My sheep hear my voice; they will not follow another, but fly from him, because they know not his voice.” But not to be endless in quotations, it may chance to be objected, that there be many opinions in the fathers which have no ground in Scripture; so much the less, may I say, should we follow them, for their own words shall condemn them, and acquit us that lean not on them; otherwise these their words will acquit them, and condemn us. But it will be replied, the Scriptures are difficult to be understood, and therefore require the explanation of the fathers. It is true, there be some books, and especially some places in those books, that remain clouded; yet ever that which is most necessary to be known is most easy; and that which is most difficult, so far expounds itself ever, as to tell us how little it imports our saving knowledge. Hence, to infer a general obscurity over all the text, is a mere suggestion of the devil to dissuade men from reading it, and casts an aspersion of dishonour both upon the mercy, truth, and wisdom of God. We count it no gentleness or fair dealing in a man of power amongst us, to require strict and punctual obedience, and yet give out all his commands ambiguous and obscure; we should think he had a plot upon us; certainly such commands were no commands, but snares. The very essence of truth is plainness and brightness; the darkness and crookedness is our own. The wisdom Edition: current; Page: [15] of God created understanding, fit and proportionable to truth, the object and end of it, as the eye to the thing visible. If our understanding have a film of ignorance over it, or be blear with gazing on other false glisterings, what is that to truth? If we will but purge with sovereign eyesalve that intellectual ray which God hath planted in us, then we would believe the Scriptures protesting their own plainness and perspicuity, calling to them to be instructed, not only the wise and the learned, but the simple, the poor, the babes; foretelling an extraordinary effusion of God’s Spirit upon every age and sex, attributing to all men, and requiring from them the ability of searching, trying, examining all things, and by the spirit discerning that which is good; and as the Scriptures themselves pronounce their own plainness, so do the fathers testify of them.
I will not run into a paroxysm of citations again in this point, only instance Athanasius in his forementioned first page: “The knowledge of truth,” saith he, “wants no human lore, as being evident in itself, and by the preaching of Christ now opens brighter than the sun.” If these doctors, who had scarce half the light that we enjoy, who all, except two or three, were ignorant of the Hebrew tongue, and many of the Greek, blundering upon the dangerous and suspectful translations of the apostate Aquila, the heretical Theodotian, the judaized Symmachus, the erroneous Origen; if these could yet find the Bible so easy, why should we doubt, that have all the helps of learning, and faithful industry, that man in this life can look for, and the assistance of God as near now to us as ever? But let the Scriptures be hard; are they more hard, more crabbed, more abtruse than the fathers? He that cannot understand the sober, plain, and unaffected style of the Scriptures, will be ten times more puzzled with the knotty Africanisms, the pampered metaphors, the intricate and involved sentences of the fathers, besides the fantastic and declamatory flashes, the cross-jingling periods which cannot but disturb, and come thwart a settled devotion, worse than the din of bells and rattles.
Now, sir, for the love of holy Reformation, what can be said more against these importunate clients of antiquity than she herself their patroness hath said? Whether, think ye, would she approve still to doat upon immeasurable, innumerable, and therefore unnecessary and unmerciful volumes, choosing rather to err with the specious name of the fathers, or to take a sound truth at the hand of a plain upright man, that all his days has been diligently reading the holy Scriptures, and thereto imploring God’s grace, while the admirers of antiquity have been beating their brains about their ambones, their dyptichs, and meniaias? Now, he that cannot tell of stations and indictions, nor has wasted his precious hours in the endless conferring of councils and conclaves that demolish one another, (although I know many of those that pretend to be great rabbies in these studies, have scarce saluted them from the strings, and the titlepage; or to give them more, have been but the ferrets and mousehunts of an index:) yet what pastor or minister, how learned, religious, or discreet soever, does not now bring both his cheeks full blown with œcumenical and synodical, shall be counted a lank, shallow, insufficient man, yea a dunce, and not worthy to speak about reformation of church discipline. But I trust they for whom God hath reserved the honour of reforming this church, will easily perceive their adversaries’ drift in thus calling for antiquity: they fear the plain field of the Scriptures; the chase is too hot; they seek the dark, the bushy, the tangled forest, they would imbosk: they feel themselves strook in the transparent streams of divine truth; they would plunge, and tumble, and think to lie hid in the foul weeds and muddy waters where Edition: current; Page: [16] no plummet can reach the bottom. But let them beat themselves like whales, and spend their oil till they be dragged ashore: though wherefore should the ministers give them so much line for shifts and delays? wherefore should they not urge only the gospel, and hold it ever in their faces like a mirror of diamond, till it dazzle and pierce their misty eyeballs? maintaining it the honour of its absolute sufficiency and supremacy inviolable: for if the Scriptures be for reformation, and antiquity to boot, it is but an advantage to the dozen, it is no winning cast: and though antiquity be against it, while the Scriptures be for it, the cause is as good as ought to be wished, antiquity itself sitting judge.
But to draw to an end; the second sort of those that may be justly numbered among the hinderers of reformation, are libertines; these suggest that the discipline sought would be intolerable: for one bishop now in a diocese, we should then have a pope in every parish. It will not be requisite to answer these men, but only to discover them; for reason they have none but lust and licentiousness, and therefore answer can have none. It is not any discipline that they could live under, it is the corruption and remissness of discipline that they seek. Episcopacy duly executed, yea, the Turkish and Jewish rigour against whoring and drinking; the dear and tender discipline of a father, the sociable and loving reproof of a brother, the bosom admonition of a friend, is a presbytery, and a consistory to them. It is only the merry friar in Chaucer can disple* them.
- Full sweetly heard he confession,
- And pleasant was his absolution,
- He was an easy man to give penance.
And so I leave them; and refer the political discourse of episcopacy to a second book.
THE SECOND BOOK.
Sir,—It is a work good and prudent to be able to guide one man; of larger extended virtue to order well one house: but to govern a nation piously and justly, which only is to say happily, is for a spirit of the greatest size, and divinest mettle. And certainly of no less a mind, nor of less excellence in another way, were they who by writing laid the solid and true foundations of this science, which being of greatest importance to the life of man, yet there is no art that hath been more cankered in her principles, more soiled, and slubbered with aphorisming pedantry, than the art of policy: and that most, where a man would think should least be, in Christian commonwealths. They teach not, that to govern well, is to train up a nation in true wisdom and virtue, and that which springs from thence, magnanimity, (take heed of that,) and that which is our beginning, regeneration, and happiest end, likeness to God, which in one word we call godliness; and that this is the true flourishing of a land, other things follow Edition: current; Page: [17] as the shadow does the substance; to teach thus were mere pulpitry to them. This is the masterpiece of a modern politician, how to qualify and mould the sufferance and subjection of the people to the length of that foot that is to tread on their necks; how rapine may serve itself with the fair and honourable pretences of public good; how the puny law may be brought under the wardship and control of lust and will: in which attempt if they fall short, then must a superficial colour of reputation by all means, direct or indirect, be gotten to wash over the unsightly bruise of honour. To make men governable in this manner, their precepts mainly tend to break a national spirit and courage, by countenancing open riot, luxury, and ignorance, till having thus disfigured and made men beneath men, as Juno in the fable of Io, they deliver up the poor transformed heifer of the commonwealth to be stung and vexed with the breese and goad of oppression, under the custody of some Argus with a hundred eyes of jealousy. To be plainer, sir, how to sodder, how to stop a leak, how to keep up the floating carcase of a crazy and diseased monarchy or state, betwixt wind and water, swimming still upon her own dead lees, that now is the deep design of a politician. Alas, sir! a commonwealth ought to be but as one huge Christian personage, one mighty growth and stature of an honest man, as big and compact in virtue as in body; for look what the grounds and causes are of single happiness to one man, the same ye shall find them to a whole state, as Aristotle, both in his Ethics and Politics, from the principles of reason lays down: by consequence, therefore, that which is good and agreeable to monarchy, will appear soonest to be so, by being good and agreeable to the true welfare of every Christian; and that which can be justly proved hurtful and offensive to every true Christian, will be evinced to be alike hurtful to monarchy: for God forbid that we should separate and distinguish the end and good of a monarch, from the end and good of the monarchy, or of that from Christianity. How then this third and last sort that hinder reformation, will justify that it stands not with reason of state, I much muse; for certain I am, the Bible is shut against them, as certain that neither Plato nor Aristotle is for their turns. What they can bring us now from the schools of Loyola with his Jesuits, or their Malvezzi, that can cut Tacitus into slivers and steaks, we shall presently hear. They allege, 1. That the church government must be conformable to the civil polity; next, that no form of church-government is agreeable to monarchy, but that of bishops. Must church-government that is appointed in the gospel, and has chief respect to the soul, be conformable and pliant to civil, that is arbitrary, and chiefly conversant about the visible and external part of man? This is the very maxim that moulded the calves of Bethel and of Dan; this was the quintessence of Jeroboam’s policy, he made religion conform to his politic interests; and this was the sin that watched over the Israelites till their final captivity. If this state principle come from the prelates, as they affect to be counted statists, let them look back to Eleutherius bishop of Rome, and see what he thought of the policy of England; being required by Lucius, the first Christian king of this island, to give his counsel for the founding of religious laws, little thought he of this sage caution, but bids him betake himself to the Old and New Testament, and receive direction from them how to administer both church and commonwealth; that he was God’s vicar, and therefore to rule by God’s laws; that the edicts of Cæsar we may at all times disallow, but the statutes of God for no reason we may reject. Now certain, if church-government be taught in the gospel, as the bishops dare not deny, we may well conclude of what late standing this position is, newly calculated for Edition: current; Page: [18] the altitude of bishop-elevation, and lettuce for their lips. But by what example can they show, that the form of church-discipline must be minted and modelled out to secular pretences? The ancient republic of the Jews is evident to have run through all the changes of civil estate, if we survey the story from the giving of the law to the Herods; yet did one manner of priestly government serve without inconvenience to all these temporal mutations; it served the mild aristocracy of elective dukes, and heads of tribes joined with them; the dictatorship of the judges, the easy or hardhanded monarchies, the domestic or foreign tyrannies: lastly, the Roman senate from without, the Jewish senate at home, with the Galilean tetrarch; yet the Levites had some right to deal in civil affairs: but seeing the evangelical precept forbids churchmen to intermeddle with worldly employments, what interweavings or interworkings can knit the minister and the magistrate, in their several functions, to the regard of any precise correspondency? Seeing that the churchman’s office is only to teach men the Christian faith, to exhort all, to encourage the good, to admonish the bad, privately the less offender, publicly the scandalous and stubborn; to censure and separate, from the communion of Christ’s flock, the contagious and incorrigible, to receive with joy and fatherly compassion the penitent: all this must be done, and more than this is beyond any church-authority. What is all this either here or there, to the temporal regiment of weal public, whether it be popular, princely, or monarchical? Where doth it intrench upon the temporal governor? where does it come in his walk? where doth it make inroad upon his jurisdiction? Indeed if the minister’s part be rightly discharged, it renders him the people more conscionable, quiet, and easy to be governed; if otherwise, his life and doctrine will declare him. If, therefore, the constitution of the church be already set down by divine prescript, as all sides confess, then can she not be a handmaid to wait on civil commodities and respects; and if the nature and limits of church-discipline be such, as are either helpful to all political estates indifferently, or have no particular relation to any, then is there no necessity, nor indeed possibility, of linking the one with the other in a special conformation.
Now for their second conclusion, “That no form of church-government is agreeable to monarchy, but that of bishops,” although it fall to pieces of itself by that which hath been said; yet to give them play, front and rear, it shall be my task to prove that episcopacy, with that authority which it challenges in England, is not only not agreeable, but tending to the destruction of monarchy. While the primitive pastors of the church of God laboured faithfully in their ministry, tending only their sheep, and not seeking, but avoiding all worldly matters as clogs, and indeed derogations and debasements to their high calling; little needed the princes and potentates of the earth, which way soever the gospel was spread, to study ways out to make a coherence between the church’s polity and theirs: therefore, when Pilate heard once our Saviour Christ professing that “his kingdom was not of this world,” he thought the man could not stand much in Cæsar’s light, nor much endamage the Roman empire; for if the life of Christ be hid to this world, much more is his sceptre unoperative, but in spiritual things. And thus lived, for two or three ages, the successors of the apostles. But when, through Constantine’s lavish superstition, they forsook their first love, and set themselves up two gods instead, Mammon and their Belly; then taking advantage of the spiritual power which they had on men’s consciences, they began to cast a longing eye to get the body also, and bodily things into their command: upon which their carnal desires, the spirit daily quenching and dying in them, knew no way to keep Edition: current; Page: [19] themselves up from falling to nothing, but by bolstering and supporting their inward rottenness by a carnal and outward strength. For a while they rather privily sought opportunity, than hastily disclosed their project; but when Constantine was dead, and three or four emperors more, their drift became notorious, and offensive to the whole world; for while Theodosius the younger reigned, thus writes Socrates the historian, in his 7th book, chap. 11. “Now began an ill name to stick upon the bishops of Rome and Alexandria, who beyond their priestly bounds now long ago had stepped into principality:” and this was scarce eighty years since their raising from the meanest worldly condition. Of courtesy now let any man tell me, if they draw to themselves a temporal strength and power out of Cæsar’s dominion, is not Cæsar’s empire thereby diminished? But this was a stolen bit; hitherto he was but a caterpillar secretly knawing at monarchy; the next time you shall see him a wolf, a lion, lifting his paw against his raiser, as Petrarch expressed it, and finally an open enemy and subverter of the Greek empire. Philippicus and Leo, with divers other emperors after them, not without the advice of their patriarchs, and at length of a whole eastern council of three hundred and thirty-eight bishops, threw the images out of churches as being decreed idolatrous.
Upon this goodly occasion, the bishop of Rome not only seizes the city, and all the territory about, into his own hands, and makes himself lord thereof, which till then was governed by a Greek magistrate, but absolves all Italy of their tribute and obedience due to the emperor, because he obeyed God’s commandment in abolishing idolatry.
Mark, sir, here, how the pope came by St. Peter’s patrimony, as he feigns it; not the donation of Constantine, but idolatry and rebellion got it him. Ye need but read Sigonius, one of his own sect, to know the story at large. And now to shroud himself against a storm from the Greek continent, and provide a champion to bear him out in these practices, he takes upon him by papal sentence to unthrone Chilpericus the rightful king of France, and gives the kingdom to Pepin, for no other cause, but that he seemed to him the more active man. If he were a friend herein to monarchy, I know not; but to the monarch I need not ask what he was.
Having thus made Pepin his last friend, he calls him into Italy against Aistulphus the Lombard, that warred upon him for his late usurpation of Rome, as belonging to Ravenna which he had newly won. Pepin, not unobedient to the pope’s call, passing into Italy, frees him out of danger, and wins for him the whole exarchate of Ravenna; which though it had been almost immediately before the hereditary possession of that monarchy, which was his chief patron and benefactor, yet he takes and keeps it to himself as lawful prize, and given to St. Peter. What a dangerous fallacy is this, when a spiritual man may snatch to himself any temporal dignity or dominion, under pretence of receiving it for the church’s use? Thus he claims Naples, Sicily, England, and what not? To be short, under show of his zeal against the errors of the Greek church, he never ceased baiting and goring the successors of his best lord Constantine, what by his barking curses and excommunications, what by his hindering the western princes from aiding them against the Sarazens and Turks, unless when they humoured him; so that it may be truly affirmed, he was the subversion and fall of that monarchy, which was the hoisting of him. This, besides Petrarch, whom I have cited, our Chaucer also hath observed, and gives from hence a caution to England, to beware of her bishops in time, for that their ends and aims are no more friendly to monarchy, than the pope’s.
This he begins in the Ploughman speaking, Part ii., Stanz. 28.
Edition: current; Page: [20]- The emperor yafe the pope sometime
- So high lordship him about,
- That at last the silly kime,
- The proud pope put him out;
- So of this realm is no doubt,
- But lords beware and them defend;
- For now these folks be wonders stout,
- The king and lords now this amend.
And in the next Stanza, which begins the third part of the tale, he argues that they ought not to be lords.
- Moses law forbade it tho
- That priests should no lordship welde,
- Christ’s gospel biddeth also
- That they should no lordships held:
- Ne Christ’s apostles were never so bold
- No such lordships to hem embrace,
- But smeren her sheep and keep her fold.
And so forward. Whether the bishops of England have deserved thus to be feared by men so wise as our Chaucer is esteemed; and how agreeable to our monarchy and monarchs their demeanour has been, he that is but meanly read in our chronicles needs not be instructed. Have they not been as the Canaanites, and Philistines, to this kingdom? what treasons, what revolts to the pope? what rebellions, and those the basest and most pretenceless, have they not been chief in? What could monarchy think, when Becket durst challenge the custody of Rochester-castle, and the Tower of London, as appertaining to his signory? To omit his other insolencies and affronts to regal majesty, until the lashes inflicted on the anointed body of the king, washed off the holy unction with his blood drawn by the polluted hands of bishops, abbots, and monks.
What good upholders of royalty were the bishops, when by their rebellious opposition against King John, Normandy was lost, he himself deposed, and this kingdom made over to the pope? When the bishop of Winchester durst tell the nobles, the pillars of the realm, that there were no peers in England, as in France, but that the king might do what he pleased. What could tyranny say more? It would be pretty now if I should insist upon the rendering up of Tournay by Woolsey’s treason, the excommunications, cursings, and interdicts upon the whole land; for haply I shall be cut off short by a reply, that these were the faults of men and their popish errors, not of episcopacy, that hath now renounced the pope, and is a protestant. Yes, sure; as wise and famous men have suspected and feared the protestant episcopacy in England, as those that have feared the papal.
You know, sir, what was the judgment of Padre Paolo, the great Venetian antagonist of the pope, for it is extant in the hands of many men, whereby he declares his fear, that when the hierarchy of England shall light into the hands of busy and audacious men, or shall meet with princes tractable to the prelacy, then much mischief is like to ensue. And can it be nearer hand, than when bishops shall openly affirm that, no bishop no king? A trim paradox, and that ye may know where they have been a begging for it, I will fetch you the twin brother to it out of the Jesuits’ cell: they feeling the axe of God’s reformation, hewing at the old and hollow trunk of papacy, and finding the Spaniard their surest friend, and safest refuge, to sooth him up in his dream of a fifth monarchy, and withal to uphold the decrepit papalty, have invented this superpolitic aphorism, as one terms it, one pope and one king.
Surely, there is not any prince in Christendom, who, hearing this rare sophistry, can choose but smile; and if we be not blind at home, we may Edition: current; Page: [21] as well perceive that this worthy motto, no bishop no king, is of the same batch, and infanted out of the same fears, a mere ague-cake coagulated of a certain fever they have, presaging their time to be but short: and now like those that are sinking, they catch round of that which is likeliest to hold them up; and would persuade regal power, that if they dive, he must after. But what greater debasement can there be to royal dignity, whose towering and stedfast height rests upon the unmovable foundations of justice, and heroic virtue, than to chain it in a dependance of subsisting, or ruining, to the painted battlements and gaudy rottenness of prelatry, which want but one puff of the king’s to blow them down like a pasteboard house built of court-cards? Sir, the little ado which methinks I find in untacking these pleasant sophisms, puts me into the mood to tell you a tale ere I proceed further; and Meneinus Agrippa speed us.
Upon a time the body summoned all the members to meet in the guild for the common good (as Æsop’s chronicles aver many stranger accidents:) the head by right takes the first seat, and next to it a huge and monstrous wen, little less than the head itself, growing to it by a narrow excrescency. The members, amazed, began to ask one another what he was that took place next their chief? none could resolve. Whereat the wen, though unwieldy, with much ado gets up, and bespeaks the assembly to this purpose: that as in place he was second to the head, so by due of merit; that he was to it an ornament, and strength, and of special near relation; and that if the head should fail, none were fitter than himself to step into his place: therefore he thought it for the honour of the body, that such dignities and rich endowments should be decreed him, as did adorn, and set out the noblest members. To this was answered, that it should be consulted. Then was a wise and learned philosopher sent for, that knew all the charters, laws, and tenures of the body. On him it is imposed by all, as chief committee to examine and discuss the claim and petition of right put in by the wen; who soon perceiving the matter, and wondering at the boldness of such a swoln tumor; “Wilt thou (quoth he) that art but a bottle of vicious and hardened excrements, contend with the lawful and free-born members, whose certain number is set by ancient and unrepealable statute? head thou art none, though thou receive this huge substance from it: what office bearest thou? what good canst thou show by thee done to the commonweal?” The wen not easily dashed, replies, that his office was his glory; for so oft as the soul would retire out of the head from over the steaming vapours of the lower parts to divine contemplation, with him she found the purest and quietest retreat, as being most remote from soil and disturbance. Lourdan, quoth the philosopher, thy folly is as great as thy filth: know that all the faculties of the soul are confined of old to their several vessels and ventricles, from which they cannot part without dissolution of the whole body; and that thou containest no good thing in thee, but a heap of hard and loathsome uncleanness, and art to the head a foul disfigurement and burden; when I have cut thee off, and opened thee, as by the help of these implements I will do, all men shall see.
But to return whence was digressed: seeing that the throne of a king, as the wise king Solomon often remembers us, “is established in justice,” which is the universal justice that Aristotle so much praises, containing in it all other virtues, it may assure us that the fall of prelacy, whose actions are so far distant from justice, cannot shake the least fringe that borders the royal canopy; but that their standing doth continually oppose and lay battery to regal safety, shall by that which follows easily appear. Amongst many secondary and accessary causes that support monarchy, these are not Edition: current; Page: [22] of least reckoning, though common to all other states; the love of the subjects, the multitude and valour of the people, and store of treasure. In all these things hath the kingdom been of late sore weakened, and chiefly by the prelates. First, let any man consider, that if any prince shall suffer under him a commission of authority to be exercised, till all the land groan and cry out, as against a whip of scorpions, whether this be not likely to lessen, and keel the affections of the subject. Next, what numbers of faithful and freeborn Englishmen, and good Christians, have been constrained to forsake their dearest home, their friends and kindred, whom nothing but the wide ocean, and the savage deserts of America, could hide and shelter from the fury of the bishops? O sir, if we could but see the shape of our dear mother England, as poets are wont to give a personal form to what they please, how would she appear, think ye, but in a mourning weed, with ashes upon her head, and tears abundantly flowing from her eyes to behold so many of her children exposed at once, and thrust from things of dearest necessity, because their conscience could not assent to things which the bishops thought indifferent? What more binding than conscience? What more free than indifferency? Cruel then must that indifferency needs be, that shall violate the strict necessity of conscience; merciless and inhuman that free choice and liberty that shall break asunder the bonds of religion! Let the astrologer be dismayed at the portentous blaze of comets, and impressions in the air, as foretelling troubles and changes to states: I shall believe there cannot be a more ill-boding sign to a nation (God turn the omen from us!) than when the inhabitants, to avoid insufferable grievances at home, are enforced by heaps to forsake their native country. Now, whereas the only remedy and amends against the depopulation and thinness of a land within, is the borrowed strength of firm alliance from without, these priestly policies of theirs, having thus exhausted our domestic forces, have gone the way also to leave us as naked of our firmest and faithfullest neighbours abroad, by disparaging and alienating from us all protestant princes and commonwealths; who are not ignorant that our prelates, and as many as they can infect, account them no better than a sort of sacrilegious and puritanical rebels, preferring the Spaniard our deadly enemy before them, and set all orthodox writers at nought in comparison with the Jesuits, who are indeed the only corrupters of youth and good learning: and I have heard many wise and learned men in Italy say as much. It cannot be that the strongest knot of confederacy should not daily slacken, when religion, which is the chief engagement of our league, shall be turned to their reproach. Hence it is that the prosperous and prudent states of the United Provinces, (whom we ought to love, if not for themselves, yet for our own good work in them, they having been in a manner planted and erected by us, and having been since to us the faithful watchmen and discoverers of many a popish and Austrian complotted treason, and with us the partners of many a bloody and victorious battle,) whom the similitude of manners and language, the commodity of traffic, which founded the old Burgundian league betwixt us, but chiefly religion, should bind to us immortally; even such friends as these, out of some principles instilled into us by the prelates, have been often dismissed with distasteful answers, and sometimes unfriendly actions: nor is it to be considered to the breach of confederate nations, whose mutual interests is of such consequence, though their merchants bicker in the East Indies; neither is it safe, or wary, or indeed Christianly, that the French king, of a different faith, should afford our nearest allies as good protection as we. Sir, I persuade myself, if our zeal to true religion, and the brotherly usage of our truest friends, Edition: current; Page: [23] were as notorious to the world, as our prelatical schism, and captivity to rochet apophthegms, we had ere this seen our old conquerors, and afterwards liegemen the Normans, together with the Britons our proper colony, and all the Gascoins that are the rightful dowry of our ancient kings, come with cap and knee, desiring the shadow of the English sceptre to defend them from the hot persecutions and taxes of the French. But when they come hither, and see a tympany of Spaniolized bishops swaggering in the foretop of the state, and meddling to turn and dandle the royal ball with unskilful and pedantic palms, no marvel though they think it as unsafe to commit religion and liberty to their arbitrating as to a synagogue of Jesuits.
But what do I stand reckoning upon advantages and gains lost by the misrule and turbulency of the prelates? What do I pick up so thriftly their scatterings and diminishings of the meaner subject, whilst they by their seditious practices have endangered to lose the king one third of his main stock? What have they not done to banish him from his own native country? But to speak of this as it ought, would ask a volume by itself.
Thus as they have unpeopled the kingdom by expulsion of so many thousands, as they have endeavoured to lay the skirts of it bare by disheartening and dishonouring our loyalest confederates abroad, so have they hamstrung the valour of the subject by seeking to effeminate us all at home. Well knows every wise nation, that their liberty consists in manly and honest labours, in sobriety and rigorous honour to the marriage-bed, which in both sexes should be bred up from chaste hopes to loyal enjoyments; and when the people slacken, and fall to looseness and riot, then do they as much as if they laid down their necks for some wild tyrant to get up and ride. Thus learnt Cyrus to tame the Lydians, whom by arms he could not whilst they kept themselves from luxury; with one easy proclamation to set up stews, dancing, feasting, and dicing, he made them soon his slaves. I know not what drift the prelates had, whose brokers they were to prepare, and supple us either for a foreign invasion or domestic oppression: but this I am sure, they took the ready way to despoil us both of manhood and grace at once, and that in the shamefullest and ungodliest manner, upon that day which God’s law, and even our own reason hath consecrated, that we might have one day at least of seven set apart wherein to examine and increase our knowledge of God, to meditate and commune of our faith, our hope, our eternal city in heaven, and to quicken withal the study and exercise of charity; at such a time that men should be plucked from their soberest and saddest thoughts, and by bishops, the pretended fathers of the church, instigated by public edict, and with earnest endeavour pushed forward to gaming, jigging, wassailing, and mixed dancing, is a horror to think! Thus did the reprobate hireling priest Balaam seek to subdue the Israelites to Moab, if not by force, then by this devilish policy, to draw them from the sanctuary of God to the luxurious and ribald feasts of Baal-peor. Thus have they trespassed not only against the monarchy of England, but of heaven also, as others, I doubt not, can prosecute against them.
I proceed within my own bounds to show you next what good agents they are about the revenues and riches of the kingdom, which declare of what moment they are to monarchy, or what avail. Two leeches they have that still suck, and suck the kingdom, their ceremonies and their courts. If any man will contend that ceremonies be lawful under the gospel, he may be answered other where. This doubtless, that they ought to be many and overcostly, no true protestant will affirm. Now I appeal to all wise men, what an excessive waste of treasure hath been within these few years in this land, not in the expedient, but in the idolatrous erection of temples Edition: current; Page: [24] beautified exquisitely to outvie the papists, the costly and dear-bought scandals and snares of images, pictures, rich copes, gorgeous altar-cloths: and by the courses they took, and the opinions they held, it was not likely any stay would be, or any end of their madness, where a pious pretext is so ready at hand to cover their insatiate desires. What can we suppose this will come to? What other materials than these have built up the spiritual Babel to the height of her abominations? Believe it, sir, right truly it may be said, that Antichrist is Mammon’s son. The sour leaven of human traditions, mixed in one putrefied mass with the poisonous dregs of hypocrisy in the hearts of prelates, that lie basking in the sunny warmth of wealth and promotion, is the serpent’s egg that will hatch an Antichrist wheresoever, and engender the same monster as big, or little, as the lump is which breeds him. If the splendour of gold and silver begin to lord it once again in the church of England, we shall see Antichrist shortly wallow here, though his chief kennel be at Rome. If they had one thought upon God’s glory, and the advancement of Christian faith, they would be a means that with these expenses, thus profusely thrown away in trash, rather churches and schools might be built, where they cry out for want; and more added where too few are; a moderate maintenance distributed to every painful minister, that now scarce sustains his family with bread, while the prelates revel like Belshazzar with their full carouses in goblets, and vessels of gold snatched from God’s temple; which (I hope) the worthy men of our land will consider. Now then for their courts. What a mass of money is drawn from the veins into the ulcers of the kingdom this way; their extortions, their open corruptions, the multitude of hungry and ravenous harpies that swarm about their offices, declare sufficiently. And what though all this go not over sea? It were better it did: better a penurious kingdom, than where excessive wealth flows into the graceless and injurious hands of common spunges, to the impoverishing of good and loyal men, and that by such execrable, such irreligious courses.
If the sacred and dreadful works of holy discipline, censure, penance, excommunication, and absolution, where no profane thing ought to have access, nothing to be assistant but sage and Christianly admonition, brotherly love, flaming charity and zeal; and then, according to the effects, paternal sorrow, or paternal joy, mild severity, melting compassion: if such divine ministeries as these, wherein the angel of the church represents the person of Christ Jesus, must lie prostitute to sordid fees, and not pass to and fro between our Saviour, that of free grace redeemed us, and the submissive penitent, without the truckage of perishing coin, and the butcherly execution of tormentors, rooks, and rakeshames sold to lucre; then have the Babylonish merchants of souls just excuse. Hitherto, sir, you have heard how the prelates have weakened and withdrawn the external accomplishments of kingly prosperity, the love of the people, their multitude, their valour, their wealth; mining and sapping the outworks and redoubts of monarchy. Now hear how they strike at the very heart and vitals.
We know that monarchy is made up of two parts, the liberty of the subject, and the supremacy of the king. I begin at the root. See what gentle and benign fathers they have been to our liberty! Their trade being, by the same alchymy that the pope uses to extract heaps of gold and silver out of the drossy bullion of the people’s sins, and justly fearing that the quicksighted protestant eye, cleared in great part from the mist of superstition, may at one time or other look with a good judgment into these their deceitful pedlaries; to gain as many associates of guiltiness as they can, and to infect the temporal magistrate with the like lawless, though not sacrilegious Edition: current; Page: [25] extortion, see awhile what they do; they engage themselves to preach, and persuade an assertion for truth the most false, and to this monarchy the most pernicious and destructive that could be chosen. What more baneful to monarchy than a popular commotion, for the dissolution of monarchy slides aptest into a democracy; and what stirs the Englishmen, as our wisest writers have observed, sooner to rebellion, than violent and heavy hands upon their goods and purses? Yet these devout prelates, spite of our great charter, and the souls of our progenitors that wrested their liberties out of the Norman gripe with their dearest blood and highest prowess, for these many years have not ceased in their pulpits wrenching and spraining the text, to set at naught and trample under foot all the most sacred and lifeblood laws, statutes, and acts of parliament, that are the holy covenant of union and marriage between the king and his realm, by proscribing and confiscating from us all the right we have to our own bodies, goods, and liberties. What is this but to blow a trumpet, and proclaim a firecross to an hereditary and perpetual civil war? Thus much against the subjects’ liberty hath been assaulted by them. Now how they have spared supremacy, or are likely hereafter to submit to it, remains lastly to be considered.
The emulation that under the old law was in the king towards the priest, is now so come about in the gospel, that all the danger is to be feared from the priest to the king. Whilst the priest’s office in the law was set out with an exterior lustre of pomp and glory, kings were ambitious to be priests; now priests, not perceiving the heavenly brightness and inward splendour of their more glorious evangelic ministry, with as great ambition affect to be kings, as in all their courses is easy to be observed. Their eyes ever eminent upon worldly matters, their desires ever thirsting after worldly employments, instead of diligent and fervent study in the Bible, they covet to be expert in canons and decretals, which may enable them to judge and interpose in temporal causes, however pretended ecclesiastical. Do they not hoard up pelf, seek to be potent in secular strength, in state affairs, in lands, lordships, and domains; to sway and carry all before them in high courts and privy councils; to bring into their grasp the high and principal offices of the kingdom? Have they not been told of late to check the common law, to slight and brave the indiminishable majesty of our highest court, the lawgiving and sacred parliament? Do they not plainly labour to exempt churchmen from the magistrate? Yea, so presumptuously as to question and menace officers that represent the king’s person for using their authority against drunken priests? The cause of protecting murderous clergymen was the first heartburning that swelled up the audacious Becket to the pestilent and odious vexation of Henry the Second. Nay, more, have not some of their devoted scholars begun, I need not say to nibble, but openly to argue against the king’s supremacy? Is not the chief of them accused out of his own book, and his late canons, to affect a certain unquestionable patriarchate, independent, and unsubordinate to the crown? From whence having first brought us to a servile state of religion and manhood, and having predisposed his conditions with the pope, that lays claim to this land, or some Pepin of his own creating, it were all as likely for him to aspire to the monarchy among us, as that the pope could find means so on the sudden both to bereave the emperor of the Roman territory with the favour of Italy, and by an unexpected friend out of France, while he was in danger to lose his newgot purchase, beyond hope to leap into the fair exarchate of Ravenna.
A good while the pope subtly acted the lamb, writing to the emperor, “my lord Tiberius, my lord Mauritius;” but no sooner did this his lord Edition: current; Page: [26] pluck at the images and idols, but he threw off his sheep’s clothing, and started up a wolf, laying his paws upon the emperor’s right, as forfeited to Peter. Why may not we as well, having been forewarned at home by our renowned Chaucer, and from abroad by the great and learned Padre Paolo, from the like beginnings, as we see they are, fear the like events? Certainly a wise and provident king ought to suspect a hierarchy in his realm, being ever attended, as it is, with two such greedy purveyors, ambition and usurpation; I say, he ought to suspect a hierarchy to be as dangerous and derogatory from his crown as a tetrachy or a heptarchy. Yet now that the prelates had almost attained to what their insolent and unbridled minds had hurried them; to thrust the laity under the despotical rule of the monarch, that they themselves might confine the monarch to a kind of pupillage under their hierarchy, observe but how their own principles combat one another, and supplant each one his fellow.
Having fitted us only for peace, and that a servile peace, by lessening our numbers, draining our estates, enfeebling our bodies, cowing our free spirits by those ways as you have heard, their impotent actions cannot sustain themselves the least moment, unless they would rouse us up to a war fit for Cain to be the leader of; an abhorred, a cursed, a fraternal war. England and Scotland, dearest brothers both in nature and in Christ, must be set to wade in one another’s blood; and Ireland, our free denizen, upon the back of us both, as occasion should serve: a piece of service that the pope and all his factors have been compassing to do ever since the reformation.
But ever blessed be he, and ever glorified, that from his high watchtower in the heavens, discerning the crooked ways of perverse and cruel men, hath hitherto maimed and infatuated all their damnable inventions, and deluded their great wizards with a delusion fit for fools and children: had God been so minded, he could have sent a spirit of mutiny amongst us, as he did between Abimelech and the Shechemites, to have made our funerals, and slain heaps more in number than the miserable surviving remnant; but he, when we least deserved, sent out a gentle gale and message of peace from the wings of those his cherubims that fan his mercyseat. Nor shall the wisdom, the moderation, the Christian piety, the constancy of our nobility and commons of England, be ever forgotten, whose calm and temperate connivance could sit still and smile out the stormy bluster of men more audacious and precipitant than of solid and deep reach, until their own fury had run itself out of breath, assailing by rash and heady approaches the impregnable situation of our liberty and safety, that laughed such weak enginery to scorn, such poor drifts to make a national war of a surplice brabble, a tippet scuffle, and engage the untainted honour of English knighthood to unfurl the streaming red cross, or to rear the horrid standard of those fatal guly dragons, for so unworthy a purpose as to force upon their fellow-subjects that which themselves are weary of—the skeleton of a mass-book. Nor must the patience, the fortitude, the firm obedience of the nobles and people of Scotland, striving against manifold provocations; nor must their sincere and moderate proceedings hitherto be unremembered, to the shameful conviction of all their detractors.
Go on both hand in hand, O nations, never to be disunited; be the praise and the heroic song of all posterity; merit this, but seek only virtue, not to extend your limits; (for what needs to win a fading triumphant laurel out of the tears of wretched men?) but to settle the pure worship of God in his church, and justice in the state: then shall the hardest difficulties smooth out themselves before ye; envy shall sink to hell, craft and malice be confounded, Edition: current; Page: [27] whether it be homebred mischief or outlandish cunning; yea, other nations will then covet to serve ye, for lordship and victory are but the pages of justice and virtue. Commit securely to true wisdom the vanquishing and uncasing of craft and subtlety, which are but her two runagates: join your invincible might to do worthy and godlike deeds; and then he that seeks to break your union, a cleaving curse be his inheritance to all generations.
Sir, you have now at length this question for the time, and as my memory would best serve me in such a copious and vast theme, fully handled, and you yourself may judge whether prelacy be the only church-government agreeable to monarchy. Seeing therefore the perilous and confused state into which we are fallen, and that to the certain knowledge of all men, through the irreligious pride and hateful tyranny of prelates, (as the innumerable and grievous complaints of every shire cry out,) if we will now resolve to settle affairs either according to pure religion or sound policy, we must first of all begin roundly to cashier and cut away from the public body the noisome and diseased tumour of prelacy, and come from schism to unity with our neighbour reformed sister-churches, which with the blessing of peace and pure doctrine have now long time flourished; and doubtless with all hearty joy and gratulation will meet and welcome our Christian union with them, as they have been all this while grieved at our strangeness, and little better than separation from them. And for the discipline propounded, seeing that it hath been inevitably proved that the natural and fundamental causes of political happiness in all governments are the same, and that this church-discipline is taught in the word of God, and, as we see, agrees according to wish with all such states as have received it; we may infallibly assure ourselves that it will as well agree with monarchy, though all the tribe of Aphorismers and Politicasters would persuade us there be secret and mysterious reasons against it. For upon the settling hereof mark what nourishing and cordial restorements to the state will follow; the ministers of the gospel attending only to the work of salvation, every one within his limited charge, besides the diffusive blessings of God upon all our actions; the king shall sit without an old disturber, a daily incroacher and intruder; shall rid his kingdom of a strong, sequestered, and collateral power, a confronting mitre, whose potent wealth and wakeful ambition he had just cause to hold in jealousy: not to repeat the other present evils which only their removal will remove, and because things simply pure are inconsistent in the mass of nature, nor are the elements or humours in a man’s body exactly homogeneal; and hence the best-founded commonwealths and least barbarous have aimed at a certain mixture and temperament, partaking the several virtues of each other state, that each part drawing to itself may keep up a steady and even uprightness in common.
There is no civil government that hath been known, no not the Spartan, not the Roman, though both for this respect so much praised by the wise Polybius, more divinely and harmoniously tuned, more equally balanced as it were by the hand and scale of justice than is the commonwealth of England; where, under a free and untutored monarch, the noblest, worthiest, and most prudent men, with full approbation and suffrage of the people, have in their power the supreme and final determination of highest affairs. Now if conformity of church-discipline to the civil be so desired, there can be nothing more parallel, more uniform, than when under the sovereign prince, Christ’s vicegerent, using the sceptre of David, according to God’s law, the godliest, the wisest, the learnedest ministers in their several charges have the instructing and disciplining of God’s people, by whose full and Edition: current; Page: [28] free election they are consecrated to that holy and equal aristocracy. And why should not the piety and conscience of Englishmen, as members of the church, be trusted in the election of pastors to functions that nothing concern a monarch, as well as their worldly wisdoms are privileged as members of the state in suffraging their knights and burgesses to matters that concern him nearly? And if in weighing these several offices, their difference in time and quality be cast in, I know they will not turn the beam of equal judgment the moiety of a scruple. We therefore having already a kind of apostolical and ancient church election in our state, what a perverseness would it be in us of all others to retain forcibly a kind of imperious and stately election in our church! And what a blindness to think that what is already evangelical, as it were by a happy chance in our polity, should be repugnant to that which is the same by divine command in the ministry! Thus then we see that our ecclesiastical and political choices may consent and sort as well together without any rupture in the state, as Christians and freeholders. But as for honour, that ought indeed to be different and distinct, as either office looks a several way; the minister whose calling and end is spiritual, ought to be honoured as a father and physician to the soul, (if he be found to be so,) with a son-like and disciple-like reverence, which is indeed the dearest and most affectionate honour, most to be desired by a wise man, and such as will easily command a free and plentiful provision of outward necessaries, without his further care of this world.
The magistrate, whose charge is to see to our persons and estates, is to be honoured with a more elaborate and personal courtship, with large salaries and stipends, that he himself may abound in those things whereof his legal justice and watchful care gives us the quiet enjoyment. And this distinction of honour will bring forth a seemly and graceful uniformity over all the kingdom.
Then shall the nobles possess all the dignities and offices of temporal honour to themselves, sole lords without the improper mixture of scholastic and pusillanimous upstarts; the parliament shall void her upper house of the same annoyances; the common and civil laws shall both be set free, the former from the control, the other from the mere vassalage and copyhold of the clergy.
And whereas temporal laws rather punish men when they have transgressed, than form them to be such as should transgress seldomest, we may conceive great hopes, through the showers of divine benediction watering the unmolested and watchful pains of the ministry, that the whole inheritance of God will grow up so straight and blameless, that the civil magistrate may with far less toil and difficulty, and far more ease and delight, steer the tall and goodly vessel of the commonwealth through all the gusts and tides of the world’s mutability.
Here I might have ended, but that some objections, which I have heard commonly flying about, press me to the endeavour of an answer. We must not run, they say, into sudden extremes. This is a fallacious rule, unless understood only of the actions of virtue about things indifferent: for if it be found that those two extremes be vice and virtue, falsehood and truth, the creater extremity of virtue and superlative truth we run into, the more virtuous and the more wise we become; and he that, flying from degenerate and traditional corrupation, fears to shoot himself too far into the meeting embraces of a divinely warranted reformation, had better not have run at all. And for the suddenness, it cannot be feared. Who should oppose it? The papists? they dare not. The protestants otherwise affected? they were mad. There is nothing will be removed but what to them is professedly indifferent. Edition: current; Page: [29] The long affection which the people have borne to it, what for itself, what for the odiousness of prelates, is evident: from the first year of Queen Elizabeth it hath still been more and more propounded, desired, and beseeched, yea, sometimes favourably forwarded by the parliaments themselves. Yet if it were sudden and swift, provided still it be from worse to better, certainly we ought to hie us from evil like a torrent, and rid ourselves of corrupt discipline, as we would shake fire out of our bosoms.
Speedy and vehement were the reformations of all the good kings of Judah, though the people had been nuzzled in idolatry ever so long before; they feared not the bugbear danger, nor the lion in the way that the sluggish and timorous politician thinks he sees; no more did our brethren of the reformed churches abroad; they ventured (God being their guide) out of rigid popery, into that which we in mockery call precise puritanism, and yet we see no inconvenience befel them.
Let us not dally with God when he offers us a full blessing, to take as much of it as we think will serve our ends, and turn him back the rest upon his hands, lest in his anger he snatch all from us again. Next, they allege the antiquity of episcopacy through all ages. What it was in the apostles’ time, that, questionless, it must be still; and therein I trust the ministers will be able to satisfy the parliament. But if episcopacy be taken for prelacy, all the ages they can deduce it through, will make it no more venerable than papacy.
Most certain it is (as all our stories bear witness) that ever since their coming to the see of Canterbury, for near twelve hundred years, to speak of them in general, they have been in England to our souls a sad and doleful succession of illiterate and blind guides; to our purses and goods a wasteful band of robbers, a perpetual havoc and rapine; to our state a continual hydra of mischief and molestation, the forge of discord and rebellion: this is the trophy of their antiquity, and boasted succession through so many ages. And for those prelate-martyrs they glory of, they are to be judged what they were by the gospel, and not the gospel to be tried by them.
And it is to be noted, that if they were for bishoprics and ceremonies, it was in their prosperity and fulness of bread; but in their persecution, which purified them, and near their death, which was their garland, they plainly disliked and condemned the ceremonies, and threw away those episcopal ornaments wherein they were installed, as foolish and detestable; for so the words of Ridley at his degradement, and his letter to Hooper, expressly show. Neither doth the author of our church-history spare to record sadly the fall (for so he terms it) and infirmities of these martyrs, though we would deify them. And why should their martyrdom more countenance corrupt doctrine or discipline, than their subscriptions justify their treason to the royal blood of this realm, by diverting and entailing the right of the crown from the true heirs, to the houses of Northumberland and Suffolk? which had it took effect, this present king had in all likelihood never sat on this throne, and the happy union of this island had been frustrated.
Lastly, whereas they add that some, the learnedest of the reformed abroad admire our episcopacy; it had been more for the strength of the argument to tell us, that some of the wisest statesmen admire it, for thereby we might guess them weary of the present discipline, as offensive to their state, which is the bug we fear: but being they are churchmen, we may rather suspect them for some prelatizing spirits that admire our bishoprics, not episcopacy.
The next objection vanishes of itself, propounding a doubt, whether a greater inconvenience would not grow from the corruption of any other discipline than from that of episcopacy. This seems an unseasonable foresight, Edition: current; Page: [30] and out of order, to defer and put off the most needful constitution of one right discipline, while we stand balancing the discommodities of two corrupt ones. First constitute that which is right, and of itself it will discover and rectify that which swerves, and easily remedy the pretended fear of having a pope in every parish, unless we call the zealous and meek censure of the church a popedom, which whoso does, let him advise how he can reject the pastorly rod and sheephook of Christ, and those cords of love, and not fear to fall under the iron sceptre of his anger, that will dash him to pieces like a potsherd.
At another doubt of theirs I wonder—whether this discipline which we desire be such as can be put in practice within this kingdom; they say it cannot stand with the common law nor with the king’s safety, the government of episcopacy is now so weaved into the common law. In God’s name let it weave out again; let not human quillets keep back divine authority. It is not the common law, nor the civil, but piety and justice that are our foundresses; they stoop not, neither change colour for aristocracy, democracy, or monarchy, nor yet at all interrupt their just courses; but far above the taking notice of these inferior niceties, with perfect sympathy, wherever they meet, kiss each other. Lastly, they are fearful that the discipline which will succeed cannot stand with the king’s safety. Wherefore? it is but episcopacy reduced to what it should be: were it not that the tyranny of prelates under the name of bishops had made our ears tender and startling, we might call every good minister a bishop, as every bishop, yea, the apostles themselves, are called ministers, and the angels ministering spirits, and the ministers again angels. But wherein is this propounded government so shrewd? Because the government of assemblies will succeed. Did not the apostles govern the church by assemblies? How should it else be catholic? How should it have communion? We count it sacrilege to take from the rich prelates their lands and revenues, which is sacrilege in them to keep, using them as they do; and can we think it safe to defraud the living church of God of that right which God has given her in assemblies? O but the consequence! assemblies draw to them the supremacy of ecclesiastical jurisdiction. No, surely, they draw no supremacy, but that authority which Christ, and St. Paul in his name, confers upon them. The king may still retain the same supremacy in the assemblies, as in the parliament; here he can do nothing alone against the common law, and there neither alone, nor with consent, against the Scriptures. But is this all? No, this ecclesiastical supremacy draws to it the power to excommunicate kings; and then follows the worst that can be imagined. Do they hope to avoid this, by keeping prelates that have so often done it? Not to exemplify the malapert insolence of our own bishops in this kind towards our kings, I shall turn back to the primitive and pure times, which the objectors would have the rule of reformation to us.
Not an assembly, but one bishop alone, Saint Ambrose of Milan, held Theodosius, the most Christian emperor, under excommunication above eight months together, drove him from the church in the presence of his nobles; which the good emperor bore with heroic humility, and never ceased by prayers and tears, till he was absolved; for which coming to the bishop with supplication into the salutatory, some outporch of the church, he was charged by him with tyrannical madness against God, for coming into holy ground. At last, upon conditions absolved, and after great humiliation approaching to the altar to offer, (as those thrice pure times then thought meet,) he had scarce withdrawn his hand, and stood awhile, when a bold archdeacon comes in the bishop’s name, and chases him from within Edition: current; Page: [31] the rails, telling him peremptorily, that the place wherein he stood was for none but the priests to enter, or to touch; and this is another piece of pure primitive divinity! Think ye, then, our bishops will forego the power of excommunication on whomsoever? No, certainly, unless to compass sinister ends, and then revoke when they see their time. And yet this most mild, though withal dreadful and inviolable prerogative of Christ’s diadem, excommunication, serves for nothing with them, but to prog and pander for fees, or to display their pride, and sharpen their revenge, debarring men the protection of the law; and I remember not whether in some cases it bereave not men all right to their worldly goods and inheritances, besides the denial of Christian burial. But in the evangelical and reformed use of this sacred censure, no such prostitution, no such Iscariotical drifts are to be doubted, as that spiritual doom and sentence should invade worldly possession, which is the rightful lot and portion even of the wickedest men, as frankly bestowed upon them by the all-dispensing bounty as rain and sunshine. No, no, it seeks not to bereave or destroy the body; it seeks to save the soul by humbling the body, not by imprisonment, or pecuniary mulct, much less by stripes or bonds, or disinheritance, but by fatherly admonishment and Christian rebuke, to cast it into godly sorrow, whose end is joy and ingenuous bashfulness to sin: if that cannot be wrought, then as a tender mother takes her child and holds it over the pit with scaring words, that it may learn to fear where danger is; so doth excommunication as dearly and as freely, without money, use her wholesome and saving terrors: she is instant, she beseeches; by all the dear and sweet promises of salvation she entices and woos; by all the threatenings and thunders of the law, and rejected gospel, she charges, and adjures: this is all her armory, her munition, her artillery; then she awaits with long-sufferance, and yet ardent zeal. In brief, there is no act in all the errand of God’s ministers to mankind, wherein passes more loverlike contestation between Christ and the soul of a regenerate man lapsing, than before, and in, and after the sentence of excommunication. As for the fogging proctorage of money, with such an eye as struck Gehazi with leprosy, and Simon Magus with a curse; so does she look, and so threaten her fiery whip against that banking den of thieves that dare thus baffle, and buy and sell the awful and majestic wrinkles of her brow. He that is rightly and apostolically sped with her invisible arrow, if he can be at peace in his soul, and not smell within him the brimstone of hell, may have fair leave to tell all his bags over undiminished of the least farthing, may eat his dainties, drink his wine, use his delights, enjoy his lands and liberties, not the least skin raised, not the least hair misplaced, for all that excommunication has done: much more may a king enjoy his rights and prerogatives undeflowered, untouched, and be as absolute and complete a king, as all his royalties and revenues can make him. And therefore little did Theodosius fear a plot upon his empire, when he stood excommunicate by Saint Ambrose, though it were done either with much haughty pride, or ignorant zeal. But let us rather look upon the reformed churches beyond the seas, the Grizons, the Swisses, the Hollanders, the French, that have a supremacy to live under as well as we; where do the churches in all these places strive for supremacy? Where do they clash and justle supremacies with the civil magistrate? In France, a more severe monarchy than ours, the protestants, under this church-government, carry the name of the best subjects the king has; and yet presbytery, if it must be so called, does there all that it desires to do; how easy were it, if there be such great suspicion, to give no more scope to it in England! But let us not, for fear of a scarecrow, or else through hatred to be reformed, Edition: current; Page: [32] stand hankering and politizing, when God with spread hands testifies to us, and points us out the way to our peace.
Let us not be so overcredulous, unless God hath blinded us, as to trust our dear souls into the hands of men that beg so devoutly for the pride and gluttony of their own backs and bellies, that sue and solicit so eagerly, not for the saving of souls, the consideration of which can have here no place at all, but for their bishoprics, deaneries, prebends, and canonries. How can these men not be corrupt, whose very cause is the bribe of their own pleading, whose mouths cannot open without the strong breath and loud stench of avarice, simony, and sacrilege, embezzling the treasury of the church on painted and gilded walls of temples, wherein God hath testified to have no delight, warming their palace kitchens, and from thence their unctuous and epicurean paunches, with the alms of the blind, the lame, the impotent, the aged, the orphan, the widow? for with these the treasury of Christ ought to be—here must be his jewels bestowed, his rich cabinet must be emptied here; as the constant martyr Saint Lawrence taught the Roman prætor. Sir, would you know what the remonstrance of these men would have, what their petition implies? They intreat us that we would not be weary of those insupportable grievances that our shoulders have hitherto cracked under; they beseech us that we would think them fit to be our justices of peace, our lords, our highest offices of state, though they come furnished with no more experience than they learnt between the cook and the manciple, or more profoundly at the college audit, or the regent house, or to come to their deepest insight, at their patron’s table; they would request us to endure still the rustling of their silken cassocs, and that we would burst our midriffs, rather than laugh to see them under sail in all their lawn and sarcenet, their shrouds and tackle, with a geometrical rhomboides upon their heads: they would bear us in hand that we must of duty still appear before them once a year in Jerusalem, like good circumcised males and females, to be taxed by the poll, to be sconced our headmoney, our twopences, in their chandlerly shop-book of Easter. They pray us that it would please us to let them still hale us, and worry us with their bandogs and pursuivants; and that it would please the parliament that they may yet have the whipping, fleecing, and flaying of us in their diabolical courts, to tear the flesh from our bones, and into our wide wounds instead of balm, to pour in the oil of tartar, vitriol, and mercury: surely a right reasonable, innocent, and soft-hearted petition. O the relenting bowels of the fathers! Can this be granted them, unless God have smitten us with frenzy from above, and with a dazzling giddiness at noonday? Should not those men rather be heard that come to plead against their own preferments, their worldly advantages, their own abundance; for honour and obedience to God’s word, the conversion of souls, the Christian peace of the land, and union of the reformed Catholic church, the unappropriating and unmonopolizing the rewards of learning and industry, from the greasy clutch of ignorance and high feeding? We have tried already, and miserably felt what ambition, worldly glory, and immoderate wealth, can do; what the boisterous and contradictional hand of a temporal, earthly, and corporeal spirituality can avail to the edifying of Christ’s holy church; were it such a desperate hazard to put to the venture the universal votes of Christ’s congregation, and fellowly and friendly yoke of a teaching and laborious ministry, the pastorlike and apostolic imitation of meek and unlordly discipline, the gentle and benevolent mediocrity of church-maintenance, without the ignoble hucksterage of piddling tithes? Were it such an incurable mischief to make a little trial, what all this would do to the Edition: current; Page: [33] flourishing and growing up of Christ’s mystical body? as rather to use every poor shift, and if that serve not, to threaten uproar and combustion, and shake the brand of civil discord?
O, sir, I do now feel myself inwrapped on the sudden into those mazes and labyrinths of dreadful and hideous thoughts, that which way to get out, or which way to end, I know not, unless I turn mine eyes, and with your help lift up my hands to that eternal and propitious Throne, where nothing is readier than grace and refuge to the distresses of mortal suppliants: and it were a shame to leave these serious thoughts less piously than the heathen were wont to conclude their graver discourses.
Thou, therefore, that sittest in light and glory unapproachable, Parent of angels and men! next, thee I implore, omnipotent King, Redeemer of that lost remnant whose nature thou didst assume, ineffable and everlasting Love! and thou, the third subsistence of divine infinitude, illumining Spirit, the joy and solace of created things! one Tripersonal godhead! look upon this thy poor and almost spent and expiring church; leave her not thus a prey to these importunate wolves, that wait and think long till they devour thy tender flock; these wild boars that have broke into thy vineyard, and left the print of their polluting hoofs on the souls of thy servants. O let them not bring about their damned designs, that stand now at the entrance of the bottomless pit, expecting the watchword to open and let out those dreadful locusts and scorpions, to reinvolve us in that pitchy cloud of infernal darkness, where we shall never more see the sun of thy truth again, never hope for the cheerful dawn, never more hear the bird of morning sing. Be moved with pity at the afflicted state of this our shaken monarchy, that now lies labouring under her throes, and struggling against the grudges of more dreaded calamities.
O Thou, that, after the impetuous rage of five bloody inundations, and the succeeding sword of intestine war, soaking the land in her own gore, didst pity the sad and ceaseless revolution of our swift and thick-coming sorrows; when we were quite breathless, of thy free grace didst motion peace, and terms of covenant with us; and having first well nigh freed us from antichristian thraldom, didst build up this Britannic empire to a glorious and enviable height, with all her daughter-islands about her; stay us in this felicity, let not the obstinacy of our half-obedience and willworship bring forth that viper of sedition, that for these fourscore years hath been breeding to eat through the entrails of our peace; but let her cast her abortive spawn without the danger of this travailing and throbbing kingdom: that we may still remember in our solemn thanksgivings, how for us, the Northern ocean even to the frozen Thule was scattered with the proud shipwrecks of the Spanish armada, and the very maw of hell ransacked, and made to give up her concealed destruction, ere she could vent it in that horrible and damned blast.
O how much more glorious will those former deliverances appear, when we shall know them not only to have saved us from greatest miseries past, but to have reserved us for greatest happiness to come! Hitherto thou hast but freed us, and that not fully, from the unjust and tyrannous claim of thy foes; now unite us entirely, and appropriate us to thyself; tie us everlastingly in willing homage to the prerogative of thy eternal throne.
And now we know, O thou our most certain hope and defence, that thine enemies have been consulting all the sorceries of the great whore, and have joined their plots with that sad intelligencing tyrant that mischiefs the world with his mines of Ophir, and lies thirsting to revenge his naval ruins that have larded our seas: but let them all take counsel together, and Edition: current; Page: [34] let it come to nought; let them decree, and do thou cancel it; let them gather themselves, and be scattered; let them embattle themselves, and be broken; let them embattle and be broken, for thou art with us.
Then, amidst the hymns and hallelujahs of saints, some one may perhaps be heard offering at high strains in new and lofty measures, to sing and celebrate thy divine mercies and marvellous judgments in this land throughout all ages; whereby this great and warlike nation, instructed and inured to the fervent and continual practice of truth and righteousness, and casting far from her the rags of her old vices, may press on hard to that high and happy emulation to be found the soberest, wisest, and most Christian people at that day, when thou, the eternal and shortly-expected King, shalt open the clouds to judge the several kingdoms of the world, and distributing national honours and rewards to religious and just commonwealths, shalt put an end to all earthly tyrannies, proclaiming thy universal and mild monarchy through heaven and earth; where they undoubtedly, that by their labours, counsels, and prayers, have been earnest for the common good of religion and their country, shall receive above the inferior orders of the blessed, the regal addition of principalities, legions, and thrones into their glorious titles, and in supereminence of beatific vision, progressing the dateless and irrevoluble circle of eternity, shall clasp inseparable hands with joy and bliss, in overmeasure for ever.
But they contrary, that by the impairing and diminution of the true faith, the distresses and servitude of their country, aspire to high dignity, rule, and promotion here, after a shameful end in this life, (which God grant them,) shall be thrown down eternally into the darkest and deepest gulf of hell, where, under the despiteful control, the trample and spurn of all the other damned, that in the anguish of their torture, shall have no other ease than to exercise a raving and bestial tyranny over them as their slaves and negroes, they shall remain in that plight for ever, the basest, the lowermost, the most dejected, most underfoot, and downtrodden vassals of perdition.
T.261 John Milton, Of Prelatical Episcopacy (June or July, 1641).↩
This Text is available elsewhere in the OLL Collection
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date
Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.261 [1641.06] John Milton, Of Prelatical Episcopacy (June or July, 1641).
Full titleOf Prelatical Episcopacy, and whether it may be deduced from the Apostolical times by virtue of those testimonies which are alledg'd in some late treatises, one whereof goes under the name of James, Archbishop of Armagh. Printed by R. 0. & G. D. for Thomas Underhill.
Estimated date of publicationJune/July, 1641
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 23. E. 164. (19.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
(insert text of pamphlet here)
OF PRELATICAL EPISCOPACY,
AND WHETHER IT MAY BE DEDUCED FROM THE APOSTOLICAL TIMES, BY VIRTUE OF THOSE TESTIMONIES WHICH ARE ALLEGED TO THAT PURPOSE IN SOME LATE TREATISES; ONE WHEREOF GOES UNDER THE NAME OF JAMES, ARCHIBISHOP OF ARMAGH.
[first published 1641.]
Episcopacy, as it is taken for an order in the church above a presbyter, or, as we commonly name him, the minister of a congregation, is either of divine constitution or of human. If only of human, we have the same human privilege that all men have ever had since Adam, being born free, and in the mistress island of all the British, to retain this episcopacy, or to remove it, consulting with our own occasions and conveniences, and for the prevention of our own dangers and disquiets, in what best manner we can devise, without running at a loss, as we must needs in those stale and Edition: current; Page: [35] useless records of either uncertain or unsound antiquity; which, if we hold fast to the grounds of the reformed church, can neither skill of us, nor we of it, so oft as it would lead us to the broken reed of tradition. If it be of divine constitution, to satisfy us fully in that, the Scripture only is able, it being the only book left us of divine authority, not in any thing more divine than in the all-sufficiency it hath to furnish us, as with all other spiritual knowledge, so with this in particular, setting out to us a perfect man of God, accomplished to all the good works of his charge: through all which book can be nowhere, either by plain text or solid reasoning, found any difference between a bishop and a presbyter, save that they be two names to signify the same order. Notwithstanding this clearness, and that by all evidence of argument, Timothy and Titus (whom our prelates claim to imitate only in the controlling part of their office) had rather the vicegerency of an apostleship committed to them, than the ordinary charge of a bishopric, as being men of an extraordinary calling; yet to verify that which St. Paul foretold of succeeding times, when men began to have itching ears, then not contented with the plentiful and wholesome fountains of the gospel, they began after their own lusts to heap to themselves teachers, and, as if the divine Scripture wanted a supplement, and were to be eked out, they cannot think any doubt resolved, and any doctrine confirmed, unless they run to that indigested heap and fry of authors which they call antiquity. Whatsoever time, or the heedless hand of blind chance, hath drawn down from of old to this present in her huge drag-net, whether fish or sea-weed, shells or shrubs, unpicked, unchosen, those are the fathers. Seeing, therefore, some men, deeply conversant in books, have had so little care of late to give the world a better account of their reading, than by divulging needless tractates stuffed with specious names of Ignatius and Polycarpus; with fragments of old martyrologies and legends, to distract and stagger the multitude of credulous readers, and mislead them from their strong guards and places of safety, under the tuition of holy writ; it came into my thoughts to persuade myself, setting all distances and nice respects aside, that I could do religion and my country no better service for the time, than doing my utmost endeavour to recall the people of God from this vain foraging after straw, and to reduce them to their firm stations under the standard of the gospel; by making appear to them, first the insufficiency, next the inconveniency, and lastly the impiety of these gay testimonies, that their great doctors would bring them to dote on. And in performing this, I shall not strive to be more exact in method, than as their citations lead me.
First, therefore, concerning Ignatius shall be treated fully, when the author shall come to insist upon some places in his epistles. Next, to prove a succession of twenty-seven bishops from Timothy, he cites one Leontius bishop of Magnesia, out of the 11th act of the Chalcedonian council: this is but an obscure and single witness, and for his faithful dealing who shall commend him to us, with this his catalogue of bishops? What know we further of him, but that he might be as factious and false a bishop as Leontius of Antioch, that was a hundred years his predecessor? For neither the praise of his wisdom, or his virtue, hath left him memorable to posterity, but only this doubtful relation, which we must take at his word: and how shall this testimony receive credit from his word, whose very name fiad scarce been thought on but for this bare testimony? But they will say, he was a member of the council, and that may deserve to gain him credit with us. I will not stand to argue, as yet with fair allowance I might, that we may as justly suspect there were some bad and slippery Edition: current; Page: [36] men in that council, as we know there are wont to be in our convocations: nor shall I need to plead at this time, that nothing hath been more attempted, nor with more subtlety brought about, both anciently by other heretics, and modernly by papists, than to falsify the editions of the councils, of which we have none, but from our adversaries’ hands, whence canons, acts, and whole spurious councils are thrust upon us; and hard it would be to prove in all, which are legitimate, against the lawful rejection of an urgent and free disputer. But this I purpose not to take advantage of; for what avails it to wrangle about the corrupt editions of councils, whenas we know that many years ere this time, which was almost five hundred years after Christ, the councils themselves were foully corrupted with ungodly prelatism, and so far plunged into worldly ambition, as that it stood them upon long ere this to uphold their now well tasted hierarchy by what fair pretext soever they could, in like manner as they had now learned to defend many other gross corruptions by as ancient, and supposed authentic tradition as episcopacy? And what hope can we have of this whole council to warrant us a matter, four hundred years at least above their time, concerning the distinction of bishop and presbyter, whenas we find them such blind judges of things before their eyes, in their decrees of precedency between bishop and bishop, acknowledging Rome for the apostolic throne, and Peter, in that see, for the rock, the basis, and the foundation of the catholic church and faith, contrary to the interpretation of more ancient fathers? And therefore from a mistaken text, did they give to Leo, as Peter’s successor, a kind of pre-eminence above the whole council as Euagrius expresses; (for now the pope was come to that height, as to arrogate to himself by his vicars incompatible honours;) and yet having thus yielded to Rome the universal primacy, for spiritual reasons as they thought, they conclude their sitting with a carnal and ambitious decree, to give the second place of dignity to Constantinople from reason of state, because it was new Rome; and by like consequence doubtless of earthly privileges annexed to each other city, was the bishop thereof to take his place.
I may say again therefore, what hope can we have of such a council, as, beginning in the spirit, ended thus in the flesh? Much rather should we attend to what Eusebius, the ancientest writer extant of church-history, notwithstanding all the helps he had above these, confesses in the 4th chapter of his third book, That it was no easy matter to tell who were those that were left bishops of the churches by the apostles, more than by what a man might gather from the Acts of the Apostles, and the Epistles of St. Paul, in which number he reckons Timothy for bishop of Ephesus. So as may plainly appear, that this tradition of bishoping Timothy over Ephesus was but taken for granted out of that place in St. Paul, which was only an intreating him to tarry at Ephesus to do something left him in charge. Now, if Eusebius, a famous writer, thought it so difficult to tell who were appointed bishops by the apostles, much more may we think it difficult to Leontius, an obscure bishop, speaking beyond his own diocese: and certainly much more hard was it for either of them to determine what kind of bishops these were, if they had so little means to know who they were; and much less reason have we to stand to their definitive sentence, seeing they have been so rash to raise up such lofty bishops and bishoprics out of places in Scripture merely misunderstood. Thus while we leave the Bible to gad after the traditions of the ancients, we hear the ancients themselves confessing, that what knowledge they had in this point was such as they had gathered from the Bible.
Since therefore antiquity itself hath turned over the controversy to that Edition: current; Page: [37] sovereign book which we had fondly straggled from, we shall do better not to detain this venerable apparition of Leontius any longer, but dismiss him with his list of seven and twenty, to sleep unmolested in his former obscurity.
Now for the word πϱοεστὼς, it is more likely that Timothy never knew the word in that sense: it was the vanity of those next succeeding times not to content themselves with the simplicity of scripture-phrase, but must make a new lexicon to name themselves by; one will be called πϱοεστὼς, or antistes, a word of precedence; another would be termed a gnostic, as Clemens; a third sacerdos, or priest, and talks of altars; which was a plain sign that their doctrine began to change, for which they must change their expressions. But that place of Justin Martyr serves rather to convince the author, than to make for him, where the name πϱοεστὼς τῶν ἀδελφῶν, the president or pastor of the brethren, (for to what end is he their president, but to teach them?) cannot be limited to signify a prelatical bishop, but rather communicates that Greek appellation to every ordinary presbyter: for there he tells what the Christians had wont to do in their several congregations, to read and expound, to pray and administer, all which he says the πϱοεστὼς, or antistes, did. Are these the offices only of a bishop, or shall we think that every congregation where these things were done, which he attributes to this antistes, had a bishop present among them? Unless they had as many antistites as presbyters, which this place rather seems to imply; and so we may infer even from their own alleged authority, “that antistes was nothing else but presbyter.”
As for that nameless treatise of Timothy’s martyrdom, only cited by Photius that lived almost nine hundred years after Christ, it handsomely follows in that author the martyrdom of the seven sleepers, that slept (I tell you but what mine author says) three hundred and seventy and two years; for so long they had been shut up in a cave without meat, and were found living. This story of Timothy’s Ephesian bishopric, as it follows in order, so may it for truth, if it only subsist upon its own authority, as it doth; for Photius only saith he read it, he does not aver it. That other legendary piece found among the lives of the saints, and sent us from the shop of the Jesuits at Louvain, does but bear the name of Polycrates; how truly, who can tell? and shall have some more weight with us, when Polycrates can persuade us of that which he affirms in the same place of Eusebius’s fifth book, that St. John was a priest, and wore the golden breastplate: and why should he convince us more with his traditions of Timothy’s episcopacy, than he could convince Victor bishop of Rome with his traditions concerning the feast of Easter, who, not regarding his irrefragable instances of examples taken from Philip and his daughters that were prophetesses, or from Polycarpus, no nor from St. John himself, excommunicated both him, and all the Asian churches, for celebrating their Easter judaically? He may therefore go back to the seven bishops his kinsmen, and make his moan to them, that we esteem his traditional ware as lightly as Victor did.
Those of Theodoret, Felix, and John of Antioch, are authorities of later times, and therefore not to be received for their antiquity’s sake to give in evidence concerning an allegation, wherein writers, so much their elders, we see so easily miscarry. What if they had told us that Peter, who, as they say, left Ignatius bishop of Antioch, went afterwards to Rome, and was bishop there, as this Ignatius, and Irenæus and all antiquity with one mouth deliver? there be nevertheless a number of learned and wise protestants, who have written, and will maintain, that Peter’s being at Rome as bishop cannot stand with concordance of Scripture.
Edition: current; Page: [38]Now come the epistles of Ignatius to show us, first, that Onesimus was bishop of Ephesus; next, to assert the difference of bishop and presbyter: wherein I wonder that men, teachers of the protestant religion, make no more difficulty of imposing upon our belief a supposititious offspring of some dozen epistles, whereof five are rejected as spurious, containing in them heresies and trifles; which cannot agree in chronology with Ignatius, entitling him archbishop of Antioch Theopolis, which name of Theopolis that city had not till Justinian’s time, long after, as Cedrenus mentions; which argues both the barbarous time, and the unskilful fraud of him that foisted this epistle upon Ignatius. In the epistle to those of Tarsus, he condemns them for ministers of Satan, that say, “Christ is God above all.” To the Philippians, them that kept their Easter as the Asian churches, as Polycarpus did, and them that fasted upon any Saturday or Sunday, except one, he counts as those that had slain the Lord. To those of Antioch, he salutes the subdeacons, chanters, porters, and exorcists, as if these had been orders of the church in his time: those other epistles less questioned, are yet so interlarded with corruptions, as may justly endue us with a wholesome suspicion of the rest. As to the Trallians, he writes, that “a bishop hath power over all beyond all government and authority whatsoever.” Surely then no pope can desire more than Ignatius attributes to every bishop; but what will become then of the archbishops and primates, if every bishop in Ignatius’s judgment be as supreme as a pope? To the Ephesians, near the very place from whence they fetch their proof for episcopacy, there stands a line that casts an ill hue upon all the epistle; “Let no man err,” saith he; “unless a man be within the rays or enclosure of the altar, he is deprived of the bread of life.” I say not but this may be stretched to a figurative construction; but yet it has an ill look, especially being followed beneath with the mention of I know not what sacrifices. In the other epistle to Smyrna, wherein is written that “they should follow their bishop as Christ did his Father, and the presbytery as the apostles;” not to speak of the insulse, and ill laid comparison, this cited place lies upon the very brim of a noted corruption, which, had they that quote this passage ventured to let us read, all men would have readily seen what grain the testimony had been of, where it is said, “that it is not lawful without a bishop to baptize, nor to offer, nor to do sacrifice.” What can our church make of these phrases but scandalous? And but a little further he plainly falls to contradict the spirit of God in Solomon, judged by the words themselves; “My son,” saith he, “honour God and the king; but I say, honour God, and the bishop as high-priest bearing the image of God according to his ruling, and of Christ according to his priesting, and after him honour the king.” Excellent Ignatius! can ye blame the prelates for making much of this epistle? Certainly if this epistle can serve you to set a bishop above a presbyter, it may serve you next to set him above a king. These, and other like places in abundance through all those short epistles, must either be adulterate, or else Ignatius was not Ignatius, nor a martyr, but most adulterate, and corrupt himself. In the midst, therefore, of so many forgeries, where shall we fix to dare say this is Ignatius? As for his style, who knows it, so disfigured and interrupted as it is? except they think that where they meet with any thing sound, and orthodoxal, there they find Ignatius. And then they believe him not for his own authority, but for a truth’s sake, which they derive from elsewhere: to what end then should they cite him as authentic for episcopacy, when they cannot know what is authentic in him, but by the judgment which they brought with them, and not by any judgment which they might safely learn from him? How can they bring satisfaction Edition: current; Page: [39] from such an author, to whose very essence the reader must be fain to contribute his own understanding? Had God ever intended that we should have sought any part of useful instruction from Ignatius, doubtless he would not have so ill provided for our knowledge, as to send him to our hands in this broken and disjointed plight; and if he intended no such thing we do injuriously in thinking to taste better the pure evangelic manna, by seasoning our mouths with the tainted scraps and fragments of an unknown table; and searching among the verminous and polluted rags dropped overworn from the toiling shoulders of time, with these deformedly to quilt and interlace the entire, the spotless, and undecaying robe of truth, the daughter not of time, but of Heaven, only bred up here below in Christian hearts, between two grave and holy nurses, the doctrine and discipline of the gospel.
Next follows Irenæus bishop of Lyons, who is cited to affirm, that Polycarpus “was made bishop of Smyrna by the apostles;” and this, it may seem, none could better tell than he who had both seen and heard Polycarpus: but when did he hear him? Himself confesses to Florinus, when he was a boy. Whether that age in Irenæus may not be liable to many mistakings; and whether a boy may be trusted to take an exact account of the manner of a church constitution, and upon what terms, and within what limits, and with what kind of commission Polycarpus received his charge, let a man consider, ere he be credulous. It will not be denied that he might have seen Polycarpus in his youth, a man of great eminence in the church, to whom the other presbyters might give way for his virtue, wisdom, and the reverence of his age; and so did Anicetus, bishop of Rome, even in his own city, give him a kind of priority in administering the sacrament, as may be read in Eusebius: but that we should hence conclude a distinct and superior order from the young observation of Irenæus, nothing yet alleged can warrant us; unless we shall believe such as would face us down, that Calvin and, after him, Beza were bishops of Geneva, because that in the unsettled state of the church, while things were not fully composed, their worth and learning cast a greater share of business upon them, and directed men’s eyes principally towards them: and yet these men were the dissolvers of episcopacy. We see the same necessity in state affairs; Brutus, that expelled the kings out of Rome, was for the time forced to be as it were a king himself, till matters were set in order, as in a free commonwealth. He that had seen Pericles lead the Athenians which way he listed, haply would have said he had been their prince: and yet he was but a powerful and eloquent man in a democracy, and had no more at any time than a temporary and elective sway, which was in the will of the people when to abrogate. And it is most likely that in the church, they which came after these apostolic men, being less in merit, but bigger in ambition, strove to invade those privileges by intrusion and plea of right, which Polycarpus, and others like him possessed, from the voluntary surrender of men subdued by the excellency of their heavenly gifts; which because their successors had not, and so could neither have that authority, it was their policy to divulge that the eminence which Polycarpus and his equals enjoyed, was by right of constitution, not by free will of condescending. And yet thus far Irenæus makes against them, as in that very place to call Polycarpus an apostolical presbyter. But what fidelity his relations had in general, we cannot sooner learn than by Eusebius, who, near the end of his third book, speaking of Papias, a very ancient writer, one that had heard St. John, and was known to many that had seen and been acquainted with others of the apostles, but being of a shallow wit, and not understanding those traditions which he received, filled his writings Edition: current; Page: [40] with many new doctrines, and fabulous conceits: he tells us there, that “divers ecclesiastical men, and Irenæus among the rest, while they looked at his antiquity, became infected with his errors.” Now, if Irenæus was so rash as to take unexamined opinions from an author of so small capacity, when he was a man, we should be more rash ourselves to rely upon those observations which he made when he was a boy. And this may be a sufficient reason to us why we need no longer muse at the spreading of many idle traditions so soon after the apostles, while such as this Papias had the throwing them about, and the inconsiderate zeal of the next age, that heeded more the person than the doctrine, had the gathering them up. Wherever a man, who had been any way conversant with the apostles, was to be found, thither flew all the inquisitive ears, although the exercise of right instructing was changed into the curiosity of impertinent fabling: where the mind was to be edified with solid doctrine, there the fancy was soothed with solemn stories: with less fervency was studied what St. Paul or St. John had written, than was listened to one that could say, Here he taught, here he stood, this was his stature; and thus he went habited; and, O happy this house that harboured him, and that cold stone whereon he rested, this village wherein he wrought such a miracle, and that pavement bedewed with the warm effusion of his last blood, that sprouted up into eternal roses to crown his martyrdom. Thus, while all their thoughts were poured out upon circumstances, and the gazing after such men as had sat at table with the apostles, (many of which Christ hath professed, yea, though they had cast out devils in his name, he will not know at the last day,) by this means they lost their time, and truanted in the fundamental grounds of saving knowledge, as was seen shortly by their writings. Lastly, for Irenæus, we have cause to think him less judicious in his reports from hand to hand of what the apostles did, when we find him so negligent in keeping the faith which they wrote, as to say in his third book against heresies, that “the obedience of Mary was the cause of salvation to herself and all mankind;” and in his fifth book, that “as Eve was seduced to fly God, so the virgin Mary was persuaded to obey God, that the virgin Mary might be made the advocate of the virgin Eve.” Thus if Irenæus, for his nearness to the apostles, must be the patron of episcopacy to us, it is no marvel though he be the patron of idolatry to the papist, for the same cause. To the epistle of those brethren of Smyrna, that write the martyrdom of Polycarpus, and style him an apostolical and prophetical doctor, and bishop of the church of Smyrna, I could be content to give some credit for the great honour and affection which I see those brethren bear him; and not undeservedly, if it be true, which they there say, that he was a prophet, and had a voice from heaven to comfort him at his death, which they could hear, but the rest could not for the noise and tumult that was in the place; and besides, if his body were so precious to the Christians, that he was never wont to pull off his shoes for one or other that still strove to have the office, that they might come in to touch his feet; yet a light scruple or two I would gladly be resolved in: if Polycarpus (who as they say, was a prophet that never failed in what he foretold) had declared to his friends, that he knew, by vision, he should die no other death than burning, how it came to pass that the fire, when it came to proof, would not do his work, but starting off like a full sail from the mast, did but reflect a golden light upon his unviolated limbs, exhaling such a sweet odour, as if all the incense of Arabia had been burning; insomuch that when the billmen saw that the fire was overawed, and could not do the deed, one of them steps to him and stabs him with a sword, at which wound such abundance of Edition: current; Page: [41] blood gushed forth as quenched the fire. By all this relation it appears not how the fire was guilty of his death, and then how can his prophecy be fulfilled? Next, how the standers-by could be so soon weary of such a glorious sight, and such a fragrant smell, as to hasten the executioner to put out the fire with the martyr’s blood; unless perhaps they thought, as in all perfumes, that the smoke would be more odorous than the flame: yet these good brethren say he was bishop of Smyrna. No man questions it, if bishop and presbyter were anciently all one, and how does it appear by any thing in this testimony that they were not? If among his other high titles of prophetical, apostolical, and most admired of those times, he be also styled bishop of the church of Smyrna in a kind of speech, which the rhetoricans call ϰατ’ ἐξοχὴν, for his excellence sake, as being the most famous of all the Smyrnian presbyters; it cannot be proved neither from this nor that other place of Irenæus, that he was therefore in distinct and monarchical order above the other presbyters; it is more probable, that if the whole presbytery had been as renowned as he, they would have termed every one of them severally bishop of Smyrna. Hence it is, that we read sometimes of two bishops in one place; and had all the presbyters there been of like worth, we might perhaps have read of twenty.
Tertullian accosts us next, (for Polycrates hath had his answer,) whose testimony, state but the question right, is of no more force to deduce episcopacy, than the two former. He says that the church of Smyrna had Polycarpus placed there by John, and the church of Rome, Clement ordained by Peter; and so the rest of the churches did show what bishops they had received by the appointment of the apostles. None of this will be contradicted, for we have it out of the Scripture that bishops or presbyters, which were the same, were left by the apostles in every church, and they might perhaps give some special charge to Clement, or Polycarpus, or Linus, and put some special trust in them for the experience they had of their faith and constancy; it remains yet to be evinced out of this and the like places, which will never be, that the word bishop is otherwise taken, than in the language of St. Paul and The Acts, for an order above presbyters. We grant them bishops, we grant them worthy men, we grant them placed in several churches by the apostles; we grant that Irenæus and Tertullian affirm this; but that they were placed in a superior order above the presbytery, show from all these words why we should grant. It is not enough to say the apostle left this man bishop in Rome, and that other in Ephesus, but to show when they altered their own decree set down by St. Paul, and made all the presbyters underlings to one bishop. But suppose Tertullian had made an imparity where none was originally, should he move us, that goes about to prove an imparity between God the Father, and God the Son, as these words import in his book against Praxeas? “The Father is the whole substance, but the Son a derivation, and portion of the whole as he himself professes, because the Father is greater than me.” Believe him now for a faithful relater of tradition, whom you see such an unfaithful expounder of the Scripture: besides, in his time, all allowable tradition was now lost. For this same author, whom you bring to testify the ordination of Clement to the bishopric of Rome by Peter, testifies also, in the beginning of his treatise concerning chastity, that the bishop of Rome did then use to send forth his edicts by the name of Pontifex Maximus, and Episcopus Episcoporum, chief priest, and bishop of bishops: for shame then do not urge that authority to keep up a bishop, that will necessarily engage you to set up a pope. As little can your advantage be from Hegesippus, an historian of the same time, not Edition: current; Page: [42] extant but cited by Eusebius: his words are, that “in every city all things so stood in his time as the law, and the prophets, and our Lord did preach.” If they stood so, then stood not bishops above presbyters; for what our Lord and his disciples taught, God be thanked, we have no need to go learn of him: and you may as well hope to persuade us out of the same author, that James the brother of our Lord was a Nazarite, and that to him only it was lawful to enter into the holy of holies; that his food was not upon any thing that had life, fish or flesh; that he used no woollen garments, but only linen, and so as he trifles on.
If therefore the tradition of the church were now grown so ridiculous, and disconsenting from the doctrine of the apostles, even in those points which were of least moment to men’s particular ends, how well may we be assured it was much more degenerated in point of episcopacy and precedency, things which could afford such plausible pretences, such commodious traverses for ambition and avarice to lurk behind!
As for those Britain bishops which you cite, take heed, what you do; for our Britain bishops, less ancient than these, were remarkable for nothing more than their poverty, as Sulpitius Severus and Beda can remember you of examples good store.
Lastly, (for the fabulous Metaphrastes is not worth an answer,) that authority of Clemens Alexandrinus is not to be found in all his works; and wherever it be extant, it is in controversy whether it be Clement’s or no; or if it were, it says only that St. John in some places constituted bishops: questionless he did, but where does Clemens say he set them above presbyters? No man will gainsay the constitution of bishops: but the raising them to a superior and distinct order above presbyters, seeing the gospel makes them one and the same thing, a thousand such allegations as these will not give prelatical episcopacy one chapel of ease above a parish church. And thus much for this cloud I cannot say rather than petty fog of witnesses, with which episcopal men would cast a mist before us, to deduce their exalted episcopacy from apostolic times. Now, although, as all men well know, it be the wonted shift of error, and fond opinion, when they find themselves outlawed by the Bible, and forsaken of sound reason, to betake them with all speed to their old startinghole of tradition, and that wild and overgrown covert of antiquity, thinking to farm there at large room, and find good stabling, yet thus much their own deified antiquity betrays them to inform us, that tradition hath had very seldom or never the gift of persuasion; as that which church-histories report of those east and western paschalists, formerly spoken of, will declare. Who would have thought that Polycarpus on the one side could have erred in what he saw St. John do, or Anicetus bishop of Rome on the other side, in what he or some of his friends might pretend to have seen St. Peter or St. Paul do; and yet neither of these could persuade either when to keep Easter? The like frivolous contention troubled the primitive English churches, while Colmanus and Wilfride on either side deducing their opinions, the one from the undeniable example of Saint John, and the learned bishop Anatolius, and lastly the miraculous Columba, the other from Saint Peter and the Nicene council; could gain no ground each of other, till King Oswy, perceiving no likelihood of ending the controversy that way, was fain to decide it himself, good king, with that small knowledge wherewith those times had furnished him. So when those pious Greek emperors began, as Cedrenus relates, to put down monks, and abolish images, the old idolaters, finding themselves blasted, and driven back by the prevailing light of the Scripture, sent out their sturdy monks Edition: current; Page: [43] called the Abramites, to allege for images the ancient fathers Dionysius, and this our objected Irenæus: nay, they were so highflown in their antiquity, that they undertook to bring the apostles, and Luke the evangelist, yea Christ himself, from certain records that were then current, to patronize their idolatry: yet for all this the worthy emperor Theophilus, even in those dark times, chose rather to nourish himself and his people with the sincere milk of the gospel, than to drink from the mixed confluence of so many corrupt and poisonous waters, as tradition would have persuaded him to, by most ancient seeming authorities. In like manner all the reformed churches abroad, unthroning episcopacy, doubtless were not ignorant of these testimonies alleged to draw it in a line from the apostles’ days: for surely the author will not think he hath brought us now any new authorities or considerations into the world, which the reformers in other places were not advised of: and yet we see, the intercession of all these apostolic fathers could not prevail with them to alter their resolved decree of reducing into order their usurping and over-provendered episcopants; and God hath blessed their work this hundred years with a prosperous and steadfast, and still happy success. And this may serve to prove the insufficiency of these present episcopal testimonies, not only in themselves but in the account of those that ever have been the followers of truth. It will next behove us to consider the inconvenience we fall into, by using ourselves to be guided by these kind of testimonies. He that thinks it the part of a well-learned man to have read diligently the ancient stories of the church, and to be no stranger in the volumes of the fathers, shall have all judicious men consenting with him; not hereby to control, and new fangle the Scripture, God forbid! but to mark how corruption and apostasy crept in by degrees, and to gather up wherever we find the remaining sparks of original truth, wherewith to stop the mouths of our adversaries, and to bridle them with their own curb, who willingly pass by that which is orthodoxal in them, and studiously cull out that which is commentitious, and best for their turns, not weighing the fathers in the balance of Scripture, but Scripture in the balance of the fathers. If we, therefore, making first the gospel our rule and oracle, shall take the good which we light on in the fathers, and set it to oppose the evil which other men seek from them, in this way of skirmish we shall easily master all superstition and false doctrine; but if we turn this our discreet and wary usage of them into a blind devotion towards them, and whatsoever we find written by them; we both forsake our own grounds and reasons which led us at first to part from Rome, that is, to hold the Scriptures against all antiquity; we remove our cause into our adversaries’ own court, and take up there those cast principles, which will soon cause us to soder up with them again; inasmuch, as believing antiquity for itself in any one point, we bring an engagement upon ourselves of assenting to all that it charges upon us. For suppose we should now, neglecting that which is clear in Scripture, that a bishop and presbyter is all one both in name and office, and that what was done by Timothy and Titus, executing an extraordinary place, as fellow-labourers with the apostles, and of a universal charge in planting Christianity through divers regions, cannot be drawn into particular and daily example; suppose that neglecting this clearness of the text, we should, by the uncertain and corrupted writings of succeeding times, determine that bishop and presbyter are different, because we dare not deny what Ignatius, or rather the Perkin Warbeck of Ignatius, says; then must we be constrained to take upon ourselves a thousand superstitions and falsities, which the papists will prove us down in, from as good authorities, and as ancient as these Edition: current; Page: [44] that set a bishop above a presbyter. And the plain truth is, that when any of our men, of those that are wedded to antiquity, come to dispute with a papist, and leaving the Scriptures put themselves, without appeal, to the sentence of synods and councils, using in the cause of Sion the hired soldiery of revolted Israel, where they give the Romanists one buff, they receive two counterbuffs. Were it therefore but in this regard, every true bishop should be afraid to conquer in his cause by such authorities as these, which if we admit for the authority’s sake, we open a broad passage for a multitude of doctrines, that have no ground in Scripture, to break in upon us.
Lastly, I do not know, it being undeniable that there are but two ecclesiastical orders, bishops and deacons, mentioned in the gospel, how it can be less than impiety to make a demur at that, which is there so perspicuous, confronting and paralleling the sacred verity of St. Paul with the offals and sweepings of antiquity, that met as accidentally and absurdly, as Epicurus’s atoms, to patch up a Leucippean Ignatius, inclining rather to make this phantasm an expounder, or indeed a depraver of St. Paul, than St. Paul an examiner, and discoverer of this impostorship; nor caring how slightly they put off the verdict of holy text unsalved, that says plainly there be but two orders, so they maintain the reputation of their imaginary doctor that proclaims three. Certainly if Christ’s apostle have set down but two, then according to his own words, though he himself should unsay it, and not only the angel of Smyrna, but an angel from heaven, should bear us down that there be three, Saint Paul has doomed him twice, “Let him be accursed;” for Christ hath pronounced that no tittle of his word shall fall to the ground; and if one jot be alterable, it as possible that all should perish: and this shall be our righteousness, our ample warrant, and strong assurance, both now and at the last day, never to be ashamed of, against all the heaped names of angels and martyrs, councils and fathers, urged upon us, if we have given ourselves up to be taught by the pure and living precept of God’s word only; which, without more additions, nay, with a forbidding of them, hath within itself the promise of eternal life, the end of all our wearisome labours, and all our sustaining hopes. But if any shall strive to set up his ephod and teraphim of antiquity against the brightness and perfection of the gospel; let him fear lest he and his Baal be turned into Bosheth. And thus much may suffice to show, that the pretended episcopacy cannot be deduced from the apostolical times.
T.8 (10.2) [Richard Overton or John Taylor], Old Newes newly Revived (June 1641).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.8 [1641.06] (10.2) [Richard Overton or John Taylor], Old Newes newly Revived (June 1641).
Full title[Richard Overton or John Taylor], Old Newes newly Revived: or, The discovery of all occurences happened since the beginning of the Parliament : As the confusion of Patents, the Deputies death, Canterburies imprisonment, secretary Windebank, L. Finch, doctor Roane, Sir Iohn Sucklin and his associates flight, the fall of Wines, the desolation of Doctors Commons, the misery of the Papists, Judge Barckleyes imprisonment, and the ruine of Alderman Abels Monopoly. Most exactly compiled in a short discourse between Mr. Inquisitive, a countrey gentleman, and Master Intelligencer, a Newes monger.
Printed in the yeare 1641.
Estimated date of publicationJune 1641.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 18; E. 160. (22.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
(insert text of pamphlet here)
OLD NEVVES Newly Revived.
Inquisitive
HOnest Jack Intelligencer, th’art welcom home, I woonot lose so much time to aske thee how thou do’st, because thy face has already told me thou wantst money: so do I, tis a generall want, and be fitting a Gentleman; but let that passe, tell me what newes is stirring in or neere London, newes is all that I seeke: you know my humour I hope.
I doe Sir, and finde it most correspondent to your name; and because I am desirous to satisfie your humour, I leave off and abandon all superfluous salutations, and fall roundly to the matter. The first enormity the Parliament tooke into its hands, was Patents in generall.
It was very likely that it would fall to particulars in time: but what befell those Patents?
Faith though it was in the Winter, yet the owners of them were forced to leave them off, though they hazarded going over shooes, in griefe whereof they were all utterly confounded.
What? all Patents, of what nature soever?
Yes, that were pretended for the common good, but aimed at particular mens profits, as the Patents for Cards, Dice, Pins, Soap, Leather, and such like were utterly damned?
I marry Sir, the Parliament began well, heaven blesse their proceedings: how went they forward?
Then to particular persons. The next that was found a delinquent, was no lesse a man then the Earle of Strafford, he that set three Kingdomes at variance.
What, he that as he went through our Towne into Ireland, had the streets swept, and made neat for his comming, hee that paid all the Officers so bountifully? By this hand he was a most liberal man, and many say understanding.
That’s certaine; yet for all his wit he could not easily understand his owne head. Alas! he was intrapt in his policie, and constrained to lay his ambitious necke on the Traytors blocke. On my conscience young Gregory is the most famous man in all England.
What, he that had the reversion of his fathers place, the young Soule-sender, hee that fild the Dungmans Cart with Dogges which he had headed, the better to enable him to effect the reall matter; why is he so famous?
Ile tell you Sir, if the glorious acts that Hector did, made his conquest the more honourable, and Achilles by slaying him ingrost all his heroicke deeds, why should not yong Brandon be as famous for the death of him that shak’t three Kingdomes?
Come, thou art merry: but how scap’t his Compeere the Archbishop of Canterbury? it was thought that he was as deep as the other, it would bee a wonder if hee should come off with as you were, as they doe in the Artillery Garden.
Truly Sir, I am of your opinion, take my word if ever bee come into his Metropolitan house againe, and sit there his Majesties high Commissioner, discharging the new Canons, he will goe neere to blow up the little Levite that writ Lambeth Faire. But he, good man, being his life was so irregular before has now betaken himselfe to a private lodging, and in a stronger house then that o’re the water; hee is not now much troubled with signing paper Petitions, and referring them to Sir John Lamb, although he keep house continually, and never stures abroad, not to farre as into Saint Georges fields to take the aire.
I heard say, he never durst come into those fields since the up-roare at the dissolution of the last Parliament, he was afraid of the Ghost of him hee set upon the Citie gates to keep watch.
I cannot tell whether that be the reason or no, but on my conscience I thinke that honourable young Brandon will have the honour to ship his soule into Charons boat for all his father was a Clothier of Reading. As soone as ever this man of Grace was laid in Limbo Patrum, his most deare friend, and the Papists most favourable compounder, and his Majesties Secretary Sir Francis Windebank, with much pruvidence tooke a voyage into France.
Then I hope wee shall pay no more Ship-money: that same Sir Francis has been prayd for the wrong way most heartily; the Ship-money was never mentioned, but a devout imprecation was offered up for him, much good doe him with it.
Alas! he never had hand in it, it was my Lord Finch, the Lord Keeper of England, that dealt with Ship-money, and ’twas done with a most provident eye: for hee knew he should have occasion to use ships before hee died, and so he had: for he went after Mr. Secretary. Ile tell you Sir, hee was so weary with determining controversies upon the Bench, that he resolv’d hereafter to end them with the sword: he became a brother of the blade, and with a tilting feather, a flaunting periwig, Buffe doubler, scarlet hose, and sword as broad as a lath, hee looked as like a Dammee newly come out of the North, as could be imagined; and under that disguise fled most swiftly into France.
But under your favour, hee was but a Coward to flye as soone as ever he was accouterd in his marshall habiliments.
But I think him most valiant: for wisedome was ever held the better part of valour; and none but desperate fooles will run themselves upon certaine, death: and though some such there are, yet he is none of those. I am sure, that valiant men and brave Commanders followed his example, and no worse men then Sir John Sucklin, the discontented Colonell, and his associates.
Sir John Sucklin, what hee that writ admired Aglaura? the Blacke Friers Actors have a foule losse of him,
And lest the Players should grow poore,
Send them Aglauros more and more.
What he that gave the King a hundred horse against the Scotch Pedlers? is he fled for Religion too?
As sure as he fled from the Pedlers, his coat of Male would not keepe out their Bullets, though it would Sir John Digbies Rapier in the Playhouse,
I heard that he was for Portugall, and to that purpose had two or three hundred Cap and Feather men in pay, did he mistake France for Portugall?
You may see the fortune of the dice, they run what chance they please, Sir John knowes it, but theres a greater man then he gone by faire.
None of the other Iudges? Iudge Barkley is not gone, is he?
No faith, hee’s safe enough, hee’s a most fast and substantiall friend, he and Davenant the Queenes Poet doe keepe their chambers, as if they mourned for the iniquity of the times, but he that I meane is greater then any of these in bulke, tis Doctor Roane.
Why if he be gone, how fares the Civill Law, for he was the body of it.
In good faith Master Inquisitive they droope extreamely, you may walke in the Commons and be offended with no confused noise of the Proctors that prated onely for the tother fee, they will now without grudging take a ten groats fee and thanke you; theyl onely sigh out, O quantum mutatus ab illo — Termino, &c. Their Clarkes, although they are not troubled with much imployment, cannot be at leisure to redeem the gownes which they pawned in Lent Vacation: and Doctors Commons himselfe for feare lest hee should dye intestate, has made his will, and bequeath’d all his goods most equally.
Then I may presume that the High Commission is downe; the Papists I know rejoyce at it, they have paid many a fat fine, have they not?
Faith I thinke that they have rather cause to grieve, for their fines were very easie compositions, but now the Parliament has taken them in hand, and useth them far more ruggedly then the chiefe Commissioner would.
If the Parliament has taken them in hand, I prognosticate that they weare Lent in their cheekes, their Ave Maries, Creeds, Paternosters, the dropping of their Beads, their sprinkling themselves with Holy water, will scarce bee of force to entreat the Virgin Mary to command her Son to pitty them they must visit Rome, must they not?
Or Tyburne, choose them whether, as the ballad saies, they have a very bad time of it now I can assure you.
Well, let them be hang’d and they will, thou and I will goe drinke a pint of Canary.
As I live, I had almost forgot, Canary is now at sixe pence a pint in London.
At sixe pence a pint, how comes that to passe?
This blessed Parliament has pryed into Alderman Abels knavery, and has found his politicke projects out, has made a confusion of his ticket office, and laid him and his brother Kilvert in a house of stone, who shall be made exemplary.
Why then honest Jacke Intelligencer I pronounce thee welcome home, weele to the Tayerne and drink pottles in healths to this most happy Parliament.
The Deputy is dead, the Archbishop sure,
(I doe not say to dye) Judge Barkleyes cure,
If any be is casting of his coyne,
Abell and Kilvert too, that did purloine
A penny to ’em from each pint of Sacke,
If money helpe them not, their neckes must cracke;
And witty Davenant, their miseries
To terminate will write their Elegies,
And so he will his owne; they that fled
Int’ other Countries, and so sav’d their heads,
From asore aching cannot merry be,
Whilst thou and I laugh at their misery:
We can be jocound and thinke no man harme,
With joviall Sacke our duller spirits warme.
Away with sorrow, welcome sweet content,
This health Ile drink to’th blessed Parliament.
FINIS.
T.262 John Milton, Animadversions upon The Remonstrants Defence against Smectymnuus (July, 1641).↩
This Text is available elsewhere in the OLL Collection
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date
Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.262 [1641.07] John Milton, Animadversions upon The Remonstrants Defence against Smectymnuus (July, 1641).
Full titleabc
Estimated date of publicationabc
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationabc
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
ANIMADVERSIONS OPON THE REMONSTRANT’S DEFENCE AGAINST SMECTYMNUUS.
[first published 1641.]
THE PREFACE.
Although it be a certain truth, that they who undertake a religious cause need not care to be men pleasers; yet because the satisfaction of tender and mild consciences is far different from that which is called men pleasing; to satisfy such, I shall address myself in few words to give notice beforehand of something in this book, which to some men perhaps may seem offensive, that when I have rendered a lawful reason of what is done, I may trust to have saved the labour of defending or excusing hereafter. We all know that in private or personal injuries, yea, in public sufferings for the cause of Christ, his rule and example teaches us to be so far from a readiness to speak evil, as not to answer the reviler in his language, though never so much provoked: yet in the detecting and convincing of any notorious enemy to truth and his country’s peace, especially that is conceited to have a voluble and smart fluence of tongue, and in the vain confidence of that, and out of a more tenacious cling to worldly respects, stands up for all the rest to justify a long usurpation and convicted pseudepiscopy of prelates, with all their ceremonies, liturgies, and tyrannies, which God and man are now ready to explode and hiss out of the land; I suppose, and more than suppose, it will be nothing disagreeing from Christian meekness to handle such a one in a rougher accent, and to send home his haughtiness well bespurted with his own holy water. Nor to do thus are we unauthorized either Edition: current; Page: [89] from the moral precept of Solomon, to answer him thereafter that prides him in his folly; nor from the example of Christ, and all his followers in all ages, who, in the refuting of those that resisted sound doctrine, and by subtile dissimulations corrupted the minds of men, have wrought up their sealous souls into such vehemencies, as nothing could be more killingly spoken: for who can be a greater enemy to mankind, who a more dangerous deceiver, than he who, defending a traditional corruption, uses no common arts, but with a wily stratagem of yielding to the time a greater part of his cause, seeming to forego all that man’s invention hath done therein, and driven from much of his hold in Scripture; yet leaving it hanging by a twined thread, not from divine command, but from apostolical prudence or assent; as if he had the surety of some rolling trench, creeps up by this mean to his relinquished fortress of divine authority again, and still hovering between the confines of that which he dares not be openly, and that which he will not be sincerely, trains on the easy Christian insensibly within the close ambushment of worst errors, and with a sly shuffle of counterfeit principles, chopping and changing till he have gleaned all the good ones out of their minds, leaves them at last, after a slight resemblance of sweeping and garnishing, under the seven-fold possession of a desperate stupidity? And therefore they that love the souls of men, which is the dearest love, and stirs up the noblest jealousy, when they meet with such collusion, cannot be blamed though they be transported with the zeal of truth to a well-heated fervency; especially, seeing they which thus offend against the souls of their brethren, do it with delight to their great gain, ease and advancement in this world; but they that seek to discover and oppose their false trade of deceiving, do it not without a sad and unwilling anger, not without many hazards; but without all private and personal spleen, and without any thought of earthly reward, whenas this very course they take stops their hopes of ascending above a lowly and unenviable pitch in this life. And although in the serious uncasing of a grand imposture, (for to deal plainly with you, readers, prelaty is no better,) there be mixed here and there such a grim laughter, as may appear at the same time in an austere visage, it cannot be taxed of levity or insolence: for even this vein of laughing (as I could produce out of grave authors) hath ofttimes a strong and sinewy force in teaching and confuting, nor can there be a more proper object of indignation and scorn together; than a false prophet taken in the greatest, dearest, and most dangerous cheat, the cheat of souls: in the disclosing whereof, if it be harmful to be angry, and withal to cast a lowering smile, when the properest object calls for both, it will be long enough ere any be able to say why those two most rational faculties of human intellect, anger and laughter, were first seated in the breast of man. Thus much, readers, in favour of the softer spirited Christian; for other exceptioners there was no thought taken. Only if it be asked why this close and succinct manner of coping with the adversary was rather chosen, this was the reason chiefly, that the ingenuous reader, without further amusing himself in the labyrinth of controversial antiquity, may come to the speediest way to see the truth vindicated, and sophistry taken short at the first false bound. Next that the Remonstrant himself, as oft as he pleases to be frolic, and brave it with others, may find no gain of money, and may learn not to insult in so bad a cause. But now he begins.
SECTION I.
My single remonstrance is encountered with a plural adversary.
Did not your single remonstrance bring along with it a hot scent of your more than singular affection to spiritual pluralities, your singleness would be less suspected with all good Christians than it is.
Their names, persons, qualities, numbers, I care not to know.
Their names are known to the all-knowing Power above; and in the mean while, doubtless, they reck not whether you or your nomenclator know them or not.
But could they say my name is Legion, for we are many.
Wherefore should ye begin with the devil’s name, descanting upon the number of your opponents? Wherefore that conceit of Legion with a by-wipe? Was it because you would have men take notice how you esteem them, whom through all your book so bountifully you call your brethren? We had not thought that Legion could have furnished the Remonstrant with so many brethren.
My cause, ye gods would bid me meet them undismayed, &c.
Ere a foot further we must be content to hear a preambling boast of your valour, what a St. Dunstan you are to encounter Legions, either infernal or human.
My cause, ye gods.
What gods? Unless your belly, or the god of this world be he? Show us any one point of your remonstrance that does not more concern superiority, pride, ease, and the belly, than the truth and glory of God, or the salvation of souls.
My cause, ye gods, would bid me meet them undismayed, and to say with holy David, “though a host, &c.”
Do not think to persuade us of your undaunted courage, by misapplying to yourself the words of holy David; we know you fear, and are in an agony at this present, lest you should lose that superfluity of riches and honour, which your party usurp. And whosoever covets, and so earnestly labours to keep such an incumbering surcharge of earthly things, cannot but have an earthquake still in his bones. You are not armed, Remonstrant, nor any of your band; you are not dieted nor your loins girt for spiritual valour, and Christian warfare; the luggage is too great that follows your camp; your hearts are there, you march heavily: how shall we think you have not carnal fear, while we see you so subject to carnal desires?
I do gladly fly to the bar.
To the bar with him then. Gladly, you say. We believe you as gladly as your whole faction wished and longed for the assembling of this parliament, as gladly as your beneficiaries the priests came up to answer the complaints and outcries of all the shires.
The Areopagi! who were those? Truly, my masters, I had thought this had been the name of the place, not of the men.
A soar-eagle would not stoop at a fly; but sure some pedagogue stood at your elbow, and made it itch with this parlous criticism; they urged you with a decree of the sage and severe judges of Athens, and you cite them to appear for certain paragogical contempts, before a capacious pedanty of hot-livered grammarians. Mistake not the matter, courteous Remonstrant; they were not making Latin: if in dealing with an outlandish name, they thought it best not to screw the English mouth to a harsh foreign termination, Edition: current; Page: [91] so they kept the radical word, they did no more than the elegantest authors among the Greeks, Romans, and at this day the Italians, in scorn of such a servility use to do. Remember how they mangle our British names abroad; what trespass were it, if we in requital should as much neglect theirs? And our learned Chaucer did not stick to do so, writing Semyramis for Semiramis, Amphiorax for Amphiaraus, K. Sejes for K. Ceyx the husband of Alcyone, with many other names strangely metamorphosed from the true orthography, if he had made any account of that in these kind of words.
Lest the world should think the press had of late forgot to speak any language other than libellous, this honest paper hath broken through the throng.
Mince the matter while you will, it showed but green practice in the laws of discreet rhetoric to blurt upon the ears of a judicious parliament with such a presumptuous and overweening proem: but you do well to be the fewer of your own mess.
That which you miscall the preface, was a too just complaint of the shameful number of libels.
How long is it that you and the prelatical troop have been in such distaste with libels? Ask your Lysimachus Nicanor what defaming invectives have lately flown abroad against the subjects of Scotland, and our poor expulsed brethren of New England, the prelates rather applauding than showing any dislike: and this hath been ever so, insomuch that Sir Francis Bacon in one of his discourses complains of the bishops, uneven hand over these pamphlets, confining those against bishops to darkness, but licensing those against puritans to be uttered openly, though with the greater mischief of leading into contempt the exercise of religion in the persons of sundry preachers, and disgracing the higher matter in the meaner person.
A point no less essential to that proposed remonstrance.
We know where the shoe wrings you; you fret and are galled at the quick; and O what a death it is to the prelates to be thus unvisarded, thus uncased, to have the periwigs plucked off that cover your baldness, your inside nakedness thrown open to public view! The Romans had a time once every year, when their slaves might freely speak their minds; it were hard if the freeborn people of England, with whom the voice of truth for these many years, even against the proverb, hath not been heard but in corners, after all your monkish prohibitions, and expurgatorious indexes, your gags and snaffles, your proud Imprimaturs not to be obtained without the shallow surview, but not shallow hand of some mercenary, narrow-souled, and illiterate chaplain; when liberty of speaking, than which nothing is more sweet to man, was girded and strait-laced almost to a broken-winded phthisic, if now at a good time, our time of parliament, the very jubilee and resurrection of the state, if now the concealed, the aggrieved, and long persecuted truth, could not be suffered to speak; and though she burst out with some efficacy of words, could not be excused after such an injurious strangle of silence, nor avoid the censure of libelling, it were hard, it were something pinching in a kingdom of free spirit. Some princes, and great statists, have thought it a prime piece of necessary policy, to thrust themselves under disguise into a popular throng, to stand the night long under eaves of houses, and low windows, that they might hear every where the utterances of private breasts, and amongst them find out the precious gem of truth, as amongst the numberless pebbles of the shore; whereby they might be the abler to discover, and avoid, that deceitful and close-couched Edition: current; Page: [92] evil of flattery that ever attends them, and misleads them, and might skilfully know how to apply the several redresses to each malady of state, without trusting the disloyal information of parasites and sycophants: whereas now this permission of free writing, were there no good else in it, yet at some times thus licensed, is such an unripping, such an anatomy of the shyest and tenderest particular truths, as makes not only the whole nation in many points the wiser, but also presents and carries home to princes, men most remote from vulgar concourse, such a full insight of every lurking evil, or restrained good among the commons, as that they shall not need hereafter, in old cloaks and false beards, to stand to the courtesy of a nightwalking cudgeller for eaves-dropping, nor to accept quietly as a perfume, the overhead emptying of some salt lotion. Who could be angry, therefore, but those that are guilty, with these free-spoken and plain-hearted men, that are the eyes of their country, and the prospective-glasses of their prince? But these are the nettlers, these are the blabbing books that tell, though not half your fellows’ feats. You love toothless satires; let me inform you, a toothless satire is as improper as a toothed sleek-stone, and as bullish.
I beseech you, brethren, spend your logic upon your own works.
The peremptory analysis that you call it, I believe will be so hardy as once more to unpin your spruce fastidious oratory, to rumple her laces, her frizzles, and her bobbins, though she wince and fling never so peevishly.
Those verbal exceptions are but light froth and will sink alone.
O rare subtlety, beyond all that Cardan ever dreamed of! when, I beseech you, will light things sink? when will light froth sink alone? Here in your phrase, the same day that heavy plummets will swim alone. Trust this man, readers, if you please, whose divinity would reconcile England with Rome, and his philosophy make friends nature with the chaos, sine pondere habentia pondus.
That scum may be worth taking off which follows.
Spare your ladle, sir; it will be as the bishop’s foot in the broth; the scum will be found upon your own remonstrance.
I shall desire all indifferent eyes to judge, whether these men do not endeavour to cast unjust envy upon me.
Agreed.
I had said that the civil polity, as in general notion, hath sometimes varied, and that the civil came from arbitrary imposers; these gracious interpreters would needs draw my words to the present and particular government of our monarchy.
And deservedly have they done so; take up your logic else and see: civil polity, say you, hath sometimes varied, and come from arbitrary imposers; what proposition is this? Bishop Downam in his dialectics will tell you it is a general axiom, though the universal particle be not expressed, and you yourself in your defence so explain in these words as in general notion. Hence is justly inferred, he that says civil polity is arbitrary, says that the civil polity of England is arbitrary. The inference is undeniable, a thesi ad hypothesin, or from the general to the particular, an evincing argument in logic.
Brethren, whiles ye desire to seem godly, learn to be less malicious.
Remonstrant, till you have better learnt your principles of logic, take not upon you to be a doctor to others.
God bless all good men from such charity.
I never found that logical maxims were uncharitable before; yet should a jury of logicians pass upon you, you would never be saved by the book.
And our sacred monarchy from such friends.
Add, as the prelates.
If episcopacy have yoked monarchy, it is the insolence of the persons, not the fault of the calling.
It was the fault of the persons, and of no calling; we do not count prelaty a calling.
The testimony of a pope (whom these men honour highly).
That slanderous insertion was doubtless a pang of your incredible charity, the want whereof you lay so often to their charge; a kind token of your favour lapped up in a parenthesis; a piece of the clergy benevolence laid by to maintain the episcopal broil, whether the 1000 horse or no, time will discover: for certainly had those cavaliers come on to play their parts, such a ticket as this of highly honouring the pope, from the hand of a prelate, might have been of special use and safety to them that had cared for such a ransom.
And what says Antichrist?
Ask your brethren the prelates, that hold intelligence with him: ask not us. But is the pope Antichrist now? Good news! take heed you be not shent for this; for it is verily thought, that had this bill been put in against him in your last convocation, he would have been cleared by most voices.
Any thing serves against episcopacy.
See the frowardness of this man; he would persuade us, that the succession and divine right of bishopdom hath been unquestionable through all ages; yet when they bring against him kings, they were irreligious; popes, they are Antichrist. By what era of computation, through what fairy land, would the man deduce this perpetual beadroll of uncontradicted episcopacy? The pope may as well boast his ungainsaid authority to them that will believe, that all his contradicters were either irreligious or heretical.
If the bishops, saith the pope, be declared to be of divine right, they would be exempted from regal power; and if there might be this danger in those kingdoms, why is this enviously upbraided to those of ours? who do gladly profess, &c.
Because your dissevered principles were but like the mangled pieces of a gashed serpent, that now begun to close, and grow together popish again. Whatsoever you now gladly profess out of fear, we know what your drifts were when you thought yourselves secure.
It is a foul slander to charge the name of episcopacy with a faction, for the fact imputed to some few.
The more foul your faction that hath brought a harmless name into obloquy, and the fact may justly be imputed to all of ye that ought to have withstood it, and did not.
Fie, brethren! are ye the presbyters of the church of England, and dare challenge episcopacy of faction?
Yes, as oft as episcopacy dares be factious.
Had you spoken such a word in the time of holy Cyprian, what had become of you?
They had neither been haled into your Gehenna at Lambeth, nor strapadoed with an oath ex officio by your bowmen of the arches: and as for Cyprian’s time the cause was far unlike; he indeed succeeded into Edition: current; Page: [94] an episcopacy that began then to prelatize; but his personal excellence like an antidote overcame the malignity of that breeding corruption, which was then a disease that lay hid for a while under show of a full and healthy constitution, as those hydropic humours not discernible at first from a fair and juicy fleshiness of body, or that unwonted ruddy colour, which seems graceful to a cheek otherwise pale; and yet arises from evil causes, either of some inward obstruction or inflammation, and might deceive the first physicians till they had learned the sequel, which Cyprian’s days did not bring forth; and the prelatism of episcopacy, which began then to burgeon and spread, had as yet, especially in famous men, a fair, though a false imitation of flourishing.
Neither is the wrong less to make application of that which was most justly charged upon the practices and combinations of libelling separatists, whom I deservedly censured, &c.
To conclude this section, our Remonstrant we see is resolved to make good that which was formerly said of his book, that it was neither humble nor a remonstrance, and this his defence is of the same complexion. When he is constrained to mention the notorious violence of his clergy attempted on the church of Scotland, he slightly terms it a fact imputed to some few; but when he speaks of that which the parliament vouchsafes to name the city petition, “which I,” saith he, (as if the state had made him public censor,) “deservedly censured.” And how? As before for a tumultuary and underhand way of procured subscriptions, so now in his defence more bitterly, as the practices and combinations of libelling separatists, and the miszealous advocates thereof, justly to be branded for incendiaries. Whether this be for the honour of our chief city to be noted with such an infamy for a petition, which not without some of the magistrates, and great numbers of sober and considerable men, was orderly and meekly presented, although our great clerks think that these men, because they have a trade, (as Christ himself and St. Paul had,) cannot therefore attain to some good measure of knowledge, and to a reason of their actions, as well as they that spend their youth in loitering, bezzling, and harlotting, their studies in unprofitable questions and barbarous sophistry, their middle age in ambition and idleness, their old age in avarice, dotage, and diseases. And whether this reflect not with a contumely upon the parliament itself, which thought this petition worthy, not only of receiving, but of voting to a commitment, after it had been advocated, and moved for by some honourable and learned gentleman of the house, to be called a combination of libelling separatists, and the advocates thereof to be branded for incendiaries; whether this appeach not the judgment and approbation of the parliament I leave to equal arbiters.
SECTION II.
After the overflowing of your gall, you descend to liturgy and episcopacy.
The overflow being past, you cannot now in your own judgment impute any bitterness to their following discourses.
Dr. Hall, whom you name I dare say for honour’s sake.
You are a merry man, sir, and dare say much.
And why should not I speak of martyrs, as the authors and users of this holy liturgy?
As the authors! the translators, you might perhaps have said: for Edward the Sixth, as Hayward hath written in his story, will tell you upon the word of a king, that the order of the service, and the use thereof in the English tongue, is no other than the old service was, and the same words in English which were in Latin, except a few things omitted, so fond, that it had been a shame to have heard them in English; these are his words: whereby we are left uncertain who the author was, but certain that part of the work was esteemed so absurd by the translators thereof, as was to be ashamed of in English. O but the martyrs were the refiners of it, for that only is left you to say. Admit they were, they could not refine a scorpion into a fish, though they had drawn it, and rinsed it with never so cleanly cookery, which made them fall at variance among themselves about the use either of it, or the ceremonies belonging to it.
Slight you them as you please, we bless God for such patrons of our good cause.
O Benedicite! Qui color ater erat, nunc est contrarius atro. Are not these they which one of your bishops in print scornfully terms the Foxian confessors? Are not these they whose acts and monuments are not only so contemptible, but so hateful to the prelates, that their story was almost come to be a prohibited book, which for these two or three editions hath crept into the world by stealth, and at times of advantage, not without the open regret and vexation of the bishops, as many honest men that had to do in setting forth the book will justify? And now at a dead lift for your liturgies you bless God for them: out upon such hypocrisy!
As if we were bound to make good every word that falls from the mouth of every bishop.
Your faction then belike is a subtile Janus, and hath two faces: your bolder face to set forward any innovations or scandals in the church, your cautious and wary face to disavow them if they succeed not, that so the fault may not light upon the function, lest it should spoil the whole plot by giving it an irrecoverable wound. Wherefore else did you not long ago, as a good bishop should have done, disclaim and protest against them? Wherefore have you sat still, and complied and hood-winked, till the general complaints of the land have squeezed you to a wretched, cold, and hollow-hearted confession of some prelatical riots both in this and other places of your book? Nay, what if you still defend them as follows?
If a bishop have said that our liturgy hath been so wisely and charitably framed, as that the devotion of it yieldeth no cause of offence to a very pope’s ear.
O new and never heard of supererogative height of wisdom and charity in our liturgy! Is the wisdom of God or the charitable framing of God’s word otherwise inoffensive to the pope’s ear, than as he may turn it to the working of his mysterious iniquity? A little pulley would have stretched your wise and charitable frame it may be three inches further, that the devotion of it might have yielded no cause of offence to the very devil’s ear, and that had been the same wisdom and charity surmounting to the highest degree. For Antichrist we know is but the devil’s vicar, and therefore please him with your liturgy, and you please his master.
Would you think it requisite, that we should chide and quarrel when we speak to the God of peace?
Fie, no sir; but forecast our prayers so, that Satan and his instruments may take as little exception against them as may be, lest they should chide and quarrel with us.
It is no little advantage to our cause and piety, that our liturgy is taught to speak several languages for use and example.
The language of Ashdod is one of them, and that makes so many Englishmen have such a smattering of their Philistian mother. And indeed our liturgy hath run up and down the world like an English galloping nun proffering herself, but we hear of none yet that bids money for her.
As for that sharp censure of learned Mr. Calvin, it might well have been forborn by him in aliena republica.
Thus this untheological remonstrant would divide the individual catholic church into several republics: know, therefore, that every worthy pastor of the church of Christ hath universal right to admonish over all the world within the church; nor can that care be aliened from him by any distance or distinction of nation, so long as in Christ all nations and languages are as one household.
Neither would you think it could become any of our greatest divines, to meddle with his charge.
It hath ill become them indeed, to meddle so maliciously, as many of them have done, though that patient and Christian city hath borne hitherto all their profane scoffs with silence.
Our liturgy passed the judgment of no less reverend heads than his own.
It bribed their judgments with worldly engagements, and so passed it.
As for that unparalleled discourse concerning the antiquity of liturgies, I cannot help your wonder, but shall justify mine own assertion.
Your justification is but a miserable shifting off those testimonies of the ancientest fathers alleged against you, and the authority of some synodal canons which are now arrant to us. We profess to decide our controversies only by the Scriptures; but yet to repress your vain-glory, there will be voluntarily bestowed upon you a sufficient conviction of your novelties out of succeeding antiquity.
I cannot see how you will avoid your own contradiction, for I demand, is this order of praying and administration set, or no? If it be not set, how is it an order? And if it be a set order both for matter and form—
Remove that form, lest you tumble over it, while you make such haste to clap a contradiction upon others.
If the forms were merely arbitrary, to what use was the prescription of an order.
Nothing will cure this man’s understanding but some familiar and kitchen physic, which, with pardon, must for plainness’ sake be administered to him. Call hither your cook. The order of breakfast, dinner, and supper, answer me, is it set or no? Set. Is a man therefore bound in the morning to poached eggs and vinegar, or at noon to brawn or beef, or at night to fresh salmon, and French kickshose? May he not make his meals in order, though he be not bound to this or that viand? Doubtless the neat-fingered artist will answer yes, and help us out of this great controversy without more trouble. Can we not understand an order in church-assemblies of praying, reading, expounding, and administering, unless our prayers be still the same crambe of words?
What a poor exception is this, that liturgies were composed by some particular men?
It is a greater presumption in any particular men to arrogate to themselves, that which God universally gives to all his ministers. A minister Edition: current; Page: [97] that cannot be trusted to pray in his own words without being chewed to, and fescued to a formal injunction of his rote lesson, should as little be trusted to preach, besides the vain babble of praying over the same things immediately again; for there is a large difference in the repetition of some pathetical ejaculation raised out of the sudden earnestness and vigour of the inflamed soul, (such as was that of Christ in the garden,) from the continual rehearsal of our daily orisons; which if a man shall kneel down in a morning, and say over, and presently in another part of the room kneel down again, and in other words ask but still for the same things as it were out of one inventory, I cannot see how he will escape that heathenish battology of multiplying words, which Christ himself, that has the putting up of our prayers, told us would not be acceptable in heaven. Well may men of eminent gifts set forth as many forms and helps to prayer as they please; but to impose them on ministers lawfully called, and sufficiently tried, as all ought to be ere they be admitted, is a supercilious tyranny, impropriating the Spirit of God to themselves.
Do we abridge this liberty by ordaining a public form?
Your bishops have set as fair to do it as they durst for that old pharisaical fear that still dogs them, the fear of the people; though you will say you are none of those, still you would seem not to have joined with the worst, and yet keep aloof off from that which is best. I would you would either mingle, or part: most true it is what Savanarola complains, that while he endeavoured to reform the church, his greatest enemies were still these lukewarm ones.
And if the Lord’s prayer be an ordinary and stinted form, why not others?
Because there be no other Lords, that can stint with like authority.
If Justin Martyr said, that the instructor of the people prayed (as they falsely term it) “according to his ability.”
“Οση δύναμις ἀυτῷ will be so rendered to the world’s end by those that are not to learn Greek of the Remonstrant; and so Langus renders it to his face, if he could see; and this ancient father mentions no antiphonies or responsories of the people here, but the only plain acclamation of Amen.
The instructor of the people prayed according to his ability, it is true; so do ours: and yet we have a liturgy, and so had they.
A quick come-off. The ancients used pikes and targets, and therefore guns and great ordnance, because we use both.
Neither is this liberty of pouring out ourselves in our prayers ever the more impeached by a public form.
Yes, the time is taken up with a tedious number of liturgical tautologies, and impertinences.
The words of the council are full and affirmative.
Set the grave councils up upon their shelves again, and string them hard, lest their various and jangling opinions put their leaves into a flutter. I shall not intend this hot season to bid you the base through the wide and dusty champaign of the councils, but shall take counsel of that which counselled them, reason: and although I know there is an obsolete reprehension now at your tongue’s end, yet I shall be bold to say, that reason is the gift of God in one man as well as in a thousand: by that which we have tasted already of their cisterns, we may find that reason was the only thing, and not any divine command that moved them to enjoin set forms of liturgy. First, lest any thing in general might be missaid in their public prayers through ignorance, or want of care, contrary to the faith: and next, Edition: current; Page: [98] lest the Arians, and Pelagians in particular, should infect the people by their hymns, and forms of prayer. By the leave of these ancient fathers, this was no solid prevention of spreading heresy, to debar the ministers of God the use of their noblest talent, prayer in the congregation; unless they had forbid the use of sermons, and lectures too, but such as were ready made to their hands, as our homilies: or else he that was heretically disposed, had as fair an opportunity of infecting in his discourse as in his prayer or hymn. As insufficiently, and to say truth, as imprudently, did they provide by their contrived liturgies, lest any thing should be erroneously prayed through ignorance, or want of care in the ministers. For if they were careless and ignorant in their prayers, certainly they would be more careless in their preaching, and yet more careless in watching over their flock; and what prescription could reach to bound them both in these? What if reason, now illustrated by the word of God, shall be able to produce a better prevention than these councils have left us against heresy, ignorance, or want of care in the ministry, that such wisdom and diligence be used in the education of those that would be ministers, and such strict and serious examination to be undergone, ere their admission, as St. Paul to Timothy sets down at large, and then they need not carry such an unworthy suspicion over the preachers of God’s word, as to tutor their unsoundness with the *Abcie of a liturgy or to diet their ignorance, and want of care, with the limited draught of a matin, and even-song drench. All this may suffice after all their laboursome scrutiny of the councils.
Our Saviour was pleased to make use in the celebration of his last and heavenly banquet both of the fashions and words which were usual in the Jewish feasts.
What he pleased to make use of does not justify what you please to force.
The set forms of prayer at the Mincha.
We will not buy your rabbinical fumes; we have one that calls us to buy of him pure gold tried in the fire.
In the Samaritan chronicle.
As little do we esteem your Samaritan trumpery, of which people Christ himself testifies, Ye worship ye know not what.
They had their several songs.
And so have we our several psalms for several occasions without gramercy to your liturgy.
Those forms which we have under the names of Saint James, &c., though they have some insertions which are plainly spurious, yet the substance of them cannot be taxed for other than holy and ancient.
Setting aside the odd coinage of your phrase, which no mint-master of language would allow for sterling, that a thing should be taxed for no other than holy and ancient, let it be supposed the substance of them may savour of something holy or ancient, this is but the matter; the form, and the end of the thing, may yet render it either superstitious, fruitless, or impious, and so worthy to be rejected. The garments of a strumpet are often the same, materially, that clothe a chaste matron, and yet ignominious for her to wear: the substance of the tempter’s words to our Saviour were holy, but his drift nothing less.
In what sense we hold the Roman a true church, is so cleared that the iron is too hot for their fingers.
Have a care it be not the iron to sear your own conscience.
You need not doubt but that the alteration of the liturgy will be considered by wiser heads than your own.
We doubt it not, because we know your head looks to be one.
Our liturgy symbolizeth not with popish mass, neither as mass nor as popish.
A pretty slipskin conveyance to sift mass into no mass, and popish into not popish; yet saving this passing fine sophistical boulting hutch, so long as she symbolizes in form, and pranks herself in the weeds of popish mass, it may be justly feared she provokes the jealousy of God, no otherwise than a wife affecting whorish attire kindles a disturbance in the eye of her discerning husband.
If I find gold in the channel, shall I throw it away because it was ill laid?
You have forgot that gold hath been anathematized for the idolatrous use; and to eat the good creatures of God once offered to idols, is in St. Paul’s account to have fellowship with devils, and to partake of the devil’s table. And thus you throttle yourself with your own similes.
If the devils confessed the Son of God, shall I disclaim that truth?
You sifted not so clean before, but you shuffle as foully now; as if there were the like necessity of confessing Christ, and using the liturgy: we do not disclaim that truth, because we never believed it for their testimony; but we may well reject a liturgy which had no being that we can know of, but from the corruptest times: if therefore the devil should be given never so much to prayer, I should not therefore cease from that duty, because I learned it not from him; but if he would commend to me a new Pater-noster, though never so seemingly holy, he should excuse me the form which was his; but the matter, which was none of his, he could not give me, nor I be said to take it from him. It is not the goodness of matter therefore which is not, nor can be owed to the liturgy, that will bear it out, if the form, which is the essence of it, be fantastic and superstitious, the end sinister, and the imposition violent.
Had it been composed into this frame on purpose to bring papists to our churches.
To bring them to our churches? alas, what was that? unless they had been first fitted by repentance, and right instruction. You will say, the word was there preached, which is the means of conversion; you should have given so much honour then to the word preached, as to have left it to God’s working without the interloping of a liturgy baited for them to bite at.
The project had been charitable and gracious.
It was pharisaical, and vain-glorious, a greedy desire to win proselytes by conforming to them unlawfully; like the desire of Tamar, who, to raise up seed to her husband, sate in the common road drest like a courtezan, and he that came to her committed incest with her. This was that which made the old Christians paganize, while by their scandalous and base conforming to heathenism they did no more, when they had done their utmost, but bring some pagans to Christianize; for true Christians they neither were themselves, nor could make other such in this fashion.
If there be found aught in liturgy that may endanger a scandal, it is under careful hands to remove it.
Such careful hands as have shown themselves sooner bent to remove and expel the men from the scandals, than the scandals from the men, and to lose a soul rather than a syllable or a surplice.
It is idolized they say in England, they mean at Amsterdam.
Be it idolized therefore where it will, it is only idolatrized in England.
Multitudes of people they say distaste it; more shame for those that have so mistaught them.
More shame for those that regard not the troubling God’s church with things by themselves confessed to be indifferent, since true charity is afflicted, and burns at the offence of every little one. As for the Christian multitude which you affirm to be so mistaught, it is evident enough, though you would declaim never so long to the contrary, that God hath now taught them to detest your liturgy and prelacy; God who hath promised to teach all his children, and to deliver them out of your hands that hunt and worry their souls: hence is it that a man shall commonly find more savoury knowledge in one layman, than in a dozen of cathedral prelates; as we read in our Saviour’s time that the common people had a reverend esteem of him, and held him a great prophet, whilst the gowned rabbies, the incomparable and invincible doctors, were of opinion that he was a friend of Beelzebub.
If the multitude distaste wholesome doctrine, shall we, to humour them, abandon it?
Yet again! as if they were like necessity of saving doctrine, and arbitrary, if not unlawful, or inconvenient liturgy: who would have thought a man could have thwacked together so many incongruous similitudes, had it not been to defend the motley incoherence of a patched missal?
Why did not other churches conform to us? I may boldly say ours was, and is, the more noble church.
O Laodicean, how vainly and how carnally dost thou boast of nobleness and precedency! more lordly you have made our church indeed, but not more noble.
The second quære is so weak, that I wonder it could fall from the pens of wise men.
You but are a bad fencer, for you never make a proffer against another man’s weakness; but you leave your own side always open: mark what follows.
Brethren, can ye think that our reformers had any other intentions than all the other founders of liturgies, the least part of whose care was the help of the minister’s weakness?
Do you not perceive the noose you have brought yourself into, whilst you were so brief to taunt other men with weakness? Is it clean out of your mind what you cited from among the councils; that the principal scope of those liturgy-founders was to prevent either the malice or the weakness of the ministers; their malice, of infusing heresy in their forms of prayer; their weakness, lest something might be composed by them through ignorance or want of care contrary to the faith? Is it not now rather to be wondered, that such a weakness could fall from the pen of such a wise remonstrant man?
Their main drift was the help of the people’s devotion, that they knowing before the matter that should be sued for,—
A solicitous care, as if the people could be ignorant of the matter to be prayed for; seeing the heads of public prayer are either ever constant, or very frequently the same.
And the words wherewith it should be clothed, might be the more prepared, and be so much the more intent and less distracted.
As for the words, it is more to be feared lest the same continually Edition: current; Page: [101] should make them careless or sleepy, than that variety on the same known subject should distract; variety (as both music and rhetoric teacheth us) erects and rouses an auditory, like the masterful running over many chords and divisions; whereas if men should ever be thumbing the drone of one plain song, it would be a dull opiate to the most wakeful attention.
Tell me, is this liturgy good or evil?
It is evil; repair the acheloian horn of your dilemma how you can, against the next push.
If it be evil, it is unlawful to be used.
We grant you, and we find you have not your salve about you.
Were the imposition amiss, what is that to the people?
Not a little, because they bear an equal part with the priest in many places, and have their cues and verses as well as he.
The ears and hearts of our people look for a settled liturgy.
You deceive yourself in their ears and hearts; they look for no such matter.
The like answer serves for homilies, surely they were enjoined to all, &c.
Let it serve for them that will be ignorant; we know that Hayward their own creature writes, that for defect of preachers, homilies were appointed to be read in churches, while Edward VI. reigned.
Away then with the book, whilst it may be supplied with a more profitable nonsense.
Away with it rather, because it will be hardly supplied with a more unprofitable nonsense, than is in some passages of it to be seen.
SECTION III.
Thus their cavils concerning liturgy are vanished.
You wanted but hey pass, to have made your transition like a mystical man of Sturbridge. But for all your sleight of hand, our just exceptions against liturgy are not vanished; they stare you still in the face.
Certainly had I done so, I had been no less worthy to be spitten upon for my saucy uncharitableness, than they are now for their uncharitable falsehood.
We see you are in a choler, therefore, till you cool awhile we turn us to the ingenuous reader. See how this Remonstrant would invest himself conditionally with all the rheum of the town, that he might have sufficient to bespaul his brethren. They are accused by him of uncharitable falsehood, whereas their only crime hath been, that they have too credulously thought him, if not an over-logical, yet a well-meaning man; but now we find him either grossly deficient in his principles of logic, or else purposely bent to delude the parliament with equivocal sophistry, scattering among his periods ambiguous words, whose interpretation he will afterwards dispense according to his pleasure, laying before us universal propositions, and then thinks when he will to pinion them with a limitation: for say, Remonstrant,
Episcopal government is cried down abroad by either weak or factious persons.
Choose you whether you will have this proposition proved to you to be ridiculous or sophistical; for one of the two it must be. Step again to bishop Downam your patron, and let him gently catechise you in Edition: current; Page: [102] the grounds of logic; he will show you that this axiom, “episcopal government is cried down abroad by either weak or factious persons,” is as much as to say, they that cry down episcopacy abroad, are either weak or factious persons. He will tell you that this axiom contains a distribution, and that all such axioms are general; and lastly, that the distribution in which any part is wanting, or abundant, is faulty, and fallacious. If therefore distributing by the adjuncts of faction and weakness, the persons that decry episcopacy, and you made your distribution imperfect for the nonce, you cannot but be guilty of fraud intended toward the honourable court to whom you wrote. If you had rather vindicate your honesty, and suffer in your want of art you cannot condemn them of uncharitable falsehood, that attributed to you more skill than you had, thinking you had been able to have made a distribution, as it ought to be, general and full; and so any man would take it, the rather as being accompanied with that large word, (abroad,) and so take again either your manifest leasing, or manifest ignorance.
Now come these brotherly slanderers.
Go on, dissembling Joab, as still your use is, call brother and smite; call brother and smite, till it be said of you, as the like was of Herod, a man had better be your hog than your brother.
Which never came within the verge of my thoughts.
Take a metaphor or two more as good, the precinct, or the diocese of your thoughts.
Brethren, if you have any remainders of modesty or truth, cry God mercy.
Remonstrant, if you have no groundwork of logic, or plain dealing in you, learn both as fast as you can.
Of the same strain is their witty descant of my confoundedness.
Speak no more of it, it was a fatal word that God put into your mouth when you began to speak for episcopacy, as boding confusion to it.
I am still, and shall ever be thus self-confounded, as confidently to say, that he is no peaceable and right-affected son of the church of England, that doth not wish well to liturgy and episcopacy.
If this be not that saucy uncharitableness, with which, in the foregoing page, you voluntarily invested yourself, with thought to have shifted it off, let the parliament judge, who now themselves are deliberating whether liturgy and episcopacy be to be well wished to, or no.
This they say they cannot but rank amongst my notorious—speak out, masters; I would not have that word stick in your teeth or in your throat.
Take your spectacles, sir, it sticks in the paper, and was a pectoral roule we prepared for you to swallow down to your heart.
Wanton wits must have leave to play with their own stern.
A meditation of yours doubtless observed at Lambeth from one of the archiepiscopal kittens.
As for that form of episcopal government, surely could those look with my eyes, they would see cause to be ashamed of this their injurious misconceit.
We must call the barber for this wise sentence; one Mr. Ley the other day wrote a treatise of the sabbath, and his preface puts the wisdom of Balaam’s ass upon one of our bishops, bold man for his labour; but we shall have more respect to our Remonstrant, and liken him to the ass’s master, though the story say he was not so quick-sighted as his beast. Is Edition: current; Page: [103] not this Balaam the son of Beor, the man whose eyes are open, that said to the parliament, Surely, could those look with my eyes? Boast not of your eyes; it is feared you have Balaam’s disease, a pearl in your eye, Mammon’s prestriction.
Alas, we could tell you of China, Japan, Peru, Brazil, New England, Virginia, and a thousand others, that never had any bishops to this day.
O do not foil your cause thus, and trouble Ortelius; we can help you, and tell you where they have been ever since Constantine’s time at least, in a place called Mundus alter et idem, in the spacious and rich countries of Crapulia, Pamphagonia, Yuronia, and in the dukedom of Orgilia, and Variana, and their metropolis of Ucalegonium. It was an oversight that none of your prime antiquaries could think of these venerable monuments to deduce episcopacy by; knowing that Mercurius Britannicus had them forthcoming.
SECTION IV.
Hitherto they have flourished, now I hope they will strike.
His former transition was in the fair about the jugglers, now he is at the pageants among the whifflers.
As if arguments were almanacks.
You will find some such as will prognosticate your date, and tell you that, after your long summer solstice, the equator calls for you, to reduce you to the ancient and equal house of Libra.
Truly, brethren, you have not well taken the height of the pole.
No marvel; there be many more that do not take well the height of your pole; but will take better the declination of your altitude.
He that said I am the way, said that the old way was the good way.
He bids ask of the old paths, or for the old ways, where or which is the good way; which implies that all old ways are not good, but that the good way is to be searched with diligence among the old ways, which is a thing that we do in the oldest records we have, the gospel. And if others may chance to spend more time with you in canvassing later antiquity, I suppose it is not for that they ground themselves thereon; but that they endeavour by showing the corruptions, uncertainties, and disagreements of those volumes, and the easiness of erring, or overslipping in such a boundless and vast search, if they may not convince those that are so strongly persuaded thereof; yet to free ingenuous minds from an overawful esteem of those more ancient than trusty fathers, whom custom and fond opinion, weak principles, and the neglect of sounder and superior knowledge hath exalted so high as to have gained them a blind reverence; whose books in bigness and number so endless and immeasurable, I cannot think that either God or nature, either divine or human wisdom, did ever mean should be a rule or reliance to us in the decision of any weighty and positive doctrine: for certainly every rule and instrument of necessary knowledge that God hath given us, ought to be so in proportion, as may be wielded and managed by the life of man, without penning him up from the duties of human society; and such a rule and instrument of knowledge perfectly is the holy Bible. But he that shall bind himself to make antiquity Edition: current; Page: [104] his rule, if he read but part, besides the difficulty of choice, his rule is deficient, and utterly unsatisfying; for there may be other writers of another mind, which he hath not seen; and if he undertake all, the length of man’s life cannot extend to give him a full and requisite knowledge of what was done in antiquity. Why do we therefore stand worshipping and admiring this unactive and lifeless Colossus, that, like a carved giant terribly menacing to children and weaklings, lifts up his club, but strikes not, and is subject to the muting of every sparrow? If you let him rest upon his basis, he may perhaps delight the eyes of some with his huge and mountainous bulk, and the quaint workmanship of his massy limbs; but if ye go about to take him in pieces, ye mar him; and if you think, like pigmies, to turn and wind him whole as he is, besides your vain toil and sweat, he may chance to fall upon your own heads. Go, therefore, and use all your art, apply your sledges, your levers, and your iron crows, to heave and hale your mighty Polypheme of antiquity to the delusion of novices and unexperienced Christians. We shall adhere close to the Scriptures of God, which he hath left us as the just and adequate measure of truth, fitted and proportioned to the diligent study, memory, and use of every faithful man, whose every part consenting, and making up the harmonious symmetry of complete instruction, is able to set out to us a perfect man of God, or bishop thoroughly furnished to all the good works of his charge: and with this weapon, without stepping a foot further, we shall not doubt to batter and throw down your Nebuchadnezzar’s image, and crumble it like the chaff of the summer threshing-floors, as well the gold of those apostolic successors that you boast of, as your Constantinian silver, together with the iron, the brass, and the clay of those muddy and strawy ages that follow.
Let the boldest forehead of them all deny that episcopacy hath continued thus long in our island, or that any till this age contradicted it.
That bold forehead you have cleanly put upon yourself, it is you who deny that any till this age contradicted it; no forehead of ours dares do so much: you have vowed yourself fairly between the Scylla and Charybdis, either of impudence or nonsense, and now betake you to whither you please.
As for that supply of accessory strength, which I not beg.
Your whole remonstrance does nothing else but beg it, and your fellow-prelates do as good as whine to the parliament for their fleshpots of Egypt, making sad orations at the funeral of your dear prelacy, like that doughty centurion Afranius in Lucian; who, to imitate the noble Pericles in his epitaphian speech, stepping up after the battle to bewail the slain Severianus, falls into a pitiful condolement, to think of those costly suppers and drinking banquets, which he must now taste of no more; and by then he had done, lacked but little to lament the dear-loved memory and calamitous loss of his capon and white broth.
But raise and evince from the light of nature, and the rules of just policy, for the continuance of those things which long use and many laws have firmly established as necessary and beneficial.
Open your eyes to the light of grace, a better guide than nature. Look upon the mean condition of Christ and his apostles, without that accessory strength you take such pains to raise from the light of nature and policy: take divine council, “Labour not for the things that perish:” you would be the salt of the earth; if that savour be not found in you, do not think much that the time is now come to throw you out, and tread you Edition: current; Page: [105] under-foot. Hark how St. Paul, writing to Timothy, informs a true bishop; “Bishops (saith he) must not be greedy of filthy lucre; and having food and raiment, let us be therewith content: but they (saith he, meaning, more especially in that place, bishops) that will be rich, fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition: for the love of money is the root of all evil, which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith.” How can we therefore expect sound doctrine, and the solution of this our controversy from any covetous and honour-hunting bishop, that shall plead so stiffly for these things, while St. Paul thus exhorts every bishop; “But thou, O man of God, flee these things?” As for the just policy, that long use and custom, and those many laws which you say have conferred these benefits upon you; it hath been nothing else but the superstitious devotion of princes and great men that knew no better, or the base importunity of begging friars, haunting and harassing the deathbeds of men departing this life, in a blind and wretched condition of hope to merit heaven for the building of churches, cloisters, and convents. The most of your vaunted possessions, and those proud endowments that ye as sinfully waste, what are they but the black revenues of purgatory, the price of abused and murdered souls, the damned simony of Trentals, and indulgences to mortal sin? How can ye choose but inherit the curse that goes along with such a patrimony? Alas! if there be any releasement, any mitigation, or more tolerable being for the souls of our misguided ancestors; could we imagine there might be any recovery to some degree of ease left for as many of them as are lost, there cannot be a better way than to take the misbestowed wealth which they were cheated of, from these our prelates, who are the true successors of those that popped them into the other world with this conceit of meriting by their goods, which was their final undoing; and to bestow their beneficent gifts upon places and means of Christian education, and the faithful labourers in God’s harvest, that may incessantly warn the posterity of Dives, lest they come where their miserable forefather was sent by the cozenage and misleading of avaricious and worldly prelates.
It will stand long enough against the battery of their paper pellets.
That must be tried without a square cap in the council; and if pellets will not do, your own canons shall be turned against you.
They cannot name any man in this nation, that ever contradicted episcopacy, till this present age.
What an overworn and bedridden argument is this! the last refuge ever of old falsehood, and therefore a good sign, I trust, that your castle cannot hold out long. This was the plea of Judaism and idolatry against Christ and his apostles; of papacy against reformation; and perhaps to the frailty of flesh and blood in a man destitute of better enlightening may for some while be pardonable: for what has fleshly apprehension other to subsist by than succession, custom, and visibility; which only hold, if in his weakness and blindness he be loth to lose, who can blame? But in a protestant nation, that should have thrown off these tattered rudiments long ago, after the many strivings of God’s Spirit, and our fourscore years’ vexation of him in this our wilderness since reformation began, to urge these rotten principles, and twit us with the present age, which is to us an age of ages wherein God is manifestly come down among us, to do some remarkable good to our church or state; is, as if a man should tax the renovating and reingendering Spirit of God with innovation, and that new creature for an upstart novelty; yea, the new Jerusalem, which, without Edition: current; Page: [106] your admired link of succession, descends from heaven, could not escape some such like censure. If you require a further answer, it will not misbecome a Christian to be either more magnanimous or more devout than Scipio was; who, instead of other answer to the frivolous accusations of Petilius the tribune, “This day, Romans, (saith he,) I fought with Hannibal prosperously; let us all go and thank the gods, that gave us so great a victory:” in like manner will we now say, not caring otherwise to answer this unprotestantlike objection; In this age, Britons, God hath reformed his church after many hundred years of popish corruption; in this age he hath freed us from the intolerable yoke of prelates and papal discipline; in this age he hath renewed our protestation against all those yet remaining dregs of superstition. Let us all go, every true protested Briton, throughout the three kingdoms, and render thanks to God the Father of light, and Fountain of heavenly grace, and to his Son Christ our Lord, leaving this Remonstrant and his adherents to their own designs; and let us recount even here without delay, the patience and long-suffering that God hath used towards our blindness and hardness time after time. For he being equally near to his whole creation of mankind, and of free power to turn his beneficent and fatherly regard to what region or kingdom he pleases, hath yet ever had this island under the special indulgent eye of his providence; and pitying us the first of all other nations, after he had decreed to purify and renew his church that lay wallowing in idolatrous pollutions, sent first to us a healing messenger to touch softly our sores, and carry a gentle hand over our wounds: he knocked once and twice, and came again, opening our drowsy eyelids leisurely by that glimmering light, which Wickliff and his followers dispersed; and still taking off by degrees the inveterate scales from our nigh perished sight, purged also our deaf ears, and prepared them to attend his second warning trumpet in our grandsires’ days. How else could they have been able to have received the sudden assault of his reforming Spirit, warring against human principles, and carnal sense, the pride of flesh, that still cried up antiquity, custom, canons, councils, and laws; and cried down the truth for novelty, schism, profaneness, and sacrilege? whenas we that have lived so long in abundant light, besides the sunny reflection of all the neighbouring churches, have yet our hearts rivetted with these old opinions, and so obstructed and benumbed with the same fleshly reasonings, which in our forefathers soon melted and gave way, against the morning beam of reformation. If God had left undone this whole work, so contrary to flesh and blood, till these times; how should we have yielded to his heavenly call, had we been taken, as they were, in the starkness of our ignorance; that yet, after all these spiritual preparatives and purgations, have our earthly apprehensions so clammed and furred with the old leaven? O if we freeze at noon after their early thaw, let us fear lest the sun for ever hide himself, and turn his orient steps from our ingrateful horizon, justly condemned to be eternally benighted. Which dreadful judgment, O thou the ever-begotten Light and perfect image of the Father! intercede, may never come upon us, as we trust thou hast; for thou hast opened our difficult and sad times, and given us an unexpected breathing after our long oppressions: thou hast done justice upon those that tyrannized over us, while some men wavered and admired a vain shadow of wisdom in a tongue nothing slow to utter guile, though thou hast taught us to admire only that which is good, and to count that only praiseworthy, which is grounded upon thy divine precepts. Thou hast discovered the plots, and frustrated the hopes, of all the wicked in the land, and put to shame the persecutors of thy church: thou hast made our false prophets to be found a Edition: current; Page: [107] lie in the sight of all the people, and chased them with sudden confusion and amazement before the redoubled brightness of thy descending cloud, that now covers they tabernacle. Who is there that cannot trace thee now in thy beamy walk through the midst of thy sanctuary, amidst those golden candlesticks, which have long suffered a dimness amongst us through the violence of those that had seized them, and were more taken with the mention of their gold than of their starry light; teaching the doctrine of Balaam, to cast a stumbling-block before thy servants, commanding them to eat things sacrificed to idols, and forcing them to fornication? Come, therefore, O thou that hast the seven stars in thy right hand, appoint thy chosen priests according to their orders and courses of old, to minister before thee, and duly to press and pour out the consecrated oil into thy holy and everburning lamps. Thou hast sent out the spirit of prayer upon thy servants over all the land to this effect, and stirred up their vows as the sound of many waters about thy throne. Every one can say, that now certainly thou hast visited this land, and hast not forgotten the utmost corners of the earth, in a time when men had thought that thou wast gone up from us to the farthest end of the heavens, and hadst left to do marvellously among the sons of these last ages. O perfect and accomplish thy glorious acts! for men may leave their works unfinished, but thou art a God, thy nature is perfection: shouldst thou bring us thus far onward from Egypt to destroy us in this wilderness, though we deserve; yet thy great name would suffer in the rejoicing of thine enemies, and the deluded hope of all thy servants. When thou hast settled peace in the church, and righteous judgment in the kingdom, then shall all thy saints address their voices of joy and triumph to thee, standing on the shore of that Red sea into which our enemies had almost driven us. And he that now for haste snatches up a plain ungarnished present as a thank-offering to thee, which could not be deferred in regard of thy so many late deliverances wrought for us one upon another, may then perhaps take up a harp, and sing thee an elaborate song to generations. In that day it shall no more be said as in scorn, this or that was never held so till this present age, when men have better learnt that the times and seasons pass along under thy feet to go and come at thy bidding: and as thou didst dignify our fathers’ days with many revelations above all the foregoing ages, since thou tookest the flesh; so thou canst vouchsafe to us (though unworthy) as large a portion of thy Spirit as thou pleasest: for who shall prejudice thy all-governing will? seeing the power of thy grace is not passed away with the primitive times, as fond and faithless men imagine, but thy kingdom is now at hand, and thou standing at the door. Come forth out of thy royal chambers, O Prince of all the kings of the earth! put on the visible robes of thy imperial majesty, take up that unlimited sceptre which thy almighty Father hath bequeathed thee; for now the voice of thy bride calls thee, and all creatures sigh to be renewed.
SECTION V.
Neglect not the gift which was given thee by prophecy, and by laying on the hands of presbytery.
The English translation expresses the article (the,) and renders it the presbytery, which you do injury to omit.
Which I wonder ye can so press, when Calvin himself takes it of the office, and not of the men.
You think then you are fairly quit of this proof, because Calvin interprets it for you, as if we could be put off with Calvin’s name, unless we be convinced with Calvin’s reason! the word πϱισβυτίϱιον is a collective noun, signifying a certain number of men in one order, as the word privy-council with us; and so Beza interprets, that knew Calvin’s mind doubtless, with whom he lived. If any amongst us should say the privy-council ordained it, and thereby constrain us to understand one man’s authority, should we not laugh at him? And therefore when you have used all your cramping-irons to the text, and done your utmost to cram a presbytery into the skin of one person, it will be but a piece of frugal nonsense. But if your meaning be with a violent hyperbaton to transpose the text, as if the words lay thus in order, “neglect not the gift of presbytery:” this were a construction like a harquebuss shot over a file of words twelve deep, without authority to bid them stoop; or to make the word gift, like the river Mole in Surry, to run under the bottom of a long line, and so start up to govern the word presbytery, as in immediate syntaxis; a device ridiculous enough to make good that old wife’s tale of a certain queen of England that sunk at Charing-cross, and rose up at Queenhithe. No marvel though the prelates be a troublesome generation, and, which way soever they turn them, put all things into a foul discomposure, when to maintain their domineering, they seek thus to rout and disarray the wise and well-couched order of Saint Paul’s own words, using either a certain textual riot to chop off the hands of the word presbytery, or else a like kind of simony to clap the word gift between them. Besides, if the verse must be read according to this transposition, μή ἀμέλει τ[Editor: illegible character] ἐν σοὶ χαϱίσματος τ[Editor: illegible character] πϱεσβυτεϱί[Editor: illegible character], it would be improper to call ordination χάϱισμα, whenas it is rather only χείϱιασμα, an outward testimony of approbation; unless they will make it a sacrament as the papists do: but surely the prelates would have Saint Paul’s words ramp one over another, as they use to climb into their livings and bishoprics.
Neither need we give any other satisfaction to the point, than from St. Paul himself, 2 Timothy, i. 6, “Stir up the gift of God which is in thee by the imposition of my hands;” mine, and not others.
Ye are too quick; this last place is to be understood by the former; as the law of method, which bears chief sway in the art of teaching, requires, that clearest and plainest expressions be set foremost, to the end they may enlighten any following obscurity; and wherefore we should not attribute a right method to the teachableness of Scripture, there can be no reason given: to which method, if we shall now go contrary, besides the breaking of a logical rule, which the Remonstrant hitherto we see hath made little account of, we shall also put a manifest violence and impropriety upon a known word against his common signification, in binding a collective to a singular person. But if we shall, as logic (or indeed reason) instructs us, expound the latter place by the former cited, and understand “by the imposition of my hands,” that is, of mine chiefly as an apostle, with the joint authority and assistance of the presbytery, there is nothing more ordinary or kindly in speech, than such a phrase as expresses only the chief in any action, and understands the rest. So that the imposition of Saint Paul’s hands, without more expression in this place, cannot exclude the joint act of the presbytery affirmed by the former text.
In the meanwhile see, brethren, how you have with Simon fished all night, and caught nothing.
If we fishing with Simon the apostle can catch nothing, see what you can catch with Simon Magus; for all his hooks and fishing implements he bequeathed among you.
SECTION XIII.
We do again profess, that if our bishops challenge any other power than was delegated to and required of Timothy and Titus, we shall yield them usurpers.
Ye cannot compare an ordinary bishop with Timothy, who was an extraordinary man, foretold and promised to the church by many prophecies, and his name joined as collateral with Saint Paul, in most of his apostolic epistles, even where he writes to the bishops of other churches, as those in Philippi. Nor can you prove out of the Scripture that Timothy was bishop of any particular place; for that wherein it is said in the third verse of the first epistle, “As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus,” will be such a gloss to prove the constitution of a bishop by, as would not only be not so good as a Bourdeaux gloss, but scarce be received to varnish a vizard of Modona. All that can be gathered out of holy writ concerning Timothy is, that he was either an apostle, or an apostle’s extraordinary vice-gerent, not confined to the charge of any place. The like may be said of Titus, (as those words import in the 5th verse,) that he was for that cause left in Crete, that he might supply or proceed to set in order that which St. Paul in apostolic manner had begun, for which he had his particular commission, as those words sound “as I had appointed thee.” So that what he did in Crete, cannot so much be thought the exercise of an ordinary function, as the direction of an inspired mouth. No less may be gathered from the 2 Cor. viii. 23.
You descend to the angels of the seven Asian churches; your shift is, that the word angel is here taken collectively, not individually.
That the word is collective, appears plainly, Revel. ii.
First, Because the text itself expounds it so; for having spoken all the while as to the angel, the seventh verse concludes, that this was spoken to the churches. Now if the Spirit conclude collectively, and kept the same tenor all the way, for we see not where he particularizes; then certainly he must begin collectively, else the construction can be neither grammatical nor logical.
Secondly, If the word angel be individual, then are the faults attributed to him individual: but they are such as for which God threatens to remove the candlestick out of its place, which is as much as to take away from that church the light of his truth; and we cannot think he will do so for one bishop’s fault. Therefore those faults must be understood collective, and by consequence the subject of them collective.
Thirdly, An individual cannot branch itself into sub-individuals; but this word angel doth in the tenth verse. “Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer; behold the devil shall cast some of you into prison.” And the like from other places of this and the following chapter may be observed. Therefore it is no individual word, but a collective.
Fourthly, in the 24th verse this word angel is made capable of a pronoun plural, which could not be, unless it were a collective. As for the supposed manuscript of Tecla, and two or three other copies that have expunged the copulative, we cannot prefer them before the more received reading, and we hope you will not, against the translation of your mother the church of England, that passed the revise of your chiefest prelates: besides this, you will lay an unjust censure upon the much-praised bishop of Thyatira, and reckon him among those that had the doctrine of Jezebel Edition: current; Page: [110] when the text says, he only suffered her. Whereas, if you will but let in a charitable conjunction, as we know your so much called for charity will not deny, then you plainly acquit the bishop, if you comprehend him in the name of angel, otherwise you leave his case very doubtful.
“Thou sufferest thy wife Jezebel:” was she wife to the whole company, or to one bishop alone?
Not to the whole company doubtless, for that had been worse than to have been the Levite’s wife in Gibeah: but here among all those that constantly read it otherwise, whom you trample upon, your good mother of England is down again in the throng, who with the rest reads it, ‘that woman Jezebel:’ but suppose it were wife, a man might as well interpret that word figuratively, as her name Jezebel no man doubts to be a borrowed name.
Yet what makes this for a diocesan bishop? Much every way.
No more than a special endorsement could make to puff up the foreman of a jury. If we deny you more precedence, than as the senior of any society, or deny you this priority to be longer than annual; prove you the contrary from hence, if you can. That you think to do from the title of eminence, Angel: alas, your wings are too short. It is not ordination nor jurisdiction that is angelical, but the heavenly message of the gospel, which is the office of all ministers alike; in which sense John the Baptist is called an Angel, which in Greek signifies a messenger, as oft as it is meant by a man, and might be so rendered here without treason to the hierarchy; but that the whole book soars to a prophetic pitch in types and allegories. Seeing then the reason of this borrowed name is merely to signify the preaching of the gospel, and that this preaching equally appertains to the whole ministry; hence may be drawn a fifth argument, that if the reason of this borrowed name Angel be equally collective and communicative to the whole preaching ministry of the place, then must the name be collectively and communicatively taken; but the reason, that is to say, the office, of preaching and watching over the flock, is equally collective and communicative: therefore the borrowed name itself is to be understood as equally collective and communicative to the whole preaching ministry of the place. And if you will contend still for a superiority in one person, you must ground it better than from this metaphor, which you may now deplore as the axehead that fell into the water, and say, “Alas, master for it was borrowed;” unless you have as good a faculty to make iron swim, as you had to make light froth sink.
What is, if this be not, ordination and jurisdiction?
Indeed in the constitution and founding of a church, that some men inspired from God should have an extraordinary calling to appoint, to order, and dispose, must needs be. So Moses, though himself no priest, sanctified and ordained Aaron and his sons; but when all needful things be set, and regulated by the writings of the apostles, whether it be not a mere folly to keep up a superior degree in the church only for ordination and jurisdiction, it will be no hurt to debate awhile. The apostles were the builders, and, as it were, the architects of the Christian church; wherein consisted their excellence above ordinary ministers? A prelate would say in commanding, in controlling, in appointing, in calling to them, and sending from about them, to all countries, their bishops and archbishops as their deputies, with a kind of legantine power. No, no, vain prelates; this was but as the scaffolding of a new edifice, which for the time must board and overlook the highest battlements; but if the structure once finished, Edition: current; Page: [111] any passenger should fall in love with them, and pray that they might still stand, as being a singular grace and strengthening to the house, who would otherwise think, but that the man was presently to be laid hold on, and sent to his friends and kindred? The eminence of the apostles consisted in their powerful preaching, their unwearied labouring in the word, their unquenchable charity, which, above all earthly respects, like a working flame, had spun up to such a height of pure desire, as might be thought next to that love which dwells in God to save souls; which, while they did, they were contented to be the offscouring of the world, and to expose themselves willingly to all afflictions, perfecting thereby their hope through patience to a joy unspeakable. As for ordination, what is it, but the laying on of hands, an outward sign or symbol of admission? It creates nothing, it confers nothing; it is the inward calling of God that makes a minister, and his own painful study and diligence that manures and improves his ministerial gifts. In the primitive times, many, before ever they had received ordination from the apostles, had done the church noble service, as Apollos and others. It is but an orderly form of receiving a man already fitted, and committing to him a particular charge; the employment of preaching is as holy, and far more excellent; the care also and judgment to be used in the winning of souls, which is thought to be sufficient in every worthy minister, is an ability above that which is required in ordination: for many may be able to judge who is fit to be made a minister, that would not be found fit to be made ministers themselves; as it will not be denied that he may be the competent judge of a neat picture, or elegant poem, that cannot limn the like. Why therefore we should constitute a superior order in the church to perform an office which is not only every minister’s function, but inferior also to that which he has a confessed right to; and why this superiority should remain thus usurped, some wise Epimenides tell us. Now for jurisdiction, this dear saint of the prelates, it will be best to consider, first, what it is: that sovereign Lord, who in the discharge of his holy anointment from God the Father, which made him supreme bishop of our souls, was so humble as to say, “Who made me a judge, or a divider over ye?” hath taught us that a churchman’s jurisdiction is no more but to watch over his flock in season, and out of season, to deal by sweet and efficacious instructions, gentle admonitions, and sometimes rounder reproofs: against negligence or obstinacy, will be required a rousing volley of pastorly threatenings; against a persisting stubbornness, or the fear of a reprobate sense, a timely separation from the flock by that interdictive sentence, lest his conversation unprohibited, or unbranded, might breathe a pestilential murrain into the other sheep. In sum, his jurisdiction is to see the thriving and prospering of that which he hath planted: what other work the prelates have found for chancellors and suffragans, delegates and officials, with all the hell-pestering rabble of summers and apparitors, is but an invasion upon the temporal magistrate, and affected by them as men that are not ashamed of the ensign and banner of antichrist. But true evangelical jurisdiction or discipline is no more, as was said, than for a minister to see to the thriving and prospering of that which he hath planted. And which is the worthiest work of these two, to plant as every minister’s office is equally with the bishops, or to tend that which is planted, which the blind and undiscerning prelates call jurisdiction, and would appropriate to themselves as a business of higher dignity? Have patience therefore a little, and hear a law case. A certain man of large possessions had a fair garden, and kept therein an honest and laborious servant, whose skill and profession was to set or sow all wholesome herbs and delightful flowers, according to every season, and Edition: current; Page: [112] whatever else was to be done in a well-husbanded nursery of plants and fruits. Now, when the time was come that he should cut his hedges, prune his trees, look to his tender slips, and pluck up the weeds that hindered their growth, he gets him up by break of day, and makes account to do what was needful in his garden; and who would think that any other should know better than he how the day’s work was to be spent? Yet for all this there comes another strange gardener that never knew the soil, never handled a dibble or spade to set the least potherb that grew there, much less had endured an hour’s sweat or chillness, and yet challenges as his right the binding or unbinding of every flower, the clipping of every bush, the weeding and worming of every bed, both in that and all other gardens thereabout. The honest gardener, that ever since the day-peep, till now the sun was grown somewhat rank, had wrought painfully about his banks and seedplots, at his commanding voice turns suddenly about with some wonder; and although he could have well beteemed to have thanked him of the ease he proffered, yet loving his own handywork, modestly refused him, telling him withal, that, for his part, if he had thought much of his own pains, he could for once have committed the work to one of his fellow-labourers, for as much as it is well-known to be a matter of less skill and less labour to keep a garden handsome, than it is to plant it, or contrive it, and that he had already performed himself. No, said the stranger, this is neither for you nor your fellows to meddle with, but for me only that am for this purpose in dignity far above you; and the provision which the lord of the soil allows me in this office is, and that with good reason, tenfold your wages. The gardener smiled and shook his head; but what was determined, I cannot tell you till the end of this parliament.
If in time you shall see wooden chalices, and wooden priests, thank yourselves.
It had been happy for this land, if your priests had been but only wooden; all England knows they have been to this island not wood, but wormwood, that have infected the third part of our waters, like that apostate star in the Revelation, that many souls have died of their bitterness; and if you mean by wooden, illiterate or contemptible, there was no want of that sort among you; and their number increasing daily, as their laziness, their tavern-hunting, their neglect of all sound literature, and their liking of doltish and monastical schoolmen daily increased. What, should I tell you how the universities, that men look should be fountains of learning and knowledge, have been poisoned and choked under your governance? And if to be wooden be to be base, where could there be found among all the reformed churches, nay in the church of Rome itself, a baser brood of flattering and time-serving priests? according as God pronounces by Isaiah, the prophet that teacheth lies, he is the tail. As for your young scholars, that petition for bishoprics and deaneries, to encourage them in their studies, and that many gentlemen else will not put their sons to learning; away with such young mercenary striplings, and their simoniacal fathers; God has no need of such, they have no part or lot in his vineyard: they may as well sue for nunneries, that they may have some convenient stowage for their withered daughters, because they cannot give them portions answerable to the pride and vanity they have bred them in. This is the root of all our mischief, that which they allege for the encouragement of their studies, should be cut away forewith as the very bait of pride and ambition, the very garbage that draws together all the fowls of prey and ravin in the land to come and gorge upon the church. How can it be but ever unhappy to the church of England, while she shall think to entice men to the pure Edition: current; Page: [113] service of God by the same means that were used to tempt our Saviour to the service of the devil, by laying before him honour and preferment? Fit professors indeed are they like to be, to teach others that godliness with content is great gain, whenas their godliness of teaching had not been but for worldly gain. The heathen philosophers thought that virtue was for its own sake inestimable, and the greatest gain of a teacher to make a soul virtuous; so Xenophon writes to Socrates, who never bargained with any for teaching them; he feared not lest those who had received so high a benefit from him, would not of their own free will return him all possible thanks. Was moral virtue so lovely, and so alluring, and heathen men so enamoured of her, as to teach and study her with greatest neglect and contempt of worldly profit and advancement? And is Christian piety so homely and so unpleasant, and Christian men so cloyed with her, as that none will study and teach her, but for lucre and preferment? O stale-grown piety! O gospel rated as cheap as thy Master, at thirty pence, and not worth the study, unless thou canst buy those that will sell thee! O race of Capernaïtans, senseless of divine doctrine, and capable only of loaves and bellycheer! But they will grant, perhaps, piety may thrive, but learning will decay: I would fain ask these men at whose hands they seek inferior things, as wealth, honour, their dainty fare, their lofty houses? No doubt but they will soon answer, that all these things they seek at God’s hands. Do they think then, that all these meaner and superfluous things come from God, and the divine gift of learning from the den of Plutus, or the cave of Mammon? Certainly never any clear spirit nursed up from brighter influences, with a soul enlarged to the dimensions of spacious art and high knowledge, ever entered there but with scorn, and thought it ever foul disdain to make pelf or ambition the reward of his studies; it being the greatest honour, the greatest fruit and proficiency of learned studies to despise these things. Not liberal science, but illiberal must that needs be, that mounts in contemplation merely for money. And what would it avail us to have a hireling clergy, though never so learned? For such can have neither true wisdom nor grace; and then in vain do men trust in learning, where these be wanting. If in less noble and almost mechanic arts, according to the definitions of those authors, he is not esteemed to deserve the name of a complete architect, an excellent painter, or the like, that bears not a generous mind above the peasantly regard of wages and hire; much more must we think him a most imperfect and incomplete divine, who is so far from being a contemner of filthy lucre, that his whole divinity is moulded and bred up in the beggarly and brutish hopes of a fat prebendary, deanery, or bishopric; which poor and low-pitched desires, if they do but mix with those other heavenly intentions that draw a man to this study, it is justly expected that they should bring forth a baseborn issue of divinity, like that of those imperfect and putrid creatures that receive a crawling life from two most unlike procreants, the sun and mud. And in matters of religion, there is not any thing more intolerable than a learned fool, or a learned hypocrite; the one is ever cooped up at his empty speculations, a sot, an idiot for any use that mankind can make of him, or else sowing the world with nice and idle questions, and with much toil and difficulty wading to his auditors up to the eyebrows in deep shallows that wet not the instep: a plain unlearned man that lives well by that light which he has, is better and wiser, and edifies others more towards a godly and happy life than he. The other is still using his sophisticated arts, and bending all his studies how to make his insatiate avarice and ambition seem pious and orthodoxal, by painting his lewd and deceitful principles with a smooth and glossy varnish in a Edition: current; Page: [114] doctrinal way, to bring about his wickedest purposes. Instead of the great harm therefore that these men fear upon the dissolving of prelates, what an ease and happiness will it be to us, when tempting rewards are taken away, that the cunningest and most dangerous mercenaries will cease of themselves to frequent the fold, whom otherwise scarce all the prayers of the faithful could have kept back from devouring the flock! But a true pastor of Christ’s sending hath this especial mark, that for greatest labours and greatest merits in the church, he requires either nothing, if he could so subsist, or a very common and reasonable supply of human necessaries: we cannot therefore do better than to leave this care of ours to God; he can easily send labourers into his harvest, that shall not cry, Give, give, but be contented with a moderate and beseeming allowance; nor will he suffer true learning to be wanting, where true grace and our obedience to him abounds; for if he give us to know him aright, and to practise this our knowledge in right established discipline, how much more will he replenish us with all abilities in tongues and arts, that may conduce to his glory and our good! He can stir up rich fathers to bestow exquisite education upon their children, and so dedicate them to the service of the gospel; he can make the sons of nobles his ministers, and princes to be his Nazarites; for certainly there is no employment more honourable, more worthy to take up a great spirit, more requiring a generous and free nurture, than to be the messenger and herald of heavenly truth from God to man, and, by the faithful work of holy doctrine, to procreate a number of faithful men, making a kind of creation like to God’s, by infusing his spirit and likeness into them, to their salvation, as God did into him; arising to what climate soever he turn him, like that Sun of righteousness that sent him, with healing in his wings, and new light to break in upon the chill and gloomy hearts of his hearers, raising out of darksome barrenness a delicious and fragrant spring of saving knowledge, and good works. Can a man, thus employed, find himself discontented, or dishonoured for want of admittance to have a pragmatical voice at sessions and jail deliveries? Or because he may not as a judge, sit out the wrangling noise of litigious courts to shrive the purses of unconfessing and unmortified sinners, and not their souls, or be discouraged though men call him not lord, whenas the due performance of his office would gain him, even from lords and princes, the voluntary title of father? Would he tug for a barony to sit and vote in parliament, knowing that no man can take from him the gift of wisdom and sound doctrine, which leaves him free, though not to be a member, yet a teacher and persuader of the parliament? And in all wise apprehensions, the persuasive power in man to win others to goodness by instruction is greater, and more divine, than the compulsive power to restrain men from being evil by terror of the law; and therefore Christ left Moses to be the lawgiver, but himself came down amongst us to be a teacher, with which office his heavenly wisdom was so well pleased, as that he was angry with those that would have put a piece of temporal judicature into his hands, disclaiming that he had any commission from above for such matters.
Such a high calling therefore as this, sends not for those drossy spirits that need the lure and whistle of earthly preferment, like those animals that fetch and carry for a morsel; no. She can find such as therefore study her precepts, because she teaches to despise preferment. And let not those wretched fathers think they shall impoverish the church of willing and able supply, though they keep back their sordid sperm, begotten in the lustiness of their avarice, and turn them to their malting kilns; rather let them take heed what lessons they instil into that lump of flesh which Edition: current; Page: [115] they are the cause of; lest, thinking to offer him as a present to God, they dish him out for the devil. Let the novice learn first to renounce the world, and so give himself to God, and not therefore give himself to God, that he may close the better with the world, like that false shepherd Palinode in the eclogue of May, under whom the poet lively personates our prelates, whose whole life is a recantation of their pastoral vow, and whose profession to forsake the world, as they use the matter, bogs them deeper into the world. Those our admired Spenser inveighs against, not without some presage of these reforming times:
- The time was once and may again return,
- (For oft may happen that hath been beforn,)
- When shepherds had none inheritance,
- Ne of land nor fee in sufferance,
- But what might arise of the bare sheep,
- (Were it more or less,) which they did keep.
- Well ywis was it with shepherds tho,
- Nought having, nought feared they to forego:
- For Pan himself was their inheritance,
- And little them served for their maintenance:
- The shepherds God so well them guided,
- That of nought they were unprovided.
- Butter enough, honey, milk and whey,
- And their flock fleeces them to array.
- But tract of time, and long prosperity
- (That nurse of vice, this of insolency)
- Lulled the shepherds in such security,
- That not content with loyal obeysance,
- Some gan to gape for greedy governance,
- And match themselves with mighty potentates,
- Lovers of lordships and troublers of states.
- Tho gan shepherds swains to looke aloft,
- And leave to live hard, and learne to lig soft.
- Tho under colour of shepherds some while
- There crept in wolves full of fraud and guile,
- That often devoured their own sheep,
- And often the shepherd that did them keep.
- This was the first source of shepherds sorrow,
- That now nill be quit with bale nor borrow.
By all this we may conjecture, how little we need fear that the ungilding of our prelates will prove the woodening of our priests. In the mean while let no man carry in his head either such narrow or such evil eyes, as not to look upon the churches of Belgia and Helvetia, and that envied city Geneva: where in the Christian world doth learning more flourish than in these places? Not among your beloved Jesuits, nor their favourers, though you take all the prelates into the number, and instance in what kind of learning you please. And how in England all noble sciences attending upon the train of Christian doctrine may flourish more than ever; and how the able professors of every art may with ample stipends be honestly provided; and finally, how there may be better care had that their hearers may benefit by them, and all this without the prelates; the courses are so many and so easy, that I shall pass them over.
It is God that makes the bishop, the king that gives the bishopric; what can you say to this?
What you shall not long stay for: we say it is God that makes a bishop, and the devil that makes him take a prelatical bishopric; as for the king’s gift, regal bounty may be excusable in giving, where the bishop’s covetousness is damnable in taking.
Many eminent divines of the churches abroad have earnestly wished themselves in our condition.
I cannot blame them, they were not only eminent but supereminent Edition: current; Page: [116] divines, and for stomach much like to Pompey the Great, that could endure no equal.
The Babylonian note sounds well in your ears, “Down with it, down with it, even to the ground.”
You mistake the matter, it was the Edomitish note; but change it, and if you be an angel, cry with the angel, “It is fallen, it is fallen.”
But the God of heaven will, we hope, vindicate his own ordinance so long perpetuated to his church.
Go rather to your god of this world, and see if he can vindicate your lordships, your temporal and spiritual tyrannies, and all your pelf; for the God of heaven is already come down to vindicate his ordinance from your so long perpetuated usurpation.
If yet you can blush.
This is a more Edomitish conceit than the former, and must be silenced with a counter quip of the same country. So often and so unsavourily has it been repeated, that the reader may well cry, Down with it, down with it, for shame. A man would think you had eaten over-liberally of Esau’s red porridge, and from thence dream continually of blushing; or perhaps, to heighten your fancy in writing, are wont to sit in your doctor’s scarlet, which through your eyes infecting your pregnant imaginative with a red suffusion, begets a continual thought of blushing; that you thus persecute ingenuous men over all your book, with this one overtired rubrical conceit still of blushing: but if you have no mercy upon them, yet spare yourself, lest you bejade the good galloway, your own opiniatre wit, and make the very conceit itself blush with spurgalling.
The scandals of our inferior ministers I desired to have had less public.
And what your superior archbishop or bishops! O forbid to have it told in Gath! say you. O dauber! and therefore remove not impieties from Israel. Constantine might have done more justly to have punished those clergical faults which he could not conceal, than to leave them unpunished, that they might remain concealed: better had it been for him, that the heathen had heard the fame of his justice, than of his wilful connivance and partiality; and so the name of God and his truth had been less blasphemed among his enemies, and the clergy amended, which daily, by this impunity, grew worse and worse. But, O to publish in the streets of Ascalon! sure some colony of puritans have taken Ascalon from the Turk lately, that the Remonstrant is so afraid of Ascalon. The papists we know condole you, and neither Constantinople nor your neighbours of Morocco trouble you. What other Ascalon can you allude to?
What a death it is to think of the sport and advantage these watchful enemies, these opposite spectators, will be sure to make of our sin and shame!
This is but to fling and struggle under the inevitable net of God, that now begins to environ you round.
No one clergy in the whole Christian world yields so many eminent scholars, learned preachers, grave, holy, and accomplished divines, as this church of England doth at this day.
Ha, ha, ha!
And long, and ever may it thus flourish.
O pestilent imprecation! flourish as it does at this day in the prelates?
But O forbid to have it told in Gath!
Forbid him rather, sacred parliament, to violate the sense of Edition: current; Page: [117] Scripture, and turn that which is spoken of the afflictions of the church under her pagan enemies, to a pargetted concealment of those prelatical crying sins: for from these is profaneness gone forth into all the land; they have hid their eyes from the sabbaths of the Lord; they have fed themselves, and not their flocks; with force and cruelty have they ruled over God’s people: they have fed his sheep (contrary to that which St. Peter writes) not of a ready mind, but for filthy lucre; not as examples to the flock, but as being lords over God’s heritage: and yet this dauber would daub still with his untempered mortar. But hearken what God says by the prophet Ezekiel, “Say unto them that daub this wall with untempered mortar, that it shall fall; there shall be an overflowing shower, and ye, O great hailstones, shall fall, and a stormy wind shall rend it, and I will say unto you, the wall is no more, neither they that daubed it.”
Whether of us shall give a better account of our charity to the God of peace, I appeal.
Your charity is much to your fellow-offenders, but nothing to the numberless souls that have been lost by their false feeding: use not therefore so sillily the name of charity, as most commonly you do, and the peaceful attribute of God to a preposterous end.
In the next section, like illbred sons, you spit in the face of your mother the church of England.
What should we do or say to this Remonstrant, that, by his idle and shallow reasonings, seems to have been conversant in no divinity, but that which is colourable to uphold bishopries? we acknowledge, and believe, the catholic reformed church; and if any man be disposed to use a trope or figure, as St. Paul did in calling her the common mother of us all, let him do as his own rhetoric shall persuade him. If, therefore, we must needs have a mother, and if the catholic church only be, and must be she, let all genealogy tell us, if it can, what we must call the church of England, unless we shall make every English protestant a kind of poetical Bacchus, to have two mothers: but mark, readers, the crafty scope of these prelates; they endeavour to impress deeply into weak and superstitious fancies, the awful notion of a mother, that hereby they might cheat them into a blind and implicit obedience to whatsoever they shall decree or think fit. And if we come to ask a reason of aught from our dear mother, she is invisible, under the lock and key of the prelates her spiritual adulterers; they only are the internuncios, or the go-betweens, of this trim-devised mummery: whatsoever they say, she says must be a deadly sin of disobedience not to believe. So that we, who by God’s special grace have shaken off the servitude of a great male tyrant, our pretended father the pope, should now, if we be not betimes aware of these wily teachers, sink under the slavery of a female notion, the cloudy conception of a demy-island mother; and, while we think to be obedient sons, should make ourselves rather the bastards, or the centaurs of their spiritual fornications.
Take heed of the ravens of the valley.
The ravens we are to take heed of are yourselves, that would peck out the eyes of all knowing Christians.
Sit you, merry brethren.
So we shall when the furies of prelatical consciences will not give them leave to do so.
Whether they would not jeopard their ears rather, &c.
A punishment that awaits the merits of your bold accomplices, for the lopping and stigmatizing of so many freeborn Christians.
Whether the professed slovenliness in God’s service, &c.
We have heard of Aaron and his linen amice, but those days are past; and for your priest under the gospel, that thinks himself the purer or the cleanlier in his office for his new-washed surplice, we esteem him for sanctity little better than Apollonius Thyanæus in his white frock, or the priest of Isis in his lawn sleeves; and they may all for holiness lie together in the suds.
Whether it were not most lawful and just to punish your presumption and disobedience.
The punishing of that which you call our presumption and disobedience, lies not now within the execution of your fangs; the merciful God above, and our just parliament, will deliver us from your Ephesian beasts, your cruel Nimrods, with whom we shall be ever fearless to encounter.
God give you wisdom to see the truth, and grace to follow it.
I wish the like to all those that resist not the Holy Ghost; for of such God commands Jeremiah, saying, “Pray not thou for them, neither lift up cry or prayer for them, neither make intercession to me, for I will not hear thee;” and of such St. John saith, “He that bids them God speed, is partaker of their evil deeds.”
TO THE POSTSCRIPT.
A goodly pasquin borrowed for a great part out of Sion’s plea, or the breviate consisting of a rhapsody of histories.
How wittily you tell us what your wonted course is upon the like occasion: the collection was taken, be it known to you, from as authentic authors in this kind, as any in a bishop’s library; and the collector of it says, moreover, that if the like occasion come again, he shall less need the help of breviates, or historical rhapsodies, than your reverence to eke out your sermonings shall need repair to postils or poliantheas.
They were bishops, you say; true, but they were popish bishops.
Since you would bind us to your jurisdiction by their canon law; since you would enforce upon us the old riffraff of Sarum, and other monastical relics; since you live upon their unjust purchases, allege their authorities, boast of their succession, walk in their steps, their pride, their titles, their covetousness, their persecuting of God’s people; since you disclaim their actions, and build their sepulchres, it is most just that all their faults should be imputed to you, and their iniquities visited upon you.
Could you see no colleges, no hospitals built?
At that primero of piety, the pope and cardinals are the better gamesters, and will cog a die into heaven before you.
No churches re-edified?
Yes, more churches that souls.
No learned volumes writ?
So did the miscreant bishop of Spalato write learned volumes against the pope, and run to Rome when he had done: ye write them in your closets, and unwrite them in your courts; hot volumists and cold bishops; a swashbuckler against the pope, and a dormouse against the devil, while the whole diocese be sown with tares, and none to resist the enemy but such as let him in at the postern; a rare superintendent at Rome, and a cipher at home. Hypocrites! the gospel faithfully preached to the Edition: current; Page: [119] poor, the desolate parishes visited and duly fed, loiterers thrown out, wolves driven from the fold, had been a better confutation of the pope and mass, than whole hecatontomes of controversies; and all this careering with spear in rest, and thundering upon the steel cap of Baronius or Bellarmine.
No seduced persons reclaimed?
More reclaimed persons seduced.
No hospitality kept?
Bacchanalias good store in every bishop’s family, and good gleeking.
No great offenders punished?
The trophies of your high commission are renowned.
No good offices done for the public?
Yes, the good office of reducing monarchy to tyranny, of breaking pacifications, and calumniating the people to the king.
No care of the peace of the church?
No, nor of the land; witness the two armies in the North, that now lie plundered and overrun by a liturgy.
No diligence in preaching?
Scarce any preaching at all.
No holiness in living?
No.
Truly, brethren, I can say no more, but that the fault is in your eyes.
If you can say no more than this, you were a proper Remonstrant to stand up for the whole tribe!
Wipe them and look better.
Wipe your fat corpulencies out of our light.
Yea, I beseech God to open them rather that they may see good.
If you mean good prelates, let be your prayer. Ask not impossibilities.
As for that proverb, “the bishop’s foot hath been in it,” it were more fit for a Scurra in Trivio, or some ribald upon an alebench.
The fitter for them then of whom it was meant.
I doubt not but they will say, the bishop’s foot hath been in your book, for I am sure it is quite spoiled by this just confutation; for your proverb, Sapit ollam.
Spoiled, quoth ye? Indeed it is so spoiled, as a good song is spoiled by a lewd singer; or as the saying is, “God sends meat, but the cooks work their wills:” in that sense we grant your bishop’s foot may have spoiled it, and made it “Sapere ollam,” if not “Sapere aulam;” which is the same in old Latin, and perhaps in plain English. For certain your confutation hath achieved nothing against it, and left nothing upon it but a foul taste of your skillet foot, and a more perfect and distinguishable odour of your socks, than of your nightcap. And how the bishop should confute a book with his foot, unless his brains were dropped into his great toe, I cannot meet with any man that can resolve me; only they tell me that certainly such a confutation must needs be gouty. So much for the bishop’s foot.
You tell us of Bonner’s broth; it is the fashion in some countries to send in their keal in the last service; and this it seems is the manner among our Smectymnuans.
Your latter service at the high altar you mean: but soft, sir; the feast was but begun; the broth was your own; you have been inviting the Edition: current; Page: [120] land to it this fourscore years; and so long we have been your slaves to serve it up for you, much against our wills: we know you have the beef to it ready in your kitchens, we are sure it was almost sod before this parliament begun; what direction you have given since to your cooks, to set it by in the pantry till some fitter time, we know not, and therefore your dear jest is lost: this broth was but your first service: Alas, sir, why do you delude your guests? Why do not those goodly flanks and briskets march up in your stately charges? Doubtless if need be, the pope, that owes you for mollifying the matter so well with him, and making him a true church, will furnish you with all the fat oxen of Italy.
Learned and worthy Doctor Moulin shall tell them.
Moulin says in his book of the calling of pastors, that because bishops were the reformers of the English church, therefore they were left remaining: this argument is but of small force to keep you in your cathedrals. For first, it may be denied that bishops were our first reformers; for Wickliff was before them; and his egregious labours are not to be neglected: besides, our bishops were in this work but the disciples of priests, and began the reformation before they were bishops. But what though Luther and other monks were the reformers of other places? Does it follow therefore that monks ought to continue? No; though Luther had taught so. And lastly, Moulin’s argument directly makes against you; for if there be nothing in it but this, bishops were left remaining because they were reformers of the church; by as good a consequence therefore they are now to be removed, because they have been the most certain deformers and ruiners of the church. Thus you see how little it avails you to take sanctuary among those churches which in the general scope of your actions formerly you have disregarded and despised; however, your fair words would now smooth it over otherwise.
Our bishops, some whereof being crowned with martyrdom, subscribed the gospel with their blood.
You boast much of martyrs to uphold your episcopacy; but if you would call to mind what Eusebius in his fifth book recites from Apollinarius of Hieropolis, you should then hear it esteemed no other than an old heretical argument, to prove a position true, because some that held it were martyrs; this was that which gave boldness to the Marcionists and Cataphryges to avouch their impious heresies for pious doctrine, because they could reckon many martyrs of their sect; and when they were confuted in other points, this was ever their last and stoutest plea.
In the mean time I beseech the God of heaven to humble you.
We shall beseech the same God to give you a more profitable and pertinent humiliation than yet you know, and a less mistaken charitableness, with that peace which you have hitherto so perversely misaffected.
T.9 (10.3) [Richard Overton], The Frogges of Egypt, or the Caterpillers of the Commonwealth (August, 1641).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.9 [1641.08] (10.3) [Richard Overton], The Frogges of Egypt, or the Caterpillers of the Commonwealth (August, 1641).
Full title[Richard Overton], The Frogges of Egypt, or the Caterpillers of the Commonwealth. truely dissected and laid open; With the Subjects Thankefulnesse unto God for thier deliverance from that Nest of Vermine.
Printed in the yeare 1641.
Estimated date of publicationOctober, 1641.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 26; E. 166. (2.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
THE FROGS OF EGYPT OR THE CATTERPILLERS OF THE Common-wealth.
MOnopolers by their nefarious Projects, and impious exactions, have contaminated the Land with such a contagious exulceration of wicked impositions, that I may with a coequall sympathie, assimulate them to the Frogs of Ægypt. First, In regard that those Frogs were the second Plague that was brought upon the Ægyptians: So these Monopolers (in respect that Bishops had the priority) were the second Plague, which with disastrous aspersions, did infect our Nation. Secondly, As those Frogs came unto Pharaoes Bed-chamber, and upon his Bed: So these Diabolicall Parasites, did creeep into our Kings bosome, with their Phariticall Calumny. Thirdly, Those Frogs did come upon all the people in Ægypt, throughout their Territories: And who is there in all our Kingdom, that have not beene infected by the contagion of their venenosive aspersions: they were a Nest of Wasps, which did Tyrannically sting the Kings loyal Subjects with their exacting impositions: They were a swarme of Vermine, which did pollute sincere purity, and like the Frogs of Ægypt, did over-creep the Land. They warmed themselves at other mens fires, and though the peoples fingers ends were a cold, by regard of their impious Project, yet they would alwayes remember to say with Mantuan Optimum est alienafrui pecunia. They sip’t of honest mens cups, and did distend their purses in their Bacchanalian ryot, for they drowned themselves in Bacchus Fountaine, while other men payd the reckoning. They did alwaies share with the Butler in his Box, yea they grew so fat and plump with damned Projects, that it was easier for Hercules to beate the Triple-headed Cerberous out of Hells Seygian Portali, then for us of late, to speake against these cursed Projectors, who abused the Triple Crowne. But (we thank the all-directing providence of the mighty and Almighty God) we have found the like successe with Hercules, and by the inflexible Justice of the Parliament, we shall with him, drag these Hell-hounds upon the earth, who did eradicate the well planted branch of Plenty. They were heretofore so Epidemically strict, that they would not bate us a pin in their exactions; they have worne a Vizard a long time: But a Vizard sayd I? Their pride was a sufficient Vizard, for it was no marvaile that no man else could know them, when they knew not themselves. But when the Parliament shall once unface these, they will prove as bad as any cards in the packe. They were Janus-like, and had two Cloakes to hide their knavery; and like the Pythagorean Monster, they did threaten to devoure the whole Commons at a mouth-full. In Ægypt the thirsty Dog could never lap of the River Nilus, but the Crocodile would assault him immediatly. Neither in our Land could any honest man, whom drie necessitie by compulsive coercion required to allay his sitiating thirst, sip at the odoriferous Spring of Bacchus, but incontinently he was assayled by these cursed Crocodiles, the rubbish of Babylon, Honesties Hangman, fomenters of Impietie, Iniquities prodigious Monsters, Plenties execrable Foes, Envies individuall Companions, detestable Enemies to loyall Subjects; and in a word, that I may fully paint them out, The Devills Journey-men. The Romans were never in more danger of the Sabines, than wee have beene of these pernicious members: the Sicilians never feared the Basilisk more, nor the Cretans the Minotaure neither the Athenians that pestiferous Serpent Epidaurus, than we have justly feared these wicked Dragons of implety. They are like the Grecian Horse, in the midst of Troy, under pretence of safety, but at length consumed the whole city: So these firebrands of iniquitie would have extirpated the flourishing plenty of the Land, but (thanks be to God and the righteous Parliament) they are now extinguished. For as a rotten member Ense recidendum est ne pars sincer a trahatur, ought to be cut off, least it infect, and contaminate the whole body; so ought these wicked members of the Common-wealth to be executed with the Sword of Iustice, who have already too farre polluted the body of the Realme. Tis a plausible assimulation which Hippocrates observeth, that in the body naturall, as it must be truely purged, before it can be truely sound: so likewise in the body politicke, unlesse these improbous malefactors be purged out, it can never be truly sound. Their very name Monopolers doth stigmatize them under the brand of knavery, which is derived from monois which signifies in English, Onely: so that Monopolers, are the Onely Polers of the people, which have abused them by their Projects: But now (alas poore men!) they are intruss’d and like to be whipp’d. Their very Projects themselves are set against them: Their Coles which they did aggerate are ready to consume them: The Butter, which before greased their pockets, now melts in their mouthes: The Sope scornes to be projected any longer, and will invert its first Letter S. into R. and become a Rope to them rather. The Salt is ready to pouder them to Tiburne: The Cards scorne that they should play the Knave any longer: The Pinnes could pin their Heads to the Gall-house, The Wine threatens to lay them dead——drunke: but hang them they are so crafty, that although they fall downe in a Wine-Seller, yet they know how to rise up agine in a Tobacco-Shop, but I hope before they rise there, they will first rise up at the Gall house: where I’le leave them——By these, and the like enormities have our Land beene too farre overspread, it hath lately flourished too luxuriously in impiety, which did accumulate such insupportable burthens to the weather-beaten Commons of this Realme, that they were almost everted. But thankes be to the all-disposig omnipotence of immortall God, who have alwayes preserved this Kingdome from innumerable evills, and have kept it as the apple of his eye. I say thankes be to his Supremacy, who among other evills have preserved us likewise from the Tyranny of these insulting Projectors. But we now solely depend upon the Parliaments exemplary piety and great Justice, of whom we beg with all humility, and with affectionate servency to the truth, doe supplicate that they would with expedition extinguish these cursed firebrands of the Land, who like Samsons Foxes have consumed the Lands and Possions of the Commons. Wherefore let every true hearted Subject enumerate his expresse thankefulnesse to Almigty God for the preservation of this Kingdome, and the multitude of his favours irrigated thereon with all alacritie.
A Thanksfullnesse to God for his Mercy towards this Kingdome:
VVE blesse & magnifie (great God!) thy Name
Who justly dost exenterate with shame
All Enemies to Thee, and us who dost
Preserve this Kingdome with thy favours most.
By Thee our base Monopolers doe fall
False Prelates, and false Papists in their Gall.
By Thee Projectors vanish, and by Thee
The Church has beene preserv’d from ’Popery.
By Thee our Canonists requoile, and turne
Their Innovations to a dolefull Urne.
By Thee all Pontificians dote deplore
Their fortune more diastruous and more.
Thus in our Hemisphere, while the bright Sunne
Desplayes his radiant splendor, and doe runne
Through the twelve Signes i’th’ Zodiacke, and then
Smileth upon the face of mortall men:
Thus while the Queene of night doe beautifie
Her selfe, and gilds the Star-bespangled Sky:
While liquid rivers doe returne againe
Wandring abroad into the greedy maine,
Yea, while our pious hearts remaine to be,
We yeeld a thankefull sacrifice to Thee.
And as we thanke Thee for thy Favours past,
So we doe supplicate a blessings last.
First, that Thou would’st extenerate all those
That are Monopolers, or other Foes.
And Then (oh!) then conduct the Church aright
For our Salvation and thy Heavenly Right.
That we may serve Thee, serving Thee we may
Rejoyce, rejoycing triumph, in that day:
Triumphing, then exult, exulting raise
Glory to Thee, and serve Thee all our Dayes.
FINIS.
T.10 (1.4.) [William Walwyn], A New Petition of the Papists (September 1641).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.10 [1641.09] (1.4) [William Walwyn], A New Petition of the Papists (September 1641).
Full title[William Walwyn], A New Petition of the Papists.
Printed in the Yeare 1641.
Estimated date of publicationSeptember 1641.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 31; Thomason E. 169 (7.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE AFFLICTED BRETHREN.
Humbly shewing, That whereas there are so many different Religions now professed in England; as your Honours well know, and that with griefe no doubt, casting your eyes upon the great confusion that thereby ariseth in the common wealth; every one hoping and expecting that theirs alone shall be received and established by this present and powefull high Court of Parliament and all others to bee cast forth abolished and prosecuted, which certainely would cause (if it be once Decreed) a farre greater confusion and discontentment.
For the timely prevention of which danger many hold it necessarie, and humbly desire, that you would take it into your deepe considerations and profound Judgements, whether it were not more convenient for this State, and more gratefull to the subjects to tollerate all professions whatsoever, every one being left to use his owne conscience, none to be punished or persecuted for it.
There is no man that professeth a Religion, but is in conscience perswaded that to be the best wherein to save his soule, & can give no doubt some reason, yea, and alleage some authority out of the word of God for it, which is an argument that not his will, but his Judgement is convinced, and therefore holds it unreasonable, to be forced to follow other mens Judgements and not his owne in a matter of so great importance as that of his salvation is, which is the onely marke his tender soule aymes at in his Religion, and for which hee reades the word daily, and hourely sucking from thence sweet and holy Doctrines as Bees doe honey from sweet flowers in the Spring time.
It may be objected that this Tolleration would breede a greater confusion, but wee which know wee have the Spirit, beleeve the contrary; for the establishing of onely one, and suppressing all others, will breede, in all a generall discontent, jarring, rayling, libelling, and consequently must needs follow a mighty confusion, where contrarywise, if all were permitted, all would bee pleased all in peace, and their obligation and love would be farre greater to the King and State for so great a benefit as the freedome of conscience, which to all men is the most gratefull thing in the world, more for the better maintaining of peace with each other, differring in Religion, how easie a matter it were considering the good natures and sweet dispositions of our English nation, who willingly would embrace a law enacted to that effect that were upon some penaltie to be imposed, should affront or upbraid the other for his Religion. This in divers well governed Countries is permitted, as Holland, Germanie, France, and Polonia, &c. where though their Religion be as opposite as Heaven to Hell, yet their concord is so great, that they say with the Prophet David, behold how good and pleasant a thing it is for Brethren to dwell together, Psal. 132.
If therefore the Brownists upon scruple of their tender conscience, and grounded upon the word, will separate themselves, and not go to the Church with Protestants, let them alone, give them free leave to exercise their Religion where they please without disturbance, the place where doth not import, they not daring to adde or diminish any thing in the written word.
If the Puritants will not use the Service Booke, Corner Cap, Surplesse, or Altar, nor bow at the name of Jesus, their pure hearts esteeming it Idolatrie, let them alone, they are great readers of Gods booke, and if they bee in errour, they will sooner finde it, having liberty of conscience, then being oppressed with the Tyranny of the High Commission Court or other kindes of persecutions which disquiet their consciences and troubles their patience.
If the Socinians will not subscribe to the 39. Articles nor credit more then by Naturall force of their best witts they can reach unto, let them alone, they professe that if any man can give them a better reason, or confute them by the word, they are ready every hower to change their opinions, of such soft and pliable natures they are.
If the Arminians will have Bishops, Altars, Lights, Organs, hold Free-will, merit of good workes, and divers other points with Papists, though as yet no sacrifice with them, upon their Altars, let them alone, let them use their ceremonies without sacrifice, let every spirit praise the Lord, Psal. 150.
If the Papists will have Altars, Priests, Sacrifice and ceremonies, and the Pope for their supreame head in Spirituall affaires, seeing they affirme so confidently they have had these Sixteene hundred and odde yeares, let them alone with their pretended prescription, and let every Religion take what Spirituall head they please, for so they will, whether wee will or no, but the matter imports not, so they obey the King as temporall head, and humbly submit to the State and civill Lawes, and live quietly together.
Let the Adamits Preach in vaults & caves as naked as their nailes, and starve themselves with cold, they thinke themselves as innocent as Adam and Eve were in their nakednesse before their fall, let them therefore alone till some innocent Eve bee so curious as to eate forbidden fruit, and then they will all make themselves aprons of figge leaves perceiving their nakednesse.
Let the Family of Love meete together in their sweet perfum’d Chambers, giving each other the sweet kisse of peace; great pitty it were to hinder their mutuall charity; let them alone: Lastly the same wee desire for all professors of the Gospel, Let every one abound in his owne sence, Rom. 14.
Now were this freedome permitted, there would not bee so many idle scandalous pamphlets daily cast abroad to the great vexation of each other, & trouble to the whole Realme, every one labouring to preferre his owne Religion.
A Tolleration therefore would hinder all this strife and discontentment, but if oppressed with persecution they will cry out of the word of God, We will render to Caesar, the things that are due to Caesar, and to God that which is due to God, Marke 12. If Tollerated, more promptly will they obey the King and State, if troubled or molested, they will cry, Wee must obey God rather then men, Acts 5. and so remaine discontented and afflicted in spirit.
Neither doth a Tolleration seeme dissonant, but rather concordant with the Doctrine of the most learned Protestants: First the Primate of Ireland Doctor Usher, in a Sermon before King James at Wansted 1624 admittes all Christians into the Church of what Religion soever, good soule! hee will have none persecuted, his tender heart drawes all to Heaven, Muscovites, Grecians, Ethiopians, all reformed Churches even from Constantinople, to the East Indies, none! none by him are excluded from Paradise, as you may reade in the 10. and 11. page of his aforecited sermon, his pitifull heart cannot passe such a bloody sentence upon so many poore soules; nay hee will pull in the very Jewes and Papists, for the Ethiopians though they baptize with us, yet they circumcise also both male and female, and in all other things joyne hands with the Pope, as in the confession of their faith sent to Gregory the 13. is manifest, this learned Doctor being so gracious and mercifully pittifull, how can wee Imagine that your clemencies will persecute those in earth which are esteemed worthy of Heaven. Master Hooker in his five bookes of Ecclesiasticall policy, page 138. affirmes the Church of Rome to be part of the house of God, a limbe of the visible Church of Christ, and page 130. he saith, we gladly acknowledge them to bee of the family of Jesus Christ: now if the family of the Roman Church bee of the family of Jesus Christ, then I hope you will not deny other professors of the Gospel to be of the family of Christ, if they be of the family of God, others are not of the family of the Divell, no, all servants of Christ, brethren of Christ, all according to Doctor Ushers doctrine shall bee saved: why then should any bee persecuted, shall the servants of the same family persecute their fellow servants, this must needes bee greatly displeasing to the Master of the family, let therefore none of the servants of the familie bee persecuted for the love and honour you beare to the Lord and Master.
Seeing therefore in the opinions of these and divers other learned Protestant Doctors which you know well, the Papists may be saved, and as Doctor Some saith, in his defence against Master Penrie. Page 164. 182. and 176. that it is absurd to thinke the contrary yee will without question thinke it more absurd to hold either professors damned, then it followes that it is most absurd to persecute any whose names are written in the book of life, never to bee blotted out, if they persevere and live the life of the righteous.
Let every one therefore follow his owne Religion so hee bee obedient to the State and temporall lawes certainely, that which is erroneous will in time appeare, and the professors of it will bee ashamed, it will perish and wither as a flower, vanish as smoake, and passe as a shadow.
The Apostles of Christ preaching (Acts. the 5.) the Jewes hearing these things it cut them to the heart, and they consulted to kill them; but as the same Chapter relates verse 34. one of the counsell rising up, a Pharisee called Gammaliell, a Doctor of the Law honorable to the people commanded the men to bee put forth a while, and then he said to them, you men of Israel what meane you to your selves for before these dayes there rose Theodus, saying he was some body, to whom consented a number of men, above 400. who was slaine, and all that beleived him were dispersed, and brought to nothing. After this fellow there rose Judas of Galilee, and drew away the people after him who were dispersed.
And therefore I say to you, depart from these men, and let them alone, for if this councell or worke be of men, it will be dissolved, but if it be of God, you are not able to dissolve them, least perhaps you bee found to resist God also. And they consented to him, here is a president, here is an example even from the Scripture it selfe, follow it wee beseech you, give your consents, agree, vote it, that every man may have freedome of conscience, let them alone; you desire nothing but the truth by this freedome and connivency truth will at last appeare, that which is of men will be dissolved, that which is of God will continue and remaine for ever, now many men are wavering what to follow, what to embrace, neither will they bee contented with any thing that shall bee established by Act of Parliament, were it never so good, onely freedome will in time cause the truth to shine upon them.
The matter therefore of so great importance and consequence, we prostrate; leaving to your honours profound and deepe Judgements, humbly requesting and imploring againe and againe, that for the quiet of the state, for the comfort of the subject, and for the love of truth, you cause and proclaime a tolleration, that for Religion none shall bee persecuted, but every one shall freely enjoy his conscience.
This is every mans case, this would bring Joy to all, discontent to none; this would breede the hartiest love, loyalty and affection to our dread Soveraigne, our gratious King, this would cause all dutifull and loving respects to you, right honorable and noble Peeres of the upper House of Parliament, and no lesse to the most noble Knights, Citizens and Burgesses of the Honorable House of Commons, the carefull watchfull, and painefull laborers, and endeavourers in this, behalfe for the good of the Common wealth, and the comfort of afflicted soules and consciences, grant therefore this Petition, and for ever you will eternize your names.
And so praying to the Lord that hee would endue your hearts with the spirit of true wisedome and clemency towards your poore servants and brethren in the Lord, and grant their humble petition, we cease.
T.11 (8.4.) Katherine Chidley, The Justification of the Independant Churches of Christ (October, 1641).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.11 [1641.10] (8.4) Katherine Chidley, The Justification of the Independant Churches of Christ (October, 1641).
Full titleKatherine Chidley, The Justification of the Independant Churches of Christ. Being an Answer to Mr. EDVVARDS his BOOKE, which hee hath written against the Government of CHRISTS CHVRCH, and Toleration of CHRISTS Publike Worship; BRIEFELY DECLARING That the Congregations of the Saints ought not to have Dependancie in Government upon any other; or direction in worship from any other than CHRIST their HEAD and LAVV-GIVER. By KATHERINE CHIDLEY.
1 SAM. 17. 45. Thou commest unto me with a Sword, and with a Speare, and with a Sheild, but I come unto thee in the name of the Lord of Hoasts the God of the armies of Israel, whom thou hast defied.
IVDGES 4. 21. Then Iael, Hebers wife tooke a naile of the tent, and tooke an hammer in her hand, and went softly unto him, and smote the naile into his temples and fastened it into the ground, (for he was fast asleepe and weary) and so he died.
LONDON, Printed for WILLIAM LARNAR, and are to be sold at his Shop, at the Signe of the Golden Anchor, neere Pauls-Chaine. 1641.
Estimated date of publicationOctober, 1641.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, pp. 37–38; Thomason E. 174 (7.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
TO The CHRISTIAN READER; Grace, Mercy, and Peace, from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ.
IT is, and hath beene (for a long time) a Question more enquired into than well weighed; Whether it be lawfull for such, who are informed of the evills of the Church of England, to Separate from it: For my owne part, considering that the Church of England is governed by the Canon Lawes (the Discipline of Antichrist) and altogether wanteth the Discipline of Christ, and that the most of them are ignorant what it is, and also doe professe to worship God by a stinted Service-Booke. I hold it not onely lawfull, but also the duty of all those who are informed of such evills, to separate themselves from them, and such as doe adhere unto them; and also to joyne together in the outward profession and practise of Gods true worship, when God hath declared unto them what it is; and being thus informed in their minds of the knowledge of the will of God (by the teaching of his Sonne Jesus Christ) it is their duty to put it in practise, not onely in a Land where they have Toleration, but also where they are forbidden to preach, or teach in the name (or by the power) of the Lord Jesus.
But Mr. Edwards (with whom I have here to deale) conceiving that the beauty of Christs true worship, would quickly discover the Foggy darkenesse of the Antichristian devised worship; and also that the glory of Christs true Discipline, grounded and founded in his Word, would soone discover the blacknesse and darkenesse of the Antihristian Government (which the poore people of England are in bondage unto) hath set his wits a work to withstand the bright comming of Christs Kingdome (into the hearts of men) which we are all commanded in the most absolute rule of Prayer to petition for; for the turning aside whereof Mr. Edwards hath mustred up his forces, even eight Reasons, against the government of Christ, which hee calls Independant; and hath joyned unto these eight, ten more; which he hath made against Toleration; affirming that they may not practise contrary to the course of the Nation wherein they live, without the leave of the Magistrate, neither judgeth he it commendable in them to aske the Magistrates leave, nor commendable in the Magistrate to heare their petitions, but rather seeketh to stirre up all men to disturbe their peace, affirming most unjustly, that they disturbe the peace of the Kingdome, nay, the peace of three Kingdomes, which all the lands under the Kings Dominions know to be contrary, nay I thinke most of the Kingdomes in Europe cannot be ignorant what the cause of the disturbance was;
But this is not the practise of Mr. Edwards alone, but also of the whole generation of the Clergie; as thou maist know, Christian Reader, to was the practise of the Bishop of Canterbury to exclaime against Mr. Burton, Doctor Bastwicke, and Mr. Prynne, calling them scandalous Libellers, & Innovators (though they put their own name to that which they write, and proved what they taught by divine authority) and this hath beene alwayes the practise of the instruments of Sathan, to accuse the Lords people, for disturbing of the peace, as it hath beene found in many Nations, when indeede the troublers be themselves and their fathers house. But in this they are like unto Athalia crying treason, treason, when they are in the treason themselves.
But for the further strengthning of his army, he hath also subjoyned unto these his Answer to fixe Reasons, which he saith, are theirs, but the forme of some of them seemeth to be of his owne making; all which thou shalt finde answered, and disproved in this following Treatise.
But though these my Answers are not laid downe in a Schollerlik way, but by the plaine truth of holy Scripture; yet I beseechthee have the patience to take the paynes to reade them, and spare some time to consider them; and if thou findest things disorderly placed, labour to rectifie them to thine own mind. And if there be any weight in them, give the glory to God; but if thou feest nothing worthy, attribute not the weakenesse thereof to the truth of the cause, but rather to the ignorance and unskilfulnesse of the weake Instrument.
Thine in the Lord Jesus,
Katherine Chidlet.
THE Answer to Mr. Edvvards his Introdvction.
I Hearing the complaints of many that were godly, against the Booke that Mr. Edwards hath written; and upon the sight of this his Introduction considering his desperate resolution, (namely) that he would set out severall Tractates against the whole way of Separation. I could not but declare by the testimony of the Scripture it selfe, that the way of Separation is the way of God, who is the author of it,* which manifestly appeares by his separating of his Church from the world, and the world from his Church in all ages.
When the Church was greater than the world, then the world was to be separated from the Church; but when the world was greater than the Church, then the Church was to separate from the world.
As for instance,
When Caine was a member of the Church, then the Church was greater than the world; and Caine being discovered, was exempted from Gods presence;* before whom he formerly had presented himselfe:c but in the time of Noah, when the world was greater than the Churchd then Noah and his Family who were the Church, were commanded to goe into the Arkee in which place they were saved, when the world was drowned,f yet Ham being afterward discovered, was accursed of his Father, and Shem was blessed, and good prophesied for Iaphat.
Afterward when the world was grown mightier than the Church againe, then Abraham was called out of Vr of the Caldeans, both from his country and from his kindred, and from his fathers houseg (because they were &illegible;) to worship God in Canaan.
Moreover, afterwards Moses was &illegible; and his brother &illegible; to deliver the children of Israel out of the Land of Egypt when Pharaoh vexed them,h at which time God wrought their deliverance,i separating wondrously between the Egyptians and the Israelites, and that which was light to the one, was darkenesse to the other.
Afterwards, when Corah and his Congregation rebelled against God, and were obstinate thereink the people were commanded to depart from the tenis of those &illegible; I &illegible; were the children separated from the parents, and those who did not separate, were destroyed by fire,lm and swallowed by the earth,n upon the day which God had appointed* as those Noahs time, who repented not, were swallowed by &illegible;.
Moreover, when God brought his people into the promised Land, he commanded them to be separated from the Idolatrous and not to meddle with the accursed things.Deut. 5. 26. 27. And for this cause God gave them his Ordinances and Commandements; and by the manifestation of their Obedience to them they were knowne to be the onely people of God,* which made a reall separation.
Ezza. 1. Hag. 1. 2, 3. 4. 8. 12. 14.And when they more carried captive into Babylon at any time for their sinnes: God raised them up deliverors to bring them from thence: and Prophets to call them from thencep and from their backesliding.q And it was the practise of all the Prophets of God, (which prophesied of the Church under the New Testament) to separate the precious from the vile, and God hath declared that bee that so doth shall be as his mouth, Jer. 15. 19.
And we know it was the practise of the Apostles of the Lord Iesus, to declare to the people that there could be no more agreement betweene beleevers and unbeleevers, than betweene light and darkenesse, God and Belial, as Paul writing to the Corinthians doth declare, when he saith, Be not unequally yoked together with unbeleevers; for what fellowship hath righteousnesse with unrighteousnesse? and what communion hath light with darkenesse, and what concord hath Christ with Belial?Christ made so great a difference betweene the world and the Church, that hee would not pray for the world; yet would die for the Church, which was given him out of the world; and without a Separation the Church can not be known from the world. or what part hath he that beleeveth with an Infidell? and what agreement hath the Temple of God with Idolls? for yee are the Temple of the living God, as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walke in them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people; Wherefore come out from among them, and be yet Separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the uncleane thing, and I will receive you, and I will be a Father unto you, and yee shall be my sonnes and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty, 1 Cor. 6. 14, 15, 16, 17, 18.
Moreover, they are pronounced blessed, which reade, heare, and keepe the words of the Booke of the Revelation of Iesus Christ;r among which sentences, there is a commandement from heaven for a totall Separation.s
These things (in briefe) I have minded from the Scriptures, to prove the necessitie of Separation; and though the Scripture be a deepe Well, and containeth in the Treasures thereof innumerable Doctrines and Precepts tending to this purpose; yet I leave the further prosecution of the same, till a fitter opertunity be offered to me, or any other whom the Lord shall indue with a greater measure of his Spirit.
But Mr. Edwards, for preparation to this his desperate intention, hath sent these Reasons against Independant government, and Toleration, and presented them to the Honorable House of Commons; which Reasons (I thinke) he would have to beget a Snake, to appeare (as he saith) under the greene grasse; for I am sure, he cannot make the humble petitions of of the Kings subjects to be a Snake, for petitioning is away of peace and submission, without violence or venum; neither can it cast durt upon any government of the Nation, as he unjustly accuseth the Protestation Protested, for that Author leaveth it to the Magistrate, not undertaking to determine of himselfe what government shall be set ever the Nation, for the bringing of men to God but leaveth it to the consideration of them that have authority.
And whereas Mr. Edwards grudges that they preach so often at the Parliament; in this he is like unto Amazial, who bid the Prophet Amos to flee away into the Land of Judea. and not to Prophesie at Bethel, the Kings Chappeil, and the House of the Kingdome.*
And though Mr. Edwards boast himselfe heare, to be a Minister of the Gospell, and a sufferer for it, yet I challenge him, to prove unto me, that he hath any Calling or, Ordination to the Ministry, but that which he hath successively from Rome; If he lay claime to that; he is one of the Popes household; But if he deny that calling, then is he as void of a calling to the worke of the Ministry, and as void of Ordination, as any of those Ministers, whom hee calleth Independant men, (which have cust off the Ordination of the Prelates) and consequently as void of Ordination as a macanicall trades man.
And therefore I hope that Honourable House that is so full of wisedome (which Mr Edwards doth confesse) will never judge these men unreasonable, because they do Petition, nor their petitions unreasonable before they are tried, and so proved, by some better ground, then the bare entrance of Mr. Edwards his Cavit, or writ of Ne admittas, though he saith he forehed it from heaven; for I know it was never there, Neither is it confirmed by the Records of holy Scripture, but taken from the practise of Nimrod. That mighty Hunter before the Lord,* and from the practise of Haman that wicked persecucuter,* & from the evill behaviour and malicious speeches, and gesture of wicked Sanballet,* and Tobias, who were both bitter enemies to God, and sought to hinder the building of the walles of Jerusalem.
But the Prophet Haggai, reproveth not onely such as hindred the building of the Lords House: but also those that were contented to live in their seyled Houses, and suffer the Lords House to lie waste, Hag. 1.
AN ANSVVER To Mr. Edvvards his Booke, Intituled, Reasons against the Independent Government in particular Congregations.
Mr. EDWARDS,
I Understanding that you are a mighty Champion, and now mustering up yourmighty forces (as you say) and I apprehending, they must come against the Hoast of Israel, and hearing the Armies of the Living God so defied by you, could nor be withheld, but that I (in stead of a better) must needs give you the meeting.
First, Whereas you affirme, That the Church of God (which is his House and Kingdome) could not subsist with such provision as their father gave them: which provision was (by your owne confession) the watering of them by Evangelists, and Prophets, when they were planted by the apostles, and after planting and watering to have Pastors and Teachers, with all other Officers, set over them by the Apostles & their own Election, yet notwithstanding all this provision, the Father hath made for them, it was evident (say you) they could not well stand of themselves, without some other helpe.
This was the very suggestion of Sathan into the hearts of our first Parents; for they having a desire of some thing more then was warranted by God, tooke unto them the forbidden fruit, as you would have the Lords Churches to doe when you say they must take some others besides these Churches and Officers, and that to interpose authoritatively; and these something else you make to be Apostles, Evangelists, and Elders of other Churches, whereas you confessed before, that these are the furniture of Christs Kingdome; and wee know their authoritie was limitted, within the bounds of the Word of God: as first, If any of them would be greater, he must be servant to all. Secondly, they were forbidden to be Lords over Gods heritage. Thirdly, they were commanded to teach the people, to observe onely those things which Christ had commanded them.
And whereas you seeme to affirme, that these Offices were extraordinary and ceased, and yet the Churches have still neede of them: You seeme to contradict your selfe, and would faine cure it againe, in that some other way which you say, you have to supply the want of them, but this other way you have not yet made known: You presuppose, it may be by some Smods and Councels, to make a conjunction of the whole.
If you meane such a Counsell, as is mentioned; Acts 15. 4. 22. consisting of Apostles and Elders with the whole Church; then you have said no more than you have said before, and that which we grant, for this is still the furniture of the Kingdome; but if you intend that your Counsell should consist of an armie of Arch-Bishops Diocesan Bishops, Deanes, Suffragans, with the rest of that rabble, which be for their titles names of blasphemy, and such as were bred in the smoake of the pit. I deny that any of these be ordained of God, for they have no footing in his word; therefore indeede these are a part of the fruit of the forbidden Tree, which the Churches of God have taken and eaten; and this seeking out inventions of their owne, after that God made them righteous, hath brought them into a state of Apostasie, even as Ieroboams high places and Calves did the people of Israel; which may plainely appeare by the Churches of Asia. If these be that some other supply which you meane and have produced to helpe the Churches, and Cities of God (as you call them) to determine for those Churches and Cities the cases of Doctrine and Discipline in stead of those many Ministers which, you conceive them now to want, it tends to make (as they have now done) a conjunction not onely of all the Churches prosessing one faith into one body; but also of all the Armies of the Man of Sinne, and so to confound the Church and the world together, which the Ministers of the Gospell ought to divide,Iss. 15. 19. by separating the precious from the vile.
And whereas you affirme, The Independent Congregations now have but few Ministers;
It is very true, for indeede they are but a few people, and a few hands will feede a few mouths sufficiently, if God provide meat.
But whereas you affirme, That those Congregations may have no Officer, at all by their owne grounds, and yet be independent.
I thinke, they conceive by those grounds, the Office onely of Pastor, and Teacher; but not that the Church of God hath need at any time of the helpe of any other, then God hath given and set in his Church, which be all the Officers that are before mentioned, as Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors, and Teachers; and to have recourse to any for counsell, helpe, or assistance, either of Church or Ministry, which is not of Christs owne, were very ridiculous. For it is recorded, Ephe. 4. 11. 12. That he gave these for the gathering together of the Saints for the worke of the Ministry, and for the edification of the body of Christ, being so gathered;Verse 13. 14. 16. The time they must continue is, till all the Saints be in the unitie of faith. The reason wherefore they were given, was to keepe people from being tossed too and fro with every winde of Doctrine. And these are they, by whom all the body is coupled and knit together,Compared with 1 Cor. 12. by every joynt for the furniture thereof, according to the effectuall power, which is in the measure of every part, and receiveth increase of the body unto the edifying of it selfe in love. And this is according to the promise that Christ made, Matth. 28. 19. 20. to be with his Ministers in teaching his people to the end of the world.
And thus you may see Mr. Edwards, you cannot gather from our owne words, that we have neede of the helpe of any other Churches, or Ministers, to interpose (as you unjustly affirme) as it may plainely appeare by Mr. Robinsons owne words in the Justification of the Separation, pag. 121. 122. These are his words; It is the Stewards duty to make provision for the family; but what if he neglect this duty in the Masters absence? Must the whole family starve, yea and the wife also? Or is not some other of the family best able to be employed for the present necessity? The like he saith concerning the government of a Ship, of an Armie, and of Commonwealths; alluding to the Church of Christ. And further expresseth, that as a private Citizen may become a Magistrate, so a private member may become a Minister, for an action of necessity to be performed, by the consent of the rest, &c.
Therefore it appeares plainely by all that hath binsaid, that the Churches of Christ may be truely constituted according to the Scripture, and subsist a certaine time without Pastor and Teacher, and enjoy the power of Christ amongst themselves having no dependancie upon any other Church or Churches which shall claime Authority or superiority over them.
And thus much for your first Reason.
NOw in your second Reason, which runneth upon the calling of the Ministry, you affirme, That the government of the Independent Congregations is not of divine institution.
Which I utterly denie, and will prove it, by disproveing the following. Instances, by which you affirme to prove it.
Whereas you affirme, That their Independencie forces them to have Ministers without Ordination.
I Answer, it is a plaine case by the foregoing Answer, to your first Reason, that you speake untruely, for their practise is there made knowne to be otherwise; and if you will still affirme, that they have not power so to practise, you will thereby deny the truth of the Scriptures; for the Apostles were commanded to teach the Churches, to observe all things whatsoever Christ had commanded them. But Christ commanded the Apostles to ordaine Elders in every Church by election; therefore the Apostles taught the Churches to ordaine Elders by Election also. And whereas you bid us produce one instance (if we can) for an ordinary Officer to be made without Ordination, it is needlesse; for we (whom you call Independant) strive for no such thing, as you have proved it plainely out of Mr. Robinsons Booke, Apol. Chap. 1. 18. to which I send you to learne better.
Further you alleadge, That if they be ordained, it is by persons who are not in office.
Now if you meane, they have no office because they are not elected, ordained and set apart by the Clergie to some serviceable, administration; I pray you tell me who ordained the Apostles, Prophets, and Evangelists to their worke or Ministry? If you will say they were ordained of God, I will grant it, and doe also affirme that God hath promised the supply of them, to the end of the world, as before hath beene mentioned, from Ephe. 4. As a so, it appeares by Pauls charge to Timothy; 2 Tim. 2. 2. That what things he had heard of him, among many witnesses, the same he should commit to faithfull men who should be able to teach others also: but I verily doe beleeve, that as Titus, so Timoth, heard of Paul that Elders must be ordained by Election in every city, and that Titus was as much bound to communicate the things unto others, which he had learned of Paul, as Timothy was, and Timothy (we know) was to teach faithfull men, and those faithfull men were to teach others those things that they had heard of Timothy, among which things Ordination was one, as it was delivered to Titus; and we are not to doubt of Timothius faithfulnesse in the declaring of this part of his message more than the rest, but if those to whom Timothy delivered it, were not faithfull in the discharge of their duty: but that in due time the Ordinances might possibly grow out of use, as the Churches did by little and little apostate; yet that hinders not but that it was still written in the Scripture that the generations to come might recover againe the right use of the Ordinances when God should by his Spirit direct them to know the same.
Moreover, I affirme, that all the Lords people, that are made Kings and Priests to God, have a free voyce in the Ordinance of Election, therefore they must freely consent before there can be any Ordination; and having so consented they may proceede to Ordination, notwithstanding they be destitute, of the Counsell or assistance of any neighbour Church; as if there were no other Churches in the Land, but onely one company of beleevers joyned together in fellowship, according to Christs institution. The promise made in the 14th, of Iohn 12. 13. is made unto them, where Christ said. The workes that he did they should doe &illegible; & that whatsoever they should aske in his name, that he would do for &illegible; that the Father may be glorified, and that the Spirit of truth should dide with them for ever. And that he should teach them all things, and bring all things unto their remembrance, as it is said in the following verses of the same Chapter. This (you may see) is the portion of beleevers, and they that have this portion are the greatest in the world, and many of them are greater than one, but many joyned together in a comely order in the fellowship of the Gospell, according to the Scriptures, are the greatest of all and therefore have power to ordaine, and to blesse their Ministers in the name of the Lord. Thus the lesser is blessed of the greater.
Now Mr. Edwards, I hope you will confesse, that you spake unadvisedly, when you affirmed, The maintenance of Independensie, was the breaking of Gods Ordinance, and violating of that Order and constant way of Ministers recorded in the Word.
To this I Answer, that if the Church doe elect one, he must be elected out of some more, & those that are not elected, may be as able to blesse the Church in the name of the Lord, as he, therefore one of these who are not elected, being chosen by the whole Church, to blesse him in the name of the Lord, whom the Church hath ordained, is the hand of the whole (who are greatest of all, and so a sufficient Officer for that worke which hee is put a part to doe.
Thus you may see (Mr. Edwards) that we doe not hold Ordination extraordinary and temporary; neither doe we hold it the least of Gods Institutions, for we have respect unto them all; But that nothing in matter of Order hath so cleare and constant a practise as this (as you do affirme) and also say, the whole frame of Church and Discipline, hath not so much ground in the word for it as this. I deny, and doe affirme, that not onely this, but all Gods Ordinances have as much ground and footing in Gods Word also.
Yet notwithstanding you say, that Calvin confesseth, that there is no expresse precept concerning the imposition of hands: Hath the imposition of hands no footing in Gods Word? and yet hath not all the forme of Gods Worship so much footing as it? Here Mr. Calvin and you, will now pin all the forme of Church and Discipline, upon unwritten verities.
Further, you rehearse confusedly, the opinion of Zanchius to strenghen yours who (say you) would have the example of the Apostles and ancient Church, to be more esteemed of, and to be instead of a command.
I pray you, how doe you know it to be their example, if it be not written?
And whereas you alledge, that Zanchius saith, it is no value Ceremony but the holy Spirit is present to performe things inwardly, which are signified by this Ordinance outwardly.
I have granted you that already, where I affirme, that the Church having the Spirit of God hath power by an instrument of her owne chusing, to blesse the party to his worke in the name of the LORD; and I am also bound to beleeve, that God will accompany that his owne Ordinance (which is performed by them outwardly) with his owne Spirit inwardly, to furnish the party (so blessed by them) with the knowledge of the Scripture, which is able to furnish the man of God to every part of his duty. And thus you may see, that we have not departed from Christs way, nor gone any other way, in things concerning his House and Officers, then he hath directed.
And whereas you demand for what cause Paul left Titus at Creete? I answer, that I have told you before, that it was to communicate the things unto others, which hee had learned, whereof Ordination was one. And no doubt but hee declared the same to faithfull men, that they might teach others also, therefore he was there employed in preaching of the Gospell, as well as if he had gone preaching with Paul.
The next thing you goe upon, is the triall of the gifts of Ministers, and this you attribute to them which have the greatest measure of the Spirit, for you say, Examination belongeth to the most skilfull, and they who have most authority.
All these things are well allowed of by us, for who hath a greater measure of the Spirit than beleevers? and who hath more skill than he that hath beene trained up in the Schoole of Christ? and hath learned this Lesson to be obedient to his Master Christ in keeping of all his commandements? and who hath greater authority upon the earth then they that are visible Saints? and what makes men visible Saints? if not the manifestation of their obedience to God the Father, and Christ his sonne, in the practise of all his Ordinances, and not to have some other Presbyters present with them, to assist them, (as you affirme) for by these other Presbyters, I know not yet who you meane.
And whereas you say, that the Church may be led into errours, or kept in a low estate by unfit Pastors and Elders.
I answer, It is a cleare truth; as wofull experience teacheth us, who live here in the Land of England.
And whereas you affirme, that visible Saints cannot ordaine Officers, because they have no gifts of prayer.
I Answer, Here you make prayer the Ordination of Ministers.
And whereas you say they are not able to conceive prayer.
Here you give the holy Ghost the lie: for Beleevers have received the Spirit of adoption to cry Abba Father,
But say you, they cannot conceive prayer according to the action in &illegible;
Here you would seeme to make beleevers, which have the Spirit of God, to leade them into all truths, more voide of common reason, then men that have but gifts of nature.
Againe, you say, they have not gifts to make publike exhortation, and admonition.
To which I answer, If they had first knowledge to feele the want of a Pastor, and also diversable men out of whom to elect and ordaine a Pastor, then they out of whom this person is chosen, are able to exhort, and to admonish: for he that hath not the gift of teaching, may have the gift of exhortation: againe, the man that undertaketh to teach others, ought to be taught by God, and likewise to be able by sound Doctrine to withstand the Gainesayers, but a man may give good exhortations, (and that publikely) that is not able to withstand the Gainesayers by sound Doctrine. By this you may see, the Church of God can never be without some Ministers, except it be (according to that spoken by zachariah) in the day of very small things indeede, when God shall take away their Ministers by death, prison, or exile: for seeing the Churches were planted by Ministers of Gods owne ordaining; therefore they were not without Ministers in the very beginning: and still the Churches are planted by the Ministeriall power of the Lord Jesus, which cannot be exercised without fit instruments; Yet that they must want the word preached, or Sacraments administred, till they have Pastors and Teacher in Office, is yet to be proved, but that page of Mr. Robinsons, which hath beene alledged before, is sufficient for this present purpose against you, even to prove that the family must not be unprovided for, either for the absence or neglect of a Steward.
But now you seeme to insinuate an affirmation, or a supposition, I cannot well tell whether, That a ruleing Elder may be destitute of the guift of discering, and seeme to imply, that if he be destitute, then all the Church must be destitute, if there be no more Officers then be.
Here you would faine make the ruling Elders, the eyes of the Church, and then all the rest of the body must be blinde, and so unfit to have any hand in election, and also voide of the Spirit of Grace to discerne the gifts by, though it hath beene proved unto you before, that she is the greatest of all, having the Spirit of God to leade her into all truth, being the Spouse of Christ, and endowed with all his riches, gifts, and donations.
And thus you still deny the Authority & ability of the Church giving to the persons in office all power and deserning. But this is indeede according to your practise here in England, but not according to the minde and Spirit of God.
And for the neighbour Churches Counsell, I deny not, but that it may be imbraced, and the Saints have cause to praise God for any helpes of Gods ordaining. But if they want the helpe of a neighbour Church to Counsell them, or neighbour Ministers to direct them: yet if they be a Church of Jesus Christ, they have (as hath beene said before) power among themselves to elect and ordaine their owne Officers; as also the Spirit of discerning, whereby to try their gifts, and yet be farre from falling into that evill, which they complaine against in the Episcopacie (namely) for one man to have the sole power of Ordination.
By all these particulars, you may clearely see all your pretended proofes and former assertions disproved, as I promised you, in the entrance of this my answer to your second Reason.
So that these two first Reasons, being (as I conceive) the greatest Champions, which you have sent out in this skirmage, are now both slaine, and made voide of all the life that ever was in them, for, they were made most of suppositions, and of things that appeared unto you by likelihood, without any ground from the Scriptures: and of some other thing than Gods Word allowed: and of some triviall affirmations which were not grounded upon any truth of Gods Word.
Now, these two being thus turned aside, by one of the meanest of all the Army of Jesus Christ, you may justly feare, that all the rest of your souldiers will run away wounded.
IN your third Reason, You say it is not to be thought, that Christ would institute such a Government of his Church which off ords no helpe; nor allowes no way or remedy for innocent persons that are wronged.
Which thing I grant to be very true; but touching the means and helpes which you pleade for, that is, some other Synods to appeale unto, I tell you I know not what Synods you meane. But this I affirme that there are no larger Synods to be kept to settle Church differences, then the comming together of the Ministers, and Brethren, as it is mentioned in the 15th. of the Acts, which I have garnted you in my Answers to your former Reasons.
And whereas you strive for appeales:
I Answer, It is the rule of Christ:Matth. 14. 15. 16. 17. that if one brother doe trespasse against another; and if the brother offending will not be reclaimed by the private admonition of the brother offended, he is to be admonished by one or two other brethren with him; but if he will not heare them, the brother offended is to tell the Church; and if he will not heare the Church, then he is not to be accounted a brother but as a Heathen man and a Publican; if not as a brother, then out of the fellowship: then if the wrong be any personall injury, as oppression, or fraud, or any other finne of these natures, the Law is open, where he may appeale for Justice to the Magistrate in any part of the Kingdome, where-ever he liveth; but if it be a matter of scandall; as if hee should be a drunkard, or incontinent, or the like, then he hath sufficient remedy, when such a one is cast out of his society. By this you may see, the way of government given by Christ Jesus, the King of peace, is the way of peace and righteousnesse.
And whereas you affirme, That if the controversie touching Circumcision, should have beene ended in the Church of Antiochia, then parties must have beene Iudges.
Here, you would seeme by this to make the whole Church of Antioch leavened with the Doctrine of Justification by Circumcision, which to doe is a very great slander, as it appeares by Paul & Barnabas opposing them there, and that Churches sending Paul and Barnabas to have the Churches advise at Ierusalem concerning this matter.
But whereas you affirme,Acts 15. 1. &illegible; That the Church of Antiochia, judged it unequall to decide the case among themselves:
I answer, That they judged it unequall, is more than is expressed in that place: but if that should be granted it will make against you, for their reason in sending the matter to Ierusalem, was, because the parties were members of the Church of Ierusalem, as it appeares by Acts. 15. 1. 5. 24. The first verse sheweth, that they were men of Iudea; the 5th. verse proves that they were Beleevers; The 24th verse declares, that they went out of the Church of Ierusalem unto them. And by this you may see plainely, that this Chapter (above all the Chapters that I can finde) proves Independencie upon your owne ground; that the Church of Antiochia judged it an unequall thing for them to judge the members of the Church of Ierusalem. And by this you may perceive, how you have either erred, not knowing the Scriptures or else you have done worse in labouring to darken the truth by evasions, or false glosses.
Thus much for your third Reason.
IN your fourth Reason you affirme, That the light and Law of Nature, with right reason, is against the Independencie of particular Churches; which is an unjust affirmation as hath beene plainely proved before in the Answer to your third Reason. But a few words concerning this Reason.
You say it is found necessary, in bodies naturall, that the particular members doe joyne in one, for the good of the whole, and that the whole being greater than a part, the severall parts should be subject too, and ordered by the whole: All this I have granted you freely already in the Answer to your second Reason; where I have plainely proved unto you, that the hands of the Church are ordered by the whole body, in the Ordination of the Ministery: And this is according to the very Scripture it selfe, for the holy Ghost speaketh so, in 1 Cor. 12.1 Cor. 12. Comparing the Church of God to the naturall body of a man; and therefore when the hand lanceth the foote, it cannot be said properly to be the action of the hand alone, because the hand is set a worke, by the body; neither can the body set the hand a worke, if it be destitute of the power, for the motion of the body commeth not from the hand but the motion of the hand from the body; and thus you may see I have granted your comparison. And the nearer politicke bodies doe goe to this Rule; the more orderly they are guided; for as all the cities and country of England, make up but one Kingdome, and all the people in England ought to be subject to one King; so all the Independant Congregations in England, and out of England, (that are guided by the Lawes of Christ) make up but one Kingdome spiritually to him that is their King.
Now concerning Armies; though I be very ignorant in these things, yet thus much I conceive, that all the Armies, that belong to the Kingdome ought to be under the banner of their owne King; even so all the particular Congregations of Christ, are to be guided by the Lawes of their owne Captaine Christ, who rideth before them with his garments dipt in blood, and they follow after him riding upon white horses, Revel. 19. 11, 12. 13, 14.
We reade also in the Scripture of another armie, which were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ: And this armie (I conceive) consisteth of those Locusts, which ascended out of the bottomlesse pit, Rev. 9. And these, as I told you before, are Arch-Bishops, Diocesan Bishops, Deanes, Prebends, &c. and the rest of that rabble; and these also have a King over them, which is the Angell of the bottomlesse pit, who is said to be the great red Dragon the Devill and Sathan, Rev. 12. 3. 9. and 20. 2. who gave unto this armie his power and throne, and great authority, Rev. 13. 2. Therefore, to any Counsells that are held, or Canon Lawes that are enacted by any Captaine of this armie, the Churches of Christ ought not to submit, though they should be commanded, by any Statute Law of the Kingdome; for those Statute Lawes are not according to Christs Rule, but ought by all Councells of State to be repealed.
And whereas you say, It is alledged by the Separation; that hold Independancie, That the Magistrate of Leyden cannot governe in Delph:
This I hope you will grant; for I am sure the Magistrates of Coventry cannot execute their office in Shrewsbury, neither can the one Towne chuse Magistrates for the other: and this still proves Independencie, for either of these may chuse their owne, and guide their owne at all times, except they forfeit their Charter.
Now whereas you say, the people alleadge for themselves, that the Law of nature teacheth them to make a Covenant; though there be neither precept nor practise of it in the word.
I suppose you misconster their sayings, for the text alleadged in Thessalonians 40 doth not prove that brotherly love was never written of in the Scripture; but that it had beene so sufficiently taught of God by written precepts, that it needed not to be written againe. Besides, I am able to prove by the Scripture, that there is both precept and practise for a Church Covenant: the which I will answer you in the Answer to your 6th. Reason, where you begge the Question.
Concerning what is asserted by some Divines of Scotland, That in such things as are alike common to the Church, and Commonwealth, and have the same use in both, and that whatsoever natures light directeth the one, directeth the other also.
You know (by what hath beene formerly spoken) I have fully assented unto it.
I also agree with Amesius, as farre as he agrees with the truth; but to agree with you in that falsehood, that the Government of independant Churches, is against the light of nature and right Reason, that I have denied, and disproved sufficiently already.
Thus having answered every particular thing in this Reason, that hath not beene answered already, I proceede to the Fifth.
IN your 5th. Reason you affirme, That there be many Rules in Scripture, that doe require the combination of Churches into Synods; for proofe whereof you say, that Amesius confesseth, the Rules and Commands to be such as these; Let all things be done to edification, decently and in order, Cor. 14. 26. 40. and follow after the things which make for peace, Rom. 14. 19. So Phil. 4. 8. And you conclude that Synods are found to be for edification, peace, and order. But you have brought no Scripture yet that proveth it; and I know all Scripture is against it, therefore I deny it. And as for the Scriptures alleadged (as you say) by Amesius, they are such as were spoken to particular Congregations: and in the particular Congregation of Colosse, Paul beheld a comely order, notwithstanding there were no Synod consisting of any but onely the members and Ministers of that Congregation, Col. 2. 5.
And as for commands, which you say are some generall, and others particular; Here you labour by evasions to turne away the truth; for you your selfe know, that every particular command reacheth not to the generall, though a generall command reach to every particular. Now if you can shew us in the Scriptures any generall command, that all the Churches should, or an example that all the Churches did gather a Councell of some Ministers out of every particular Congregation, to make Decrees or Lawes to impose upon the whole, then you will speake speake something to the purpose, but as yet you have not spoken one word that proveth any such thing.
And whereas you alleadge that Scripture, That the Spirits of the Prophets must be subject to the Prophets, 1 Cor. 14. 32.
I Answer, That that is given to particular Congregations; and therefore not to all in a Province or Nation, and so not to Synods: And Paul never sought to winne credit nor obedience to Orders established by himselfe, (as you say) for he never made any other Orders, nor taught the people any other thing than what he had received of the Lord Jesus, as it is plaine in 1 Cor. 11. Be ye followers of me (saith he) as I am of Christ, and in the 23. verse of the same Chapter, I have received of the Lord (saith he) that which I have delivered unto you. Paul also writes unto these Corinthians, (whom he had converted unto the faith) to be followers of him, 1 Cor. 4. 16. in ver. 17. he sheweth them, that therefore he sent Timothy unto them, to the end that Timothy should put them in remembrance of Pauls wayes in Christ, as Paul had taught every where in every Church. Here you may see Paul brings not the Example of the Synod before them, nor layes upon them any Decree or Command, to practise otherwise than he himselfe had learned in Christ; yet I hope you will not deny, but that this Church spoken of, was a Church of Christ as well as the Church of Colosse.
Now the next thing to be considered is, that which you alleadge of Pauls submission, to the practise of what was agreed upon, by the common consent of Iames, and the rest of the Elders, Acts 21. from. 18. &illegible; 27.
The Reason why they counselled Paul to doe the thing, was, because of the information that the Jewes had then against Paul; that he taught the people to forsake Moses, Acts 21. 21. Now I hope you will not deny, but that this was a false affirmation.
The thing wherein they conceived he transgressed was, by bringing in Trophimus and Ephesian, (as they thought into the Temple) because they saw him with him in the citie.
This was but their supposition, as it appeares in the 29 verse of this Chapter.
Now what the Elders counselled Paul to doe, in respect of giving offence to the Jewes, was no injunction to any to follow the same example, except it were in the same case.
Now Paul himselfe was a Jew, and taught all men that Christ was come to fulfill the Law, and not to destroy the Law; therefore he condescended to circumcise Timothy because his mother was a Jew,Act. 16. 1. 3. and the Jewes knew his father was a Grecian. But Titus a Grecian was not compelled to be circumcised; yea, though there were false brethren craftily crept in, to spy out their liberty; Paul gave not place to them, no not for an houre, Gal 2. 3. 4. 5.
Now the things that the Elders counselled Paul to doe, was to purifie himselfe, with them that had a vow, and to contribute with them; and the reason wherefore they counselled Paul to doe this, was, that it might appeare to the Jewes that Paul was a Jew, and not an uncircumcised person for the Jewes knew that it was a sinfull thing to bring into the Temple any uncircumcised person in heart or flesh, Ezek. 44. 7.
Now Paul in all this did nothing but what was commanded in the Law, as purifications and vowes, &c.
Moreover, this counsell of Iames and the Elders unto Paul, was not generall to the beleeving Jewes; neither was it generally or particularly to the Gentiles, but particularly to Paul, and the rest with him, because of the false report which the Jewes had received of him.
And as this Counsell was not generall, so it was not perpetuall, but served to put an honorable end to the Law, which Christ came to fulfill, and not to destroy.
By all this it appeares, it maketh nothing for any counsell that you plead for, to establish any unwritten verities; for such counsels are the counsels of darkenesse: because they are not according to the Law and the Testimony, it appeares there is no light in them: therefore they are not of authoritie to bind any particular member of the Church, much lesse the generall, as you say they are.
But seeing you confesse, that no Synod can say, It seemeth good unto the holy Ghost and to us; it plainely appeares that your counsels presume without the counsell of the holy Ghost. But you may see, that the Church of Ierusalem did nothing without the counsell of the Spirit, neither determined of anything, that was not written in the Scripture. So the Churches of God now ought to presume to do nothing but what the written Word allowes them; being taught the true meaning thereof by the Spirit that God hath given them.
Moreover, the counsell of Ierusalem imposed nothing upon the Gentiles for a Law, but counselled them to abstaine from some necessary things, which would be either offensive to the Jewes, or sinfull in themselves, Acts 15. 29. 20. 28. 29.
Now seeing the Church of Ierusalem hath done nothing, but by he counsell of the written word, in forbidding things sinfull in themselves and offensive to their brethren, it appeares to be plainely against your Synods, and dependencie in government, which in cases difficult, doe establish things which have no footing in Gods word; neither have they, by your owne confession, in their Counsels any one, who is immediately and infallibly imspired by the Spirit, and able of himselfe to satisfie the controversie, they being by your owne confession inferiour to Paul and Barnabas; And Paul and Barnabas might teach nothing but what was taught in the Law and the Prophets. And therefore, by this it appeares you have not grounded any affirmation or supposition upon Gods word; for the proving either of your Synods or dependencie.
Thus much for your fifth Reason.
IN your sixth Reason you affirme that the government of the Church by Synods, is no where forbidden by God in the new Testament, either directly, or by consequence.
But I doe affirme the contrary, and prove it thus;
That whatsoever Government is not commanded by God is accursed, and that is plainely manifested in the New Testament, Rev. 22. 18.
But your government by Synods is not commanded by God, and therefore it is accursed; as it will appeare in the following discourse.
Whereas you say, that all the Ministers are greater than one:
I have already proved,See the Answer to his second Reason against Independencie. that the Church of Christ is greater than all the Ministers.
You say Synods appoint no other office or Officer in the Church, which Christ hath not appointed.
Me thinkes you are strangely put to your shifts, that dare not tell the world what you meane by your Synods. But if you meane the Councell or Convocation that used to sit at Pauls, I have told you already they are none of the Councell of Christ neither hath he appointed that councell or any other councell, to make, or ordaine, either Officers or Offices for his Church, therefore so to affirme is blasphemie, for he himselfe is their Lord and Law-giver, and hath instituted every particular Ordinance in his Church, that the Church hath neede of, therefore it is (as hath beene said already) against the Law and light of nature, and contrary to edification, order, peace, purenesse, lovelinesse, for any to decree for, or injoyne upon, the Assemblies of the Saints any other practise but those that the Apostles have taught, which they themselves had learned from the Lord Jesus; but as for you Mr. Edwards, it appeareth plainely that you doe not understand nor see the forme of the Lords House; which causeth you to call upon any to produce a particular word, or rule, for the order of Gods worship, what must be performed first, what second, what third, what fourth, and so of the rest; and that no Ordinance, and part of worship may be in another order. Further, you chalenge them if they can, to shew a particular word or rule out of the New Testament, for their Church Covenant, which you say, is the forme of the Church.
You also inquire for the forme of Excommunication, and Ordination, and gestures in the severall Ordinances of God, and this you say they are not able to doe, but onely in generall rules.
I have told you already that generall rules reach to every perticular, and that is no more than you seeme to know already; for you have confessed, that there are generall rules to teach every one of these particulars, which you could not chuse but acknowledge; otherwise you would have made Christ not so faithfull in his house as Moses. But the more you know, the greater is your sinne, in that you labour to turne away the light; and you are still repairing of those thresholds, which have beene set up by Gods thresholds. If I had any hope therefore that you would be ashamed of all that you have done, I would shew you, though not all that I see, yet what I am able to expresse of the forme of the house of God,See Ezck. 43. 11. and the paterne thereof, and the going out thereof, and the comming in thereof, and all the Ordinances thereof, and the Lawes thereof and write it in your sight, that so you may keepe the whole fashion thereof, and all the Ordinances thereof, and doe them.
As for the Ordinance of Election, Ordination, and Excommunication &c. I have declared already the forme to them that have their eyes open to see it. But they cannot see the forme of the house, that have not repented them of the evills that they have done, therefore I will cease to strive with such persons, for they may live and stay long enough, and be of no Church of Christ.
Thus much for your Sixth Reason.
IN your 7th. Reason you say, That consociation and combination, in way of Synods, is granted by themselves, (and you produce for your Authors these foure; Christ on his Throne, Examination of Prelates Petition, Syons Prerogative Royal, and the Protestation Protested; which Authors, if the Reader please to examine, shall final cleare against you) That which you have gathered here from these Authors is, that they grant that one Church should be content that matters of difference and importance should be heard by other Churches, as also to be advised and counselled by other Churches, &c.
I answer, though all should confesse, that it is profitable to have the counsell of their brethren and neighbour Churches in doubtfull cases, yet this will be farre from proving the lawfulnesse of your Synods; as may appeare by the Authors that your selfe hath here alledged, for they intend no such Consociation, nor Combination, which you have mentioned: but seeing your selfe would have something which you cannot prove, you would begge of others to grant it or prove it for you.
Concerning the Orders, or Decrees of the Church of Ierusalem (Acts 164) they were not such Decrees as were alterable, but such as were warranted by God, and a perpetuall Rule for all the Churches of the Gentiles.
You neede not tell me what Amesius speaketh of the parts of Discipline, as if any of the Separation, held it to consist all in Excommunication; for I have told you already, that they have seene the forme of the Lords house, and have respect unto all his Ordinances, and doe not take one for all.
Neither is it granted you, that admonitions and reproofes, and decreeing of Excommunications should be by Officers of other Churches, towards members of any Congregation, though in the same constitution; the contrary most evidently appeareth, even by the practise of the Church of Antioch, who brought the matter to the Church of Ierusalem, which concerned the Church of Ierusalems members, neither may any of the Churches now be subject to the censures of other Congregations except they must be subject to humane Ordinances; but in case, both the members, and the Church, be obstinate in any knowne sinne, then are the Churches of God bound to admonish her, and reprove her, and reject her; as if the Church of Antiochia had found the Church of Ierusalem all leavened with the Doctrine of Iustification by circumcision; then had the Church of Antiochia power to admonish, reprove, and reject the Church of Ierusalem, and not have communion with them, if they persisted obstinate in that evill; for the Church of Antiochia was not inferiour in power to the Church of Ierusalem.
Thus much for your seventh Reason.
IN the beginning of your Eight Reason you say they grant and confesse That Churches of one constitution ought to withdraw from; and renounce communion and fellowship with a Congregation or Church that is fallen into sinne, as false Doctrine, and evill discipline, &c.
I answer, I have granted you, that in the conclusion of the answer to your 7th. Reason, if the Church stand obstinace in sinne and will not be reclaimed.
But that they should be complained on to Synods and Classes, and subject to their censures, that is but a question of your owne begging, and remaines for you to prove, and denied of me.
The next thing you would know is the diference betweene Excommunication and rejection and would seeme to make them both one.
To which I answer, Titus had power to reject a person,a but we doe not reade that he had power of himselfe to excommunicate that person.
A wicked man may be said to reject God when he rejecteth his Word. So Saul rejected God, (1 Sam. 15. 23. therefore God rejected him from being King, vers. 26. but did he excommunicate God? So the people of Israel rejected God, 1 Sam. 8. 7. and 10. 19. Did they therefore excommunicate God?
Here Mr. Edwards, you may see that Excommunication is more than rejection, as it also plainely appeares by Pauls words, 1 Cor. 5. 4. 5. where he delivers unto them the forme of Excommunication, in these words; When ye are gathered together, and my spirit, in the name of our Lord Iesus Christ, that such a one by the power of our Lord Iesus Christ be delivered unto Sathan, &c. Here Mr. Edwards, you may plainely see the forme of this part of the Lords house; This you see Paul had determined before; and also that Pauls spirit was together with the Church in the action doing; yet Paul tooke not upon him that power of himselfe, but committed the action to the Church who had the power of our Lord Iesus Christ, as he himselfe testifieth, which plainely proves, that the Church had the power that Paul had not; for though Paul was a good Counsellor, yet he was no executioner in that action, but as a member for his part. Here Mr. Edwards you may see the difference betweene rejection and excommunication; a man in rejecting the Law of God may be said to reject God, and he that addes to, or diminisheth from the Lawes of God, rejects God, in rejecting the counsell of God, which injoynes him neither to adde, nor diminish; but you by pleading for your unknowne Synods and ungrounded dependencie, reject the counsell of God: and so doe all those, that assist you in it.
The next thing you affirme as; That this government of Independencie (which I have proved to be Christs government) &illegible; the Communion of Saints.
To which I answer, This appeares to be contrary by that which hath beene said already; as for example, the difference betweene the Church of Antiochia, and the Church of Ierusalem; turned to good, because they undertooke not the authority to determine the case themselves, as hath beene said; because it was against the members of the Church of Ierusalem: and this increased union and communion in both Churches, as we may plainely see, for Peter communicated unto them what God had revealed unto him: and Paul & Bernabas declared what God had done by them. Iames calls from bathe to confidet what Peter had declared; and backes it with the Scripture, manifesting how it agreed with the words of the Prophets, as you may reade at large, in Act. 15. Thus you may see what sweete Communion was betweene these Churches that were both Independant.
Now, whereas you say it cannot be in a Christian Common-wealth, or Nation.
I doe affirme it may stand with Christs Church in a Common-wealth, as may plainely appeare in the three first Chapters of the Revelations, which cestifies that there were seven Churches in Asia, and these seven Churches were compared to seven &illegible; Candlestickes,b and every Candlesticke stood by it &illegible; and held forth her owne light, as appeares by those severall messages, which were sent to those seven Churches for had they had a dependencie one upon another in respect of power, then one message would have served unto them all; and what sinne any of the Churches or Angels were guilty of, would have been said unto the change of all the Churches and Angels; but wee see it was otherwise:Rev. 2. 20. As for instance, there was none charged for suffering the woman Iezebel to teach the people, to commit fornication, and to eate things sacrificed to Idols, but the Angell of Thyatira; by this you may plainely see there was not one Angell set over them all, nor one Synod oppointed to judge and correct them all, which is the thing you labour for. Yet it cannot be said that the Independancie of these seven Churches hindred their communion, either with Christ their head, or one with another; neither was it any disturbance to the Common-wealth or Nation wherein they lived.
And here you cannot say that I have evaded, but have answered you directly to these your doubts, and suppositions, and to many of your Iffs. which have beene your &illegible; out in this Scout; And moreover, I will answer all your many Reasons as I come to them (though they be joyned in battle with these) I meane your following Reasons against Toleration; and also batter, or drive backe your answers which you have made to the Six Reasons, which you say be theirs, and yet neither this Scout, nor the joyned, nor the subjoyned forces, shall be able to discover what strength is on my side, although they be formed by you in battle aray.
Now I have proved the Independant Government to be Christs Government; I will also prove in my Answers to these your following Reasons, that the Independant Congregations performe Christs publike worship, and therefore ought to be tolerated, and maintained in the practise thereof.
IN the beginning of your first Reason against Toleration, you grant, that the Scriptures speake much for Toleration, and bearing with one another in many things, both in matters of opinion and practise, and the Scriptures you quote are very pertinent to this purpose, his alwayes provided, they are to be understood as spoken properly to particular Congregations, and not unto any whole Nation.
But to stand for the Toleration of the maintenance of Heresie, and Schisme, is not the Toleration that we plead for (as farre as hath beene yet made knowne) but rather your insinuation: for I have declared unto you already in the driving backe of the first Scout of your Army. That God hath provided a way and meanes to purge every Congregation of his from all such persons that doe offend, whether it be in matters of Faith or Order. Neither doe any that stand for Christian liberty condemne them for cruelty, or that it is against charitie.
For if we compare the Church with one man or a few then it will easily appeare, that the one doth out-weigh the other: and you say, Calvin saith, It is cruell mercy which preferres one man, or a few, before the Church: To these words of Calvin I doe fully agree unto, for they are of the same nature with my former Answers to your Reasons against Independancie, where I have proved against you, that the weight and power lieth in the Church and that the Church is above the Ministers, and that the Ministers have their power by the Church to exercise in the Church, and not the Church by the Ministers.
The next thing to be considered in this your Reason, is your peremptory affirmation, but grounded upon no Scripture, (namely) That to set up Independant and separated Churches, is a Schisme in it selfe, and that it will make great disturbance in the Church, both to the outward peace, and to the faith and conscience of the people of the Kingdome.
Now that it is a Schisme in it selfe, I deny, and prove the contrary thus;
God hath commanded all his people to separate themselves from all Idolatryc and false worshippingd and false worshiperse (and therefore it is no Schisme) except you will make God the Author of Schisme) & this is according to the Prophet Esaiabs words, Esay 1. which is the first Lesson that every one ought to learne; evento cease to doe evill. But I hope it will not be denied but that they are to learne another lesson, which is, to learne to doe well: but to doe well is to keepe all Gods Commandements, and to obey God rather then men.
Now Gods commands to his people, is, that they learne to know the forme of the house (as I have told you before) and all the Ordinances of the house, and to doe them, Ezek. 43. 11. but the Ordinances of Christs Kingdome under the Gospell, (amongst the rest) are Doctrine, Fellowship, breaking of Bread, and Prayer; which Ordinances the Saints continued stedfastly in, and are commended for their constancie in the same, Acts 2. 42 and that in every particular Church or Congregation, though there were divers in one Nation, and yet I hope you will not affirme it was any disturbance to the Nation (otherwise then Christ hath shewed shall ever be, that the seed of the Serpent, shall persecute the seede of the Woman) for Gods people are said to be a peaceable people and the Lord himself hath said that he hath set them in the world as Lambs among Wolves. Now there must needs be a disagreement betweene Lambes and Wolves but the Lambes are not the cause thereof. By this you may see that Separation is not a Scisme, but obedience to Gods Commandement.
And for any Magistrate to give way for men to separate, from the worship of the Kingdome established by Law (if that worship be not according to Gods Law) is the Magistrates duty; and the Magistrate shall partake of no sinne in so doing because there is no sinne committed. Therefore the Magistrate ought not to forbid the practise of Gods Worship; when hee hath power to command it; for he is set up for the practise of those that doe well, and for the punishment of evill does.
And therefore you did well, when you admonished the Parliament in your Epistle, to cast out of the way all &illegible; blockes, and to breake downe all Images,See the 3. & 4 lease of his Epistle. and Crucifixes; and to throw downe all &illegible; and remove the High places; and to breake to pieces the brazen Serpents which have beene so abused to Idolatry and Superfiction. So then you grant, that much may be done (as it seemeth by your speech) and yet if there be not a full reformation, even to the throwing downe of the High places, it will prove a blemish to the reformers.
Reasons. 1. Pag. 23.You say, be that doth not forbid, when he hath power, he commands.
But I hope you doubt not but the Parliament hath power, and therefore whatsoever they doe not forbid (by your owne ground) they have of doe command.
But in the Protestation, they have not forbidden Gods Worship, which is according to his Word; but they have Protested (and have injoyned others so to doe) to maintaine and defend the Protestant Religion, expressed in the Doctrine of the Church of England, against all Popery, and Popish Innovations, within this Realme &c. And in the Interpretation of their meaning of the said Oath, they binde us neither to the setforme of Worship, Discipline, or Government, nor any Rites or Ceremonies of the said Church of England.
Now if we must withstand Popery, and Popish Innovations, then we must needs withstand such dependencie as makes up a whole Nation a Church both good and bad, without separating the precious from the vile, and also such Synods or Counsels that decree, and make Lawes, and impose them upon any Church to keepe, having not the Word of God to warrant them; for these are Popish Innovations, and to be withstood by us, according to our Oath.
And truely Mr. Edwards, you might have asked the independant Ministers a question in private, (for you knew where to finde them) and not have propounded so filly a question before the Parliament, when there was none there to answer you.
Pag. 23.Your Question is, Whether it be fitting, that well meaning Christians should be suffered to goe to make Churches?
To this I Answer, It is fitter for well meaning Christians than for ill-meaning Christians, for well-meaning Christians be the fittest on the earth to make Churches, and to choose their Officers; whether they be Taylors, Felt-makers, Button-makers, Tent-makers, Shepherds, or Ploughmen, or what honest Trade soever, if they are well-meaning Christians; but ill-meaning Priests are very unfit men to make Churches; because what they build up with one hand, they pull downe with the other.
Further you seeme to feare the spreading of Heresies, if there be not a hindrance of these Assemblies.
But you should rather feare that your owne glory would be eclipsed by their gifts and graces; for they are not men of so meane parts as you would make them: but are able to divide the Word of God aright by the spirit that God hath given them. Therefore I would wish you rather to let your heart bleed for your selfe and for the evills that you have done. For Christ will never suffer any to perish for whom he died.
Thus much for your first Reason.
IN your second Reason you say, the Toleration desired will not helpe to heale the Schismes and Rents of your Church.
To which I answer, that if your Church be not the Church of Christ, it will not heale it indeede, for though the Prophets would have healed Babel, it could not be healed.
You say that Ministers and people will not submit to the Reformation and Government setled by Low.
It is very like so, if it be not free from Innovations of Popery, because they are sworne to the contrary.
But you say many doubts will arise in the peoples mindes, that the Government of your Church is not ordered according to the Word of God.
To this I answer; If you meane the Church of Englands Government, established by the Canon Law. I thinke it is out of doubt with the most, for they that understand but little, doe see and know that that Government is vaine and Popish; and that is the reason (as I conceive) why so many refuse to conforme to it: and if you feare that that will prove so great a division, you may doe well to counsell the Magistrates, to expell all such Government, and to reject all such Svnods and Counsells, and to labour to understand the minde of God, and to set up his Government over Beleevers in the Kingdome of England.
And whereas you say, that many of the people who yet be not in this Church way, are possessed with these principles (of the Independant way) and much looking towards it:
I say it is pitty they should any longer be led about by the way of the Wildernesse.
2. You doe affirme, that the mindes of multitudes of Professors in England, and especially in the City of London, are upon all occasions, very apt to fall to any way in Doctrine or discipline, that is not commonly received by the Church.
I answer, Indeede the Proverbe is verified upon them. The burned child dreads the fire; for they have beene so long deceived by your false glosses, that now their eyes being a little open, the light appeareth very sweete unto them; yea, although they see men but like trees, as the blinde man, when his eyes began to be opened, who had beene blinde from his birth.
The third thing which you have laid downe in this Reason, is; That the Ministers will not be tied, from preaching those points in publike, not from speaking of them in private.
To which I answer, I hope they will not indeed, for it were their great sinne, if they should not declare Gods whole Councell, so farre as he hath revealed it unto them.
But if they would (you say) the people both men and women, are so strangely bold and pragmaticall, and so highly conceited of their way as the Kingdome of Christ and the onely way of Christ, that out of those principles, they would be drawing many of their friendship and kindred; and many would (say you) come unto them.
I answer, that this (I hope) you count a vertue, for it is the property of the Sheepe when they fare well, to call their fellowes, But Hogges will not doe so.
The fourth thing to be minded is (that you say) Liberty, the power of government, and rule, to be in the people, are mighty pleasing to flesh and blood, especially in meane persons, and such as have beene kept under.
To which I answer, that they that have beene kept under, have beene kept under by the tyranny of the Man of Sinne; This you confesse to be especially the poore, upon whom those Taskemasters have laid the greatest burthens. Therefore for them to affect liberty is no wonder.
And whereas you say they would have the power and Rule:
I answer, It is not any power or Rule which is pleasing to the flesh (as you speake, thinking them to be like those Priests, Whose god is their belly, whose glory is their shame, who minde earthly things) but it is the power of Christ which they stand for, as they are members of the Churches of Christ; to which Churches Christ the King thereof hath given all power in spirituall things.
And that the Church of Christ consisteth of meane persons, is no wonder; for wee have learned, that the poore receive the Gospell, and you know you have granted, that it stands with the light and Law of Nature, That the liberty, power, and rule, should be in the whole, and not in one man or a few; so that the power must rest in the body; and not in the Officers, though the Church be never so poore.
Now the fifth thing you minde in this Reason is, That Tolleration will be made use of to strengthen their way.
And you also conclude, it will be granted, that the ablest Ministers could not answer them, and therefore were content they should have a Tolleration.
You doe very well to feare the worst, but you had done better if you had armed your selfe against them, and answered the Scriptures, they bring by Scripture: But it is a plaine case, you could not do that, & therfore your feare was just; but if you were a wellminded man, or a wellmeaning Christian man, you should not have feared the comming of the truth to light, nor have been afraid of reformation, because it would worke to your greater divisions, and rents, for Christ came not to set peace upon the earth, (as I have told you before) but the seede of the Serpent will be ever playing his part.
Thus much for your second Reason.
IN your third Reason you affirme, That Tolleration will breed divisions, and Schismes, disturbing the peace and quiet of Churches, and Townes.
I answer, I have told you already, we plead for no tolleration that shall disturbe the peace of Churches or Townes.
Moreover, you say, it will not onely doe so, but it will also breed divisions in families betweene husband and wife, brother, and brother.
To which I answer, There was a division in the first Family that ever was, and brother rose up against brother, but Tolleration was not the cause of it; but the malice of Sathan in the seed of the Serpent, as it hath beene, and is now at this day.
And this is according to Christs words, Luke 12. 52, 53. which saith, That there shall be five in one house, two against three, and three against two, &c. and in Matth. 10. 34. 35. 36. Thinke not (saith he) that I come to send peace into the earth, I came not to send peace, but the sword: For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in Law against her mother in Law, and a mans enemies shall be they of his owne household; and moreover, in Luke 21. 16. our Saviour doth declare, that we shall be betrayed, both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolkes, and friends.
Now if Christ may be said to be the Author of evill, then you may say that Toleration of true Religion is the cause of this division.
Againe you say, (O how) this will occasion disobedience.
To this your Lamentation I answer. O that you would remember the rule* that every servant ought to count his Master worthy of all honour; and in the judgement of charitie beleeve, that persons professing the Gospel will learne that lesson.
Next you say O! how will this take away that power & authority which God hath given to Husbands, Fathers, and Masters, over wives, children, and servants.
To this I answer, O! that you would consider the text in 1 Cor. 7. which plainly declares that the wife may be a beleever, & the husband an unbeleever, but if you have considered this Text. I pray you tell me, what authority this unbeleeving husband hath over the conscience of his beleeving wife; It is true he hath authority over her in bodily and civill respects, but not to be a Lord over her conscience; and the like may be said of fathers and masters, and it is the very same authority which the Soveraigne hath over all his subjects, & therfore it must needes reach to families: for it is granted that the King hath power (according to the Law) over the bodies, goods, and lives of all his subjects; yet it is Christ the King of Kings that reigneth over their consciences: and thus you may see it taketh away no authority which God hath given to them.
The next thing you say is, that they cannot be certaine, that their servants and children sanctifie the Lords day.
To which I answer, that indeede unbeleeving Masters take as little care of this, as they that have given liberty to prophane the Lords Day; but beleeving Parents and Masters, may easily know (if their children or servants be of any Congregation) what their life and conversation is, and therefore this can binder no duties, or workes of Families (as you falsely affirme) nor crosse the good and peace of Familes.
By this you may see, that this your groundlesse affirmation, is no good Reason against Toleration.
And therefore the Court of Parliament (to whom you submit for judgement) may easily see that good members both for Churches and Common-wealths, may issue out of such Families, that live under Christs government, and that such Families may be good Nurseries, both for Church and Common-wealth.
Thus much for your third Reason.
IN your fourth Reason you doe affirme, that there will be great danger of disputes amongst you about Government and Worship, and Doctrine, and practises (in the Conclusion) you say, it will be about a question where Saints goe when they die, whether to heaven or a third place.
I Answer, This is a question I never heard amongst the Separates, (or any of those whom you call Independant men), but amongst the Papists of Rome, and England.
The next thing is, about sitting with hats on to breake bread?
I Answer, this may be a question indeed, but not to breede division; for it may be as lawfull for one man to sit covered & another uncovered, as it may be lawfull for one man to receive it sitting, and another lying in bed. But if any man list to be contentious, the Churches of God have no such custome.
Thus much for your Fourth Reason.
IN your fifth Reason you affirme, that the Ministers of the Kingdome, can have little assurance, of the continuance of their flockes to them, if such a toleration be granted, but that the tolerated Churches will admit them into fellowship, and increase Churches out of their labours: and that they should doe little else but spend and be spent.
To this I answer, that if you were the Ministers of Christ, as you would be taken to be, it might be your comfort, joy, and glory, for it was the Apostles worke to gather the Saints, and to travell in birth of children; and they did not grudge that they were added unto the Churches of Christ, but tooke care for them being so added, for the care of all Churches lay upon them, and therefore they were as Fathers, and Nurses, unto them; and the Gospell admits of no such theft as to steale away members from other Churches: but if men draw neere to the truth (which never were members of any Church) and offer themselves to joyne unto us; we may admit them upon good experience of their life and conversation, for those members that travelled from one Church to another, were commended unto those Churches by Letters from the Church where they were members, or else they could not have beene admitted: and thus you may see the way of the Gospell admits of no such disorder.
Now whereas you say, that this Toleration upon any light occasion of demanding dues; or preaching against any thing they like not, opens a wide doore, and will invite them to disert their Ministers.
I answer, by demanding of that which you call dues; you may indeede give just occasion, for you may demand for due, that which is not due; as all the Priests of England doe. Likewise by preaching of Doctrine, you may give just occasion, if you justifie the wicked, and condemne the just, and make sad the hearts of those whom God would not have made sad; and then if your people slye from you, you may thanke your selves; but concerning what you count to be your due, I will declare hereafter.*
Thus much for your fifth Reason.
NOw in the beginning of your sixth Reason, you say, that liberty will be an undoubted meanes and way of their infinite multiplication and increase, even to thirty fould.
Truely I thinke you are afraid, as Pharaoh was, least the Lords-people should grow mightier then you.
Next you say, if the Parliament could like to have more of the breede of them, and have a delight to have multitudes exempted from the Ecclesiasticall Lawes of the Land, &c.
I answer, it is no disgrace to the Parliament, if they should so delight, though never Parliament before had done the like.
Moreover, you say, they have increased within this nine moneths, without a toleration, therefore (you conclude) they would multiply much, if they had a toleration, in many, if not in most Townes and Parishes, and you say it cannot be helped.
All this I grant may be; although they have not a Toleration, I thinke they will increase; for the Taskemasters can lay no heavier burthens upon them, then they have said already: but though they should increase, it will not be unprofitable, for the increase of beleevers will be the strength and glory of the Kingdome; for they will in all lawfull things, be subject to the Kings Majestie their dread Soveraigne, and to all the wholesome Lawes of his Land, and therefore it will be no danger to have (as you say) swarmes of them.
Thus much for your Sixth Reason.
Pag. 29.IN your 7th. Reason you affirme, that it will be very prejudiciall dengerous and insufferable to this Kingdome, for Saints two, or three, or more, to gather, and combine themselves in Church Fellowship, having one of power from Christ their immediate heade: without expecting warrant from any Governors.
First, whereas you say it will be prejudiciall:
I answer, It can prejudice none in the Kingdome, except it be the Priests, and it will be but of a little tithes, which they dare not in conscience pay, because those Iewish Ceremonies are ceased, and if they have not Toleration, that will be all one (in that respect,) for they will rather suffer, then doe any thing against conscience.
Now whereas you say it will be dangerous, and insufferable to the Kingdome, both these I deny; for if they were offensive people, two or three or a few could doe but little hurt. But they have beene proved to be a peaccable people and the suffering of such hath never beene dangerous to any Nation, but the not suffering of such to live quietly in a Land, or to passe quietly thorow a land, hath brought Judgements upon such Lands.
Now whereas you seeme to imply, that they should aske leave of the Magistrate, to gather and combine themselves into visible Churches, &c.
I answer, I doe not reade that any ever asked leave of the Magistrate for such a thing; nor to performe any of the parts of Gods Worship or Discipline: and yet you confesse that these independant men doe petition, to the Parliament for liberty.* Now I pray you Master Edwards, would you have Magistrates, and Kings, and Princes to have more power over their subjects then over their bodies, estates, and lives? would you have them be Lords over their consciences? I pray you where must Christ reigne then? Must he sit at the Magistrats footestoole? and take what power the Magistrate will give him? (I meane spirituall power of gathering and making Churches) and such Lawes as the Magistrate will give him leave to have, to rule over them by? Here you thrust Christ into a narrow corner; for you would faine force him to give his glory to some other, and his praise to some graven Image, of your owne devising, which he hath said he will not doe.*
But me thinkes it were fitter for men of your coate, to ground the Government of Christs Church, upon the written Word of God, and not upon Statute Lawes, nor Canon Lawes, which you call Ecclesiasticall; for it will be no disparagement to the Imperiall Crowne of this Realme, for Christs Church to be governed by Christs owne Lawes.
The next thing is, you say,Pag. 30. lin. 30. 31. the Oath of Supremacie was appointed by Law for Ecclesiasticall persons to take.
Me thinkes that was a good consideration, for Ecclesiasticall persons have beene in all ages ready to tyrannize, over Kings and Emperours.
But now you aske the independant men (as you call them) a question; but before you come to the question, you lay downe an affirmation or a conclusion: (namely) That these, independant men give power to the Churches.
To which I answer; If they should doe so, they were very ignorant, and very presumptuous, for Christ hath given power to the Churches, and all the Ministers that doe administer in the Churches, must have the power by the Church.
But say you, they give that power to the Churches, which the Papists give unto the Pope.
I answer, if they doe so they are blasphemers for the Papists acknowledge the Pope to be the head of the Church: which title all men ought to give onely unto Christ.
But now to your question; which is, whether they will take the Oath of Supremacie, or doe acknowledge in their prayers, The King Defender of the Faith? &c.
To which I answer, This Ooth you say, was ordained for Ecclesiasticall persons, and I hope these Ecclesiasticall independant men (if I may safely so call them) will ever, both acknowledge, and maintaine, that the King is supreme over all the Land, therefore over the Church of the Land, though it consist of the Clergie, as it appeares by that Oath which you say was appointed for the Clergie.
But whether they doe acknowledge the King, defender of the Faith, &c. which is the later part of your Question?
To this I answer. It is out of all doubt, that these men doe desire from their heart, (as well as all the Lords people) that the King may defend the Faith of Christ Jesus, and dayly make their prayers and supplications to God for him, and that in conscience, and obedience to God, being commanded in his Word so to doe, for they know it is a duty laid upon them; for prayers and supplications must be made for Kings, and all them that be in authoritie;b but &illegible; can make axceptable prayers, but the Saints, for the prayers of the wicked are abomination unto the Lordc But that all Kings have beene defenders of the Faith of Christ, I deny; for there is but one Faith,* and those that do maintaine that true faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, lawfully have that title given them; and none other may lawfully have it but they.
You will happily say, Queene Mary was not a Defender of the Faith. But I say unto you, if the Crowne of England give unto Kings and Queenes that title; Queene Mary had as much right to the title as Queene Elizabeth. &c.
Pag. 31. lin. 30.Secondly, you say, they hold that the imposition of lawfull things, doth make them unlawfull, (which you say is a strange paradoxe.)
I answer the imposition of lawfull things doe not make them unlawfull, if he that imposeth them have authoritie so to doe: as for example; the imposition of an Oath is very lawfull; but if it be imposed by him that hath not authoritie, though it make not the Oath unlawfull simply in it selfe, yet it makes the use of it unlawfull, at that time, both to him and to me.
But as for formes of prayer: which (you say) they doe confesse to be for order, and lawfull in themselves, yet unlawfull, being imposed.
I say, not as you say, they say, for I know no forme of prayer lawfull in it selfe, for any of the Lords people to tie themselves unto; nor that ever was imposed upon any by Christ, or his Apostles; (We reade in 1 Tim. 2. 1. 2. that all manner of prayers must be made unto God; and amongst other, supplications must be made for Kings, but there was no forme of words given by which wee must pray for any: and we are commanded to pray with the Spirit, and to pray with understanding;) but we are commanded to avoid an evill manner of praying; that we should not be like the Hipocrites; which love to stand and pray in the Synogogues,* nor that we should make vaine repititions as the Heathens, which thinke to be heard for their much babling:* and as also we are forbidden an evill manner of praying; so wee are commanded by God what manner to use, as it is plaine in Matth. 6. 9.
The manner is that wee must in our prayers acknowledge God to be our Father.Matth. 6. 9.
And secondly, That he is in heaven.
Thirdly, we must give glory to his Name.
Fourthly, we must pray for the coming of his Kingdome.
Fiftly, we must pray that the Lords Will may be done,Ver. 10. both in earth and in heaven.
Sixthly, wee must pray for all things necessary for this life,Ver. 11. which is there set forth under the name of dayly bread.
Seventhly,Ver. 12. wee must pray for the forgivenesse of our owne sinnes; and we are also put in minde, that as wee would have our owne sinnes forgiven, so we should forgive others; if they acknowledge their offences, according to that in Luke 17. 4, If thy brother trespasse against thee seven times a day, and seven times a day, and say it repenteth him, &c.
Eightly,Ver. 13. we must pray against temptations to be delivered from the evills thereof.
And lastly, we must conclude with thankesgiving acknowledging the Kingdome to be the Lords and all power, and glory to be due unto him, not onely for that present time, but for ever.
Here you may see we are taught the manner how we ought to pray, but we are tied to no forme of words, yet we are to beleeve that this is a perfect Rule, and that we may sufficiently ground all the petitions we neede to put up from this very rule.
As for Example.
As we desire to acknowledge God to be our Father, so wee ought to desire, that others would doe the like.
And whereas we ought to pray for the Kingdome of God to come, we are not to limit it to this, (that Christ may come to rule in us onely) but that he may rule as a King in the heart of all his chosen.
Neither ought wee alone to acknowledge praises but wee ought to desire that prayses to God may be acknowledged by others also, and that they may grant the Kingdome, and power, and glory to be his, not that he should be a King onely to rule in the hearts of men, but also that he may rule and governe the actions of the bodies of men in his outward worship: as we are commanded to glorifie God with our bodies and soules, and the reason, is because they are his, 1 Cor. 6. 20. Now, if our bodies and soules be Gods, then it must needs be granted, that it is in spirituall worship: for in all civill things it hath beene acknowledged already, that both bodies and lives are our soveraigne Lord the Kings; in whose Land we dwell.
Now if there were any forme of prayer for men to bind themselves unto, it would have beene shewed, either in this Scripture, or in some other; which thing you have not yet proved.
That they were not tied to this forme of words is plaine by another Evangelist, which doth not use the same words, but addeth some, and leaveth out other some; and also the whole forme of thankesgiving, is left out by Luke, (Luke 11. 2. 3. 4. Compared with Matth. 6. 9.) and to seeke the helpe of any booke but the Bible to teach men to pray, is to disable God which hath promised to give Beleevers his Spirit, whereby they shall cry Abba Father,c and that that Spirit should leade them into all truth, and bring all things to their remembranced Therefore a forme of prayer for men to tie themselves unto, cannot be sufficient and pleasing to God though it were never imposed by any.
Thirdly, you lay another slander upon us, as though we should affirme, that Christian Princes, and Magistrates, who are defenders of the Faith have no more to doe in and about the Church, then Heathen Princes.
This is not true, for we know that Christian Princes, and Magistrates ought to be members of Christs Church; and so being they may be Officers in the Church; And if they be Defenders of the Faith, they be such as defend the pure worship of God, manifested in his Word, as also the true professors thereof, and that against all tyrannicall power that shall attempt to suppresse either it or them, as the good Kings of Judah and Israel did, by slaying the Servants and Prophets of Baal who had slaine the Lords people.
But Heathen Kings cannot be said to be members of the Church of Christ before they know Christ, and then they become Christian Kings. Therefore, to vent upon all occasions, such principles as you see wee hold, and maintaine, is not (as you say) dangerous and insufferable, neither are the people.
But you say further, that the people for a great part of them are heady and refractory, and proud, and bitter, and scornfull, and dispisers of authoritie, and that they will not suffer publike prayer; to be prayed, but that by their gesture and threatning of the Ministers, they have laboured to binder the use of them: And these people (I gather from your owne words) are the professors in England, and especially in the city of London; and it is very like to be so; because they were there at the time of your service; (for neither the Separates nor Semiseparates (as you call them) use to be there at the time of your service (for ought I know:) and these Professors you have also called Idle, & busibodies, tatlers also, as it is said, 1 Tim. 5. 13. very wanton in their wits (say you) affecting novelties in Religion, and liking of points that are not established nor commonly held, and these you say are many of the professors* And in your second Reason against Toleration, Pag. 24. (you say) that the mindes of multitudes of the Professors in England, and especially in this citie, are upon all occasions very apt to fall to any way in Doctrine or Discipline that is not commonly received by the Church, &c. But I tel you, you ought not to blame any for withstanding any thing in Gods worship, which is not grounded in his Word: Neither (if the whole body of the worship there tendred be the invention of man) ought any of them to be blamed for opposing such a worship; because it is according to their Protestation.
Yet I justifie none that will oppose disorderly, as either by casting up of hats, or threatning the Minister, or any the like unseemely behaviour; for I judge it better for them to depart in peace, if they have not faith in the action performed.
But methinkes (Mr. Edwards) you have soulely missed it, in that you have thus vilified your brethren, to call them by the names of those mockers which (Paul testified) should come in the last time, that should be heady, and high minded, and proud boasters, and despisers of authority; for such as these have not the power of godlinesse, (and by this you make your Church a soule Church, and defile shrewdly your owne nest, and make it appeare to all men that you live in a Cage of uncleane birds) & therefore you are commanded from such to turne aside;* if the feare of God be in your heart.
Moreover, You say, you feare they will not tolerate the Government established by the Ecclesiasticall, and civill Lawes; and you would faine father the cause of this your feare upon Separates, and Independancie, whereas you cannot be so ignorant, but that you must know, that the government established by Law may stand without the leave of Separates, for they have neither power to give toleration, nor to prohibit toleration, for, or against any thing.
But you say, you would rather pray against toleration, than prophesie of the wofull esse is of it.
I answer, if you can make such a prayer in a time acceptable, then sometimes such prayers will be accepted which are not grounded upon Gods Word.
But of the wofullest effects of toleration, you have prophesied already; in that you say, they will withstand your Doctrine and your dues,* and that will be a wofull effect indeede! when you shall be driven, to cry out, Alas, alas, that great city Babylon, for in one boure is so great wealth come to desolation.
Thus much for your Seventh Reason.
IN your Eight Reason, you affirme, That these Independant men, where they have power, as in New-England, will not tolerate any Churches or Government, but in their owne way.
In using the word these, you carry the matter so darkely, that I know not whom you meane, for you have named none.
But you seeme to say, they be men that have power in New England.
I answer, Indeede it may happen to be so; That there may be some men there, that take upon them authority, to binde mens consciences, as you and all your fellowes do here. But if it have beene so, I thinke it was, because they had (here in England) taken upon them an oath of conformity, (as you have sometimes done;) and because the tyranny of the Prelats was so mighty, against all good men, that they were faine to go away privately, and so had not time or opportunity publikely to disclaime this their Oath; and then there might be feare, that upon complaint made for disorder committed there, in suffering the liberty of the Gospel there which could not be admitted here, they might have beene sent for backe by their Ordinaries, and so have been committed, to some stincking prison, here in London, there to have beene murdered, as divers of the Lords people have beene, of these late yeares, as I am able to prove of my owne knowledge; and if they have banished any out of their Parents, that were neither disturbers of the peace, of the Land, nor the worship practised in the Land, I am perswaded, it was their weakenesse, and I hope they will never attempt to doe the like. But I am still perswaded, they did it upon the same ground, that having knowledge in themselves, that their former Oath, might be a snare unto them, if they did not hold still some correspondencie with the practise of England, even till God should open a way or meanes for them to seeke free liberty for all, by the approbation of authority.
The next thing you minde against them is, that they would not admit liberty, to some of their brethren, which were godly Ministers, though they did approve of them, as being against Ceremonies.
To this, 1. I answer, that it is strange that any man should send to aske their liberty. 2. It is much more strange to me (if it be true, as you say, that these men were against Ceremonies) that there should be any difference betweene them, and the Ministers in New England.
But it seemes (by your speech) they would have gone in a middle way, which presupposeth to me, that they are so farre from being against Ceremonies, that are already invented, that they would have set up some invention of their owne.
The next thing you charge some of them with, is, That they would not admit into fellowship, those that would not enter into their Covenant, and professe faith, and submit to their Church Orders, though they would be of their Church.
Me thinkes you have strange evasions, but I pray you answer me to these two questions: the first is, how men of yeares of discretion, may (by the rule of Gods Word) be admitted into fellowship, and not professe their faith.
Secondly, how men may be accounted, to be of the Church, and not submit unto the orders of the Church: Seeing that the Apostle Paul had these two things to rejoyce in; the beholding of the Saints stedfast faith, and comely order, in the Church.
But you say, that these men would faine have a toleration in this great kingdome, will not allow any in their small particular Congregations.
Truely (Mr. Edwards) It were good for you to labour to understand the minde and will of God for your selfe, and have charitie towards your brethren; and hope well, that they have so much knowledge, of the Lords will, that they will not pleade for such an absurdity, as to set up one Church, within another, and so make a schisme. But the Toleration they plead for, is that Gods true worship, may be set up in the Kingdome by those that understand what it is; and that by the sufferance of the Governors; and that it should be setled in a peaceable way; which would be farre from disturbing the peace of three Kingdomes, (as you invectively speake;) but to set up a Congregation in a Congregation, would be confusion, even as to set up one Kingdome within another.
The next thing you charge them with, is, that they are partiall; (by a supposition of your owne:) for you say, it is ordinary for men, when they are not in place, nor have no power in Church or Common-wealth; and hold also Doctrines and principles contrary to what is held and established; to pleade for Toleration; but when the same men come to have place and power (say you) they will not tolerate others; and you say, that you doe beleeve that these are the men, which now indevour a toleration.
To this I answer, you may doe well to let this beleefe of yours be no Article of your faith, because it stands upon no ground; for though a man may hope the best, and feare the worst; yet he may beleeve nothing but what he hath proofe for. But I doe beleeve that all this is your evill surmising, (to think, that if they had power in their hands to settle a Government, they would tolerate none but their independant way,) as it may plainely appeare by the Protestation Protested, which you quote here for your Author, for though the Protestor declare what he would have for the Churches of the Saints; yet he doth not take upon him to determine, what Government or rule, shall be set up in the Land, to bring men out of darkenesse to light, but leaveth that to the judgement of them which have the power, even the King and Parliament.
Thus much for your Eight Reason.
IN your ninth Reason you affirme, that toleration may be demanded, upon the same grounds, for Brownists, Anabaptists, and Familists, and others, who professe it is their conscience.
To which I answer; That seeing you plead for them, I may well hold my peace. But I thinke the Familists will not aske liberty for toleration if they be as (I doe conceive) of the Sect of the Libertines mention in the Acts.
But, say you, these may be pleaded for upon better grounds then Semi-Separates, and the Reason you say is, because they deny the truth of your Church.
Answer, I do beleeve, those (whom you call Semi-Separates) do deny the truth of your Church also; (though not in all respects,) and so farre as they be Separates, they must needs deny the Church from which they Separate.
But you here demand, whether Papists may not petition and have hope: for toleration, seeing it is their conscience.
To this I answer, I know no reason why they may not petition and hope to speede also, seeing they have many friends in the Kingdome.
Further, you adde, that if one sort may have an exemption from the Religion established, why not others?
I answer, There may be many reasons given, why those may not have freedome (of any great resorts in the Land) which have often attempted, by plots, and treachery to ruinate the Land.
The next thing you affirme, is, if ever the doore of toleration, should be but a little opened, there would be great crowding in.
To this I answer, That the more good men doe imbrace the whole truth of God, the better it will be, but there have beene too many crowders and creepers in in all ages; and we may justly seare it will be so still; for the Text saith, in the 2 Pet. 2. 2. That many shall follow their destruction, and some of them shall doe it through &illegible; who shall with fained words make merchandise of the Lords people (as is plaine in the next verse) whose destruction sleepeth not. But who these creepers in be, appeares by the 15. verse of this Chapter, That they were they that loved the wages of unrighteousnesse as Balaam did: But if any one so doe, his last end shall be worse then his beginning.
Thus much for your ninth Reason.
IN your Tenth Reason, you affirme, That the first principle of the Independant way, is, That two or three Saints wheresoever, or by what meanes soever they doe arise; separating themselves from the world into the fellowship of the Gospell, are a Church truely gathered: for this you quit? Mr. Robinsons Iustification, pag. 221.
But in that page there is no such thing written, as I can finde, but seeing it commeth so neere the truth, we neede not to contend about it. For I doe affirme, that a company of Saints, Separated from the world, and gathered into the fellowship of the Gospell (by what meanes so ever it be, that matters not, so it be by the teaching of the Sonne of God, according to that in Heb. 1. 1.) these Saints (I say) separating themselves, and being gathered into the fellowship of the Gospell (though they combine themselves without the warrant of the Governours) are a true Church, and have right to all Gods Ordinances,Matth. 18. 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20. Rev. 21. 27. and 22, 14, 15. not onely to admit men into fellowship, but also to admonish, to reprove and to cast out of their societie all obstinate offenders amongst them that doe transgresse, either against the first or second Table; having (as hath beene said before) the Spirit of God to guide them, and wisedome from above to judge of persons, and causes, within the Church, though they have nothing to doe to judge those that are without.
And this doth not make way for Libertisnime, for Heresies and Sectaries (as you say) neither doth it make men to runne from their owne Ministers, because they restraine them from sinne, or keepe them to Gods Ordinances, (as you doe affirme) for if any separate for any such cause, they shall not be received into fellowship, nor justified of any of the Lords people.
But the way of the Gospell, as hath beene plainely proved, is not to live without Gods Ordinances, nor to live at liberty (as you say) except you meane the liberty wherein Christ hath set them, and commanded them to stand fast, because he hath made them free, Gal. 5. 1. By this you may see the Saints are called into liberty; but not a liberty to sinne (as you would insinuate) but to be freed from the yoake of bondage, which is the tyranny, or tyrannicall government of the Canon Lawes, either of Rome or England.
But you say, all heretickes, Sectaries, or libertines will count themselves Saints, as well as the Independant men; and the reason you seeme to give for this, is, because the Ministers, and Magistrats of the Kingdome, shall not have power to determine who be Saints.*
Now let all men judge what a weighty argument this is, who is he that knows any thing, & knows not this, that the Priests in England which are the Bishops creatures, do generally justifie the wicked, and condemne the just, and are not these meet men to judge Saints? they justifie none that will not be conformable, and yeeld unto the traditions which they have invented, in their Councels and Convocations; though they have not one title of Gods Word to warrant them; Furthermore, they condemne all that will not submit, to their devised worship, even in all the traditions thereof: and this is the dependancie which they have brought all men unto, both high and low, even to be subject to their wills, which is a Law.
But now touching the Magistrate, you would seeme to inferre that he should have no more power than a Priest.
It is plaine, the Priests have no power, but what they have by permission, and sufferance, though they have dependancie upon the Pope himselfe, but the Magistrate hath power given him of God, by whom he is set up, for the praise of those that doe well, and for the punishment of evill doers, and hath the same rule given him (whereby to judge them) that God hath given to his Church; especially Christian Magistrates, notwithstanding they are opposed, yet they have power given of God; as you may reade in Acts 7 35. This man Moses whom they for sooke saying, who make thee a Prince and a Iudge, the same God sent for a Prince and a deliverer: and this is he which was as a God unto Aaron; when Aaron was as the mouth of Moses to the people, Exod. 4. 16. Now if you Priests could have proved your selves as Aaron, then you might have beene assistants to Godly Magistrates to deliver the Lords people out of the hands of Tyrannicall Princes; but contrariwise, you adde afflictions as Pharaohs Taskemasters did;Exod. 5. 19. even you (Mr. Edwards) when you say the Lords people are wanton-witted and idle, when they desire to have liberty to serve God.
And thus you sit in the consciences of men; judging zeale to be hypocrisie; but the time will come, when every worke shall be brought to judgement.
And now drawing neere to an end of this Answer to your tenth Reason (which is the last of this your joyned army) it is good to looke backe a little, and consider what hath beene said.
You have spoken much for Dependencie; but upon whom you doe depend, I cannot tell;
You labour to bring men into doubts, by your suppositions, but you doe not make any conclusion, which is Gods way, that men fearing God, may expect a blessing when they walke in it, but you cry out for Dependencie, upon Councels, and Synods, and Churches; I pray you what Dependencie hath the Church of England upon any other Church? for I suppose you will say, that all the Land is but one Church.
If you say, that you have Dependencie, upon the Church of Rome; I doe beleeve you; for the Bishop of Canterbury hath said so much, in his booke, where hee confesseth, Rome to be as leprous Naaman, and England to be the same Naaman cleansed.
Now that it is the same, may easily be proved, by divers of your owne Authors. But you in your Epistle, affirme, it is not cleansed, in that place, where you say, that there is yet Altars and Images, brasen Serpents, abused to Idolatry, with divers other things, which you would have purged out.
By this it appeares, that it is the same with Rome, in the very nature of it, though not in every Circumstance, and this (for any thing can be discerned) is the Dependancie, for which you pleade: even the Dependancie and affinitie, betweene Rome and England.
Therefore you should rather have said, That in the belly of this Dependancie, doth lurke all liberty, and heresie, and whatsoever, Sathan, and the corrupt hearts of men have a pleasure to broach. For in that way, it is too common for men to broach their owne pleasures; for their Religion is made of mens inventions.
Thus much for your 10th. Reason.
YEt furthermore, (for addition to these ten Reasons, you adde a Question;* your Qeustion is, what these men would have in this Toleration, Whether the number of five or sixe Congregations onely, and no more? Or whether the number shall be left undetermined, and be free to multiply? &c.
For answer to this, I doe affirme, that the number ought not to be limitted, for the Churches of the New Testament were free, to multiply, not onely in greatnesse, but also in number. I say they were left free by God; for the Apostles were not limitted, from constituting Churches wheresoever men were brought to beleeve in Christ.
But say you, it is their principles to breake one Church in two or three.
I answer, I know no man that holdeth any such principle.
But say you, it hath beene so at Amsterdam, Roterdam, and London.
To this I answer, I deny not, but that there may be offences taken, and sometimes given, which may cause men to depart one from another (as Paul and Barnabas did) sometimes about persons, and sometimes about things; and wofull experience teacheth all men, that brethren are apt to fall out by the way; and that Ioseph knew very well, when he admonished his brethren to the contrary.* But though some should be offended, and could not be reconciled, (as the Scripture saith, a brother offended, is harder to be wonne than a strong citie*) yet the departing of such a brother, (or brethren) cannot make that Church two Churches, yet notwithstanding this may sometimes tend to the further spreading of the Gospell even as the departing of Paul and Barnabas did. Not that I justifie the practise of any that are not apt to beare, but that God doth sometimes, bring good out of evill, (as it was in the selling of Ioseph,* by turning it to his owne glory, and the good and comfort of his people.
Therefore you neede not to marvell, which shall be the state approved by the Magistrate; because that properly, there remaineth but one intire state, (in such cases of division, as you have before mentioned.) By all this it appeares that it is none of our principles to breake one Church into two or three.
But you say, if the number be left undetermined, there may be many Churches in a Towne.
For answer whereof. I must tell you, that I reade in the Scriptures of no more Churches in a towne, but one, as in Ierusalem where there were many Converts, yet I reade but of one Church.
Now this was in the first plantation of the Gospell, but what they might increase to afterward, the Scripture is silent in, for any thing I know.
But that there may be two or three in one place (as you say) that seemeth unto me to be confusion, except they should meete in one place for consultation, which may very well be, for God is the God of Order and not of confusion.
And I never reade in the Scripture, that two Churches met together in one place, for the practise of publike worship.
But say you; we may have, every where, three or foure men; of an opinion differing from others, to goe to make a Church.
To this I answer, If you meane (by every where) in every Towne of the Land, I say, although it should be so, (and though there be sixe townes in a Parish) yet it will be no no confusion; for the fewer they are together the lesse ground will there be of fearing them.
But touching divisions and subdivisions.
If any such thing happen, it is but that which we have bin told on before. The Apostles words are these, They went out from us, because they were not of us, &c.* and if evill minded men, that crept in departed from Christ,* we neede not to thinke much, that such creepers in, should depard from us also; yet the disorderly going away of any (as I have said before) doth not make them a Church which goe away disorderly.
And thus I have given you an answer to your second tenth Reason,* for in your Booke you have by your stile made it a Reason, though you seemed at the first entrance into it to make it but a question.
But before you conclude the whole, you subjoyne to these, the Answer to five or sixe things (which you would make to be their reasons) and you say that they are continually alleadged, by them for their toleration, in this Kingdome.
THe first Reason (you say they bring) is, that toleration is no more then the French, and Dutch enjoy, who live among us.
Indeede that is a very good reason, for methinkes it stands with equitie, that Natives borne, should have as much priviledge as Strangers.
But you would seeme to alter the state of the case, in sixe respects.
First, That the French and Dutch Protestants have nothing, nor desire nothing, as contra distinct to the Protestants of France and Holland.
I answer, if the Protestants of France, and Holland, have liberty of their conscience, and be not at all burdened, with Iewish, Popish, or Heathenish Observations, but may be free there, to worship God, according to his Will, revealed in his Word, then they that are here (amongst us) neede not to seeke more liberty, and I am sure the Independant men will aske no more.
Secondly, you say, that this liberty, was granted, by our Pious Princes, in the times of persecution to the Protestants.
Here you crosse your first respect, for if these Protestants were persecuted in France, then it is certaine their Religion was different, from the state of their owne Nation; for you say they could not enjoy their Religion at home.
Furthermore you adde, that it hath beene kept ever since, for a refuge to the persecuted Protestants.
To which I answer, The very like may be said of the libertie granted to the English Church in Amsterdame, which hath beene a refuge for the Protestants which have beene persecuted out of England ever since.
But (you say) we may enjoy our Religion in this Land, and that by the authority of the King and Parliament.
If it be so: I pray you what is the meaning, of the bleating of such cattell, as your selfe? which cry out dayly to the King and Parliament, for the suppression of the Lords people; and for the hindring of their meetings.
Thirdly, you say, The French and Dutch Churches will willingly be joyned in Government, and in one way of discipline with the Kingdome, if there be a Reformation.
Indeede if you had not added a great If, here you had told a loud untruth, but if this were performed, that there were a Reformation, according to Gods Will, I doubt not but the Independant men would doe the like.
Fourthly, you say these Churches doe not hold our principles, but doe admit of appeales in great businesses.
I answer, I have told you already, and I now tell you againe, that I admit of appeales also, such as the Scripture warrants, and I have declared at large what appeales they be.*
Fifthly, you say, they be strangers different in Language, and have little acquaintance with you (keeping themselves for the most part among themselves) and therefore (say you) there will be the lesse danger of drawing away the people.
I answer, if they differ so little from you, as you would make the world beleeve, there were small cause of danger, or Schisme, if they will willingly be joyned (as you said before) in Government, and in one way of discipline with the Kingdome.
Further, you adde, that they vent no principles, against your Church, and Government.
I answer, Indeede, if they should never open a mouth to speake, yet their practise makes them different from you, both in worship and government; and yet it may be upon better considerations, they may draw neerer to the rule hereafter; but for my part I leave them, as being partly ignorant of their practise.
But you say, they will not admit your people to be members of their Congregations.
Answer, Indeede I doe not know that ever they have refused any; but this much I know; that some English people, that have the French, and Dutch tongue, have, and doe goe thither to heare; but that any should desire to goe thither to heare, that have not the language, were very absurd.
Sixthly, There, is (say you) a great reason, and necessity, of allowing them Churches and places to preach, and be by themselves, and the reasons you yeeld, are (1) because many of them understand not English at all, and (2) for the benefit of strangers of their owne Religion.
To which I answer, The very same may be said concerning the English Churches in Holland.
But further you adde, that they may well be allowed some Discipline among themselves, in respect they maintaine all their owne poore.
Methinks (Mr. Edwards) there should be much more reason, that the English Protestants, or Separates, should be tolerated, for the same cause, for they maintaine all their owne poore also. And furthermore, they maintaine the poore of the Church of England; yea, in every parish where their dwelling houses stand, they pay to the poore weekely, as well as any other man.
They also pay their money for the maintenance of the Visited Houses in the Parishes where they dwell.
Nay, furthermore, they pay also their mony for the maintenance of the Priests of England, (the more is the pitty) and so I feare the Dutch and French doe also, yea though the Priests are as Popish as they were in Queene Maries time. And this is well knowne to all Landlords that doe let them houses, for if they know them to be Separates, and that they will not, have to doe with the Priests in the pay ment of that they call dues, they make their Tenant pay the more rent, for if the Tenant will not the Landlord must. And by this you may see, their burthens are double to other mens; in that they must maintaine their owne poore and their owne Ministers, and the Church of Englands also.
And by this you may see, that you have not (in the least) altered the state of the case, betweene the Dutch, and French, and us, in the causes before mentioned.
Therefore this their first reason for toleration lies yet unanswered by you.
FOr answer to their second Reason, which (you say) is that they seeke no more then is granted them, in Holland; your answer to it is this,
That if that be a good ground, then Jewes and Anabaptists may have a toleration also.
To this I answer, For my part I speake for my selfe, and I suppose, that they may say as much for themselves (in these late respects, which you have mentioned) as the Separates doe, for they maintaine their poore, and their Ministers, and the poore, and the Priests of the Church of England, as well as we. And I thinke they are persecuted and hunted also; but I will leave them to pleade for themselves.
Further, you adde, That such a Toleration is not fit, neither in Divinity, nor in policie.
I answer, I know no true Divinitie that teacheth men to be Lords over the conscience; and I thinke it is no part of Godly policie, to drive the Kings subjects out of the land, because they desire free liberty to worship God in the Land according to his will; the States of Holland are counted politicke, and yet they esteeme it the Strength of their Kingdome, to grant free libertie of conscience.
Secondly, you say, there may be a toleration for us in Holland, with much more safety to the government established, then can be here, because the people understand not our language; and also have little, or no relation to us of kindred and friendship, &c.
I answer, I must say to you, as I have said already, that there was never any danger to a Kingdome, to suffer the Lords people to live quietly, and enjoy their liberty.
Thirdly, you say, The people of the Holenders are generally industrious, and mind their businesse, and keeping to what is established by their Lawes, not troubling their heads so much with other points of Religion.
By this one may easily perceive your minde (Mr. Edwards) with the rest of your fellowes, and also know, that you are naturally derived from Rome, in that you would have all men, to content themselves, with an implicit faith; and to take for granted, what government your Lawes alloweth, and what worship your inventions have hatcht; and not to search the the Scripture at all.
Further you add here, that the people in England are not so, especially in this city of London and great Townes, you say many of the professors, are more idle, and busie bodies, tatlers also, as it is said, 1 Tim. 5. 13. very wanton also in their wits, affecting novelties in Religion, &c.
Now truly (Mr. Edwards) if you were of my mind, and were a member of such a Church, that had such members in it; you woulde be so farre from fearing, of being beguilded of them, that you would be very glad to have such birds taken out of your nest. But you are so farre from observing the rule of Christ (Matth. 18. 15.) that is to tell your brother of his fault betweene him and you that you rather walke with slanders and elamours, vilifying your owne mothers sonnes; so that every good man may be ashamed of you.
Fourthly, you say, that Holland tolerates us and many others, but it is more upon grounds and necessitie of worldly respects, because of the benifite of exsise towards the maintenance of warre.
Now (Mr. Edwards) you have utterly overthrowne your owne Argument, laid downe in the beginning of your answer to this their second Reason, for then you said, it was against the rule of policie; but now you say it is their policie.
And whereas you would make the case different betweene England and Holland.
I answer, It is not different at all; for England hath the Subjects purses to maintaine warres as well as Holland; and though it be not in exsise for victuals, yet it is in some other wayes from which the subjects of Holland are freed.
The next thing you affirme, is; That your riches and strength, standeth in one way of Religion.
To which I answer, I thinke (if I could understand your minde herein) you meane the riches and strength of the Priests: for I am sure the riches, and strength of the Kingdome, may stand best with Toleration, as it may appeare, partly by what hath been said already, for you have heard that the Lords people (whom you thus persecute) maintaine their owne poore.
And it will also be made appeare, that they pay Scot, and Lot, in the Kingdome, in all civill respects, and are all as true subjects to the Kings Majesty, and are ready to doe him all faithfull service with their bodies, and estates, as any in the Kingdome.
But I confesse that toleration would be neither riches nor strength to the Priests, for it is fore against the peoples will, that they pay them any thing now; and it will be no wonder when it shall be made to appeare, what the Priests wages is,* but that shall be done hereafter.
THeir third Reason you say is, That if they have not liberty to erect some Congregations, it will force them to leave the Kingdome.
For answer whereof, you doe affirme (in the first place) that there is no neede of a toleration for them; neither that they should leave the Kingdome for conference, and that you say will appeare by the Reasons and principles which they doe agree to, which you say are these;
First, that they hold your Churches true, your Ministers true, Ordinances true: Further you say they can partake with you in your Congregations in all Ordinances, even to the Lords Supper.
To which I answer, Indeede here you would make the Readers beleeve, that they had opened a wide gappe, (if they should take your affirmation, without your provisall) but you come to helpe your selfe handsomely, in that you say their condition was, that it must first be provided, that scandalous and ignorant persons must be kept backe, and Ceremonies must be removed.
Methinks, this is a mighty great mountaine, that stands between them and you, and therefore you have small cause, to aske them wherefore they should desire, to set up Churches? for till this mountaine be removed, they may be true to their own principles, and not go from their word, and yet never communicate with you, either in worship, or government.
For first, If you keepe out all scandalous persons, out of all the Churches in England, from the Sacraments, and all ignorant persons; truely then your Churches will be as emptie as ours.
Secondly, If you should remove away all your Ceremonies, (which is the second part of your reformation,) you could not tell how to worship; for your whole forme and manner of worship is made of invented Ceremonies.
But if you can procure such a reformation, to have your Church all consist of persons of knowledge, fearing God, and hating covetousnesse, & void of all other scandalls (so far as we can judge by the Scripture) and that the Ceremonies may be removed, and we enjoy (as you bragge) all Gods Ordinances with you, as well as in our owne Churches, then you shall heare, what I will say to you, as well as the Independant men.
But till all this be done, you see there is still good reason, for good men, either to desire liberty, or to leave the Kingdome.
Further, you say, some of them could take the charge of Parochiall Churches amongst you, upon the Reformation.
I Answer, Indeede such a Reformation, which you have formerly mentioned, will hardly stand with Parochiall Churches.
But you say, they could yeeld to Presbyteriall Government, by Classes and Synods; so they might not be injoyned to submit to it, as Jure Divino.
To which I answer. It seemes (by your owne confession) that they doe deny the Presbyteriall government by Classes, and Synods, to be from God, as it appeares, in that you say, they will not submit to it, as Iure Divino, and therefore you have overthrowne your selfe (in all this your reasoning) with your Synods and Classes also; so that still there remaines good grounds to seeke a Toleration, that the Saints may grow into bodies even in this Land.
But to grow into one body with you (as you would have them) while your Churches body is like a Leopard, and all bespotted (as appeares by your words) were very absurd; for you doe affirme, that the best of your members, even the Professors, especially of London, and of the great Townes in England; are very foule; yet I hope you will confesse, that they are the best of your members; then if it be true (as you say) that you must remove in your Reformation, all ignorant and scandalous persons: by your grounds, you should have but a very few to make a Church of as well as wee. For you must remove also all your Professors, which you say are so scandalous.
Therefore, I should rather counsell you to repent of all your evills that you have done, and be reconciled to God the Father, and Christ his Sonne, and separate your selves from all your wickednesse, and even come and grow up into one body with us.
Secondly, you say, Seeing your Churches, Ministers, and Ordinances be true, the erecting of new, and withdrawing from such Congregations, can never be answered to God.
I answer, Here you take for granted that which you cannot prove, and it is your wisdome so to doe, for by that meanes; you may make simple people beleeve, that you are very right, except a few defects, which no man shall be freed from, while he is in this life.
But now to the point; and first, touching your Churches and Ministers, which you say be true, and you also say, the Independant men would grant them to be true, upon a Reformation, such as the Word requires.
I tell you for answer, that this your juggling will not helpe you, for no man is bound to take your bare word, therefore it is good you make proofe of that which you have said.
But before you goe to prove your Churches true, declare unto me what Churches you meane? for I ever tooke the whole Land of England to be but one Church, (as it stands established by the Canon Laws) and that all the Parishes in the Land make up but one entire body, therefore what is amisse in one Parish, all the whole are guilty of, and it will be laid to the charge of the Archbishops, who are the Metropolitanes, or chiefe Priests over the Church of the Land. Seeing it is so, you must stand out to maintaine your Church, and you neede not to trouble your selfe about your Church-es for I know no dependancie you have upon any, except it be Rome, according as I have told you before in the conclusion of my answer to your first tenth Reason against Independencie. Therefore this is the Church that you must maintaine, even the Church of England, established by the Canon Laws, consisting of Archbishops, Diocesan Bishops, with all the rest of that crew; for this is indeed both your Church and Ministry, which doth appeare by your owne ground, because you affirme, that in this part lieth all the power: but (by your owne grounds) the whole body of the Land (I meane of the Laitie (as you call them) hath no power at all to reforme any abuse: therefore this Clergy must needs be your Church; and thus you make your selves the head, and body, and all the rest of the Land the eayle to follow after you.
Now if you can prove this to be a true Church, which hath neither ground, nor footing in Christs Testament, you will worke wonders: but indeede such wonders have been wrought by you; for all the world hath wondered, and runne after the beast, saying, Who is like unto him? and who is able to make warre with him?Rev. 13. as you may plainely see in the 13. of the Reveation. Therefore they that doe justifie such a Church, are such as have beene deceived by her false miracles, even by the fire which she hath made to come downe from heaven.
I pray you did not fire come downe from heaven in Queene Maries time, and devour the Saints in Smithfield; if you understand heaven in that place, as I understand it (to be the seate of the Magistrate) you must grant the same, for they are called Gods, and the children of the most high.
For your forefathers did (as Pilat did) wash their hands from the blood of the Saints, and of the innocent, and turned them over, for their sentence of condemnation, to the Secular power, which you made your hornes, and your heads pushed them forward to execute your bloody cruelty; and thus you may see that fire came downe from heaven, in the sight or apprehension of men for most that beheld it thought it was just, because it was the sentence of the Magistrate.
And by this all men may see, that you of the Clergie are the Church of England and that this Clergy came from Rome,Whence the Church of England is derived. Whence the Church of Rome is derived. and that therefore your Church is derived from Rome.
Now if you would know whence the Church of Rome was derived; I conceive that her power was derived from the beast with seven heads, which rose up out of the sea, as you may read of in the thirteenth of the Revelations, for there both those beasts are mentioned, and also the Image of the first beast, which the second beast hath caused to be made, which is even here in England amongst us; and you may see I have proved unto you already what it is; as you may also read in the 15. verse of that Chapter, it was that to whom the beast gave a spirit, and also he gave it power that it should speake, and cause as many as would not worship the Image of the beast, to be killed, and hath not this Image caused aboundance to be killed in England, and hath not he caused all to receive his marke, or his name, or the number of his name; and they that have it not, may neither buy nor sell, as it is apparant by the testimonie of the Scripture it selfe, and wofull experience.
And is not this Image the Church that now you pleade for? which consisteth of all the Priests of England;What the Image of the first beast is. if it be not, I pray you tell me what it is?
But if this be it (as it appeares it is) then these are your Ministers also; and then it hath beene proved plainely, whence this your Church and Ministry came. And that any of understanding should grant this Church, and Ministry to be a true Church and Ministery, would bewray great ignorance in them.
Further you adde, that they acknowledge the Ordinances to be true.
In this I doe beleeve you upon your bareword, for it is a truth, if you meane Gods Ordinances which you have amongst you.
As first, you have the Scripture but you wring it and wrest it, according to your owne devices, and make of it a nose of waxe, and a leaden rule to leane which way your minde leadeth you; and though you ought to take that reede or rod in your hand, at all times (if you were Gods messengers) to measure both the Temple and the Altar and the worshippers, (Rev. 11 2, yet you have not learned that skill, (for your Church and Ministrie holdeth no correspondencie with that measuring line.) but contrariwise you have taken that golden cup, and filled it full of abominations; may, you have hacked it and mangled it to peeces, and made it into little lessons, which you call your Epistles and Gospells & they are Dedicated to your Saints, upon your Saints-Dayes; and thus you may see though you have the Scriptures (which is the Word of God) and take upon you to unfold the mysteries thereof, yet in stead of that, you darken the truth by false glosses.
Secondly, you have the Sacraments, even baptisme, and breaking of breade: but you pervert them both, to your owne destruction; neverthelesse they still remaine Gods Ordinances, even as the golden vessells, were Gods vessels, when they were in Babel though Belshazar made them his quassing boules, yet still they remained to be Gods vessels. Even so did Circumcision remaine Gods Ordinance, though it was with Ierobeam. The like may be said of Baptisme; in still remaines Gods Ordinance, though it be carried away with backesliding Antichristians (even the Apostate fallen stats) and so you may read in the eleventh of the Revelation, ver. 2. that the court must be left out, and be unmeasured; and the reason was because it was given to the Gentiles, even to them that should tread downe the holy citie for 42. monethes; this court we know belonged to the Temple (as you may read in the 42. of Ezekiel) and had in it the Ordinances belonging to the people. And although you have Baptisme, and the Lords Supper they will not sanctifie you; though they may be sanctified to the use of them amongst you which are Gods people, according to the election of grace.
And though you have some of Gods Ordinances, amongst you; yet you have added unto them many Ordinances of your owne devising, which doth utterly debarre the Lords people, which have knowledge of them, from communicating with you in any worship.
As for example,
How shall any man partake with you of the word preached in your assemblies, but he must needs partake also with the false calling of the Priest, by which it is preached, for none else are suffered to preach amongst you, (by your leave or approbation,) but they that preach by that false power.
And who shall receive the Sacraments with you, and not justifie your devised Service-booke? for all your things are administred by that. And as all the Lords Ordinances ought to be sanctified by the Word of God and prayer: So on the contrarie you labour to sanctifie your things, by the stinted service-booke; and therefore the withdrawing from you, may be answered to God.
Further, you beare the world in hand, that you have but something amongst you wanting yet, that were to be desired, and therefore you say there is no cause to leave the Kingdome, nor for private men to set up true Churches.
Answer, Indeed If your Church & Ministers could be proved true (which you see is a thing unpossible) then it had beene needlesse (as you say) to leave the Land; but neither is your Church nor Ministers true, nor can the Ordinances be had amongst you without sinne: and that this is the judgement of the Independant men, is plaine by your former confession; Where you affirne, they will not heare of growing into one body (or communicating) with you before a Reformation; neither submit to your Classes or Presbyters, as Jure Divino.
But in the next place you say, the setting up of devided Churches, would be to the scandall of all the Churches, and not the giving of scandall to one brother, but to tenue thousands of Congregations.
Truely (Mr. Edwards) you overshoote your selfe (in that you make your selfe such an apparant dissembler) for you would make men beleeve, that you desire to keepe your Church and brethren unspotted, and yet you your selfe with your owne tongue, have most soulely scandalized the chiefe members of your Church, making them so soule a people, that they ought not to be communicated with.*
Further, your words imply that so long as a man is not put upon the practise of that which is unlawfull, be may beare.
I tell you againe, that your whole manner is unlawfull and therefore all the Lords people, as they desire to be blessed and to be sound walking in Gods waves have cause to separate from your Church, and to practise Gods Ordinances among themselves, as well as they who are separated already, (which you here you call Brownists) and the grounds and causes be so great, that they may well be justified.
But you would have conscious men to consider Mr. Robinson, concerning circumstantiall corruptions; you say, he shewes it is not an intolerable evill, for evill men be suffered in the Church, &c. yet you confesse be affirmes it to be an evill.
Two things are here to be minded.
First, that you would still please your selfe with this, that you have a true Church (though corrupted) which hath beene proved contrary.
Secondly, that you would justifie your Church by the sinnes of others.
But you know what Mr. Robinson saith, That the government instituted by Christ is not onely neglected or violated in the Church of England, but the plaine contrarie to it is established by Law.
But you say, now supposing your Reformation, it will be otherwise with England, then when he writ.
But (you may see) it is verie plaine that the crueltie, and wickednesse, of the Church of England hath increased ever since that time.
You say there is but something neglected, and you would make it the want of some Law to suppresse evill men.
To which I answer, That your Canon Lawes be evill Lawes, and your Lawmakers evill men, and therefore it could not stand with their principles to make Lawes to suppresse evill men.
Thirdly, you say, that they (whom you call Independant) live in and are members of such Churches, and yet they thinke it unlawfull, to forsake them.
I pray you, have any of them told you, that their Churches be like the Church of England? you must make proofe thereof, for in this I will not take you upon your bare word.
Further, you say they want some parts of Government and Officers, appointed by Christ, more materially than will be in your Church, upon a Reformation.
I answer, I have plainely proved to you: that Christs Church hath his Government, and Officers; but your Church hath neither Christs Government nor Officers. But what it will be upon the Reformation. I cannot tell.
But you say, they must want the Ordinances, or else they must have them with instruments, without ordination.
I answer, This is untrue as hath beene proved at large, in the answers to one of your former Reasons against Independancie.
But you say you would have them beare with the defects in your Church, and waite till God give you more light.
I answer, I know none that interrupteth you, for wee will neither meddle with your Idols, nor with your Gods: if you would but suffer us to worship our God, after the way that you call boresie.
The next thing you say is that they tell you that something may be omitted for a time, and that affirmatives binde not alwayes and that the exercise of Discipline may be forborne for a time, when it will not be for edification to the Church, but for destruction; and therefore you question them for not incorporating themselves into your Church, though something were more there to be desired, yet you say, there will be nothing contrary put upon them (nor quite another thing.)
Now that something may be omitted for a time, that may plainely appeare; for a man that hath brought his gift to the Altar, and there remembreth that his brother hath ought against him, must leave the offering of his gift, and goe and be reconciled to his brother, Matth. 5. 23. 24.
Now that affirmatives binde not alwayes, is plaine; for they binde not alwayes in cases of impossibility, but in such cases God accepteth the will for the deede.
Further, whereas you say, the excellencie of discipline may be forborne for a time, when it is not for Edification of the Church, but for destruction;
I say, true discipline, (being rightly used) is alwayes for the edification of the Church, and never for destruction.
And whereas you affirme, that there is nothing contrary put upon us by you, (or quite another thing;)
I answer, wee know you have none of Gods Ordinances, without some other thing to accompany them.
Fourthly, you say, that they may safely be members of your Church in the Reformation of you.
I answer, You might well have spared this your vaine repetition till you had obtained a Reformation.
But the Reason you have heard alleadged for their first going away granted in a letter from Rotterdam. that reason still remaines (though you say it is ceased) and will remaine till the Reformation, you have formerly promised,
But say you, that practise they judge themselves tied to, is founded upon a false principle (namely) that the power of government is given by Christ to the body of the Congregation.
I answer, I have told you before, (in the reply to the second part of this your answer to their third Reason) & I now tell you againe, that you make your Priests the head and body both; but Christ hath given the power to the Church which is his body, by whose power every Officer, and member thereof, doth move, and doe their severall Offices.
Fifthly, There is, say you a medium, between persecution and a publike Toleration; a middle way, say you, betweene not suffering them to live in the Land, and granting them liberty.
I Answer, This is a very true thing, for Pharaoh would have beene willing, that the children of Israel, should have stayed in Egypt, and made him bricke, but he would not suffer them to goe into the wildernesse, to offer sacrifice. But if Pharoah had beene willing to have succoured the children of Israel, he would have commanded his taskemasters not to lay burthens upon them, that they could not beare; but he did not doe so, and therefore their bricke-making turned to persecution, even as your injunctions and penall Lawes doe here in England, and you binde them up with a pretence of his Majesties command, which makes the burthen very mighty.
By this it is plaine, that no good man can live in England without persecution, even at this day.
But you would have them to have a third way, for you say persons may live in the Land, and injoy their Lands and liberties, and not be compelled to professe, and practise, things against their conscience.
I pray you (Mr. Edwards) bethinke your selfe now, how untruly you speake and whether you doe not looke one day to give an account, for your words, for you know that no man can live in this land, and enjoy his lands and liberty, but he shall be forced to worship according to the custome of the Nation. Nay, children that be but sixteene yeares of age, though ignorant, and scandalous in their lives, are forced to receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, though it be to their utter condemnation.
Further you adde, that if upon petition to the Parliament, the Papists should have the Statutes repeated, which injoyne them to come to your Church, yet say you, the granting the Papists a publike toleration, for their Religion, would be quite another thing, in as much as you say though the Papists were the first in petitioning for the former, yet they move not for the latter.
For answer to this, I tell you;
First, That for granting the Papists publike exercises will not much crosse your principles, for they and you are naturall brethren.
Secondly, for that they move not for the latter (as you say:) They neede not for they injoy it without moving, and till this Parliament, none hath disturbed them for many yeares.
But further, you addr, that so you judge that the Independant men may live in the land freely and injoy their liberties and estates, (but you have your clause whereby you still crosse all your own tale; your clause is that it must be) by comming to your Churches, and enjoying the Ordinances.
Whereas you say so you judge, it presupposeth that the Papists doe come to your Churches, by what comes after, that it must be by comming to your Churches, and enjoying the Ordinances.
Indeede the Papists may come to your Churches, and injoy your Ordinances, for first they were their Ordinances, for when you apostated from Rome, you carried the Romish traditions with you, even as your forefathers in their apostacie from Christ Iesus, carried some of his Ordinances with them: so you retaine something of Gods to make your owne ware passe in sale, and have patched you up a bundle of worship borrowing also some lewish and He &illegible; Ceremonies to make up your packe; and will you be so kinde to suffer men to live in the land, if they will but submit to this worship, and promise them they shall never be compelled, to professe or practise any more? Indeede you are very liberall but it hath beene often said already, (and you have said it your selfe) that the Independant men, cannot of conscience communicate with you before a Reformation: Therefore if this be the medium you have (betweene leaving the Land and toleration.) even that they must submit to your worship, you might have bequeathed this Legacie to some that would accept of it, and give you thankes, for the Lord hath bequeathed liberty to his &illegible; and Servants, and hath purchased it at a deare price; even that they should be freed from all Egyptian bondage; and hath commanded them to stand fast in than liberty, wherein he hath made them free: and whether they must obey Gods commands, or your counsell be judge your selfe.
Sixtly, you say, If the former answers will not satisfie, but that they must needs be in a Church fellowship, as now they are then (you say) you you will shew them a way, according to their owne principles of a visible Church.
For answer whereof I must tell you, that fallacies, and false conclusions upon mens words, (without bringing their conditions) can satisfie no man concerning the matter in hand; but it may satisfie all men of your evill minde, that you still labour to turne away the truth as it may appeare; by the way you here have chalked them out, to walke in; which is
That because it is their principle (say you) that a few Saints joyned together in a Covenant, have power; therefore you imply that there should never neede a greater addition to them.*
This you may know crosseth the whole Scripture as the very prophesies of the Church under the New Testament that is to say, that a little one shall become a thousand, and a great one a strong Nation, Esay 60. 22. and that they should grow up as the Calves of the stall,Rev. 7. Mal. 4. 2. not onely in greatnesse, but also in number: and especially when the Lambe overcommeth, that is even when the Saints overcome,Rev. 12. 11. by the blood of the Lambe, and the word of their testimony, not esteeming their lives to the death.
Therefore you might have saved your schollership, when you went about to teach them, to make Churches in houses, and also to come to your Church, to the Word, Prayer, and Sacraments, for they have not so learned Christ; to come one part of the day to worship before the Idols, and to stand another part before God, for if they should doe so, the Lord saith, (Ezek. 44. 13.) they should not come neere him, neither to doe the office of the Priest, nor to come neare the holy things, but that they should beare their shame, and their abomination.
Further, you might have saved your labour in teaching them, to make family Churches: for God hath directed them what to doe in their Families.
And it is not the practise of Gods people, to shut out from their prayers, and holy duties, them that are of their Family: for God gave his Law to Abraham for another end (namely) that he should teach it his Family, and by so doing, traine up members in his family, for Christs Family.
Further, you might have spared your care taken to shew a way for maintenance, for those men among us, that are schollers bred, for if you can find no better maintenance for them, then to come and be Lecturers amongst you (as you would have them) and to live in hope of the gifts of the dead; that is no good provision: for, for want of those shooes men may goe long barefooted seeing they cannot (by your owne confession) doe that of conscience till there be a Reformation. But you might rather have perswaded your Parish Priests to have bequeathed some of their large revenewes unto them: for whether they have Parsonage or Vicarage their pole-money comes in so thicke to them and their followers, that it would make any sober minded man or woman to wonder how they can consume it: for besides their ordinary tithes or maintenance; which is the principall, they have many other petty dues, which they require of every one of the Kings subjects, & they are not so reasonable as his Majestie, which is contended with pole-money from his subjects, from 16. yeares old, and upward, but they will have a share out of him that is borne without life; as it will plainely be proved) for if a dead child be borne into the world, they will be paid for reading a dirge over it, before it shall be laid in the earth, and they will be apt to inferre, that that their deere brother is departed in the faith, though it be the childe of theeves and murderers, and the like.
Further, they will yet have another patrimony for the birth of that childe, for before the mother dare goe abroade, shee must have their blessing; that the Sun shall not smite her by day, nor the Moone by night; for which blessing of theirs, they must have an offering, and the like they require for all the children that be borne into this world, though there live not one of sixe to be men or women.
But for as many of them as doe live, they enlarge their Revenewes. for, if they live to come to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, then they must pay their offerings yearely to the Priest, though the bread and wine be provided at the parishes charge.
Further, if they live to enter into the state of Matrimony, then they must be joyned together by a Priest, for which worke of his he must have a large Offering.
And these men be not content to take money where there is money (as the King is) but they will have these (which they call dues) of him that liveth of the very almes of the Parish, whereas the King taketh not a penny of any that receive almes.
Then if we consider their exaltion how they oppresse the people, by their cruell forcing of them to pay so much as they demand, (though it be contrary to all Law or equity) it will cause us to wonder at the hardnesse of their hearts for rather then they will abate any thing of what they demand they will force poore people even to pawne their cloathes; for I am able to prove that they doe demand of poore people before they can have a childe (that is but fourteene, or fifteene yeares of age) buried in one of the out-Church-yards of the great Parishes (which land is the free gift of the dead, for the helpe of the poore, even as Creplegates new Church-yard, or Algates, Rosemary lane, or White Chappell; Mile-in greene, (or others the like;) before (I say) they can have such a child buried there, it will cost the poorest parent, seven or eight shillings: Nay, I have knowne when they have distrusted paiment, that they have affirmed, that they would not bury them, except they had their money paid before hand: Nay, when any poore man bringeth out of the remote places of the city any Corps to Bedlam (which is the cheapest place that I know) ye when all things else is discharged, even as, Bearers Wages, Graveaggers Wages, and the ground paied for also; yet they must be constrained to have a twelve-penny Priest, to say something over the grave, and he will grudge if he have not more than a shilling (though he say but a few words without the booke) when (perhaps) all the people that be left alive in the Family, be not worth a shilling.
Furthermore, If any poore man have a necessitie to worke, upon one of their Saints-dayes, then Mr. Paritor must come, and have a grote, for citing him to the Court, but if he appeare not, he must be Presented, and for not paying Fees, he shall be Excommunicated, and he shall never be blessed in again, but (though he be the poorest man in the Kingdome) the price of his blessing will be a noble at the least: but if he happen to die an Excommunicant, then his friends must give money to absolve him after he is dead, or else he shall not be buried in the consecrated Earth: but if his friends will goe to the Office, and give but a matter of five pound for his Absolution, after he is dead; then he shall be buried in the Consecrated ground; and they will also affirme he died in the Faith of Christ, ye though he were excommunicated for notorious sinne, and lived and died, obstinately in it.
It is a plaine case therefore, that these men are a greater plague to this Land, then the naturall Locusts of Egypt, for they ate up the greene things, but these eate up both greene and dry.
Nay, further. I conceive they are more prejudiciall to the Common wealth, than the Frogges that came up upon the Land of Egypt, for they entred into the Oven, and into the Kneading Trough: and wee reade not that they ascended higher than the Kings bed, and the beds of his Servants; but these are exalted above the Chimney tops, to catch a Smoke-penny from every poore mans house.
Thus you see the mighty Revenewes of the Priests: If I had but time to tell you of the things which I know (even of the extent of their Revenewes) what is gained unto the generality of Priests, by granting of Licenses to Midwives, and to Schoolemasters, with divers of their own Officers, such as Paritors, Sumners, & Pursevants, with a number of that Ranke, which have strange names that I know not, It would (as I said before) make all men wonder, how it is devoured: for they must be freed from all taxations, and have their houses rent free, and many times eate their bread at other mens tables, and yet (for the most part) they die poore men, and farre in debt, and leave behinde them, both wives and children, destitute of Calling and Maintenance, which is a plaine case to me, that the hand of God is upon this Generation, in cursing that which they would have blessed. And therfore I will confesse that I was overseene (in the entrance into this Discourse) when I moved you to perswade these men to bequeath some thing to their brethren, (that are Schollers bred;) for I did not consider, that though they received much, yet they had but little to give, because it is not blessed for increase: but I should rather have comforted you, with giving you knowledge, that God hath provided maintenance for his Ministers; as well as for his People, that they neede not bow to you for a morsell of bread; for God taught his Apostles to worke with their hands, as Paul saith, that his hands ministred to his necessities, and those that were with him; Acts 20. 34. not that Paul might not receive of the people carnall things, for he declareth the contrary in another Scripture, and I hope, all the Lords people will confesse that the labourer is worthy of his hire, and that it is their duty to make them partakers of their carnall things, of whom they receive spirituall things.
Further, you are carefull to have them sober, and peaceable, and not to preach and speake against what is established by Law.*
Indeede (I must tell you) in my judgement, no man can make way for a true Reformation, except hee declare what is evill, before he shew what is good.
Further you say, you suppose subscriptions will not be injoyned to formes of Government and Discipline.
Here you seeme to yeeld that your formes of Government and Discipline be not of God; then if there be no injunction, none will obey, but if injunctions, none will obey for conscience; for what good man can yeeld to an injuction that is not of God, so then, (you may see) your injunctions have beene the way and meanes to breed and bring forth a world of hypocrites, as one may easily see by the Time servers of your Church.
But you say, that without a toleration we may injoy in a secret way our Church fellowship.
Indeede (M. Edwards) we have learned that lesson already, for Christ hath taught us, that we shall fly into the Wildernesse,* and that the earth shall helpe us* but sometimes it proves to the danger of our lives, and alwayes to the danger of our liberty; as it may appeare by the practise herein London, for though wee meete never so privately, and peaceably, yet such Cattle as your selfe, are alwayes bleeting in the eares of your Parish Officers, and Constables, with your other Officers, even till you move the Lord Major himself to be your drudge, and as your horne, which you push forward, for the destruction of our bodies, when he hath laid violent hands on them, for it is evident that it hath beene to the losse of some of their lives; and this is the liberty we have in this Kingdome and all through the instigation of you Priests.
But you say, though some of the more sober and conscientious Ministers and people could use it better, yet the Brownists and Anabaptists, and weake brethren would be apt to scandall: and therefore to avoid scandall, you would insinuate that we are bound to neglect the whole forme of Church worship.
I told you before, and I tell you now, that you are afraid to have your owne glory ecclipsed and by this all men may see, (and by all your formers answers also) that you would have us to enjoy in this Kingdome, neither Ordinances, nor conscience.
The next thing you lay downe, is the judgement of an antient Father; But indeede he is as sound in the faith as your selfe, for hee would have men to joyne to Churches that have no power.*
And this being the sixth answer that you have given to their third reason, you entreat them to lay all your sixe together, and to consider &illegible; whether God require, unlesse they have a toleration to leave the Kingdome to roome many hazards, and dangers, when as they may enjoy, so much at home, without a Toleration, as you say you have opened to these sixe answers.
To wch I answer, when they are laid all six together, they make but a peece of an answer to one of their Reasons, and this piece of your answer is stuffed full of falicies, as hath beene already proved, and may further appeare, by the conclusion of all here, when you say they may have so much at home, for it hath beene proved already, that they can have nothing at home, either in respect of liberty, or worship; (but what they must have by stealth;) for when they would injoy the Ordinances of God, which are lewels, which you would have none to have but your selves, that so you might seeme glorious; If any (I say) will presume to borow the lewels, and carry them away, you will pursue after them; and you know it was the practise of the Egyptians of old, for they would have suffered the Israelites to have gone away empty, and left their cattle behinde them, so that they might have had nothing with them to have offered sacrifice withall; and I pray you were not the Southsayers the cause of this? by withstanding Moses and Aaron, against the children of Israel, even by the false Figures which they cast before the eyes of Pharaoh, to harden Pharoahs heart, even as you Priests doe at this day.
And thus I have laid together your sixe Reasons, and weighed them; but one truth is sufficient to overweigh them all.
But yet you have also a seventh Answer which is by it selfe: and it is this, That if they will not be satisfied (say you) without setting up Churches; it is better they should get out of the Kingdome.
Besides, you would have all others that be of this minde, to leave the Land, and goe to New-England, that cannot be satisfied, but that they must erect Churches to the disturbing of the peace of three Kingdomes.
Truely (Mr. Edwards) you shew your selfe a bloody minded man, that would have the Innocent suffer for the faults of them that are guilty. Was not the sending of your Masse-bookes into Scotland the cause of the disturbance? and hath it not appeared plaine enough to the Parliament and to the Scots, before the Parliament sate, that the Bishops and Priests were the cause of the disturbance? I doubt not but you have read both the Scotish Intentions, and their Demands, with their Dedarations, which have plainely manifested, who and what was the cause of the disturbance, it was not the meeting of a handfull of the Lordspeople, which ever sought and do seeke the good and wellfare of the three Kingdomes, with the life & happy reigne of their Soveraigne Lord the King, who alwayes sue unto God for the peace of the Kingdome, in whose peace they may enjoy peace: but contrariwise, it plainely appeares, that it was you and your Fathers house which caused this variance.
But say you, it will be no great harme for many of them to goe away.
I answer, It is like you apprehend the Judgements of God comming upon you, and you thinke to be eased, by driving out the Lords people in haste.
Further, you say, you would rather goe to the uttermost parts of the earth to live in a meane and hard condition, rather than you would disturbe the peace or good of three Kingdomes.
For Answer, to this I must tell you, I would you had considered this before you had done it. But now seeing God of his mercy hath reconciled them againe, it may be the wisedome of you and your fellowes, to depart unto Rome, that Gods true Religion may be set up here in England without Popish Injunctions, that so the last errour be not worse than the first; for you say, It is better that one perish than Vnity; therefore (in my judgement) it is better that they should runne the hazard, who have occasioned the strife.
Further, you plead for your selfe and for hundreds of your brethren, that you have borne the brunt of the times, and yet you doe professe that you will submit to what is established by Law, because you hope it will be blessed and glorious.
I tell you, you are even like Isachers Asse and so are the rest of your fellowes, even willing to stoope downe between two burdens, because ease is good: for the Law indeede makes every thing seeme glorious; but for any brunt that you have borne in these last times; I thinke it hath not over-loaded you; for I have not heard that you have beene at two pence cost, to maintaine the Lords people in prison; and therefore you are very unlike to Obadiah, for instead of hiding of the Lords people, you cry out upon the Parliament to have them hunted; and this is a great brunt indeed, (if it be well considered) and it is doubt it will cost you deare, (by that time you have paid your reckoning) except God give you repentance.
But you further expresse, that you would not set up true Churches against a true Church.
I answer, neither would these Independant men, I hope, for those things which God teacheth his servants to doe, be not against the truth, but for the truth, neither can they be any cause of Divisions, or heart-burnings, betweene either Ministers or People.
And thus you may see, and behold, that your seventh Answer (to their third Reason) that you have now left alone, is a Noune Adjective in respect of proving any thing that you brought it for.
YOu say their fourth Reason is, that if the Ministers and Churches be not tolerated, they are afraid that in time they shall draw most of the good people out of the Land after them.
And for answer to this, you say, you suppose they rather hope than feare it; and that, (say you) plainely sheweth, they have a good conceit of themselves, and of their owne way.
For answer to you, I say, that this your Answer is but a Supposition, neither do I know whether it be their Reason, for methinks it sounds somewhat like Nonsense, but your Supposition will not prove them to have a good conceit of themselves, neither of any way of their owne; for it is the way of the Lord Iesus Christ, that they plead for.
Secondly, you say, you feare too, but not as they doe, but your feare is, least toleration should draw away many good people.
I pray you trouble not your selfe, too much, for if there be no toleration, the good people will flye from you, and stand a farre off, and waite for the Reformation which you have all this while promised.
But now at last you seeme to make a doubt of any Reformation at all, when you say, If the Ceremonies and Liturgie stand in full force* which presupposeth,Pag. 48. lin. 14. that you conceive they will stand still; but no doubt, but if they be setled by Law, they will seeme glorious to you, although they are in themselves Romish Traditions.
Further, you adde, if these stand in force, and Churches tolerated; they will make brave worke in a short time.
I answer, you are so fearefull least the Lords people should enter into the citie of promise, that it is very like you never intend to enter in your selfe; and that makes you gather up your hopes, in the midst of all your feares: setting a worke your confidence, that God will preserve many judicious, and advised Christians from your way; and therefore you counsell them, to whom you speake, to let them be well shipped, and a Reformation in Government and Ministers; and then you say your feare will be over.
Truely methinkes you patch your matter together very disorderly: for you have many times said, that upon a Reformation they would communicate with you.
But now you would have them well shipt,Pag. 48. lin. 20. which I thinke is the Reformation which you desire: as may appeare by the confused speech which you make afterwards; for you say; When there is a Reformation amongst you in Government and Ministers, that feare is over with you; and your Reason is, because when that which first bred these men* is taken away, which (say you) was the violent pressing of Ceremonies, and the casting out of good Ministers; and many notorious persons being suffered in the Church of England without all censures, shall be removed; many (say you) will not be bred, and others will be satisfied, and some godly painefull Ministers of the Church of England would out-preach them, and out-live them.
To this I answer, you seemed in the beginning of your Answer, to make them proud persons, or conceited of themselves But now methinkes, I heare you boast very much of your selfe, and others of your Church.
But I thinke it may be very true: for you cannot chuse but out-preach them, if you preach them out of the Kingdome.
And it is very like you may out-live them also; if you can but banish them into some hard country, or else get them into some stinking prison, as you and the rest of your Fathers house have done very lately.
But further you adde, that you and your fellowes, will compare with them for all excellencies and abilities.
Me thinkes it had beene more credit for you to have given your neighbours leave to speake.
But now you have advanced your selfe, you labour to cast them downe, for you say, you knew many of them long before they fell to this way, but you have not seene any of them better, nor more profitable, for you say, whilst they were in the Church of England, they preached often, and now seldome.
I Answer, it is very like they dare not tell such as you when they preach, that cry out to the Parliament to disturbe their meetings.
Further, you say, they goe looser in their apparell and haire.
I answer, I know some indeede that have beene constrained to change their apparell for feare of persecution and (it may be) the haire you were offended at, might be some Perriwigge, which some of them have beene constrained through feare to put on, to blinde the eyes of the Bishops Blood-hounds, when they have come to take them.
Further, you exclaime against them, that they take lesse care for publike things that concerne the glory of God, and the salvation of mens soules.
I answer, if their care be so little, you may wonder, what makes them to take this paines, and care, to travell out of a farre countrey, to sue to the Parliament, by humble petition, for freedome of conscience, and liberty for Gods publike worship, which are things most concerning the glory of God, and the salvation of mens soules.
Further, you accuse them, that their spirits are growne narrow, like their Churches, and that they grow strange, reserved, and subtill; further, you say, in a word, they minde little else, but the propagation of their Independant way.
For answer whereof I say to you, that it is no marvell though their spirits grow narrow, towards such an Adversarie as your selfe, and great cause they have to be strange towards you, and reserved and subtill also.
But whereas you say their Churches be narrow:
I say they are even like the way to heaven or the gate that leadeth unto life, which is so narrow, that such as you can hardly enter in thereat.
But if their greatest care be (as you say) to set up the Independant way* (which is the way of God:) This still crosseth your former slander of them, that they little minde the publike good, and salvation of mens soules. But that this is true (namely, that they minde little else but the propagation of their Independant way) you bring the Protestation Protested to witnesse, which Testimony maketh them peaceable men, because they desire to meddle with no mans businesse but their owne.
And if they minde little else but to set up the Independant way, then it will also crosse your following speech, (which you say, you speak from your conscience and experience) that never any of them, bad so large a spirit for good, after they fell into that way, nor tooke such care (you say) for the propagation of the Gospell, and preaching the Word to men without.
I tell you, indeede if they did not take care to preach the Word to men without, they would never come to preach amongst you, much lesse would they then sue for libertie so to doe, (as the Welsh Ministers have done) if they had not a desire to informe the ignorant, in those truths that God hath revealed to them.
And therefore you may see in your accusations against them, you are proved a very slanderer, and have taken upon you the office of Sathan, the old accuser of the Brethren.
But you conceive God never honoured them so much afterward.
But seeing it is but your conception, it matters not; for if they were active for God, and did famously and worthily before they entred into the way of God, I am sure they could not but be more active afterwards; for when a man is in a Journey (especially if he know or conceive himselfe to be out of the way) he goeth on heavily till he meeteth with some directer, either to informe him that he is in the right way, or to direct him how he shall get into it; and being setled in his right way, hee goeth on more cheerefully, and actively than hee could doe in the time of his doubting; even so it must needs be with these men, as I said before.
Againe, you say, that the men that hold those principles of Separation, God did never honour much.
I answer, it seemes you thinke Gods thoughts are as your thoughts, and because you seeke for the praise of men and have it, and a few men honour them: and because Christs flocke is a little flocke, therefore you imagine they are not honoured of God, which is very carnall reasoning.
But as you have slandered the men all this while; so now you here slander their way (and principles) which way is the way of God, and whose principles are Gods truthes; yet (you say) there is such a malignitie eleaves to it, even as doth to the Episcopacie.
This is a very great slander, to compare Godswayes to the wayes of Sathan, in saying there is such a malignity cleaving to it, which alters mens spirits, and makes their hearts worse; and yet you here confesse, that many of them continue good in the maine.
Thus much for your Fourth Reason.
YOu say, their fifth Reason is, That this is no other but envy in the Ministers, that makes them against Toleration, because they feare their people will desert from them, and come to us, being so pure in Ordinances, and Churches; and thus you say the Protestation Protested speakes.
Your answer to this Reason is,
1. That it is not out of envie, but you hold their practise sinfull and unwarrantable to separate from your Churches, and to erect such Congregations, and therefore you say, you speake against it, and that you here promise to make good in a following Discourse.
For answer to this, I must tell you, that it is not your denying it to be out of Envie, that will cleare you, for there is nothing appeares more plainer, than that envie against the truth, and the Professors thereof, was the cause of your writing against Toleration.
And that it is through feare your people will desert, is plaine, by your owne confession in your Fourth Reason; where you say, that if the Liturgie, and Ceremonies, stand in force, and Toleration be granted, they will make brave worke in a short time and yet you hope some judicious Christians (as you say) will be kept from their way.
But in that you here say, you bold the practise sinfull and unwarrantable.
You have made that part of your judgement knowne already before; but your judgement was grounded upon no true Principle; and therefore it hath beene already proved to be emoneous.
And whereas you say, you will make it good to be sinfull in a following Discourse:
I answer, If you can but make men beleeve this, you will worke a wonder. But I know it is impossible, for you to make good your promise, and therefore I cannot expect performance.
Now to cleare your selfe.
2. You say, it cannot be counted envie in Ministers, to be unwilling to have their flocks, and people fall from them.
I answer, By so saving, you rather confirme their Reason than remove it, (namely) that it was your feare of the deserting of your people.
But for you to insinuate, that the people that be called out of a way of sinne, and brought into the way of grace, and liberty, be stollen away, and tempted away by strangers (as you would make it) concluding that it is as tolerable for children to for sake their parents, renouncing the ascribe that bare them, and the pappes that gave them sucke; throwing dirt in the face of father and mother, as it is for a man to forsake Idolatrous worship; this is an unjust comparison, and crosseth the whole tenor of the Scripture.
Now you would make this your owne case, for you allude to your spirituall children, who (say you) are the fruit of your labours.
I pray you, how can you count the Parish of St. Elens your spirituall children, seeing you are there but an hireling; and as you have not begotten them to the Faith, so you have not taken the charge of them, to watch over them as a Spirituall. Father, and you will onely preach to them so long as any will pay you wages, but no longer; how then have you converted them to God? from what have you converted them? or what have you converted them too? have you turned them from serving dumbe Idols, to serve the living God? I have heard of no great change of them, nor of any other where you have preached; you found them in the Church of England, and you found them Christians, (in your owne judgement) and you know they were baptized, when you came to them; and in the same Church where you found them, there you leave them; I pray you, how have you begotten them to God? you found them under a false power, submitting to a false worship, and you justifie them as men begotten to God, and you justifie their standing there. Thus doe you sow pillowes of flatteries under their elbowes.
But you neede not to feare any mans comming to steale your Disciples away by night, as the Jewes gave out falsely of Christs naturall body, for that was but a lie; therefore let no man presume to lie by their example.
But you say therefore you ought to watch against us, (and ought not to sleepe) least they should be stolne* away.
I answer, so did the Jewes watch the naturall body of Christ and yet he by his power raised himselfe, and also departed from them; even so by the same power will he raise from the death of sinne, many that are amongst you, and will cause them to separate themselves from your false worshipping, and from you that are false worshippers, and he will tell them where he feedeth his sheepe, and causeth them to lie downe at noone.*
Neither can you cleare your selfe by saying, you fitty them, and love them, and would not have such a sword as a toleration put into their hands (as you are pleased to say) to hurt them, though some amongst them (say you) might perhaps use it better.
I pray you feare not this, (which you here call an error on the right hand) but rather feare your Church, if (as you say) your Liturgie and Ceremonies stand still in force, which (you say) were the causes that bred the Separates.*
I tell you, if the same cause remaine you may justly feare, it will take the same effect; you have also as great cause to feare the prophanenesse and Atheisme, which is feared in the hearts of most of your people, but onely that you blesse your selfe, in hope that all ignorant and scandalous persons shall be driven out. But I pray you tell me, whither doe you intend to drive them? if you leave them any where in the Land, they will be still of your Church: except you will make you a new Church: But if you should drive them out of the Land, you would leave many places of the Land uninhabited; for the generalitie of the people (in most parts) be ignorant, and prophane; and thus you may see your selfe in a great streight, and therefore you have great cause to feare.
Further, you say, the Author would intimate that the honest soules are with them, and would be for their way; but as for those that are against their way and Toleration, they are not such honest soules.
If this Author be the Protestation Protested, you have wrested his words, for he hath not said they are not such honest soules neither hath he entred into judgement against any.
But further, (you say) you would have them know that the honest soules are not onely with them: for in the Church of England (say you) there ever have beene, and are honest Ministers and people, that have rejected our way, and any that fell to it, nay the greatest Nonconformists, and most able in that way (you say) have written the most against our way, and laboured upon all occasions to preserve the people from falling to us.
For answer whereof, I must tell you, that the Ministers, and people, were never the honester for rejecting of that way, (which hath beene proved to be the way of God) though they were the greatest Nonconformists in the world: for it is not our way properly, but the gift of the Father, which he hath given us, to walke in; and surely, it is no signe of honesty to commend the Saints in their infirmities, or to condemne them in their workes of pietie; I say, it is no signe of an honest soule to speak evill of such a holy way: I tell you, I take Hugh Latimer to be an honest soule, though he have declared both by word and writing against such as you; and affirmed, that a lay man fearing God, is much more fit to understand the holy Scripture, then a proud and arrogant Priest; yea, then the Bishop himselfe be hee never so great and glistering in all his pontificalls: and such honest soules (though they are not of the Clergie, but of those whom you call the Layetie:) are the fittest men on the earth to make Churches, and to chuse their owne Ministers (as I said before) though they be Trades-men; and such as these have dependancie upon Christ alone, whose way is properly the sincere way of God. And as for any that have writ against this way (or against those who walke uprightly in it) it will not make much for their account, for that part of their worke shall burne (as well as yours) though they may be saved: and as for these Authors which here you bring, which have beene so carefull (as you say) to keepe the people from falling into that way; I have reade some of their bookes, and found the most of them, prophesie sad things against he Church of England, except she repent.
THeir sixth Reason (you say) is, that they are good men, and men of great gifts, and therefore they should be tolerated to have such Churches, it is pitty they should leave the Land, and wee loose their prayers.
Indeede (Mr. Edwards) this may be some other, mans Reason, on their behalfe, but I hardly beleeve, that they lived so farre from good neighbours, that they must thus set forth their owne praise.
But for answer to this Reason, in the first place; you say, the better men they be, and the more able, the worse, to set up separated Churches.
To this I answer, that I ever conceived by the Scripture, that those that Christ ordained, to plant his Churches were good men, as it was said of Barnabas, that he was a good man* and the very like was said of Stephen* and therefore me thinks you are shreudly mistaken.
But further, you say, they will the more indanger the peace of the Kingdome, and make the Schismes greater.
I answer, If it be good and able men that indanger the peace of the Kingdome, you may doe well to perswade the Parliament, to keepe still in your Church, all the dumb and drunken Priests: for they are bad enough, and unable to doe good, and yet of my knowledge, they are very able to disturbe the peace, and to breed strife, and to bring Gods judgements upon the Land, which is able to make a greater Schisme than you are a ware of.
Secondly, you say, for their prayers, you have the benefit of them, as well when they are absent, as present, and some of them have said (say you) they prayed more far England when our, of it then in it.
Indeede if they did so, they did well, for that was their duty; but I suppose you (for your particular) had little benefit of those prayers, and that, because God hath hardened your heart, even against them, and all good men.
Thirdly, For these their prayers you have rewarded them with an accusation (namely) that they left the Kingdome, when it was in greatest danger, and in most neede of helpe, and provided for themselves to keepe in a whole skinne.
I answer, if they did evill in it, that evill is to be passed by; for it is very probable, that they did know that the GREAT CANONS were already made, and that they were mightily charged, and overcharged, as it may appeare by their shivering in pieces: but if they had held to have beene shot off; they might easily perceive, that they might beate holes in their owne skins, as well as in other mens, and they seeing the plague before hand, might be borne with to hide themselves.
But you say you stood without them here in the gappe, and prevailed with God.
I answer, It may be conceived, that they prevailed with God, who prayed so much for England, when they were out of it, for God will not heare sinners,* therefore you cannot expect that God should heare you, so long as you justifie the abominations of your bespotted Church; and you know Moses prevailed for Egypt, when he was out of the city.*
Exod. 9. 29. 33.But you say it is better to want their company, than to buy it at so deare a rate as a toleration, and you say you question not, but the Kingdome will doe well enough without them.
Is it possible, that you should enjoy the benefite of the prayers of those that you so much sleight, and set so little by their company, that rather then they shall have liberty, to worship God in a peaceable way (by your will) they should depare the Kingdome, when it is proved, by the Word of God that Gods servants are the strength & glory of the Kingdome: for even as the Prophets were the Charets and Horsemen of Israel, so are they that feare the Lord, a support to the Kingdome and Common-wealth wherein they live.
But as for your Kingdome of Priests, it shall neither stand without them, nor with them, for though the Prophets sought to heale Babel, yet it could not be healed, for your hornes shall be knocked off, and methinks I heare the decree gone forth, that your Kingdome is devided, and therefore you have neede, to set downe your resolution, that it shall not long stand, but the Kingdome of England may safely stand with Toleration.
Fourthly, you say for this Objection, of being good men, you will answer it at large in another Tractate, wherein (you say) you shall minde men of many dangers that may arise to them from good and eminent men; and further, you say you will fully shew what little strength is in that Reason, and cleare also many things in reference to that Objection.
I answer when I see this performed, I will take it into consideration, and then you may heare more of my minde; in the meane while, I rest in the Scriptures; which satisfie me, that good men ever bring a blessing.
The next thing you bring is this question (namely) whether conscientious men,Pag 52. who agree with you in the maine in points of Doctrine, and practise, may be tolerated and spared, in some things wherein they differ from that which is commonly received.
Indeede you have made divers answers to this already for it was before your owne question, in some of your Reasons alledged against them, where you affirme, that you iustifie much, both bearing and forbearing, and have also see the Counsell of ancient Fathers before them, to teach them to heare with others both in points of Doctrine and practise, wherein they may something differ from that which is commonly received.
But here further, you adde a more large answer, That you still say it is your judgement that there should be bearing in many differences of opinions and practise, so as Christians ought not to judge nor censure one another, nor refuse commotion and fellowship, by not admitting men into their Churches, and to the Ordinances.
You have seemed (all this while) to be afraid least they should admit too many into their Churches, and now you seeme to say, it is the fault of the Independant Churches to deny communion to many Saints for some differences in judgment, about Church-Government and Orders. Now if this be true (as you say it is) they are so farre from stealing away your members that they will not receive them into fellowship, if there be differences in judgment,* for which you here seeme to blame them, and therefore I think you would have them open the mouthes of their Churches wider, even as wide as yours. But the Scripture hath declared, that the gates of the holy city, are of an equall widenesse, for they are never shut, Rev. 21. 25 and yet they are so well watched by the Angels of God, even the Ministers of Christ Jesus, that there shall be no uncleane thing suffered to enter in thereat, &c.* Here you may see if any of you attempt to come in (who are so ignorant and scandalous and spotted (as you say they be) they shall not be suffered amonst us; for indeede they are fit for no society, but the society of your Fathers house: yet (I say) if any of these doe creepe in, it is through the neglect of the Portor, which the Lord hath set to watch, or else it must needs be by their cunning transfiguring themselves to be that which they are not.
But (you say) you would not have men forced to change their mindes, and opinions, by casting them violently out of the Ministry and Church, which (you say) was the practise of many in these late times, and hath caused,Pag. 52. so many Schismes and strifes amongst you.
Well, here all men may take notice, that it was the cruelty of the Clergie, that caused the Shismes and strifes, by forcing men to change their mindes, and not the practise of the Separation (as you here acknowledge) therefore in this confession you have crossed the tenor of many of your other arguments, as that the Separates have caused strife in the three Kingdomes, and that they had made the rents and Schismes, which now you acknowledge to be done by them (that force men to change their mindes) which are the Clergie of England.
Further, you say, that you approve not of such practises, but desire to be a follower, and lover of the wayes of peace and communion, with any who agree in the maine, and have something of God and Christ in them.
I answer, if you approve not of such practises, I hope you will not hereafter be an occasion to move Magistrates to force men to change their mindes, and so justifie your selfe in that you condemne in others, for you confesse your selfe, that though these Independent mens spirits be growne narrow (even closed up from you) yet they continue good in the maine;* and then sure they have something of God, and of Christ in them.
You say further, that the practise of the antient Fathers, that pleaded for bearing, are infinitely pleasing to you.
I answer, if they be infinitely pleasing to you, I hope you will never be unpleased againe, with any of the Lords servants, about keeping of dayes, which you say was the difference betweene these Fathers*
Moreover, you seeme to inferre, that because Siprian (whom you confesse, erred in the point of rebaptizing) would not condemne them, who were of a contrary opinion: that therefore men may be tolerated in their differences of opinions.
But here you have brought an erring Father (by your owne confession) to perswade us to keepe communion with those that are contrary minded but the Apostle exhorteth us to labour to be of one minde, that we may walke by one rule, but if any be otherwise minded, we ought to waite till God reveile further, and not to force him to be of our minde, till he hath faith in himselfe, grounded upon the Word of God. But that ground which you have (that men should be tolerated in their differences of opinions) is built upon the sayings of this Father Ciprian.
But presently you come with your provisall, which hath quite altered the Case, your provisall is (they may be tolerated) so long as they keepe communion with the Church, and submit to the Discipline and orders, and be peaceable, and not speake against what is established by common consent nor practise to the scandall and contempt of the Magistrate and Church.
I answer, this is but even a crossing of your owne speech againe, for this constraining of men to yeeld to whatsoever is established by common consent, is but a forcing of men to change their minds; which you said before, was the cause of Schisines and strifes, and though you approve not of it in others, yet (it seemes) you could freely practise it your selfe, as may plainely appeare by what you speake hereafter, which is the very same thing which you have often spoke already; that is, If a few men (halfe a dozen, or halfe a score) refuse communion with your Church, and vent opinions every where, to the disturbing of the Kingdome, and drawing disciples after them, though they were Ministers of gold, and had the tongues of men and Angels, they should not be tolerated.
Now you have strucke up the stroke, but it will not serve your turne; for this your vaine insinuation (that they disturbe the Kingdome and draw Disciples after them,) hath beene many a time disproved already, because it hath beene oftentimes repeated by you, to fill up your matter; nay your owne words have disproved your selfe, where you say, they will not receive them into fellowship except they be of their mindes.*
But further (you say) you would have us to reade Calvin upon that subject, in his last Epistle to Felerius: The matter you say is this, that if He would not be reduced into order, the Ministers should tell him, that he is not to be accounted as a brother, because he disturbed the common discipline.
What the Disciscipline was that he disturbed I cannot tell, but you say it was a Discipline that was common, which makes it appeare to mee, that it was like your Booke-worship, or your Common Prayer-booke, which is common as farre as the Pope hath any preheminence or jurisdiction; and that you confesse this Common Discipline, was not the Discipline of God, neither a Discipline that you approve of, appeares by your owne words.
That you judge it not of God, appeares here in your following words; where you grant this to be the authority of men, and that it is not to be sought after it: &c. and you know the things that they decreed was, that he that would not submit to the Synod must be put out of his place; and you say, that you would not have any cast out of the Ministery, or Church, because it breedeth Schismes* and by this it appeares, that you allow not of this manner of Discipline, and by this one may also plainely see, that you are made all of contradictions, as it may plainely appeare in the very next words following, where you conclude, that the authority of men is not to be sought, when the Spirit of God pronounceth of such, &c. and here you quote the 1 Cor. 11. 19. where you would make Paul an author of casting men out of their places, because they would not yeeld to the Synod. I pray you hath Paul in this Chapter discoursed of any such thing? was not the controversie here about long haire, about which Paul saith the Church hath no such custome of contention; and doth not Paul himselfe put the thing to be judged by the Church? in the thirteenth verse, where he saith, Iudge in your selves, Is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? and further, in the 14th. verse, Doth not nature it selfe teach us, that if a man have long haire it is a shame unto him? and was not this Doctrine grounded in the Law and Prophets, and confirmed and established by God long before the Apostles time? yes surely it was, and therefore it will not serve your turne, to prove that Synods may decree Customes, for the Church of God? but it will serve your turne to prove what you desire, that is, a dependancie between Rome and England, and that the Bishops of Rome and England by their Synods, should make all their shavelings to crouch and submit, and bow to their injunctions; for your owne practises prove it, by your very submitting, be it never so contrary to the Law of God, and of Nature it selfe, if it be but confirmed by a Synod; and therefore it appeares that it is your malignity of spirit, which causeth you to write as you doe.
But you say you doe it from a zeale;
But I tell you, it is a zeale against Gods glory and the good of his Church, and against the preservation of puritie of Doctrine, and holinesse of life, even at the best like unto the zeale which Paul had, before hee knew Christ, when he went with Letters from the high Priest, to persecute the Church of God, and when he was their Pursevant, to enter into houses, and to hale men and women to prison* if Paul should have said for himselfe, as you would now pleade for your selfe, that peace could not stand with toleration, and therefore it was meete to disturbe their meetings, it would not have served his turne, for if God had not stricken him downe in the way he should never have seene the Lord Jesus (but to his confusion) though he was a man every way as well informed as your selfe.
Yea, be might have pleaded as well as you, that he did it not out of passion, but that he had thoughts of the Church way before; for you may know that Paul was a member of the Church of the Jewes, which was erected by God, and was zealous for the Law, and mighty in knowledge being brought up at the feete of Gamaliel,* and also a free borne Roman,* and yet he neither knew Christ,* nor what Christ would have him to doe,* but hee thought other wayes of himselfe, or else he would not have persecuted the professors of the truth, but that hee imagined there was evill in the practise of the truth; even as you say you apprehend evill in the practise of Independancie, though they see it not that practise it, because (say you) they are ingaged in it, but it was ignorance in Paul, so to thinke, and so (at the best) it is ignorance in you. Therefore you have no neede to say, that you see more evill in it, then the Independants can doe, but you should rather have said you seeme to see, for you cannot see an evill where none is.
But you wish that the Independant Ministers, would consider what hath beene written.
I answer, Indeede (for my part) if their considerations be as mine, and though they consider it as I doe, without partialitie, yet they will finde nothing in it, to perswade them to lay aside all thoughts of setting up separated Assemblies (which hath beene plainely proved to be the way of God) much lesse that they should come, and grow into one body, and joyne in one way with you, so long as you have so foule a body (which you confesse you have) and your way so contrary to the way of Christ, being indeede away of your owne devising.
And touching the counsell of Mr Calvin to this purpose.
I say, If he should counsell, as you counsell, it would be to me but a as blast of breath; for we are to take the councell of the holy Ghost, by the mouth of Paul, which bids us follow him, as hee followes Christ.*
But you would have us to consider, what Paul requires in a Pastor, of which things you say, this is not the least, that hee ought not to be selfe-willed; that is (say you) to be adicted to his owne proper judgement.
I answer, I have considered this text already, and doe conceive, that this rule of Paul is broken by the Pope of Rome, and the Popes of England, which are adicted to their owne wills, and set up their own proper judgements for a Law; which evill and error Paul saw in his time, when he said, the mystery of iniquitie began then to worke.*
Moreover, I do acknowledge that it is a vertue in a good Pastor from his heart to feare contentions, and not to differ from his brethren, unlesse it be in cases greatly necessary, but what is all this which you have said to the matter in hand, you know Paul spake to the Churches planted in the order of Christs Gospell, and not by the order of the man of Sin, and therefore it will not help you to call them againe, to consider what they may enjoy in your Church, for I have proved it plainely before in my reply to your Answer to their third Reason, that a Saint of God can injoy no thing in your Church without sinne, and therefore what you thinke you have shewed before in your three first Reasons is nothing at all; for though you say it is but some circumstances that be wanting, about the manner and forme of Discipline. I tell you you want the substance, even Christ to be the head of your Churche, and have made you a head of Archbishops and Lord Bishops, which head is full of leprosic.
But here you have brought Mr. Calvin to crosse you shrewdly, and you would have us to beleeve him; and indeed with my heart I beleeve it, whether Mr. Calvin speake it or no; you say he affirmes that the Scriptures expresse the substance of discipline; this is very true; but in another place you say, that Calvin said, there is no expresse precept concerning this matter:* And the like you rehearse presently in your next words for you say he affirmeth, that the forme of exercising it, must be ordained by the Ministers for edification, because it is not prescribed by the Lord.
Doth not Clavin and you both crosse your selves here? hath Christ indeede written in his Word the substance of Discipline and not the forme? you would make (indeed) the substance of discipline without forme, and voide, even as the earth it selfe was, when darkenes was upon the face of the deepe: so you would have men conceive there is a substance, but they must have no rule to know where to finde it; for you say, the forme of exercising it, is not prescribed. Here you would make Christ wanting to his owne house, for we know that Moses had the forme of the house, as well as the substance of the house, and the forme of every Ordinance, with every, circumstance that was to be used, in and about Gods worship, and the forme was given unto Moses by God himselfe and Moses had not power to alter any thing in the forme, neither had any of the Ministers which came after him: but the wicked Priests did alter the forme, and Apostated from the truth of those Ordinances taught by Moses; even so the wicked Antichristians apostated from the forme of wholsome words given by Paul, which was to follow him as he followed Christ.
And also from the rule of our Saviour Christ given to all his Apostles, that they should teach the people what he commanded them, (Matth, 28. 20.) And this (you may see) was not onely in substance but in forme also, for Paul expresseth to the Corinthians, the very forme of breaking of bread, which he had received of the Lord Jesus;* and by this you may see you have given the holy Ghost the lie, even as Calvin also, affirming, that the forme of exercising it, is not presribed by the Lord; and therefore I would have you, (Mr. Edwards) to take the Counsell your selfe, that you give unto others, for it is very good counsell.
First, that you please not your selfe in your owne Opinions.
Secondly, that you be not so adicted to your owne judgement, but remember the danger that Calvin laies downe here, that a man being wedded to his owne Judgement, so soone as ever an Ocation offers it self, will be a Schismaticke; and I have told you already, that this was the first occasion of Schisme and Apostacie, from the truth of the Gospels worship, that being darke in their mindes, and judgeing the substance of Gods worship to be without forme; and as they them selves (so presuming) tooke upon them to prescribe a forme themselves, so they being wedded to their owne judgement, did Schisme from the truth of the Scripture.
Thus you say you have delivered your owne soule.
But to whom, or from what you have delivered it, I cannot tell.
But you say further: you hope the brethren, will withdraw their petitions, that they may not be reade in the honourable house of Commons, but, if they should be read (you say) you hope the House will cast them out.*
I Answer, That they should withdraw their Petitions, is but one of your vaine hopes, for they had more neede now to petion then ever they had, both to God and men, seeing such a Goliah as you, musters up so many forces against them.
But the later of these your vaine hopes, doth manifest the malice of your heart, in that you hope the house will cast their petitions out.
Are you so void of true piety towards that Honourable House? or judge you that House so void of common Reason? being as they are indeede the very Eyes of the whole land; the Eares of the whole land, and the Tongue of the whole land; yea the hand and power of the whole land: being so as I conceive in my simplicity, would you have them, I say to be blinde of one eye? and to looke upon the Petitions and complaints of some of the people of the land, and not upon all? would you have them so partiall? would you have them also deafe of one care? that they should not hearken to the cries and petitions, and complaints of all the Kings subjects, one as well as another? would you have them also so defective in their tongue, that they should not be for the praise of them that doe well, as well as for the punishment of evill doers? nay, seeing they are called Gods,* would you have their hands so shortned, that they should not once stretch them forth, to support and helpe the poore afflicted members of Jesus Christ? Then indeede you would have them very unlike unto Moses, even as unlike as your selves are unto Aaron.
Would you have this House to exercise their power upon persons before they have made due triall of the cause? (by hearing witnesses speake on both sides: truely (Mr. Edwards) if you would (as it appeareth plaine it is your minde,) then I will submit to the judgement of both the Houses of Parliament, whether you be not a man void of common Reason; for he is a foole that judgeth a matter before he know it.
And you are not onely void of Reason your selfe, but you would have the Parliament to be like you; for if the Parliament should judge a man before they heare his cause, they would be like the Court at Lambeth, which were used to sit in the high Priests Hall, judgeing matters without due triall.
Further, you say you are perswaded, that it will never be said of this Parliament, that they opened a doore for Toleration.
For Answer to this, I must tell you, that I conceive, they may receive a Petition, and yet not open a doore for Toleration; I meane for such a Toleration as you here speake of, for setting up Churches against Churches, for that is not the Toleration that we pleade for, but your evill conclusion.
And therefore you may pray, if you will, that that doore maybe kept shut.
And we will pray also that all doores may be kept shut, that will let any evills into the Kingdome in processe of time, least that any succeeding generations, should have cause to write in their Chronicles of this Parliament, as it was written of Naaman the Syrian; that is (as you say, (it will be said of them) but they granted a Toleration.
Moreover, we desire nothing at their hands, that may cast a darke shadow upon their glorious light.
But that which we desire, is liberty of conscience to practise Gods true worship in the land wherein we were borne, which will be no blemish to any Christian Magistrate to grant, nor for any Counsell of state to establish.
And therefore you should not have concluded this your Discourse against independancie, and against Toleration, before you had offered it to the triall before some lawfull Committee chosen by the Parliament, to heare both you and them; and then if you could have maintained your Churche of England (which you plead for) with your Synods, and Counsells, Ceremonies, and Booke-worship, Canons, and Sensures, Citations, Degradations, and Excommunications, with your Absolutions, to be founded upon the substance of that Worship and Discipline, which you say Calvin affirmeth, is expressed in the Scriptures, then you might with the more shew of honesty have admoninished the Parliament, to have cast out their Petitions, but till then you may lay your hand upon your mouth, and never for shame affirme, that the granting of Toleration unto us (to worship God, without molestation) will be setting up Churches against Churches.
Neither ought you to have concluded against them, before you had proved their way of worship to be contrary to the word of God, or not to have footing in his word (as yours hath not) for except you had done this, you have small cause to rejoyce in your thoughts, in respect of the accounts that you are to give about this contraversie; for your contraversie can be conceived at the best, to be but, the contraversie that Paul had, when he went unto Damascus which was a Contraversie against Christ* though Christ in his rich grace pardoned him, when hee had smitten him downe, and driven him out of himselfe, and made him to confesse, that he knew not Christ, in these words (where hee saith,) LORD WHO ART THOV, and further acknowledged that he knew not the will of Christ? by asking him (with these words) WHAT WILT THOV HAVE ME TO DOE? thus you may see, though the controversie was against Christ, yet Paul was reconciled to God the Father, by Iesus Christ the Sonne, and endued with the holy Ghost, which made him a Minister of the New Testament, which all his humane learning could not doe.
And Paul might have boasted that he was stirred up by the Spirit of God, against the way of Christ, as you boast, that you are stirred up by Gods Spirit against the way of Separation. But that would not have justified Paul, much lesse shall it justifie you; for Paul did that hee did out of a zeale to maintaine the Law of God. But yours is to maintaine the Law of Sinne, even the Law of Sathan. Paul persecuted those that he did conceive to be evill; but you persecute those that you acknowledge good men, and such as have beene active and famous for God.
And therefore you have no neede to boast of the Spirits enabling you all along, and that above your owne strength (as you declare) for it may plainely appeare (unto all men of understanding) that it was the very spirit of delusion.
And therefore, you may justly expect Censures and Reproaches (as you say you doe) because your way in this action was not pleasing to God.
But for my part, instead of censuring you, I would rather reprove you; and admonish you, rather than reproach you, and pray that God might turne you. And if God would be pleased to give you that reward of your labour, which hee gave unto Paul, even to strike you downe, and to make you to heare his voyce, and learne to know him, and what he would have you to doe; then it would turne much to the praise of God, and to the comfort of your poore soule, if you be a chosen vessell unto him, (which is the thing you pretend you aime at) and then you shall be sure to gaine truth, and love and peace, and holinesse in all your after discourses, when you shall speake with a new tongue, and expresse the language of Canaan.
And now (Mr. Edwards) for conclusion of the whole, I doe here affirme, that if upon the sight of this Booke, you shall conceive that I have either misconstrued your words, or accused you without ground (necessarily drawne from your owne speeches) or that I have mistaken the sence of any Scripture, that I have quoted in this Booke, or that I have not answered you directly to the point (by any oversight) Then chuse you sixe men, (or more, if you please) and I will chuse as many, and if you will we will agree upon a Moderator; and trie it out in a faire discourse, & peradventure save you a labour from publishing your large Tractates, which you say you intend to put out in Print against the whole way of Separation; and if it can be made appeare that (in any of these particulars) I have missed it, I will willingly submit, But if you overcome me, your conquest will not be great, for I am a poore worrne, and unmeete to deale with you.
But if you doe give another onset, before you accept of a parse, (seeing I have offered you conditions of peace) the world will judge you an unreasonable man, and you shall never have the day.
But if you will (say your quarrell is only against those Ministers, that justifie your Church and Ministry, and worship) and can prove that the Minsters of Holland and New England doe generally justifie the Church of England, and the Ministery of the Church of England, and the worship instituted by the Church of England: I say if they thus far justifie you (as I have here specified) then will I freely acknowledge (when I heare them speak it) that I was mistaken concerning them (yet the case in controversie stands still to be tried between you and me) but I do otherwise conceive of them for the present, because I am credibly informed, that they doe, generally and publikely, renounce the power by which they were called to their office of Ministry, in and by the Church of England; some of them affirming that they have stood Ministers too long under such a false power; others confessing here in publike, that it was their sinne, that they had not revealed so much to the people before they went away, with many the like expressions, which I can prove, if wee come face to face, which maketh it appeare to me (for the present) that though they preach in the Assemblies met together by publike authority, yet they judge themselves to be Ministers sent of God to separate the precious from the vile, and that though they have not an outward mediate calling (seeing they have cast it off, because it was false) yet they have an inward immediate calling, as all the Ministers of God had in former time, which were able to unfould the Misteries of the Scripture, though they had neither calling by man, nor by the will of man but by the holy Ghost.
And I hope these men, (of whom I speake) will never returne to serve God before the Idols, nor preach for wages, as Balaam did, but still stand fast in the liberty wherein Christ hath set them; Seeing they cave bast off the grievous yoke of Antichrist, separating betweene the precious and the vile, sitting men for the Lords building, that so they may goe up to Ierusalem by troupes.
This is my charity towards them, though I know them not by face, and I thinke I may boldly say that none of them knowes me.
Esay 41. 21. Stand to your cause, saith the Lord, bring forth your strong reasons, saith the King of Jacob.
Esay 5-8. Take counsell together, yet it shall be brought to nought, pronounce a Decree, yet it shall not stand, for GOD is with us.
FINIS.
Endnotes
[* ] Deut. 32, &illegible; 2 King. 8. 53.
[* ] Gen. 4. 14. 15. 16.
[c ] Gen. 4. 3.
[d ] Mat. 24. 38. 39. 1 Pet. 3. 20.
[e ] Gen. 7. 1.
[f ] Ver. 21, 22, 23.
[g ] Gen. 12. 1.
[h ] Exo. 3. 7. 8. 9. 10. Chap. 6. 26. 27.
[i ] And 12. 42.
[k ] Num 16. 12, 13, 14.
[l ] Ver. 21. 24, 25, 26.
[m ] Ver. 35.
[n ] Ver. 31, 32, 33.
[* ] Ver. 5.
[* ] Deut. 28. 9. 10.
[p ] Ier. 51. 6.
[q ] Ier. 3. 12. Hos. 11, 7.
[r ] Rev. 1. 3.
[s ] Rev. 18. 4.
[* ] Amos 7. 12. 13.
[* ] Gen. 10, 8, 9.
[* ] Eester 3. 8. 6. 6.
[* ] Neh. 6.
[a ] Tit 3. 10.
[b ] Rev. 1. 20.
[c ] 2 Cor. 6. 14, 15. 16. 17.
[d ] Rev. 14. 9, 10, 11. 12.
[e ] Chap. 18. 4.
[* ] 1 Tim. 6.
[* ] For this see the Reply to his Answer to their third Reason for Toleration.
[* ] For this see his Book pag. 5. 5.
[* ] Esay 4. 2. 8.
[b ] 1 Tim. 2. 1. 2.
[c ] Pro. 15. 8.
[* ] &illegible; 4. 5.
[* ] Matth. 6. 5.
[* ] Ver. 7. 8.
[c ] Rom. 8. 15.
[d ] Ioh. 14. 26.
[* ] For this see the third part of his Answer to their second Reason against Toleration, pag. 30.
[* ] 2 Tim. 3. 5.
[* ] For this see his fift Reason against Toleration. pag. 28. lin. 12. 13.
[* ] Pag. 34.
[* ] Pag. 34.
[* ] Gen. 45. 24.
[* ] Pro. 18. 19.
[* ] Gen. 50. 20.
[* ] 1 Ioh. 2. 19.
[* ] Ioh. 6. 66. 67.
[* ] I pray thee (good Reader) take notice, that here I acknowledge an oversight (in taking Mr. Edwards his eleventh Reason, to be a second tenth Reason) it was through my neglect, in not looking into his Errata.
[* ] For this reade the Answer to his third Reason against Independancie.
[* ] See the Reply to the sixth part of his Answer to this their following Reason.
[* ] In the Second Part of his second Reason against toleration, pag. 24. In his sixth Reason against toleration pag. 29. and the third part of his Answer to their second Reason for toleration.
[* ] Pag. 43. lin. 16. 17.
[* ] Pag. 45.
[* ] Rev. 12. 14
[* ] Verse 16.
[* ] Pag. 46. E. &illegible;
[* ] What it is that bred the Separates.
[* ] Pag. 49. &illegible; 9. 10.
[* ] Pag. 50. lin 23. to lin. 29.
[* ] Cant. 1. 7.
[* ] Pag. 48. l. 23. 24.
[* ] Acts 11. 24.
[* ] Acts 6. 5. 8. 10.
[* ] Ioh. 9. 31.
[* ] When Stephen Gardiner harped upon unitie, unitie: yea Sir (said Latimer) but in Veritie, not in Popery: better is a Diversities &illegible; Veritie in Popery.
[* ] Rev. 21. 19.
[* ] Pag. 49. lin. 31. 2.
[* ] Pag. 52. lin. 33. 34.
[* ] For this see his eigth Reason against Toleration. pag. 32. lin. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27.
[* ] Pag. 26.
[* ] Acts 8. 3.
[* ] Act. 21. &illegible;
[* ] Ver. 28.
[* ] Ver. 8.
[* ] Ver. 10.
[* ] Cor. 11. 1.
[* ] Thes. 2. 7.
[* ] For this see Reasons against Independancie, pag. 5. lin. 12. &illegible;
[* ] 1 Cor. &illegible; 23.
[* ] For this see his Book pag. 55.
[* ] Psal. &illegible; 1. 6.
[* ] Acts 9. 4. 5.
T.12 (1.5.) Robert Greville, Lord Brooke, A Discourse opening the Nature of that Episcopacie, which is exercised in England (November 1641).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.12 [1641.11] (1.5) Robert Greville, A Discourse opening the Nature of that Episcopacie (November 1641).
Full titleRobert Greville, Lord Brooke, A Discourse opening the Nature of that Episcopacie, which is exercised in England. Wherein, With all Humility, are represented some Considerations tending to the much-desired Peace, and long expected Reformation, of This our Mother Church.
The Second Edition, Corrected and Enlarged.
London, Printed by R.C. for Samuel Cartwright, and are to be sold at the signe of the Hand and Bible in Ducke-Lane, 1642.
November 1641.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 44; Thomason E. 177 (22.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
TO THE MOST NOBLE LORDS, WITH THE HONORABLE KNIGHTS, CITIZENS, AND BURGESSES, Now assembled in Parliament.
IN Epistles Dedicatory, sometimes men render an account to the world, by what Principles they were Led to such a worke Sometimes they maintaine and strengthen, what they have done, by New Arguments. Sometimes times ad captandam Benevolentiam, they present their whole Designe, in a briefe Epitomy, that so they may invite the Reader. But I shall doe None of These.
The first I need not: For if the Ten Kings must hate the Whore, Eate her flesh, and Burne her with her fire; Will not every good Christian offer himselfe a ready Servant to This Worke, a Willing Souldier under this Standard?
The Second, I cannot; without questioning my owne Diligence, or (which is worse) my Readers Gentlenesse: Either of which every Writer carefully shunneth.
The third I will not, lest I be injurious to my selfe: For, Humane Nature is ever Novorum avida; and the Soule of vast comprehension; the Booke therefore would seeme but Crambe bis cocta, to All that read the Epistle; and but create a nausea to Those that had already gathered all, by viewing the Breviate.
If it be the Glory of a King’s Daughter to be clothed in Needle-worke; surely This poore Birth will need more then Figleaves, to make it Beautifull. When it is Cloathed with its Best Robes, It will not be worthy to appeare in so Great a Presence. How much lesse then, when presented only in a bare and naked Sceleton?
The Worke then of These Lines, is to lay prostrate at Your Feet (most Noble Lords, and Gentlemen) the Retirements of Your Humble Servant in the Last Recesse.
If You shall aske mee, how I dare take the boldnesse to interrupt Your more serious Thoughts, with These Things of Little Worth: All I shall plead for my selfe is but This, the bow must be sometimes unbent; and if then This Pamphlet may be called for, it is all I aspire to. For, Your Protection, and Your Patronage, not Your Trouble, is My Request: Of which being no whit Doubtfull; with all Humility commending This to Your Noble Favour; Your selves and Counsels to the Almighty; I crave leave for ever to remaine
The Contents of the Sections, and Chapters, in the following Discourse.
-
Section. I. Sheweth, What is that Episcopacy that is fought against; and how incongruous it is to State-policy.
- Chap. I THe Subject Stated, Not a Bishops Name, but Office Opposed: nor Office in generall, but Such. Such a Bishop repugnant to State-Policie; Antiquity; Scripture. The Method propounded for the first Section, containing Arguments drawne from State-Policie. fol. 1.
- Chap. II. Of Our Bishops Birth; how unsuitable to his Office: how Hurtfull to Himselfe and Others: How incongruous to State-Policie. 3
- III. A Bishops Breeding not fit for his Calling: against Rules of Policie. Some Objections answered. 5
- IV. Of Our Bishops Election; whether suitable to State-Policie. Of his Office: Principles, or Maximes, by which hee governeth: and Practice according to Those Principles. 10
- V. Of the Nature of Indifference; what it is: and in what it hath place: whether in Re, or onely in Appearance to our Understandings. 17
- VI. Where the Power of Indifferent Things seemes to be fixed: whether in the Church, or not: or if in the Church, How farre. Of the Churches Deciding Commanding Power. Of Doubts, and how we must deport our selves under Doubts. 27
- VII. Of the Consequents to a Bishops Office. His Relations Upward and Dependances. Of his Vote in Parliament. Relations Downward: How repugnant to State Policie. 32
- VIII. What Good our Bishops can do to the State, is examined. whether they have beene, or can he, friends to Monarchy, or Civill Government. 38
- IX. How suitable such Episcopacie can be to Monarchy, is farther considered. Whether the Best forme of Church Government be Monarchicall. Whether other Formes may not well stand with Civill Monarchy. How Church and State Government differ and agree. 44
- X. Who it is that opposeth, and exalteth himselfe above all that is called God. Who is properly a Papist: and what is Popery: Why the Pope is most properly Antichrist: How such Episcopacy differs, or agrees with Popery. 49
-
Section II. Considereth how Consonant such Episcopacy is either to sound Antiquity or Scripture.
- Chap. I. Some Antiquities produced by a late most Learned and Reverend Patron of Episcopacie, are discussed. 65
- II. Our Bishops Election, Delegation, &c. Examined by Antiquity. 69
- III. Of Ordination, whether proper onely to Bishops: or equally committed to all Presbyters: discussed by Ancient Authorities. 72
- IV. Of the Name and Office of a Bishop in Scripture. How little, or how much the Scripture makes for, or against Bishops, Diverse Texts are discussed. 74
- V. What forme of Church Government seemes most consonant to Scripture. Whether Monarchicall, Aristocraticall, or Democraticall. 79
- VI. Of the consequents that may possibly follow the change of Church Government. Of the great danger of Schismes, Sects and Heresies. Of One new Sect to come in the Last Dayes. Whether Bishops can keepe the Church from Schismes, Sects, &c. What is, or who are the Cause of most Schismes among us. 84
- VII. The danger of Schismes and Sects more fully discuss’d: the Nature and Danger of Anabaptisme, Separatisme, and Unlicensed Preaching. The conclusion, with an affectionate desire of peace and union. 95
ERRATA.
PAge 6. line to for our r. their, p. 73. l. 39. for Prebyter, r. Presbyter, p. 87. l. 13. for though r, though, P. 97. l. 22. for letting r. setting.
A DISCOVRSE OPENING THE NATVRE OF THAT EPJSCOPACY WHICH IS EXERCISED IN ENGLAND:
Wherein with all humility, are represented some Considerations tending to the much-desired Peace, and long expected Reformation, of this our Mother Church.
SECT. I.: Sheweth, what is that Episcopacy that is fought against; and how incongruous it is to State-Policy.
CHAP. I.
The Subject Stated. Not a Bishops Name, but Office Opposed: nor Office in generall, but Such. Such a Bishop repugnant to State-Policie; Antiquity, Scripture. The Method propounded for the first Section, containing Arguments drawne from State-Policie.
I Ayme not at Words, but Things; not loving to fight with Shadowes. It is not the Looke, much lesse the Name of a Bishop that I feare, or quarrell with; it is his Nature, his Office, that displeaseth me.
Nor yet his Nature, or Office in Generall; but Such and so cloathed, or rather veiled, with such and such adjuncts.
1. For to me the Word Bishop signifies, either one that is to Preach, Administer the Sacraments, Exhort, Reprove, Convince, Excommunicate, &c. not onely in some one distinct Congregation, his owne Parish; but in many, severall Congregations crowded up together in one strange (and, for long, unknowne) word, a Diocesse.
2. Or one who hath to all this added, not onely the name of a Civill Lord, (with which bare name or shadow, I fight not) but also a vast, unweldy (I had almost said unlimited) Power in Civill Government; which must needs draw on a mighty Traine, and cloath it selfe with glorious Robes of long extended and magnifique stiles, scarce to be marshall’d by a better Herauld than Elihu, who could give no Titles.
3. Or in the last place, (which should be first) a true faithfull Overseer, that, over one single Congregation, hath a joynt care with the Elders, Deacons, and rest of the Assembly, who are all fellow-helpers, yea servants each to others faith.
This last is a Bishop, of the first Institution; of Christs allowance; setled in divers Churches, even in the Apostles times.
The first is of the second Century, when Doctrine, Discipline, all Religion, began to waine. For even then Mysterious Antichrist was not onely conceived, but began to quicken.
The second rose last, (though first intended by the Churches Enemy.) Rising up while the world was busie, looking all one way; as amaz’d at the new Beast, successour to the Dragon.
This is now our Adversary; One monstrously compounded, of different, yea opposite Offices; and those the greatest, both Ecclesiasticall and Civill: for which he seemes no way able, no way fit; and that for many reasons, which may bee brought from Scripture, Church-Antiquity, State-Policy.
I shall beginne with the last, (as that I now ayme at most.) Here let us view our Bishop a while as a private man, before his Office. Next as a Lord over Church and State, in his Office. Then with some necessary Consequents to his Office; as now it is exercised in this Kingdome. Thus shall we quickely judge how sutable to true Policy of State, are either the Antecedents, Concomitants, or Consequents, of this too officious, two-headed Bishop.
Antecedents to his Office, are his Birth, Education, Election, Ordination, &c.
Concomitants, (or rather Ingredients) we may call, that almost illimited power, both Intensive, in sole Ordination; Jurisdiction (Directive; by Injunctions, Canons, &c. Corrective, by Excommunication, Suspension, Deprivation, &c.) As also Extensive, over so vast a Diocesse.
Hither also we may referre his power Juridicall or Legislative, in Parliament; Judiciall in many great, yea Civill Tribunals. And (of all monsters most ugly) his power Delegative: then which this sunne hath seene nothing more monstrous, at least as of late it hath beene exercis’d.
By Consequents I meane his Relations, (acquired by his office) both Upward, to his Soveraigne, Creator, Benefactors; as Downward, to his owne family, Creatures, and hang-by Dependants.
CHAP. II.
Of our Bishops Birth, how unsutable to his Office: how Hurtfull to Himselfe and Others: How incongruous to State-Policie.
LEt us begin with Antecedents; in them the first. Which we shall finde very unsutable to his after acquired office. For the most part he is Ex fæce plebis; humi-serpent; of the lowest of the people (an old complaint.) Now for such a low borne man, to be exalted high, so high, and that not gradatim, step by step, but per saltum, all at once, as oft it is (in one of few, or no Schoole Degrees; which yet indeed at best are scarce degrees to the Civill honour of a Peere;) must needes make as great a Chasme in Politiques, as such leapes use to doe in Naturals.
A great Evill must it be, and that both in himselfe, and to himselfe from others.
In others eye, his honour will be the object, not so much perhaps of envy, as scorne: while every man of lowest worth, will still value himselfe at as high a rate, and still conceive he wanted not the vermous desert, but fortunate reward, a Bishop had. Now every Action will from hence displease, sith unexpected, sudden happinesse, is oft times fault enough.
Now that fitting deportment, which may but expresse the just dignity of his place, and answer the majesty of his high calling, shall be esteem’d but pride, insolence, and at best but affectation. And from some such displeasing action, or gesture, (though but surmis’d on some groundlesse fancy) oft his very person comes to be distasted: and then adieu all effectuall good, which his words or actions, else, might soone effect.
Sure the chiefe Dominion of Gospell Ministers should be in That, the Lord and master of the Gospell so much requires; My sonne, give me thy heart. If a Minister once come to lose the heart, and affections of his people, he may indeed study some way to force their bodies; but shall scarse ever winne a soule, or save a sinner. Homo duci vult, cogi non potest, man may be led, but cannot be compelled: if you can fasten any force on his whole person, it must be that of Love. For sure the Gospell constraint, is onely that of Love. The love of Christ constraineth. This, and this only is an irresistible Attractive, an uncontroulable constraint. Thus is the Minister, the Bishop hurt, in regard of Others.
In regard of Himselfe: sudden great changes are dangerous in Nature: the skilfull Grasier, the expert Gardiner, will not translate from barren to an over-fruitfull soile; for this suffocates the Spirits, and destroyes the Plant. The sudden unexpected newes of a sonnes life, (which was reported dead) was the death of the Parent, as we read in Roman Histories.
High places cause a swimming in the braine: your Faulkners seele a Pigeons eye, (when they would have her soare high) to prevent a vertigo. I conceive from this Reason, and mainely from this, it was the good pleasure of the Spirit, that under the Law, when the Church had an influence into state-affaires, the High Priest should be chosen out of one eminent family, of the stocke of Levi: and some of the Kings of Israel are reproved by God, for that they chose their Priests out of the meanest of the people. He that is to goe in and out before the people, and is their guide, must be without blemish.
Those Horses which are designed to a lofty Ayre, and generous manage, must be of a Noble race. Non bene conveniunt, nec in una sede morantur, Majestas & Origo plebeia, Majesty, and a Base Originall, doe not well suite; neither can they dwell together: The Vapours which by the Sun are raised to a great height, even to the second Region, being of so meane a Progeny, are but the matter of haile, snow, raine, storme, and tempest, which by Historians are observ’d to be the frequent Prognostickes, or at least companions of Wars, and confusions.
CHAP. III.
A Bishops Breeding not fit for his Calling: against Rules df Policy. Some Objections answered.
But some will say, this defect (in Birth) may be repaired in Breeding, else we shut the doores of hope, (and by Consequence of Industry) to Cicero, Marius, and such other Worthies; who though but of a low Pedegree, may advance themselves even to the Helme, and there approve themselves men admirable, in the way of Government.
’Tis true, Art oft-times helpeth Nature: some men of small beginnings, by their vertues have deserved for a Motto, and Impreso, the Poets words,——Et que non fecimus ipsi,
Vix ea nostra voce———
That which is not of our owne doing, we can scarce call our owne. But when was this seene in a Bishop?
Let us therefore in the next place, examine their Breeding; and see whether in probability, that be not as disadvantagious to their Office, as their Birth.
Our Education, if we intend service in way of Civill Policie) must be in converse with those who are therein Arts Masters: or in reading their writings: or lastly, and mainely, in an happy use of both. Neither of the two former, hardly both together, can make us so expert, as Practice. Scribendo discimus scribere. Long, Active, costly, and dangerous Observations, are the onely way to make a wise States-man.
Now when these Gentlemen, I meane, the most refined wits amongst them, (for others come not within our question;) designe the Ministeriall Function, they either lay aside Divinity, and so God is displeased: or else they labour seriously in the more spirituall pathes; and then the Common Weale is by them deserted. For, these two (so different) studies cannot goe forward pari passu, with equall progresse. A Minister cannot serve God and Mammon.
I know other men thinke otherwise, (of these Studies) but I conceive the case is cleare: For sure the complaints of good men, Canons and Acts of Councels, (forbidding Ministers to meddle in State affaires) and the Answers of our owne breasts prove this truth more then sufficiently.
You shal have St. Austin (in his 81. Epist.) complaining that worldly affaires distracted his thoughts from his calling: and St. Cyprian apprehends, those great persecutions were but just consequences of the Clergies guilt in this kinde. Gregory. the great was much troubled to feele himselfe under that load.
Secondly, Canons and Councels discover their judgements fully in this point; so Can. 6. 8. and 83. of the Apostles, Councels also doe the same; Con. Carthag. Can. 16. Conc. Calced. Can. 3. and thus still they did while Canons and Councels did at all study the advancement of Christs Kingdome.
I confesse of later times, Ministers (like Water-men) have looked one way, and row’d another; so that perhaps now you may finde Canons of another straine.
But thirdly, (which may answer all Objections) let every good Minister examine but his owne breast, his owne heart; and then let him speake.
I am sure, to those who maintaine such Prelaticall Bishops, this absurdity will follow; that to one man the whole power may be given, both in Civilibus, & Ecclesiasticis: a Thing, which God thought Christ one’y fit for; and so on His shoulders only, did he place the Worlds Government.
Object.Yet some will perhaps affirme, Both these compatible, and this by example from Gods owne Injunctions, to some of the Ministers, under the Law, in the Jewish Policy.
Answ. 1.But I answer, first, There are Two maine things in which our Ministery, and the Jewes (of old) doe differ.
First, all their solemne externall worship, (at least most part of it) lay in Bodily Worke, in such things wherein the mind and braine was but little exercised; as in offering Sacrifice, burning Incense, divers washings, &c.
Secondly, That which made their members uncapable of comming into their assemblies, was outward uncleannesse, (as touching of a dead body, Leprosie, want of Legall washings, &c.) and from hence their Ministeriall watch (one of the greatest workes) became as Easy, as Outward and Visible; so that even of the inferiour Levites, were made Porters; and to these, the Office of restraining unmeet persons, from their Congregation, did belong.
But, now, the Work of our Ministers under Christ, differeth toto Cælo; and that both in publique and private.
In publique, it is Preaching, Expounding, Catechising, &c. which require mighty workings of the braine, and inward man: specially sith these must be done with Majesty and Authority; (Let no man despise thy youth) and yet with all sweetnesse and gentlenesse, (for a Bishop must not be fierce.)
In private, his Worke is to compose differences, (that they breake not out into publique) to visit the sicke, to comfort the afflicted, (for Who is sicke (saith Paul) and I am not troubled? who is weake or offended, and I burne not?) Yea, and many more works of this Nature. And all this, besides the care of his Family, and besides his private study, a worke too great for any man.
If you then consider the quantity, the variety, or spirituality, of the Ministeriall Worke under the Gospell; you cannot but acknowledge it great, very great, and much greater than that of old under the Law. Indeed they dispute sometimes, who have not tryed; but a painfull Preacher still cryeth out, Who is sufficient, who is fit, for these things?
In the Censures of the Church (though indeed the Keyes be entrusted with others as well as himselfe, yet) by his learning, piety, and prudence, he must steere all: so that he must alwayes be awake. Caveat Dictator nequid detrimenti capiat Respublica, Let the Dictatour take heed, that the Common-wealth sustaine no losse.
Will any man now say, that the Case of a Priest, and a Minister, is all one? for, suppose the Priests of old, did intermeddle with secular affaires, shall any Minister now from this example, (when the calling is so vastly different) take upon him both functions? If he doe, let him take heed he be not as one that hath taken up the Plough of the Kingdome of Heaven, and then doth the worke of the Lord negligently: If so, his judgement will be intolerable.
Ansiv. 2.But, in the second place, I answer confidently, and I hope truely, that these two Offices, or Callings, did not under the Law meete in One, except in some Extraordinary Cases, and persons.
First, the old Patriarchs, I confesse, did exercise Both Functions, in some sense, and in some sense they did not: (I meane as a Calling.) Abraham indeed swayed the Scepter; but his whole Kingdome was limited to his owne Family; and so he was a King, and no King; for every Master of a Family, must in the like case keepe up Government.
I confesse he offered Sacrifice; but then, when there was no Law, no Priest: and others might have done it as well as He, had they beene so well inclined. Thus he was a Priest, and no Priest; for in his Priestly Office, he did but what every good man would doe; at least might have done: and in his Kingly Office, he was but as a Master of a Family. And so it was in the rest of the Patriarches; so that little can be urged from these examples. To which may also be referr’d, that old instance of Melchisedech; if at least he were a man, and not the Second Person of the Trinity, in mans forme; as Cuneus, Molineus, and many others hold.
Secondly, I find Two Judges that were High-Priests also; Samuel and Ely: but it seemes they were thus, by some expresse, particular, Extraordinary Command: for God saith to Samuel, These have not rejected Thee, but Me: intimating that he had particularly appointed him to judge, as in an Extraordinary Case, which may therefore be no president for Ordinary men, in Ordinary Cases. Samuels speciall calling appeares not onely from his being devoted before his Birth, and strange call of God, after: but most clearely in that he was not (as all the Priests were to be) of Aarons house; as appeares by 1 Sam 1. Compared with 1 Chron. 6. Yea, and Ely too, though of Aaron, yet was not of the eldest sonne; (whose Line by right ought to have had the High-Priesthood) as the Jewes discourse at large; and of late Cloppenburge, in his Excellent Schoole of Sacrifice.
Now Hosea may by speciall Licence take a wife of Adulteries; Abraham Sacrifice his childe; the Jewes borrow Jewels of the Ægyptians, and Phineas doe justice by an extraordinary command or instinct, but we may not follow these presidents.
Some say that inferiour Levites did intermeddle in secular affaires. But I answer, there were Levites of two sorts; out of one sort, Priests were chosen, (out of Aarons Line;) the others were like the Seculars among the Jesuites. And these last did (as the Seculars doe) performe the Civill part of those Religious Services; and nothing else, that I can finde in Scripture or Story.
Lastly, for the High Priests after the Jewish Government was broken in pieces, I hope no body will bring them for a president: there being then no Vision for spirituall things from God, no more Government for Civill things, according to the Rule of God.
Of those times Josephus complaineth, that the Chasmonei had taken upon them the Uniting of Priest-hood and Secular power, in one person; which could not be done, but in extraordinary cases, by Gods speciall command. And thus I suppose they will get but little from Gods injunctions among the Jewes.
Object.But some still will say,Object. that one of these Studies may fit for another. All truthes, Polemicke, positive, whether Politique, Philosophicall, or Theologicall, are of neere consanguinity; and he that is a Gnostique in one, cannot be a meere Tyrunculus in the other.
Ansiv.1.I confesse did they improve their Studies to the ripening of Reason, and inlarging of their understanding, This might in some sense be true. But they spend their time in Criticall, Cabalisticall, Scepticall, Scholasticall Learning: which fils the head with empty, aeriall, notions; but gives no sound food to the Reasonable part of man. Yea their study is mainly laid out upon bookes, which they prize, and sleight as they please; while they want, Cotem Scientie & ingenii, the Whetstone of Learning, and Wit, A Reall Adversary, that by contradiction might raise their Parts, and much inlarge their judgements. Their learning is in Termes, it is but Nominall; and waters cannot rise higher then their Fountaine.
Ansiv. 2.But allow that they improve their studies to be best; yet this is not enough: For, State Policy is the Daughter of Converse, Observation, Industry, Experience, Practice; and Bookes will never Teach That: but They are but ill Leaders of the Blinde, and what will be the issue in that Case, judge you.
CHAP. IV.
Of our Bishops Election; whether sutable to State-Policie. Of his Office: Principles, or Maximes, by which he governeth: and Practice according to Those Principles.
VVE have seene our Bishops Birth, and Breeding, with all his Studies, and preparations to his Office; to which we have now brought him; onely that his Election, and Ordination Interpose. Of which I might speake much; but because This is the common Theame of all complaints, I shall passe it here; the rather because it may perhaps be better examined by Scripture, and Antiquity, than State-Policie, in which I now am.
Yet by the way I cannot but propose it as worthy of State consideration; how like the inferiour Clergie is to yeeld true Canonicall Obedience, to one (that nescio quo jure, requires it by Oath) though he be oft forc’d on them against, and never with, their expresse will; which they cannot expresse, having neither positive, nor negative votes in election. Except perchance the whole Clergie of a Diocesse or Province, may be fully represented by a Cloistred Chapiter, among which are usually the very dregges of lowest men. Who yet indeede (themselves) have no Elective votes; but after the solemne dirge of Veni Sancte Spiritus, are as sure to finde the Spirit in a Conge d’ eslire, as others not long since, in the Tridentine Post-mantile.
Certainely, it is to be desired, that Christians would shew as much care and conscience in setting heads over whole Churches, as some Heathen Emperours did in setting Governours over private Townes; which yet they would not doe, till at least free liberty was given to the Citizens complaint and rejection, if not Election, of the party propounded. And this Antoninus learnt from the Jewes, and Christians choyce of Their Church Governours in Those Times, though now Latter ages are growne Wiser. But I must leave this Subject.
We are now come to view our Bishop in his Office. Though we may complaine (as one once of Lewes the 11.) he cannot be fairely limn’d, because still in Motion: which yet in it selfe might be, at least excusable; were he not nimium Diligens, too officious; being made up of Two most inconsistent Offices, the one of Church, the other of State.
His deportment in Both, we may guesse by his Maximes or Rules by which he goes, which once seene, we shall quickly perceive how well he squares his Practise by his Principles: and how consonant both to true Church or State-Policie.
I shall instance but in one or two, for we may know Ex ungue Leonem, the Lion by his paw. The Climax runs up thus.
First, the Church hath power in all Indifferents.
Secondly, the Church is Judge what is Indifferent:
Thirdly, the Bishops (and their Creatures) are This Church.
If a Prince hath power to Command the persons and estates of his Subjects in case of Necessity, and the same Prince be sole judge of Necessity; it will be no wonder to me, if That People be ever Necessitous.
If the Church have power in Adiaphoris, in Indifferent things, and the same Church be Judge Quid sit Adiaphoron, what is Indifferent; and this Church be the Bishops; I shall not wonder to see those things that are purely Indifferent, made absolutely necessary, to the insupportable burden of all mens consciences.
But some will perhaps say, These Maximes have influenceObject. onely into Church Government, and so belong not to the present question of State-Policie.
I confesse, did they confine the pressing of these, within theAnsiv. confines of the Church, they could not so properly belong to the dispute in hand: but they run over; for the Maxime is very large. It is not onely Indifferent things in the Church, but Indifferent things in generall, All Indifferent things; and so they may take in, what they will.
Againe, they doe really set Lawes in State matters, under the notion of Indifferent; so that all the Subjects Liberty, or propriety in goods, They compasse with their Net of Indifferencie; which they make heavie with the plummets of greatest penalties.
Yea, though they medled not at all, with such Things as these, without their Horizon; yet if they make those Things to be Indifferent which are sinfull, (as they doe, I feare) and to These inforce obedience with pretence of Church Policy, They overthrow all Civill Government.
I take such Maximes, to be the very Hinges upon which our Bishops Practice turneth. I shoote not Arrowes of Scorne: For truly I have not in my intentions, either by slouts, or jeeres, or by a factious Spirit, to deale with This Adversary. Michael himselfe would not revile the Devill: It much lesse becomes me, so to behave my selfe towards These Men (with whom I treat) among whom I know so many truly Eminent: I desire to speake nothing but Truth. Yea, I should exceedingly rejoyce, if by the Spirit of Meekenesse, men of that Learning, and abilities, (which many of them are) might be reduced to That, which I from my Soule conceive to be truth, and am perswaded will be so acknowledged by Themselves, one day.
If these then be their Tenets, (as I suppose they will confesse them to be) Is there any thing more Unreasonable; more Unbrotherly: more favouring of Selfe, than These Positions?
Unreasonable; For, allow the Church hath all power in Indifferents, (which I dare not yet yeeld, who hath made the Church a Judge (beyond appeale) what is Indifferent? Is not this, to bring necessary and indifferent things all under one notion, If the Church shall judge indifferent things to be necessary, and necessary to be indifferent? which would to me be a sad story.
But you will say, if the Church be not the Judge of what is Indifferent; who may be That Judge?
I tell you, asking of questions is no answering of difficulties
But secondly, (because I love to deale plainely) I will tell you who shall be Judge: In expounding of Scripture, the, Scripture; but in finding out what is indifferent, Recta Ratio right reason, must be Judge.
But who shall tell us what is Recta Ratio? I answer, Recta Ratio. Will any man, if the Church shall judge That to be indifferent, which is not, say it is indifferent? or that my conscience is bound in this case? Ex. grat. I doe confesse the houre when the Congregation shall meet, is indifferent; if the Church will appoint hereupon Eleven of the Clock at night, and Five in the morning (in this Latitude under which we are) I hope no man will say but that it is ill done of the Church; and that neither my conscience, nor my outward man, is bound further in This, than to a passive obedience; certainely all force upon me, in this case, would be sinne in them.
But they will say, this is a thing in its selfe Unreasonable,Object. and so commeth not into the nature of indifferent thing.
But the Church having such power,Ansiv, as is claimed, who may dispute it?
But secondly, this action must be considered either in the universall nature of it, or else as it is presently to be put in practise. If you value and ballance it in this last sense, nothing is indifferent, no substantiall, nor circumstantiall Being. For we being bound to doe That, which hic & nunc, in this particular, and for the present, is best, That which is so with the circumstances, will be our guide, and the Church will have, can have, no power against This.
But if you consider things in the universall nature, (not cloathed with these and these circumstances) then it seemeth to have some Indifferencie; and then, if ever, it is in the Churches power; and yet even then, the Church can goe no further, than what will be according to Reason. For, for a Church to say, I will, because I will, is most Papall, Tyrannicall, and altogether displeasing to Christ: but of This, more in another place.
Thus their Tenets seeme to me very Unreasonable; They will doe more than Adam did: He gave Names to Things according to their Natures; they will give Natures according to their owne fancies.
Secondly, very Unbrotherly; in that they make themselves the Church, excluding all others: in which act, according to their Tenets) they exclude all others from Salvation; for they say, in an ordinary way, there is no Salvation out of the Church; and they in this, admit none into the Church, but themselves.
Moses was, upon a mistake, reproved by the Jewes, in that he made himselfe a Judge, though in that decision he released a Jew. Truly I know not by what authority these Bishops stile themselves the representative Church; for they must doe it either Jure humano, or Divino. By the last we doe not yeeld; That is the Question in hand: by the first they cannot; for where doe the people, either implicitely or explicitely, elect them, and resigne up their power to them?
Is it in their Convocation, that they obtaine this priviledge? That, by the Lawes of this Land, is not at all obligatory till confirmed by Parliament.
Secondly, the people choose not These Convocation men, but the Clergy, and so they cannot represent the whole Church.
Thirdly, the Clergie have no free election, for the Bishop will appoint whom they must choose; and this too Sub pæna anathematis, under the penalty of Excommunication.
The Angels (for the whole Ministery of the Church) in the Revelation, seeme to receive some particular honour from the Spirit; yet not the power of a Representative Body: but Quo jure humano, aut Divino, Twenty sixe men shall challenge to themselves, as proper, That which is not so much as by a figurative right, given to those Angels, I know not. And is not this Unbrotherly, to intrude my selfe, and exclude all others from Their Right?
But lastly it favoureth very much of Selfe. For certainely he that will out-doe the Pope, is growne to a pretty height of pride. Now in the Papacie it is a dispute, whether the Pope alone; or the whole Colledge of Cardinals; or a generall Councell; or the People; or All These; or Some of These, with their joynt forces, may stile themselves the Church. But Our men without dispute, (like the Lion in the Fable) challenge All: of whom the Poet is verified; Ætas patrum, pejor avo, tulit progeniem nequiorem, the Age of our Fathers, being worse than that of our Grandfathers, hath yet brought forth a more wicked progeny. And yet, whoever takes up Errour at the Second hand, will have an ill bargaine, though hee buy it cheap; he will be no gainer. Errour being like the Jerusalem-Artichoake; plant it where you will, it over-runnes the ground and choakes the Heart.
Thus having with the chaines Indifferency bound up the Peoples Liberty; they deale no better with their Prince. Onely Polyphemus-like, they leave Vlysses for the last. For, when the People are devoured, Kings cannot escape. But because Kings are of more prying Spirits, they steale in upon them, with Sugared Baites: such as That of Theirs, No Bishop, No King. But of this more anon.
I might instance in many other of their Maximes, which I conceive very prejudiciall, both to Church, and State-Policy. But I will rather view their Practise, according to These Principles of Indifferency. In this I shall be very short, not meaning to upbraid them with many monstrous miscarriages of late; the rather, because I am confident that God, his Majesty, and The Parliament, will not permit them longer to transgresse in This height.
Onely I cannot but intreat you to observe, how by Their Injunctions, founded on Those Maximes, They have imposed as necessary, many things that are but Indifferent, some things that are Vnlawfull.
First many Things but Indifferent, they have injoyned as necessary. Some to Ministers, as Cassockes, Gownes, Tippets, Hoods, Caps, Canonicall Coats, Blackes, and many other. Some to People, as sitting with their hats off; Standing up at Gloria Patri, the Gospel, and other parts of service. Weighty matters indeed, for Grave, Learned, Holy, Reverend Divines, to spend their time and thoughts upon.
I might perhaps goe a little higher; though I must confesse in some other things (now prest as necessary) They have had Authority above their owne (though I conceive, none for such rigid imposall;) I meane the Highest, granted by the whole representative State Civill and Ecclesiasticall: which yet (with all duty to that wombe which bare me, and Those Breasts That gave me suck) hath thought some things indifferent, which I could scarce ever apprehend such: at least as of late they have beene enjoyned on greatest penalties. It hath oft made my soule bleed, to see the greatest sinnes daily committed, without more than a paper check, (that I may not say countenanced) while thousands must sigh in private, with losse of eares, goods, estates, livings, liberty, all; onely for refusall of Those things, that at best can be but Indifferent.
But however these things may be in themselves: sure I am, our Bishops have pressed them not onely beyond the Lawes intention, but also much against the meaning of those good men; who in the first Reformation, did (though perhaps erroneously) what Christ once lawfully permitted, in almost the same case; allowing a convenient Time for Buriall of those Ceremonies, which yet appeared not Mortiferæ, deadly, though Mortuæ, dead.
Yea and some things unlawfull, by their owne power They have forced upon Minister and People under the maske of Indifferent.
On the Ministers, the Reading of the Booke of Sports, (first invented by themselves) that monstrous and prodigious late Oath, with divers new Canons, not enjoyned by Parliament, or any other Legall authority. I might adde their bare bidding forme of Prayer, Second Service at the Altar, (though it could not be heard) an illegall Oath of Canonicall Obedience, (blind devotion) and a new forme of subscription before Degrees, Orders, Institutions, &c.
On Them and the People, placing the Communion Table Altar-wise; Railing it in; Bowing to it; Receiving at it, &c. For I will now passe over their most unchristian Oath Ex Officio, (fouler than the foulest dregges of that cruell Inquisition) at one blow cutting asunder all the nerves, not onely of positive, but morall, naturall Lawes; all which (being tender of the least graine of mans liberty) have entrusted us with this Universall maxime, Nemo tenetur se prodere, No man is bound to betray himselfe.
Thus it is manifest, their Practice is according to their Principles, towards the People. And they have no lesse incroacht upon the Crowne.
Doe they not affirme, that in Civill Government, Democracie, Aristocracie, Monarchy, are all lawfull: and that of These, severall people may (at first) chuse which they please. But for Episcopacy, ’tis still with them, onely Jure Divino: in which they seeme to affirme Themselves to stand upon a surer Rocke than Kings. In This they erre against much light, (I feare) But, God forgive them.
CHAP. V.
Of the Nature of Indifference; what it is: and in what it hath place: whether in Re, or onely in Appearance to our Understandings.
But that we may no longer be impos’d upon, by This principle of Indifference, give mee leave to discover my thoughts in these two particulars.
First, What is Indifferent.
Secondly, Where the Power of Indifference is fixt.
Some call those things Indifferent which are neither forbidden, nor commanded: but here they tell us onely what ’tis not, and Negatives make no Definition.
Those also who affirme that to be Indifferent, which may, or may not be done, leave us as much to seeke, as the former.
I must intreat the Reader to remember, that we are now upon Morall beings: where the Two maine Ingredients, Matter, and Forme, can be but Metaphysically Notionall, and therefore it will be hard to give an exact Definition: Seeing even in Naturals (whose matter occurrit sensibus, is subject to sense) ’tis difficult enough.
Before I assay to give the nature of it in a Definition, give me leave to present you with some kinde of Etymology.
In the word Indifferent, the preposition In, is (They say) purely negative, though in other compounds (as incipere, inflammare, incitare, influere, &c.) it beareth another sense, which they call augmentative. But in the word Indifferent, it must deny a Difference, as much as non differens.
But under favour of our learned Critickes, I doe not conceive that particle, in This place wholly negative. Nor can I thinke Caninius, Martinius, or other good Grammarians (when they call this preposition privative) intend to make it wholly negative: but to my eye, to my sense; in such, and such circumstances.
When a man is said to be Imprudens, incautus, or the like; we may not judge Him altogether sine prudentia, sine cautela: for Animal Rationale cannot be quite devoid of these. And therefore if we take Imprudens (in this proposition; Hic homo est imprudens) in a pure negative sense, the Predicate is destructive to the Subject. So that I dare not thinke our Ancesters and learned men would give Epithets, or make Compositions contrary to all reason.
Such Propositions are then thus farre Negative, as by way of figure, to deny any caution, any prudence, whereas indeed they must allow both; except in such or such a particular, such or such a sense.
Such doubtlesse is the sense of this Preposition, in the word Indifferent: not purely Non differens, but in such, or such a respect, it Differeth not. Though in another respect, it may, and doth Differ; even from the very same Thing with which yet in other respects it Differeth not.
This Etymology I chuse the rather, because I see the Criticks, in all their Etymologies, love to give to each part (in the composition) a Positive signification. Which I cannot doe here, unlesse I translate Indifferens, Differing, and yet not differing: a sense which also the Greeke word ὰδιάφο [Editor: illegible character] ν will fully beare; For (if by other imployments I have not lost the smattering once I had in that Tongue) the phrase seemes best applyable to a Medium, that doth not fully, or wholly, carry it selfe off from both the Extremes, but participates of either.
Such an Indifferent-difference hath cleerly place in all those Naturals, which betweene two positive extremes (such as Black and White; Hot and Cold) have a positive Medium, Participationis (because it participates of both extremes) and Negationis too, because it is neither. This Medium is properly Indifferent to either Extreme; from which it Differeth, and yet it Differeth not: because it is neither of the Two Extremes, yet participates of Both. Thus Lukewarme, as Warme, Differeth not from Hot, yet differeth as Coole; and therefore is Indifferent.
This sense of Indifferent, being thus made good in Naturals; some would borrow and apply to Morall, Theologicall Beings also. So that betweene Good and Bad, they fancy an intermediate Entity, neither Good nor Bad, but Indifferent to either. As once a Moderator in the Schooles, being to determine whether Lucretia did well in stabbing her selfe; seeing that Action Good in many respects, and Bad in as many more, concluded thus, Nec bene fecit, nec male fecit, sed Interfecit.
But I conceive, such Indifference, will not, cannot be found in Morals, as it is in Naturals. The reason is, because the two extremes are not here (as in many Naturals) Both Positive Beings; so that a Medium may really participate of Both. White and Blacke indeed are Both positives, but so is not Evill; but only the privation of Good, which is the other extreme.
Moralists dispute how Passions are Indifferent, but they are put on great straites; and limit it onely to passions in specie (indeed only in a Notion) which yet in sensu composito cannot be said to be ever Both Good and Bad, or neither Good nor Bad, but being still Good Naturally, may be morally either Good, or Bad, in individuo, but in sensu diviso, not Composito.
For the same individual action, or passion (in man) cannot be said both Good and Bad (take it in actu exercito) in the same respects; yea, if in any One morall respect, it be truely Bad, it cannot at all be said to be properly Good. For an Error or Defect in any one Morall (though but so much as a Circumstance) truely denominates the whole action Evill; but onely a perfect and universall concatenation of all essentials and circumstantials too, denominates it Good. Even as in Logicke, any one negative proposition makes the whole Syllogisme such; when to an Affirm’d Syllogisme, every part must be affirm’d. So ’tis in Morals too. And hence perhaps the old Stoickes affirm’d, Omnia peccata to be paria, all sinnes to be equall. Which is one of Tullies Paradoxes: because, saith he, One Steppe beside the Line, may as truely be said to be a Transgression, as a thousand, or running a thousand miles from it. It is well observed by Aquinas, that as a Body is not perfectly set in suo bene esse naturali, in its Naturall well-being, by a bare forme without Accidents; so neither an Act in bene esse morali, in its Morall well-being, by onely object and end, rightly fixed: except also every Morall circumstance, of time, place, &c. rightly concurre.
They who will have our Vertues equally distare ab extremis, distant from the extremes, are much more in the right, than they who will have an Indifferent thing (speaking of Morals) to partake of Both extremes. Indeed Vertue flying from one extreame, when it is rancountred with an equall Evill, is arrest in medio; as Iron when accoasted by two Loadstones of equall vertue on either side, not daring to embrace either, hovereth in medio, betweene Both. Or as the Magneticall needle about the Azores, keepeth it selfe directly parallell to the Axis of the world; and admitteth no variation: because in medio, betweene the two great Continents (of Europe and America) to which some great Philosophers ascribe the Magneticall vertue, with better reason perhaps than others did, before, to the Northerne Pole, or Northerne Climates.
From all these premises, we will now assay to draw some conclusions, that may helpe us in judging what may be Indifferent.
First, it must be in it selfe Good, wholly good. For, if it have but one dram of Evill, it is wholly Bad (as was proved before) and so not Indifferent. We have found the Genus of it; it is Good, Lawfull.
In the second place, to make our approach a little neerer (if we can) and to descend more particularly into the Differing Nature of it; We must confesse it lies mainly in the seeming equality of Use. So that it may be thus described: A thing Lawfull and Good, which (as we thinke) may be Used or not: may or may not be done.
But here we must take heed we lose not our selves in Termes: For if they meane that some things at one time may be done, and at another may not; I yeeld this True: For perhaps this yeare I may not marry, and yet next yeare I may, and in some circumstances must, else I sinne. But in this Hypothesis Marriage is not generally Indifferent, because not generally Lawfull; but at some time lawfull, at some time not.
If they meane the same Thing, (the same Act) at one and the same time by the same person, may, or may not be done ad placitum, at pleasure, without offence; I must crave leave to dissent, till I see more, than now I see.
For I conceive two direct contraries, (as to marry, and not marry) at the same time, to the same person, cannot be so equally circumstantiated, that one of them, at least in one circumstance (which is enough) shall not be better than the other. And if one be Best, I conceive it past scruple, that I may not reject that Best, and chuse the Worst.
Now, if I mistake not, I am neere the Apex of this question, which yet (Pernassus-like) hath a double Vertex, a twofold toppe.
The one is, whether in two contraries (as Doing, not doing) one must not needs be Better than the other.
The second is, whether in this case I am not tyed to take, and doe the Best, but am equally Indifferent to Both.
Twill begin with this last first. In this I know I have many opposites, who stiffely mainetaine, that Optimum non est semper faciendum, the best thing is not alwaies to be done: amongst these is that good man lately deceased, (to the Churches great losse) Reverend Master Ball, in his Friendly Tryall of Separation.
I thinke it is a subtle dispute, worth the discussing; for if they meane thus, That which is Best, is not at all times Lawfull to be done while it is best; This sense cannot bee true: for here the Predicate is destructive to the subject; For, that which is unlawfull is not good, much lesse Best, at the time when unlawfull.
Or, if they meane, that the Best (in Re, in Truth) is not alwaies Possible to be done; they say True, but tell me no new thing. For all men will yeeld This; and in This case I must consider, what is best possible to me; because I cannot doe the Best in Re.
I suppose then they meane that which is Best and possible to me, is not still necessary to be done, even while it is best; but though I may doe it, yet I may also leave it undone, and doe that which is lesse good.
Here also they may deceive us with Termes. For they may meane either Best in Truth, or Best to appearance. And when these two cannot be reconciled by all my search, I must consider that which seemes (though perhaps is not) the Best.
We shall now soone joyne issue. And the case is; whether, when I must of necessity either doe, or not doe, or when I must doe either This or That; I be not bound to doe what is Best, (or at least on exactest search, seemes Best) if it be possible to be Done by me.
If they take the Negative part (of this question so stated) I hope yet they will give me leave to hold the affirmative, and yet without offence, till my judgement may be better inform’d.
My grounds briefely are these, First, it is Lawfull to doe This Best; else it is not Good, much lesse Best, as was said before. Againe, it is Expedient to doe this Best: or else some thing (at least some one Circumstance of Expedience) is in the other good, which is not in this, and so This is not Best, but That, at this time; though at another time, perhaps, This may be Best, it is not Best now, because not best expedient and most convenient.
So that at this time, This cannot bee Better than That, except This be not onely in it selfe expedient, but also more expedient than That is at this present: for one graine of more expedience makes that to be Best, which else would be Worst; And one circumstance may so alter the case, that now That may be worst, which else would have beene Best, as was said before.
I demand now, how I can be determined to That which is lesse expedient? though supposed equally lawfull, by Right Reason? All Philosophers yeeld, (and it needeth no dispute) that the Understanding rectified still dictates to the Will, Optimum faciendum, the best thing is to be done. And how is it possible I should doe well, if I so How not the Dictate of Right Reason? Video meliora, proboque; deteriora sequor.
See now to what a strait I am brought; If I follow the Dictate of Right Reason, I must still doe what is Dictated, as now Best. And Right Reason must still (where some Action is necessary) dictate That to be done, which is (at least, seemes) Best.
For, if Right Reason should ever (though but once) dictate, that This which is Best, is not now to be done, but somewhat Worse; It may much be suspected Right Reason may never dictate the Best to be done.
For, by this Case (of one such Dictate) it would appeare, that when ever Reason doth happen to dictate Right, it is but by chance, or some fancy of its owne; not by any certaine constant Rule, taken from the Nature of Things, rightly stated in such and such circumstances; For if so, it must still judge eodem modo, after the same manner, of That which is so circumstantiated. And, if it once vary from this Rule, it will seeme to have no Rule, but its owne fancy. And in this Case, we shall be under Reason, as under a most corrupt Judge, that will follow no constant Rule (founded on the Nature of Things) but onely his owne humor; which will give very Different judgements on the very same, or like Cases, in all circumstances.
I see but two Things can helpe them out of This straite. Either, that (though Right Reason cannot but dictate that the Best in all circumstances, must still bee done; yet) wee are not bound to follow Right Reasons Dictates, when we see them: Or else, we be not bound to aske Right Reason, what it will dictate; but may doe (hand over head, as they speake) without any Dictate of Reason, Right or Wrong.
But, Both These seeme to mee very strange Doctrine. For,
First, If I may but once goe against the Dictate of Right Reason, and yet not sinne, I may goe ten thousand times, yea Ever against it; and so all my acts may be Irrationall, and yet not sinfull: a strange Tenet: and sure a Case never to be found but in a distracted man; who sinnes not, though all his Acts be against Reason, because His Reason is not able to direct him; or at least He not able to follow Reason; and in this case God requires it not.
And the Case is even the same; when I Act without asking Reasons Dictate, as if I acted against Reasons Dictate. For till I see I act with, for ought I know, I act against Right Reason; and so I sinne.
Not yet, that I thinke a man bound before Every (though the most common) Action, to stay disputing for some houres or dayes, till Reason hath given its finall Dictate. For, this were to turne all practise into bare and nice Speculation. There are many Things by common use, and by themselves, so cleare that at first view Reason presently determines. Yet if there rise but the least scruple at the first glimps; Then, man is bound to discusse it, till Reason rectifi’d dictate the Action Lawfull, and Best to be done: And till This Dictate, the Act must be suspended. For I still thought that a dangerous Maxime in State policy; first, to Doe matters, (not like to sound well) and then to dispute Them: and it sounds worse in Matters of Religion.
I have done with the first Great Question, whether Optimum sit semper faciendum.
I come to the Next, whether amongst divers Things (to be done) There be still One Optimum, one Best: I must meane whether there be any Optimum, for more than One there cannot be at one time.
We may briefly State the Question Thus. Whether at any one time Two, or more Things, (suppose to Marry, and not to Marry) can possibly be so Equally Good to me, that One of them is not Better than the Other.
I thinke not. For, I dispute thus: I must bee determined to one of these Two, (having no medium) I must Marry, or not Marry. Now I aske what shall determine mee to either? Right Reason (they must answer) or my owne Fancy, Will, or other Thing.
I rejoyne; if Right Reason determine me; either it doth so on no good ground; (and then I doe a groundlesse unreasonable Act, in following Reason) or on some Ground, whose foundation is in Re, in the Thing it selfe. For, if wee once grant Reason any Rule, or Ground, but that Certaine, Constant Truth, which is fixt in the Nature of Things; wee shall make it, of all Judges, most uncertaine, most corrupt. If once I see my Reason judge point blancke against Reall Truth, I shall suspect it still.
Well then, it must bee granted, Right Reason hath determined mee (not to Marry) on some good Ground, taken from the Nature of Marriage; (not in Generall, for this would deceive me, but particularly considered with all circumstances pro hic & nunc, in this particular, and at this time) so that it must also bee granted, There was one or more circumstances, which made Marriage more unfit than non Marriage (else Reason hath made, not found a Ground in Re, which it must never doc;) Ergo, of Marriage, and Non-Marriage, One still is Best in Re, (at least to Reasons eye) else Reason doth unreasonably determine mee not to Marry, or to Marry.
And if Right Reason have not, or cannot determine me; to which side soever I incline, and rest, I sin; because I act Unreasonably: being determined by humour, fancy, passion, a wilfull Will, and not Right Reason; The Candle of God, which He hath lighted in man, lest man groaping in the darke should stumble, and fall.
I may now steppe a little higher; and affirme, that of Two Contraries, or any Two Extreames, Both are so farre from being Equally Good, that pro hoc statu, in these Circumstances, Both cannot be good at all, or lawfull.
For, if of these Two, One must be Best, and but One; and this One now necessary to be done (because Best) as was proved before; It will follow that the other extreame is now, in these circumstances, not Good at all to me; because unlawfull to be done, while now there is a better in view; though else in it selfe, with other circumstances, it would have beene Lawfull, Good, and Best.
If Right Reason determine it be better not to Marry, at this time, and I be still bound to do what Right Reason shall dictate Best (as was prov’d before:) Now, in these Circumstances, Marriage is unlawfull to me, and so not Good at all, at this time, because lesse Good than Non-Marriage. So Achitophels Counsell was Bad, being not good for that time, because not Best.
For as Moralists say, if it be possible Man could be necessitated to chuse One of Two Evills; in that case the Lesse evill would be Good: So, when I am necessitated to chuse one out of two (supposed) Goods, the lesse Good would be Evill, and unlawfull to me, who am still bound (for-ought I can yet see) to doe Optimum pro hoc statu, the best for this Condition.
The Conclusion I ay me at, through all these Premisses, is this. There is no One thing, no One Act, in all the World, That I may doe, or not doe, ad placitum, at my pleasure, all Circumstances considered.
For, this Act (so propounded) either is Best for that time, and so must needes be done: or not Best, and so must not be done; because in these Circumstances, at this Time, it is Unlawfull; as not being Good while a Better is in eye: as hath I hope fully beene proved.
From This, results our finall Determination concerning Indifference (which is our Subject in hand:) No Thing, No Act, is Indifferent in Se, in Re, in it selfe, in the thing; but either necessary to be done, (if Best) or unlawfull to be done, if Bad, or lesse Good, pro hoc statu.
What shall we say then? hath the World talked so much of Indifference, and the power in Indifference, And yet no Indifference, at all, be in the World?
Give me leave here freely to propound my owne thoughts, without offence; being still more desirous to learne, than to Dictate.
I conceive that all the Indifference (in the world) lies in our Understandings, and the Darkenesse thereof, (which makes them wavering sometimes, and doubtfull whether to doe or not, so that in them seemes some Indifference to either extreme) but there is none in the things themselves, or Actions; which are still either unlawfull, or necessary (if Lawfull, at this time in these Circumstances;) never Indifferent in Themselves.
As then it is in the point of Contingence, every thing is either True or False, Certainely to Be, or not to Be, and in one of these still Necessary in Re, and never Contingent; yet to Me, (who cannot see the whole Chaine of Causes) some things seeme Contingent, that are necessary. So for Indifference. All Things, All Acts, are in Re, either Necessary to be done, or Unlawfull; but to my blind judgment, (while I cannot discerne whether I may Act, or may not) some things Seeme, but are not Indifferent; and so we thinke (but erroneously) that these may be done, or not, as we please.
For example-sake, suppose an unskilfull Physitian have two Simples by him, one of which is poyson, and the other a pretious Cordiall; will any man living say, These are Indifferent for a sicke mans cure; so as he may use them, or not, ad placitum, without perill? And yet now suppose the Physitian ignorant of both their Natures: they may be said to be Indifferent (though not in themselves) yet to Him; who not knowing either, is Indifferent to Both, and thinkes hee may apply which he will, without offence; yet if he apply the one he erres, because ’tis poyson.
So it is in all the Things, or Acts we thinke Indifferent. In themselves they are poysons, or cordialls, very Good, (and so necessary) or very Bad, and so unlawfull. But while our judgements are clouded, so that we see not the Nature of these Objects, or Acts: we are Indifferent (because wavering) between Them; but They are not so in se; or Really to us.
I may conclude then, Nothing is Indifferent in Re, in Se; but to our Understanding some things seeme so, for want of Good light.
CHAP. VI.
Where the Power of Indifferent Things seeme to be fixed: whether in the Church, or not: or if in the Church, How farre. Of the Churches Deciding Commanding Power. Of Doubts, and how we must deport our selves under Doubts.
I Have now done with the Nature of Indifference, in which I have beene the more large, because I found it more abstruse than it seemed at first view, I come now shortly to examine What power may determine in Indifference, and where this Power is fixed.
To All, I may answer briefly thus. By Divine Right, This Power is, and is not, in the Church. The Church hath, and hath not, power in Indifferent things.
First, the Church hath no power to make any one thing Indifferent in it selfe: (that is, to make it, at one, and the same time, lawfull to be done, or left undone, positis omnibus circumstantiis, all circumstances being laid together.) For all Things and Acts, are in themselves necessarily Good or Bad, and cannot be Indifferent in Re, as hath beene proved at large.
Againe, wee cannot say the Church hath power to determine what is indifferent. If at least All Indifference comes only from the Darknesse of our Understanding (as before;) It then lies not in the power of all other men living, to determine what seemes indifferent to one mans Understanding, since Hee may perhaps not see, what they all see; & e contrario.
We are now reduced into a narrow compasse, having onely left to be considered, those Things which generally seeme indifferent (For there is no indifference in Re, but onely in appearance unto us;) because neither Scripture without, or light within, hath fully cleared, whether such things should bee done, or not: or if done, whether in such, or such a time, place, &c. And in such Cases onely Things seeme indifferent.
Now in these seeming indifferents (which sure are not so many as some pretend) the Church hath, and yet hath not, power to determine.
All (though but Seeming) indifference, is as it were in medio, betweene two Extremes, as was said before. Now, when Neither of these extremes is necessary, There, (specially where Both extremes are doubtfull) I conceive the Church hath not power to determine to Either Extreme.
As suppose Blacke and White colours should bee Doubtfull, whether both, or either, or neither, were Lawfull: In this case (for ought I yet see) the Church hath no power to determine (any one so doubting) to either Blacke or White. The Reason is, because Neither of these extremes are necessary, therebeing so many intermediate colours betweene Both.
But when One of the extremes (betweene which we waver as indifferent) is necessary to be imbraced, (as in most cases it is;) Here all the Power Lawfull, I conceive, can doe no more but resolve which of the Two extremes is Best; whether it be safest to Doe, or not to Doe (whereof one is necessary;) to do so, or so, if I must doe.
This Power (where ever it bee) must bee very warily exercised: since of All Two extremes, onely One (as was proved) can be Lawfull: so that one is wholsome, but the other poyson.
In these also the Church hath, and hath not power. If you please, Thus; It hath a power Judicative, (or if you will Juridicall) but not Legislative. It may, and must determine; (for ought I know, beyond all externall appeale) yet againe it must not determine, What, and How it Will, because it will. No, It also hath its bounds, a Rule to goe by, a constant Law (and that nonfactam, sed natam, not which the Church makes, but which it finds,) Right Reason.
So that the Church is like the Judges on the Bench in Westminster Hall (that have a Judicative, or Declarative power, being entrusted with the explication, application, and execution of the Laws:) but not as the King and Parliament, who have a Legislative power: and so not onely to declare what is Law, but to make new Lawes. And yet even This High Court hath one Rule, or Law to goe by, (and this is also the Law of the Church, even Right Reason.) And if they or the Church, should erre from this Rule, (which God forbid) we must obey indeed, but Patiendo, I will, I must give Passive obedience to Lawfull Authority; even there where I dare not, I cannot, I may not, give obedience Active.
By the Church here I meane, not onely One or Two, or a Few, of what-Ranke soever; but All, even every true Member of the whole Church. For I conceive every such Member hath de jure a Vote in This Determination.
But what if after the Determination, I yet dissent from the judgement of the greater part of the Church, which in all doubtfull causes, seemes justly to challenge (even by the law of Nature) a decisive power; What shall I doe in this Case? shall I make a Rent, Schisme, Faction that may fire Church or State?
God forbid; no, I must Read, pray, discourse, and conferre, with all humility submitting my selfe to the Reason of any man that will teach me; much more to the Judgements of many together, eminent for learning and piety. And yet if after all this, I cannot be satisfyed in my Doubts (which must be Reall, and not pretended scruples of a factious spirit) In this case, which sure will be very Rare (where Right Reason is made supreme Judge) I must suspend till my judgement be cleared, lest that which to another is Lawfull, become sin to me: Who cannot Act in Faith, while I act against or with Doubts, or Scruples.
However in the meane time, I must quietly deport my selfe without faction, turbulent commotion, or uncharitable censure of those who dissent from mee, both in Judgement und Practice; well knowing that the same thing may be Lawfull and necessary to one that sees it so; which yet to me is unlawfull, while I so doubt.
In this Case, I conceive no Power on Earth ought to force my Practice more than my Judgment. For I conceive the Churches utmost compulsive power (which must also very warily, and but rarely be used) is but Expulsion, or Excommunication; which yet I suppose may scarce ever be exercised on one that so doubteth: much lesse Fine, Imprisonment, losse of member, or life: Except his dissent in practice hath necessarily with it a destructive influence into the State also, and Body Politique. Which case I thinke hardly ever possible, in those Things which can be objects of Rationall Doubts: which are onely such as the Scripture hath not determined. And in all things not determined by Scripture, (which sure must needes be of lesse consequence) One that Doubts with reason and humility, (may not for ought I yet see) be forced by Violence.
Give me leave by some Instances to cleare my meaning, in all the premises concerning the power in Indifferent Things.
Time, Place, and Deportment of our selves in the Congregation, are the maine, if not sole things, which beare this acceptation of Indifferent: The Scripture not having laid downe expresse Rules for all particular cases of This Nature. So that we seeme left Indifferent to the use of This or That Place, this or that Time, this or that Gesture, &c.
In these Things (not determined by Scripture) there must be some determination, because one of the extremes is necessary, (We must use some Place, some Time, some Gesture) else all limitation here were needlesse, if not unlawfull, as was said before.
The Church then Doubtlesse hath power to resolve here, What Time, what Place, what Deportment, &c. and what they doe herein (though it should prove to be Evill) They doe by power which God hath entrusted them with.
And yet againe, the Church here must not command what she will, because she Will; but must goe by her Rule, which is Right Reason: if she swarve from this, she erres. And Hee that seeth Her error, or Doubteth, sinnes also, if (while he to doubteth) he yeeld her more than Passive Obedience: and if she force one so Doubting, I thinke she sinneth more.
Now I need not rippe up the foulenesse of our Bishops miscarriage in their practice about Indifferent Things, which yet hath fully suited with their principles, as was touched before.
For though I should grant (which I never shall) that onely they, and their Creatures, were the whole Church: Yet would they be so farre from a power of making things Indifferent, (which yet some seeme to challenge, or at least to exercise) that indeed they have no power to determine what is Indifferent: since it may be very easie for some men to thinke that indifferent, which to others seemes clearely either unlawfull or necessary.
Againe, in things seeming (generally) Indifferent, they have no power peremptorily to determine to one Extreme, when there is a medium betweene both extremes, and so neither is Necessary.
In things seeming Indifferent, where one extreme is necessary, They cannot determine pro arbitrio, as they please, (but by a constant Rule of Reason) much lesse by a Tyrannicall club Law force us to doe (though we rationally, and modestly doubt whether it be lawfull) what they first Make, rather than find Indifferent, and then (by their wonted maximes in indifferent Things) make Necessary, on paine of Imprisonment, losse of Eares, yea life it selfe.
Which yet might be more tolerable, if they onely tooke a Dictator-like power, to direct our judgements, in things that seeme most abstruse, or doubtfull (in which yet they make themselves Gods; for none but God can fully cleare, much lesse force my judgement;) But they scruple not, point blanke to contradict our Reason, and force our consciences, in things extremely manifest; as in Bowings, and many other things, which one as blind as he that so much commended Rhombus, may see to be unlawfull.
CHAP. VII.
Of the Consequents to a Bishops Office. His Relations Upward and Dependances. Of his Vote in Parliament. Relations Downward: How repugnant to State-Policie.
VVE have seene the Antecedents, Concomitants, or Ingredients, to our Bishops Office. Let us a little view some of the Consequents, that result from his Office.
We shall consider but Two, or rather One with Two Heads, (like himselfe) at least looking two way is; His Relations both upward and downward.
First, Upward. Nescio quo fato, I know not by what destiny, Our Bishops have still depended on anothers Becke. In the time of Popery, they were wholly moulded to the Popes Will; which oft produced such wilfull and stubborne deportment (both towards their Soveraigne and equals) that wise men of those times beganne to perceive how insufferable such forraine dependance would still bee in any free State.
Winchester was not the first, though One, that in Edward the first his Time, professed such universall Obedience to his Creator the Pope, that he quickely learned to refuse (that I may not say, disdaine) to call the King his Lord. And his Treasons against the Kings Person, made all men see how easie it was, and still would be, to reduce such Principles into Practice.
Edward the third summoned a Parliament to enable himselfe for the warres he designed: But the Arch bishop Stratford (fearing it might injure the Popes Title, if he might not be permitted there to erect his Crosse) refused to come, detained his Bishops, and prided himselfe in hindering his Soveraignes designe.
Norwich handled the second Richard with the same pride and Insolence; Levying Souldiers at the charge of the Kings Subjects to fight the Popes Battles.
We have not forgot Becket, and divers other of his temper, but reserve them to another place.
Under the Reformation; if they have indeed cast off the Pope, (which may be doubted in most, but is past doubt in some) yet they have ever beene at their command, by whose favour they stand, though (with that unhappy bird) they designe the Death of Those that give them Life.
This dependance appeares in a threefold Gradation.
1. The Calling (of the Bishops now in dispute) being only Jure Humano, they must therefore comply, not onely to fix their Persons, but their Callings.
2. When they are invested in their Sees the smile or frown of the Court, addeth or detracteth much from their splendor, comfort, and emolument.
3. Their further advancement, either to a better Bishopricke, or Archbishopricke, wholly depends on the Princes Will.
Naturalists observe, there is not so much appearance of change in many degrees of Entitie, acquired by a second motion; as in one degree, at the first slep from Non Ens, to Entitie. But Moralists find that one little step of new preferment makes more impression upon low spirits, than their first Creation out of Nothing. Both are well reconciled in our Bishops Rising. For what can so sudden unexpected advancement (from Nothing to such an Height of Being) seeme but a new Creation? so that hence such a dependance must needs result, as is that Relation which Nature fixeth in the Creature to his Creator.
Courtesies and Hopes are the most oyly Bribes, and Bribes blind the eyes of the most wise. With what nature soever Obligations meet, they have an irresistible force. If they descend so low as men of base spirits, They there get a species of Profitable; and so become like Lime-twigs to Little Birds. It was doubtlesse most feelingly spoken by the Slave in Plautus, Esculenta Vineula sunt firmissima, to which the English Proverb answers, They that are tyed by the teeth, are tyed most strongly.
If they meete with men of high rais’d, Generous, Noble thoughts; they yet worke much more, (though out of a more ingenuous Principle) while a true Noble spirit cannot breath under the least shadow of Ingratitude: having first learned that old Proverb, Ingratum si dixeris.—Ingratitude is the highest imputation.
How hardly then a Bishops Conscience, Judgement, Reason, or Will, can be his owne; under not onely so many Obligations, (for the greatest engagement past) but Hopes also for new favours to come, (either in higher advancement, or at least in continuance of His smiles, whose first frownes may quickly reduce Them to their first principles of Nothing) I leave it to wise men to judge.
To whom also I humbly propound, (as worthy mature Consideration) how fit these Spirituall Lords may bee to sit as Law-makers in That Highest Court, by whose fundamentall Orders (as also by the Law of nature) None ought to have Vote, but Free men.
And how can they possibly be deemed Free, that wholly depend on anothers Thought, (for I neede not say, Beck, Smile, or Frowne) not onely for their first Creation, but continuall Preservation in This State, and power of giving Vote in that Court?
But They say, This may be also objected against other Lords, Created by his Majesties favour; Especially Officers of Court, which yet are not Excluded from Votes in Parliament.
I answer first, Incommodum non solvit argumentum, the alleadging of an inconvenience, is not the answering of an argument.
Againe, If the Case were alike in all These (which I yeeld not) Because we are under One (perhaps invincible) Difficulty, must we needs runne and plunge our selves into another? Or being once in, may we not get out if we can?
But thirdly, there is a Vast Difference betweene Those who cannot but still be affected with Noble, generous, and most vertuous deportment; (being still to live in their Names, Honours, posterity) and Those, who in Their height, are but as Meteors, that must quickly blaze out, vanish, fall, and be no more. Betweene Those whose Birth and Breeding hath filled their veines with Heroick noble blood; and Those that are so much disadvantaged both by their Birth and Breeding: though Their Birth is nothing so ignoble as their Education; Compared with that Breeding a true States-man should have.
For, will any wise man living thinke them fit to give Counsell in Princes Closets; to make Lawes in Parliament; and sit Judges in the Highest Tribunals of Civill Justice; that all their life time, (before the Conge d’eslire diverted their thoughts) were wholly taken up in turning (rather than reading) Aquinas and Scotus, with some other schoole Triflers, before they came to some Church Benefice; where ever since they have spent all their time (that might be spared from Tything) in Liturgies, or Canons; Except some new scruple with some of their Neighbours, have cald them to peruse some Author de Decimis?
If you view their Civill Converse, they have practised little, but to wrangle downe a Sophister, or to delude a Proctor, in the Vniversity; to say Grace to a Gentle-man, or acquaint themselves with a Reading-Pue, in the Countrey. In Cases of Conscience, they have studied little, but how, with most compendium, to digest the Oath of Direct and Indirect, in point of Simony; and to swallow the Vow of thrice Nolo Episcopari, I will not be made a Bishop, when God and their owne Consciences well know, many of them are not so solicitous for Heaven, as for a Bishoprick. And are These men fit, not onely to rule the whole Church; to Ordaine, Censure, Suspend, Deprive, Excommunicate, ad placitum; to governe our Consciences, by Articles, Canons, Oathes, (and what else a Lawlesse Convocation may invent;) but also to direct and advise (I might say more) in the Privie Juncto’s; to fit at the Helme, to dictate Lawes; & tantum non, even almost, to sway the Scepter; which if they forbeare to touch, it is but as Mercury once spared Jupiters thunder-bolts, which he durst not steale, lest they should roare too loud, or at least burne his fingers.
In the last place my Answer shall be thus. Though the Birth, Blood, Thoughts, Breeding, and all, of a Bishop were as noble as any One, or all the Peeres; (which none dare say) Yet are not, cannot, Bishops be possibly so free, (and so, not so fit, to sit and Vote in Parliament) as other Lords, and members of that Great Body.
For first, They that have large Estates by Inheritance, and to continue their Names and Families to the same Inheritance, are in all reason probable with more impartiall freedome to provide for the Good of the Common-wealth in generall; than those that having little or no Estate of their owne (at least, to leave to posterity) are not like much to looke after the Weale-publike, or Good of posterity; but rather will seeke to humour the present times, (being truly Filii unius Horæ, Men of a short continuance) especially to insinuate themselves into more and more favour with their Creator, and Preserver, on whose smile wholly depends more than their Bene Esse, their welfare.
My Judgement in This is much confirmed by the observation of a truly Noble Gentleman, and most-highly-well-deserving States-man, (R. Ea. of E.) who said, he had now served thirty yeeres in Parliament, and in all that time never knew but Two or Three Bishops stand for the Common-wealth.
Againe, though all the Branches of Nobility first sprouted out from the Roote of Royalty; (Honours being in all Good States, Appendices to Majesty, and wholly disposed by the Royall hand) Yet Estates and Revenues did not; which are the Partiments and Supporters of Noble Honours. And These alse in Bishops, depend on the Princes Will.
Yea, our Honours and Baronies, though first they were granted by the King; yet now being so invested in Our blood, and become Hereditary, They cannot be revoked. In This therefore we are Freer than any Bishop, whose Baronies are onely annexed to their Office, and not invested in them by Blood.
We have seene our Bishops Relation upward; Let us now view it looking downe to his own Family, Creatures, and Dependencies. We shall see all these Consequents, as unsutable to State policie, as were the Ingredients, and Antecedents to his Office.
A Bishops Title and Place is High and Splendid, but his Estate (for the most part) Meane and Low: at least That which may be left as Inheritance to posterity.
Now to what unworthinesse will not Ambition and Avarice carry them? When they looke on themselves as Peeres and Grandees of the Kingdome, and againe reflect on their Wives and Children, as those which (after Their Decease) must soone be reduced from such an height (like falling Starres) into their first principles; Must not This be a Great Temptation, by any meanes, right or wrong, to seeke the private inrichment of themselves, and Families, even much before the publike Good of the Common-wealth; which is never more injur’d, then when it is made to stoope and vaile to the boundlesse Ambition of some private, low, base, sordid spirit.
Or suppose, by penurious Living they may in many yeares gleane up a meane Estate to leave to their House, to preserve their name: how miserable and sordid must be their deportment? how base their House-keeping? how Little their Hospitality? Which yet not onely by Scripture, but Reason seemes much (if not most) to be required of the Clergy. Such a Bishop must be as much given to Hospitality, as Blamelesse in other particulars. But alas, how can Ours be so? Except They can be content to live without any Retinue of Attendance; or be Curst by Posterity, brought up perhaps as Lords, but left as Beggers.
Except then it might be with our Bishops, or Bishops Children, as once it was with that Roman Dictator, who being brought from the Plough, was content againe to returne to the Plough, (after he had with all humility, fidelity, and successe, served the Common-wealth in the Highest Office That State at that time did afford) I cannot see why They should so ambitiously desire a Lordly Prelacie; which they can neither leave to posterity; nor carry downe to the Grave; nor yet are sure to keepe all the time they live: for of all Riches, those of a Bishop, may soonest fly away.
If therefore Our Prelates would seriously reflect on their owne Peace, Credit, and Esteeme; Or the Good of their Family and Posterity; (though they would despise the Church, and trample on the State, with the Weale, peace, and flourishing prosperity thereof) sure they would leave the Common-wealth to States-men; and thinke it honour more than enough to serve the Church, and waite on Gods Altar: I mean That Holy Table, which may be served by Them that attend the Word and Sacraments; though they must not neglect This, and serve any Other Tables.
But Venales Animæ, Mercenary Spirits, will doe any thing to Rise. Yet I hope Our Bishops doe not, at least will not doe so any more. If so, Let them know the Wheele of providence can runne as fast backward as ever it did forward. In its descent, they may perhaps sadly reflect on a serious dying speech of one of themselves; Had I served my God, as I have served my Prince, I should not have beene so deserted now. Though I must confesse I doubt they have well served neither God, nor the King. But this shall be discuss’d more anon.
CHAP. VIII.
What Good our Bishops can doe to the State, is examined, whether they have beene, or can be, friends to Monarchy, or Civill Government.
VVE have seene how much our Bishop makes against State Policie; Let us now see what he doth, or can doe, For the State; For, Both parts must be heard.
It hath still beene the practise of These men to buzze into Princes Eares, that They strike at Monarchy, that are displeased with such Episcopacie: Like one of the old Queenes Jesters, that would box and pinch any that stood neere him: and if they return’d the like, he would step before the Queene, and cry, Madame here comes a Traytor to strike at your Majesty.
I know it is one of their first Canonicall principles, No Bishop, No King. On this Axletree the whole body of Popery is wheeled about. A specious shew indeede, and One of their Master-peeces of Policie; to acquaint and perswade Kings, of what use they are to Them;
Sed Timeo Dandos, & Dona ferentes, I am afraid of the Grecians, when they come with their gifts.
It is but a Trojan Horse. Mors est in Olla, there is Death in the Pot. While they seeme to please Kings, they weaken Crownes.
Powers are Gods Ordinances; and set over us for Our Good: And Kingdomes certainely have more for them in holy writ than any other Government: Shall Royall Crownes then come and stoope to a Miter?
La France ne tombe pas en Keneville. With them a Woman must not beare the Crowne, and shall the Scepter, with us, bow to the Crosiers Staffe? Let it not be spoken in Asbkelon, nor published in the streets of Gath. Hath Christianity abated the Glory or power of the Diadem? Bishops would, but Christ will not.
In short, What is the sense of this Maxime? What can it be other than This, that the Strength, nay the Being of a King, depends wholly upon a Bishop?
Prodigious State-Blasphemic! Kings have beene when Bishops were not, and shall be yet much more Glorious, when such Bishops shall be no more. Which shall still be my desire for all Kings; but especially for Ours; whose Good and Gracious Government, I shall pray, may yet endure long, and long amongst us.
It is much rather true, If any such Bishop, no King; as I hope to make good in my subsequent discourse. Otherwise, (had these beene onely (Metaphysicall Notions, or Mathematicall speculations) I should not have beene troubled more with a square Cap on a Bishops Head, than I am with a Circle squared in a Mathematicall braine.
It is true, their Grand Master the Pope, seemed very officious in setting up the German-Franck Emperour, (the Image of the old beast) But it was not long before he shew’d his Ends. Turne your Eye but a little about, and you shall see an Emperour stand barefoote at his Gate: Here one kneels to kisse that foote that spurneth off His Crowne: There one holds the stirrup, while that Proud Bishop steps up into the saddle.
And have not our Bishops the same Designes with their Holy Father? Even to free themselves from all Power, and to bring all things under their owne Power?
What meaneth this Maxime of Episcopacie, that a Clergy man cannot fall under the Execution of a Civill Magistrate, Except they first degrade him; which they may refuse to doe as long as they please? Is not This to Exempt themselves from all Civill Jurisdiction?
What is the sense of This, that for breach of Their (Church) Injunctions, they may Excommunicate people, Ministers, Lords, Kings themselves, whom they please; But shortly This, to reduce all men, (Even Princes as well as others) to plenary Obedience to themselves? And when Once they have passed that sentence on their Soveraigne, at their owne fancie, I doubt not but some of them would be ready to receive the Crowne from their kneeling Prince, (as of old) If any King would againe so farre forget himselfe, and lay his Glory in the dust to be trampled on by such proud insulting Prelates. Which God forbid.
Their Insolent Words and Actions, vented lately against the Crowne, are very sutable to these Principles.
Some of themselves, in open Court of Judicature, have dirst to affirme, They were beholding to none, but Christ, for the place they held.
Others of Them (and Their Creatures) have said They are under no Law of man.
Some have preached point blanck, that Their standing did not at all depend on the Crowne.
Others have flatly denied the King to be Head and Governour in Ecclesiasticall Causes, over all persous: though they cannot but know that This Title was given mainely to Exclude any other Earthly Head, as it is Interpreted by Order of Parliament.
All of them Erect Episcopall Courts, send out Summons, Exercise Jurisdiction, Sentence, Fine, Imprison, doe what they list, in their Owne name. Though All the Bishops put together (and Vis unita est fortior) dare not to doe so; (for, the High Inquisition had a Commission under the Broad Seale) and yet Every particular Bishop Exercised Jurisdiction under their owne seale, by their owne power, in their owne name; without any Commission, directly against Statute, by which they all incurre a Præmunire.
Indeed they have learnt to faune upon Princes, and would make them beleeve all This is for their Honour, and Advantage: yet they are but Impostors; This is but to stroake the Horse (as the Proverb is) till they are well up in the Saddle: for, at That they aime, and thither would they come; which God forbid.
I could heartily wish, the Kings of the Earth would bee pleased to read Master Broughtons Epistle in his Refining the Roman Fox. Or Nichol. de Clemengiis, in his Excellent peece de Corrupta Ecclesiæ statu. Or that Noble Learned Lords incomparable My sterium Iniquitatis; presented to Our Late Learned Soveraigne King James: though in some late Prints it hath beene refined by an English-Romish Index Expurgatorius, yet it will still (with the other) represent the sleights of this kinde of Episcopacie, in such lively Colours, that I beleeve no Prince would trust them againe.
I neede not goe farre to seek instances that may fully represent how much Our Bishops have in all ages promoted the Weale, Peace, and Honour of This Kingdome and Crowne: For their Treasons against the State and King, want not a Register. I could briefely present you with a true Emblem of Episcopacie ab ovo ad malum; from the beginning to the end; and yet not goe higher than the Conquerour.
Lanfranck would have conquered the Conquerour: and by gentle insinuations have perswaded him to submit his Scepter to the Triple Miter: but, Etiamsi suasit, non persuasit, though he did perswade, yet he did not prevaile.
Art could not prevaile, and therefore Anselm went more rudely to worke; Though Rufus forbad him, yet with many thankes and much honour from the Pope, he went to Rome for his Pall. After he had oftentimes bearded the King in many matters, he succeeded so well, that he attempts the same against the first Henry: and left not till he had caused the Scepter to bow, and the Crowne to totter.
In Stephens time, Two Great Prelates dispute about Precedencie, and at last passing by the King, they call the Pope to be Moderator.
Beckets heights are well knowne, and scarce parallel’d in any Story: Onely as Henry the second (that Great Prince) did suffer sore stripes here: so did the Duke of Tholouse in France, for joyning with the Albigenses. That was done by a Pope, This by a Bishop.
King John fell (with his whole Kingdome) under an Interdict, for some quarrell betwixt himselfe and Two or Three Prelates: nor could he buy or begge his peace but on his knees, resigning his Crowne to proud Pandulph.
In Edward the seconds time Gaveston was much abetted by Coventry, in this a Traitor to his Countrey.
What prankes Winchester plaid with Edward the First, Stratford with Edward the Third, and with the second Richard, Norwich, was toucht before.
Henry the fourth was ill handled by Yorke, that waged warre with him: at the same time Arundell vow’d he would not leave a slip of that Religion which then he saw dawning in England.
In Henry the sixts time, Yorkes quarrell with Winchester, lost all that England had gained from France, at last Yorke sides with Warwicke against the King.
Edward the fourth had little cause to pardon the new Arch-Bishop.
Ely ended better then he beganne, but it was per accidens; for first he perswaded Buckingham to claime the Crowne, but He refusing (at least not daring to stirre for himselfe) sets him on Richmond, the true Heire.
But you will say, These were all Papists, and lived in the darke times of Popery.
True, and were not their Soveraignes such also? were not Kings and Bishops of one Religion then? Are they more now, hath a Protestant Prince now more reason to trust a Protestant Prelate, than a Popish King a Popish Bishop? Let all the world judge. Seeing in Those times it was no difference in Religion, But Malignance against Civill Government, that produced These Commotions, in Those Bishops.
But since the Pope, and Popish Religion is confessed to be the Cause of all those Treasons and Rebellions, what if I prove Prelacie and Popery to be the same in re, and onely to differ in name? This we shall Essay anon. In the meane time It is worth considering whether Our Prelates be not more like to side with the Pope against a Protestant, than Popish Prince?
I will over-looke the darke times of Popery; Let us beginne with the Reformation, (which yet could hardly have entrance, for that strong Opposition the Prelates still made) Alas what Commotions have they still raised in Scotland, and ever since the Reformation? We have felt, what Our Parents onely saw. They Eate (at least suffered) a soure grape, and Our Teeth were almost all set on edge. But blessed be God that hath delivered That Church and State from Tyrannicall Prelates; and will ere long deliver us also.
They did the same in Denmarke, till one of their Kings did perswade the people to Choose another Church Government: After he had in publike read a Charge for three houres long, containing Their Treasons, and Rebellions even since the Time that the Pope was cast out of that Countrey.
When I call to minde their Cariage and miscariage here in England, I must beginne with that of the Poet,
Infandum Regina jubes renovare dolorem; It is the renewing the memory of our great griefes, and miseries.
Our first Reformation was much opposed by Bishops. Gardiner, Bonner, and some others were no Changelings. Yea we shall finde some Good men were Bad Bishops; and the Evill were intolerable. Ridley was too fierce in maintenance of Ceremonies. Cranmer and Ridley both were for allowing Masse to the Lady Mary: but That Admirable young Prince, was even in his Infancie, with King David, wiser than his Teachers: and could weepe, though not yeeld to Their perswasions.
What our Bishops did in Queene Maries dayes (Bloody Times!) we all know; sure it was an unhappy Proverb that was then learnt, The Bishops foot hath trodden here. What they intended under the Old Queene, Essayed in King James his Reigne; and had well nigh performed under Our Gracious King Charles, to the Ruine of the Crowne, We now beginne to know: If at least Knowledge may properly be said to bee wrought by Sense, for, If so, our Feeling was enough to Teach us. Yet what wanted in This, may be supplied by the Daily complaints wee are forced to heare not onely from England, but Ireland also; where yet perhaps they have more parts to act than one. But he that sitteth in Heaven laugheth at them, the most High hath them in derision.
CHAP. IX.
How sutable such Episcopacie can be to Monarchy, is farther considered. Whether the Best forme of Church Government be Monarchicall. Whether other Formes may not well stand with Civill Monarchy. How Church and State Government differ and agree.
I Have scarce done with that Grand Principle of Episcopall policie, No Bishop, No King. Yet I must now divert you a little from it, or at least lay it aside awhile, till It come in againe at due place: which perhaps may be in This next dispute.
I am now come to the most moderate of Episcopall men. For even These affirme that The absolute Best Church Government, under a Monarchy, is Monarchicall.
By the Way I must desire it may againe be remembred that hitherto I have contended onely with our Lordly Civill Episcopacie, (properly called Prelacie) I have not yet disputed Ecclesiasticall Episcopacie in generall, or the Prelacie of One Minister before another (though I may touch That also before I conclude:) so that I am not bound to answer this Objection; which sure cannot meane that the Best Church Government under Monarchy, is Tyrannicall, (as indeed such Lordly Prelacie is even in their owne Judgements which are moderate) but simply Monarchicall, scilicet in Ecclesiasticis: against which I have not yet disputed; though I know This was One of the maine Foundations on which That Destroyer, That man of sinne beganne first to build.
But I am content to follow them Here also. Yet I must first sift out their meaning, lest they deceive me with words. Doe they meane that All other Church Governments are destructive to Monarchy? or doe they meane, Monarchy is destructive to All other Church Governments but Monarchicall?
The first sense is even the same with the former Axiome we discuss’d, No Bishop, No King; except perhaps they grant, that every Monarch is a King, but every King is not an absolute Monarch.
But take Monarchy in what sense you please: why cannot it stand with any kinde of Church Government? doth the supreme Civill power receive any essentiall part of it from Church Monarchy? Is not Monarchy compleat even there where is no Church?
I am by no meanes of their judgements who say, None that are without the pale of the Church have right to any Thing here below. A Tenet almost necessary to those that use to excommunicate Princes ad placitum, and then stirre up forraine Enemies, or Subjects themselves, to dispossesse such Princes; but to other States of very dangerous consequence.
I clearly conceive an Heathen Emperour may be as lawfull a Monarch, as any Christian Prince; And I doubt not, but His Subjects owe as exact obedience to Him, (if his Civill Title be just) as we justly pay to our Kings and Governours.
To say then that Monarchy cannot stand without Monarchical Discipline in the Church, is to weaken (if not to break) the nerves and ligaments of supreme power: nay to say that such a government will best sute with Monarchy, is to vaile the lustre and Majesty of Monarchy, which like an healthfull stomach, can easily assimulate all things to it selfe, but is not changed by any.
If they would but speake their owne Thoughts, They would turn the Proposition thus, Church-Monarchy cannot stand without Civill. Here the Mystery is unmasked. It is true, This Discipline cannot stand, but where Princes will uphold it. For that which hath no footing in Scripture, must leane upon Humane Right; and thus it discovereth its owne weakenesse. Divine Institution is able to bottome it selfe upon it selfe; but Humane is like the weake Vine or Hop, which without a pole, must creepe, and so rot, upon the earth. Yea some inventions of Men (specially in matters of Religion) are like the weake Fruitlesse Ivy, that must be propt up by some Elme, or mighty Oake, and yet most unnaturally destroyeth That prop which holdeth it up. And of This kind is that Humine (or rather Demonical) Episcopacie, of which we have treated all this time.
Our Bishops foreseeing This, (for They are wise in their generation) thought best to invert the proposition; and instead of this, that Church monarchy cannot stand without Civill, They affirme Civill Monarchy cannot stand without that of the Church. Thus they delude Silly people.
But to come a little neerer to their Best meaning, (Who stand so much for Church Monarchy) I would gladly be shewed by Reason, what there is in Church government why it may not derive it selfe into severall Corporations; where either more or fewer may beare the sway; still subscribing to those things which are left by Christ to the Civill government, or Monarchicall power. We see hundreds of Corporations are thus managed: And what there is in formali ratione of Church government (essentiall to Church government) that will not endure This; mihi non liquet; Truly I doe not yet know, I cannot yet imagine.
We see ever since the reformation of Luther and Calvin, the Churches of Christ have had another discipline than ours; under Elective and Successive, under Protestant and Catholique Princes, as will appeare clearely in Poland, Denmarke, in Scotland, and the Palatinate, in France, and Germany. I do from my heart agree that Civill Governours are Custodes utriusque Tabulæ, the Preservers of both the Tables: but what the Civill Magistrate hath to doe in Church matters, till the Church hath done her utmost, I could yet never learne.
The government of Christ is spirituall; and Hee will have his worke wrought in a sweete way; by the power of the Spirit, not by force.
If I erre in This, I shall upon better reason recant; In the interim, hoping that the clearnesse of my thoughts shall with the candid Reader receive gentle interpretation, I shall freely declare my opinion in This point.
Christ (as I shall more fully prove hereafter) hath cleerly unfolded to us the Two main things of Church affaires:
1 The Doctrine.
2 The Discipline of his Church.
Who will come in this case to adde or diminish any thing?
I appeale to any Ingenuous Reader, of what Religion soever he be (yea of what sect in any Religion) Whether any power ought to force a Church in matter of Doctrine.
I conceive, what is True Doctrine the Scripture must judge, and none but the Scripture: but what a Church will take for True Doctrine, lyes only in That Church.
Will Rome admit us to expound to them this place, Hoc est corpus meum? shall wee admit Rome’s exposition? Will either of us admit force?
There is certainly but one Truth: but what shall be taken by the Church for Truth, the Church must judge.
If you descend to Discipline, will not the Case cleerly be the same?
In Discipline consider three things.
- 1 Admission of members.
- 2 Excommunication.
- 3 Officers to execute these, and other Ordinances.
Whether you will Baptize children, and so by administring to them the Sacrament of Initiation, admit them members of the Church?
Whether you will admit all for Church members that barely professe, though they be open drunkards, and very ignorant persons?
Whether you will have Pastors, Teachers, and Elders, as your superiours in this worke, or Bishops, Archbishops, Primates, &c. who shall judge but the Church?
So long as the Church, in her Church Tenets, intermedleth not with State matters under the notion of Religion, I suppose the Civill power is not to interpose.
It is most true, if the Church will broach (with the Anabaptists) that they will have no Governours, nor Government: This is a point not of Divinity, but Policie; and here the Scepter must set a rule. Or with the Adamites (if there be any such) allow Communion of wives: This takes away property, The sword must divide this quarrell. Or with the Papists, that it is lawfull to kill Kings: that faith is not to be kept with Heretiques: I conceive in all these, (and cases of the like nature) the decision lyeth in the Magistrate; for these tenets overthrow either Civill Government, or, civill converse; The Church must not goe out of her bounds.
But if the Question be, how you will expound such a Scripture: what Gesture you will use in such an ordinance: what man is fit to be excommunicated: what deserveth excommunication: what is Idolatry: what is wil-worship: what superstition: what is the punishment of those crimes: who shall judge but the Church?
The Prince hath granted to such a Body by Charter, such priviledges, such offices, who can interpose but the power instituting? Christ hath given us a platforme of Church government, with the offices, and officers; who may here intermeddle, but Christ himselfe?
It is most true when the Church findeth any refractary, and thereupon doth excommunicate him, he fals into the hands of the Civill Magistrate, if he continue pertinacious, and not before.
When Parliaments doe consider matters of Religion, they doe it to deliver the Church from some who would impose upon her; who would take the keyes from her, that by the help of these keyes, they may wrest the Scepter out of the hand of Soveraignty, which God forbid.
And whilst Parliaments labour thus for the Church, dealing no further in the affaires of the Church, than by Scripture they may, certainely they doe well; but if they once exceede their bounds, the issue will be Confusion instead of Reformation.
Church and State government differ as much as the Sexes. Yet as there may betweene These be an happy union: (Both keeping their bounds whilst the Husband hath the supremacie;) So may there be betweene the Church, and State a sweete harmony. The State having Committed to it the custody of the ten Commandements, and yet the Church preserving to her selfe Her rights.
If the Church swallow up the State, as it is in Popery, and Episcopacy, the issue will be slavish, grosse superstition, and stockish Idolatry. If the State overtop the Church, there will be ignorance and atheisme: but give to God that which is Gods, and to Cæsar that which is Cæsars: and both Church and State will fare the better.
Thus under favour, both by reason and president it is cleere, that any Church policie besides Episcopacie, (though onely one by right ought) may stand with Monarchy.
CHAP. X.
Who it is that opposeth, and exalteth himselfe above all that is called God. Who is properly a Papist: and what is Popery: Why the Pope is most properly Antichrist: How such Episcopacy differs or agrees with Popery.
VVHen I say, Any Church Government may stand with Monarchy, or other State-Policy, I desire to be understood of any Church Government well regulated: Which as I cannot conceive of our Episcopacy, so I must againe publiquely protest, that I verily beleeve This kind of Episcopacy is destructive, not onely to Good Monarchy, but all other State Policie whatsoever.
I meane not now to runne over, so much as the Heads of my former discourse: Every particle of which is to represent, how incongruous, and incompatible to true Policie of State, Our Bishops Place, Calling, and Office is, as now it stands establisht in this Kingdome.
If any man shall yet dissent from me in this Cause, I shall now onely intreat him to view one place of Scripture, which yet perhaps at first glance may seeme to make but little for my purpose: but it is an old Maxime among Interpreters, Non est hærendum in Cortice, we must not rest in the Letter. Let us therfore a little examine the Text, and if I be not in the Right, I will gladly learne of any that can better informe me.
The Place I meane, is that which of old in the Primitive Church was wont to be more perused, and examined, than I thinke it is now, or hath beene of late: and I cannot much wonder, sith I see all men view the Sea, and well consider it at distance from the top of a Cliffe or Rocke; but when they are once falne into it, they shut their eyes, winke, and care to see as little as may be of it, while they have so much round about them.
I must not detaine you too long without, lest you thinke my Porch longer and bigger than my House. It is that of the Apostle to the Thessalonians, Ep. 2. ch. 2. ver. 3, 4. specially those words: Who opposeth and exalteth himselfe above all that is called God, or is worshipped.
For the understanding of this place, we must premise This, that it must not be taken as spoken of One single person: but a Compages of many, either existing together, or else succeeding one another; yet agreeing together in this great Apostasie, the maine thing here spoken of. And in this I have but few Adversaries: None I thinke, but some few of the Romish faction, that maintaine the grand Deceiver, False Prophet, or Apostate (for so I rather call him, than Antichrist, though I doubt not also but he is most truely Antichrist in Re) shall come onely in the end of the world, and indure but three yeares and an halfe: which yet begins to sound but ill among the Romanists themselves.
In the next place I affirme, this Man of Sinne (for so I must stile him) is not of the Laity, over whom (even over their Princes and Gods) he exalteth himselfe; but of the Clergie, For he sitteth in the Temple of God.
Being come so farre (without any Reall opposition) I now demand, Who This Man (Compages or Systeme of Men) is, or can be? The Pope, I suppose will be answered by most of our Church. And I yeeld it so; beleeving Him to be principally intended here. But if I can prove that Popery properly taken, is the same in Re, with Our Episcopacy; or at least that This is but a Piece and Part of That Mystery of Iniquity, then I hope it will be granted, that such Episcopacy is also here intended: and per consequens, that such Eposcopacy is altogether against true Policie of State, because it opposeth and exalteth it selfe above All that is called God, &c.
This therefore is now my Taske, to prove that Our Episcopacy, is the same Really with Popery, taken Properly.
Let us first then see what Popery properly may signifie: for, for ought I yet see, the world is scarce agreed in this particular. I cannot conceive that All Errours or Heresies held by some (nay all) Papists, may in proper speaking be called Popery, Most (I hope all) of the Papists agree with us in many Truthes, and all is not Heresie in which they Differ: and yet All heresie in them, not proper Popery. No not every Error or Heresie in the Pope himselfe can proprie loquendo be said to be Popery. There are many Things the Papists hold in common with many, if I may not say, All Heretickes: yet none ever properly called All Heretickes by the compendious Name of Papists. Many points are not yet so fully determined among themselves, but that some of them affirme, and others deny of the same subject. All of them will not agree about Originall sinne, Free will, Merit, &c. In this last (which yet is one of the most fundamentall points of controversie now betweene us) I see many of them comming so neere the Truth, that one must have a quicke sharpe eye to see where they come short: for many of them yeeld Our workes doe not properly merit as Ours, but as Tincta sanguine Christi, as dyed in the blood of Christ; yea and some are not rigid in pressing the phrase Merit, in its proper sense, so that perhaps Their most refined opinion in This, may be more dangerous in the Consequence, than substance or forme of it.
Nay, before the Councell of Trent, (before which yet Popery had beene long in the world) most of their Tenets were so much indetermined, that scarce any of them knew what he was to hold and beleeve; yet he was a Papist then, and is so still, and yet to this Day I thinke there is scarce one Doctrinall point, in which they all agree.
We must then consider what that is which Denominates a Papist, and may properly be called Popery. It must sure be somewhat Essentiall (as I may speake) to that Church, so that without this, it could not be called a Popish Church.
That is doubtlesse such and such Dependance on the Pope: This is in the Popes subjects truely Popery; and this Dependance on Him, is perhaps expressed by receiving his Name or Character in the Apocalyps. In the Pope himselfe, it is not this or that errour, this or that Heresie, but such an Independance, such a Lordship, such a Prelaticall Tyranny, over civill and Church estates, that is [Editor: illegible word] ’ἐξοχὴν Popery. And this is it that is so emphatically expressed here in This place to the Thessalonians, He opposeth and exalteth himselfe above all that is called God, &c. And the exercise of this Popish Tyranny is lively limn’d out in Apoc. 13. ver. 16. & 17. And he caused all, both small and great, rich and poore, free and bond, to receive a marke in their right hand, or in their foreheads. And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the marke, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
This Tyrannicall Prelaticall Power and Dominion, which the Pope usurpeth and excerciseth (contrary to Gods Word) over Clergy and Laity, Princes and Subjects, in their estates and consciences, is in Him, (as in His Clients, yeelding and submitting to this Popish Prelacy) True Proper Popery. And This is the Giving, Imprinting, or forcing of a Name, Character or Number, on the Popes part, as Receiving This on the part of Papists: though I have not now time, at least not opportunity, to discusse how much the Popes Name, Character and Number may differ. I doubt not but all are parts of That Prelaticall, usurped Power which is truly Popish; and received by Papists, as Servants and Souldiers of old received their Lord’s and Commanders Tessera, or Character in their hands and foreheads. But God also hath impressed his Motto on them all, let them read it and tremble; Apocal. 14. 9, 10. And the third Angel followed them, saying with a loud voyce, If any man worship the Beast and his image, and receive his marke in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drinke of the wine of the wrath of God, which is powred out without mixture into the cup of his indignation, and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy Angels, and in the presence of the Lambe.
God hath beene pleased to parcell out Church and Commonwealth as severall and distinct Governments: yet so that Princes should be Custodes utriusque Tabulæ, as was said before.
God hath beene pleased to make, appoint, and leave the Ministers of the Gospel Brethren, and hath permitted none of them a Lordly Prelacy above another.
But now the Pope comes, with a wide mouth, and swallowes downe at once, all Civill and Ecclesiasticall power; Challengeth to himselfe, not onely the Keyes, but the Sword; not onely Papall Dominion in Ecclesiasticis, but Regall also in Civilibus. This Usurpation of His, is properly Popery; and this robbeth Christ of his Regall Office.
As every sinne breakes all the Commands, (the whole Law) yet some sinnes doe more properly intrench on some particular command: so also is it in all Heresies and errors. All some way oppose the whole Law of Christ, and all the three Offices of Christ; yet some more properly One of these Offices, some another. As the Doctrine of Merit, de Condigno, & Congruo, of Condignity, and Congruity, encroacheth on Christs Priestly Office; the Alchoran mainely against his Propheticall. But Popery most properly strikes at his Kingly Office and Authority. For it is Christs Kingly Office to bind Kings in Chaines, and Princes in Fetters of Iron, if they resist him. And He that usurpes this Power and Priviledge, labours to unthrone Christ, to sit above him, and so properly opposeth and exalteth himselfe above all that is called God, or is worshipped. This is the Pope, and this is Popery. Yea I may adde, this is truely and most properly Antichrist; though indeed perhaps not that Antichrist of whom Saint John speakes in his first Epistle, Chap 2. 22. and 4. 3. who, it may be, was Ebion, or Cerinthus, or some other: though perhaps also Saint John might speake that of some Lordly Prelacy, which beganne (though but to dawne, if I may so speake of that darke mystery, beginning to shew it selfe) even in Saint Johns daies: for in some respect we will not stand to yeeld a Bishops Pedegree might perhaps extend so high: for even then Antichrist was conceived.
However, I doubt not to affirme the Pope is now most Really, Truely, and properly, the Grand Antichrist. For such is He most properly, that encroacheth on Christs Regall Office. This being it, which now (of all the three) is most proper to him in his Glory: and this he hath received as a most glorious Reward (if I may so speake) for all his sufferings in his humane Nature: and this I thinke the Scripture Language, (Esay 53. 12. Psal. 110. 7. Phil. 2. 8, 9, 10, 11. 1 Cor. 15. 27.) His Priestly worke was for the most part accomplisht in his Death; His Propheticall Office, as it were resigned over to his Holy Spirit; But his Kingly Office is his owne propriety, (till the end come) and so he that opposeth this, is most truely Antichrist. This is the Pope, and this is Popery.
Now on the other part, if any man please to survey Episcopacy with an unpartiall eye, he shall find this kind of Episcopacy, and Popery to be all one in Re, for they have the same Rise, the same Media of their progresse, and the same End.
The rise of Popery, was by overthrowing Christs Ordinances, and setting up of his owne. That this may appeare the more distinctly, give mee leave to shew you the Bishops boldnesse in the particulars of it.
Christs Ordinances in the New Testament, are either concerning Doctrine, or Discipline. I confesse the Pope hath made great assaults upon the doctrinall part; but what he hath done in that kind, he hath done many times by gathering up the regorgements of others, and so they are not his owne: or as an Heretique, but not as Pope, for the reasons which I have even now mentioned.
But he hath plaid his part mainely in point of Discipline: This most properly belonging to Christs royall Office, as Doctrine to his Propheticall.
In the Discipline there are two things considerable.
1. That which concerneth the Officer.
2. That which concerneth the Nature of his Office.
In the case of the Officer, you have his Accesse to his Office, and his Execution of the Office. In the first Election and Ordination are considerable.
By Gods rule his Election is to be by the people; his Ordination from the people by the hand of the Presbytery. By the rule of Popery, a Minister is Ordained by the Pope, and his Substitute, and is elected by the same power, and in the same way. And as their Schoole darkens (with a mist of their termes) what they cannot cleere: So doe These; to cloud their swarving from Christs rule, They raise up new termes, and instead of Election, have Presentation, Institution, and Induction. The first is done by the Patron, the second by the Bishop; a way which Christ never knew. It is so well knowne to all men that Episcopacy traces these very paths of Popes, that I shall not need to say more for this part of their Identity.
In the execution of his Office there are Acts of two sorts: some wherein he hath a Joynt power with other; some wherein he is a sole Agent: he is sole in Church preaching, and in administration of the Sacraments; he is coadjutor to others in Admission of members, in Excommunication.
Under the Papacy, the Minister or Priest hath the power of Preaching, and Administration according to Gods Law (and this onely with relation to the Bishop, who in his Church superintends:) But in the other he hath no power at all; it is wholly given up to the Pope, and by him committed to the Bishop. And thus the Pope may truely (while he is Dominus Dominorum) stile himselfe servum servorum: for he impropriates all Offices to himselfe; and in liew of coadjutors given by God to the Minister, the Bishop hath Officers appointed him by the Pope.
The Coadjutors of the Ministers by the Word, in some cases were the People, in some cases the Elders and Deacons, and sometimes People, Elders and Deacons: but the Pope in lieu of these hath instituted another generation of helpers; and lest that true name should reduce true Officers, he hath given them yet another title, as Apparitor, Surrogate, Chancellour, Officiall, Commissaries, Deanes, Church-wardens, Overseers of the poore. In all which Episcopacy, and Popery have so twin-like a frame, that seeing one, you see both; Nec Sosia Sosiæ similior, nec simiæ simia, Sosia is not more like to Sosia, nor an Ape to an Ape: And so I leave that point, which concernes the Officer.
In the Nature of his office it is considerable, first, What the worke of his Office is: secondly, From what power: and thirdly, in what manner he doth it.
For the first, the subject matter of his office is Administration of the Sacraments, Preaching, Admission of members, Excommunication. In reckoning these, the Pope conformeth to Gods Word, and so doth Episcopacy; for if we will erre, we must sometimes goe right, and then we may transgresse with lesse suspicion.
But consider from what power the Minister of the Gospell Acts. Hee ought not to borrow his Commission from any but from Christ, from Scripture; and he ought to keepe close to That: now the Papacy is wholly steared by Traditions, Decretals, Councells, Canons, Colledge of Cardinals, and the Pope in the Chaire, where he cannot erre in matters of Faith. The Pandects of the Civill Law, are too too boystrous, and of too great extent for any Civilian to comprehend; and yet that body of their learning is boyled up to such a degree that it runnes over, and no memory is able to attaine it, more than to compasse perfection in the learning of the Chinoes, where the A.B.C. amounts to 10000, letters. Constitutions crosse one another, and almost all fight against the Gospell of Christ.
Doth not Episcopacy (Si magna licet componere parvis, If I may compare great things with small) according to its modicum, doe the same? I confesse with them the Scripture is the rule: but who must expound this Scripture? Synods, Councels, Convocations, Bishops, Archbishops. Some of these sometimes, sometimes all of them. And though by their owne confession, these bind not mens Consciences, yet they bind them to obedience: which obedience they doe precisely challenge, and when they faile thereof, they doe without the least scruple of conscience, proceed to Excommunication, fine, imprisonment, deprivation, and what not? In the meane time it is held a sin for a Lay man at all to thinke of these studies. The Priests lips (they say) must preserve knowledge: It is a sad case (say they) when men with unhallowed hands will touch the Arke, and with unsanctified eyes, pry into these mysteries; and so these men, making the Scripture a Rule in appearance, doe in truth Monopolize all to themselves: This is just and flat Popery.
In the last place, the Manner which God hath prescribed, is that every thing be done in decency and in order: with what singlenesse and plainenesse may be: without any addition of mens inventions. The Pope carrieth on his Jurisdiction with pompe, and much outward glory; They have commissions, Injunctions, Charters, Seales, Secretaries, Clarks, and a thousand other inventions, to grind the face of the poore. Episcopacy hath its Courts, Summons, Clarkes, Seales, with other ceremonies of the like nature.
Christs rule is, that Ministers of equall ranke, shall all have equall power. Apostles indeed were above Evangelists, and Evangelists above Pastors and Teachers: but one Apostle was not above another, nor one Pastor did not superintend another. The Pope hath Priest, Bishop, Archbishop, Primate, Patriarch, Cardinall, Pope. And Episcopacy hath Ministers (now called Priests) Deacons, Bishops, Archbishops, Primates, &c.
The Scripture commandeth Preaching in season, and out of season; but with the Pope, and our Bishops, all preaching is now out of Season, I am sure out of fashion in themselves; and cryed downe in others: for with them, Ignorance is the mother of Devotion.
The Scripture alloweth but two Sacraments; the Pope addeth five; and our Bishops are ambiguous. Two onely (they say) are generally Necessary to Salvation; which may clearely intimate, that there are More than two; though perhaps not absolutely Necessary to Salvation, or though necessary, yet not Generally necessary, to all men, in all times, states and conditions whatsoever. And so much the Papists yeeld of their five Sacraments, nay, of sixe of their seven: For, onely Baptisme (they say) is absolutely and generally necessary to salvation; the Eucharist even with them, is not necessary to Infants, much lesse Matrimony, Orders, Confirmation, Penance, Unction. In what doe our Bishops then differ from Papists in this?
How doe they differ in Baptisme? Both Pope and Bishops hold it necessary, absolutely necessary to salvation. Yea, the most Moderate of Both, maintaine a generall Baptismall Grace, Equally confer’d to all partakers of that Sacrament. Indeed Our Bishops doe not openly use Salt and Spittle, but yet they retaine the Crosse, (perhaps much worse) and begin to claime spirituall alliances, as the Papists doe.
In the Lords Supper, the Pope makes (rather than findes) an Hostia, an Altar, a Priest, asd this Priest must offer for the sins of the Quicke and Dead. Our Bishops must have Priests, Altars, a Sacrifice, Corporals, and what not that Papists have? to say nothing of their Times and Gestures, which sure the Scripture never so determined, much lesse excluded any that could not yeeld to such and such circumstances, which none ever thought could be more than Indifferent.
In all Ordinances the Scripture now speakes of no other Holinesse, than that which is Spirituall, Rationall, the Holinesse of the whole man. The Pope hath found out new Holinesse, which he puts on Places, Times, Vestments, Bels, Tapers, Water, Wafers, Copes, Basons, Pots, and Cups, with other Vtensles.
And doe not our Bishops so also? What meanes such rigid pressing of Holy daies? Bare heads in Churches? Holy Surplices? What meane they else by their Holy Chalices? Holy Knives? Holy Patents? Holy Vtensles? all which may be so sanctified by a devout Priest, that they may become profitable to the Soules of those that use them. How then doe our Bishops differ from Papists in administring Sacraments, Manner of all Ordinances?
And is there any greater Difference In Admission of Members, and Excommunication? This last being the last and greatest Censure of the Church, by both Bishops and Pope, is made not onely most Common (as the humour moves them) but also most Ridiculous; being the usuall appendix of one groat short in our Reckonings with our Lord Bishops Register, Proctor, or Apparitor.
I would not be mistaken here; I bring not in these Things of Doctrine, or Discipline, as if by agreeing in One or Many of These, I might convince Bishops and Papists (or the Pope) were all one. The maine thing I drive at in all this, is the Originall fountaine from whence All These spring, and all the bankes that keepe in These Rivulets; That vertue and power which moves and actuates all these in their proper Channels: And This is Papall.
For, what ever the Pope doth of his owne head, by his owne Power, Dictating to his Vassals, as Head of the Church, This is truly Papall, and such is the Power by which They usurpe so much over mens persons, and consciences, in injoyning and pressing such or such Doctrine or Discipline.
So that a Bishops wearing a Surplice, Cope, Miter; using the Crosse, Bowing to the Altar, and many such Things (though they may be Errors, yet All These, or One of these) makes him not a Pope, a Popeling, or properly Antichristian: But Receiving these from the Popes Dictates, doing them because he commands, acknowledging his power in commanding; This makes a Papist: and Commanding them, Pressing them on Others, in such Despoticall power, makes a true Pope, a Reall Antichrist.
Nor may Our Bishops Evade by This (which I easily see will be answered) that though indeed they doe these things, and command these Things; yet they neither doe them from the Popes Command, nor Command them in the Popes Power.
Though I should grant This, which yet many wise men will not grant, (for, Our Bishops first Power came from the Pope, and of late also We have found letters, advice, commands, Dictates from the Pope, to some of our Bishops; and that in Matters of greatest Consequence, both for Church and State; But grant all they say, yet they may be Antichristian, and so such in Re, as the Pope is; though not literally Romanists, Except they do, or command, in the power of Rome.
This I shall be bold to affirme, and maintaine, till I see better Reason, that He (whoever he be) that commands the least tittle of Doctrine or Discipline, meerely Ex imperio voluntatis, in his owne Power, and Authority; without Licence or Warrant from Scripture or Right Reason, (where the Scripture hath beene silent) though the Thing he so commands should happen to be good in itselfe: Yet He in his so commanding, is not onely Tyrannicall, but Antichristian, properly Antichristian; Encroaching on the Royall Office of Christ, which is truely High Treason against God; and most properly Antichristianisme. I care not whether we call him a Pope, Papist, Romanist, or any other name; I call him Antichrist: and if you will call Antichrist by the name of Pope, I call such an Imperious Commander among us, (though he have no shadow of Dependance on Rome, or Romish Pope) an English Pope, I meane an English Antichrist.
I need not spend much time in shewing by what meanes either the Pope or our Bishops began, and continued to be so Antichristian: Du Plessis and Others have sav’d me this labour. In a word, they have beene These. With one hand they have laid pillowes under Princes, and all Governours (appointed by God) that so they might fall softly, while they thrust them downe with the other (the stronger) Hand, Arme and all. When These have beene so surely, though gently, laid downe asleepe; They have beene bold to tread on them, (yet with Plush slippers, lest they should chance to wake, stirre, and get up againe) and by Them, as so many staires or steppes, mount up themselves into this Height of Tyranny. Thus have they still opposed, and advanced themselves, against and above All that is called God, or is worshipped. And If with your owne thoughts you will please to goe on in the Chapter, you will finde some other Media (as Lying Wonders, and others) by which they have ascended.
I shall not neede to parallel Popish and Episcopall Media to Their Height. All the world sees them now, For, they were not done in a Corner.
What meanes their crying up an unjust and illimited power in Princes? Is not This their bleating out of an illegall unwarranted Prerogative (with which all our pulpits have rung of late) intended to tickle Princes till they be luld asleepe? or to sow pillowes under them, till They themselves can thrust them downe; not onely from that Tyranny which Bishops would perswade them to usurp; but also from their wholsome and lawfull prerogative?
What meaneth their Buzzing in Princes Eares, That Kings cannot stand without such Bishops? that if they should be put downe, the Church, and State too, must needs be Ruined? to This purpose they cry Blood, Blood; They can never fall without Blood: so some of them have vaunted. But Let them remember what Christ said to One (to whom they so much pretend) He that smiteth with the sword, shall perish by the sword. They know also whose Coat was sent home to their Holy Father, with this Inscription (written with his owne blood) Judge Holy Father whether This be Thy Sonnes Coat or not.
I have not forgotten how they have dealt with the People, Ministry, Gentry, Nobility, All sorts of men: For they have many staires to step up by, to such an Height; but Princes are their highest steps, their first Aime.
That which they have most sounded in the Peoples Eares, is the Church, the Church, the Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord! by This, as by a stalking horse, they have come much neerer then else they could. But now their Vizard beginnes to fall off; and Men beginne to see the true power of the True Church; and the Tyranny of that Antichristian Mock-Church; which under the Maske of Indifference, hath brought in most abominable Superstitions, and most intolerable slavery on the Persons, Liberties, Bodies, and Soules of Men. For they have pressed Consciences, even unto Gasping: yea, and would not be satisfied, though they daily heard the sighes and groanes of those bleeding hearts, which themselves had stabd with the poysoned sword of Church-Indifference.
Indeed they have used Both hands, and have stricken with Both. What the Keyes could not break, the Sword hath cut. And it had been much more tolerable If This Sword had pierced no farther then the Eares of Men: with which they have yet beene much more busie then He was, whom they bragge to have beene their first Predecessor. Yet me thinkes it was a sad Omen that this Sword should cut off the Eare of Malchus, which signifies (they say) a King, or Kingly Authority. At This they strike indeed, through the Eares, and Hearts of so many Loy all Subjects.
We neede not seeke their End, in all This. It cannot be doubted, but by all These Meanes, they aime at One End, (which is also the Popes) to pull downe all Other Power, and set up their owne. Thus, Thus they Oppose, and Exalt themselves above All that is called God, or is Worshipped; as is more fully represented in another place of this Discourse.
Now let any man Living speake: Are These Bishops, These Usurping Prelates to be suffered in a Church, or State, where there is any respect to Right, Church Government, or True State Policie? since it is Evident They are truly Papall, most properly Antichristian; and as Antichrist, must Oppose and Exalt themselves above all that is Worshipped, or Called God: Which is most True Popery, (as hath beene demonstrated) And as Popery, Destructive to all Church and State-Policie.
Doubtlesse some such Apprehensions as This, wrought in their Breasts, who being offered, have refused Bishopricks; and being possessed, could not rest till they had Dis-invested themselves againe.
Histories are full of forraine and Domesticke Examples of This subject. Such was Niceph. Bemnides chosen Patriarch of Constantinople. Weringbaldius chosen Bishop of Triers. Theophilus Bishop of Adiana. Aminonius cut off his Eare, (being Bishop) that so he might be uncapable of That Function. Eugenius (the Philosopher) left his Ministery rather than he would bee a Bishop. Bassiances an Elected Bishop, was by Memnon whipped before the Altar (three houres together) because he would not be made a Bishop. Adrian (with us) refused the Archbishopricke of Canterbury, being pressed thereunto. Two or Three Popes might come into this Catalogue; Clement the first was One: Et quis suit Alter? Shall I name Marcellus? He neither refused, nor resigned the Papacie; yet solemnely professed he saw not how Those that possessed such high places could bee saved.
O but had These piously considered what good they might have done in such high places, or duely remembred their Owne, or their friends, advancement, they could never have done This: But Ignoti nulla cupido, Men desire not what they are ignorant of.
For answer to This Objection, I shall give you some instances of Those that have resigned up their Bishopricks after they had held them long enough for a full Tryall. Yea perhaps there be more of This kinde than of the other, though the Proverbe be, Ægrius Ejicitur quam non admittitur Hospes, It is harder to throw out a man, than at first to keepe him out.
Of These were Vlbranius Bishop of Shetune, Arnulphus Bishop of Ments, Addo Bishop of Lions, Vicerbus Bishop of Ratisbone, Henger Bishop of Ments, Michael Bishop of Ephesus, with many more.
Amongst our Owne was Edmund Boniface, and Robert Kalwarby, (Both Arch-Bishops of Canterbury) Will. Beavose and William De Sancta Maria (Bishops of London.) One of Lincoln, and Two of Coventry. I may adde Miles Coverdale, who being deprived in Queene Maries dayes would not be re-invested in Queene Elizabeths, but taught a Schoole. There is One Pope Cornelius: And Gregory the Great, must not be forgotten; who said, He that affects the Primacie of the whole Church, must be Antichrist, or His Predecessor.
If some few Walloons, or men of Geneva, should declaime against Episcopacie, They would prevaile but little, because it would be said of Them, perhaps (as of That great disturber of the Church of old) Insaniunt, quia non sunt Episcopi, They rage, because themselves are not Bishops: But now Ex Ore Tuo judicaberis Your owne mouths shall condemne you. Bishops contend with Bishops: not with Words, but Deeds. I beseech you consider that Flesh and Blood is not wont to refuse, or part with such great Advantages: Sure we may conclude there is somewhat that stings within, Latet Anguis in Herba, There is a Snake under the greene Grasse. These Good men, doubtlesse, found a Sting, and they would not kicke against Prickes.
When Saint Paul (a Great Philosopher) bids us beware lest we be entangled with Philosophy: When Solomon (who had tasted all the dainty Cates Nature could provide or dresse) cries out, All is Vanity, All is Vanity: When Bishops themselves (who have fully enjoyed all the sweetnesse a Bishops Honour can afford) shall pause and cry, It is Enough, It is Enough, Non iterum bibam venenum, I will drinke poyson-no more, (as once Dioclesian, of his Empire) Sure there must be something worth reflecting on; a faire warning for our Present or Future Bishops.
O you Judges of the Earth, why will you not be wise? O you Senators (for such our Bishops are) why will you not learne Wisedome? God forbid that of You should be said (what the Spirit speaketh of some) Why should they be smitten, They rebell more and more? Why should they be reproved, They will still doe foolisbly?
Yet but for a little while; For I am consident yet, within few Yeares, if not Moneths, if not Dayes, the God of Peace and Truth will deliver his Church of This heavy yoke, from which (with the Letany Give me leave to conclude) Good Lord deliver us.
SECTION II.: Considereth how Consonant such Episcopacy is either to sound Antiquity or Scripture.
Chap. I.
Some Antiquities produced by a late most learned and Reverend Patron of Episcopacy, are discussed.
Having cleerely proved how uncompatible Our Episcopacy is to Civill Government in State Policy; let us now consider whether if may shelter it selfe under the Mysterious Covert of Antiquity.
I could heartily wish, that in matters which receive their being from Scripture, so immediately as Church Discipline doth, wee might make the Scripture (which is a sufficient rule) our sole guide, our sole moderator. But as Heretickes in the day of Judgement shall cry to the mountaines to cover them; so Heresies now also, fly to the craggy rockes of remotest times: and in such darke corners hope to shelter themselves.
Thither also we will follow them, quo fata trahunt, whither their destiny drives them, we will advance. Not doubting but to unkennell those little Foxes: hoping even with Goliah’s sword to lay Goliah in the dust, and bring the five uncircumcised Princes of the Canaanites, to their just censure, before the King or Captaines of the Israelites.
There is a most Reverend man, famous for learning, (especially for that learning which is not open to every eye) hath taken upon him the defense of this Cause: I shall therefore in few words present to Him my thoughts upon those His determinations; Concluding with Philip of Macedon, that if I can but win the chiefe City, the whole Countrey is gained: Then I shall see, whether Those things which are pressed by others, be not altogether ineffectuall to determine the point which they dispute. And so I shall leave the decision of This, to the judgement and opinion of the learned.
Before I consider that Treatise in the parts of it, give mee leave to say that which is most true, and I hope will satisfie all men. If every word of that his booke were true; yet it is little to the point: For the Question is nor, Whether there have been Bishops ever since Christs time; but, Whether these have had power over their brethren: or, Whether one Bishop hath had Jurisdiction over another. And this Question is double.
First, Whether they have had any superintendence one above another.
Secondly, Whether this hath beene mixt with that Lordlinesse which now is used; forcing obedience by the edge of the Sword, where the Keyes can give no entrance: And of this, in the whole booke there is not the least hint, ne gry quidens. Though this also were not enough for our Question; which is not only of their Lordly power in Ecclesiasticis, but also in Civilibus.
In the first Querie, we shall quickly joyne issue; agreeing with our Antagonists, that there have beene Bishops (viz. Ministers of the Gospel) who have had a Scripture power in matter of Government, over particular flocks: but the other wee doe absolutely and confidently deny.
First, he endeavoureth to prove the succession of seven and twenty Bishops, in the seat of Timothy and this he essayeth by one single (not to say simple) witnesse, a certaine man named Leontius; whose writings have not delivered him famous to us for learning, nor his exemplary holmesse (mentioned by others) famous for piety.
Truly, a man of greater authority than he, (as Papias, Ignatius, Polycarpus, who, almost all, knew the Apostles) shall not be of credit sufficient to sway my faith in this point: Not but that they were most worthy men; but because all Antiquity hath passed the refining pot of the Index expurgatorius, I shall consider well, before I subscribe. And shall I then give credit to an unknowne Author, in these things that were acted almost five hundred yeares before his birth? Let the world judge whether it be equall.
Neither is this Author quoted, from witnesse of his owne; but out of a Councell. Now how Councells have beene abused, those who have ever had place or note in great Assemblies, can too well tell: where there is almost no Order drawne up, but after a serious review, reducing the mistakes of the Clerkes, to the sense of those who did frame the Order, which might else come forth disorderly.
By what I have already said, That other testimony brought from a fatherlesse Treatise of Timothy’s Martyrdome, cited only by Photius, (a learned man, who lived seven or eight Centuries after Christ) will be of no weight: for Photius doth but say he read it. Hear-say in matter of judicature is no good testimony: and reports in matter of opinion, at the second hand, are good to amuse those who deifie venerable Antiquity; but will never edifie those who desire to bottome their resolutions upon sound Reason.
The testimonies of Felix, John of Antioch, and Theodore, are not of age sufficient to be registred among the Ancients, or to bee valued because they are old. I confesse, I set a greater value upon Ignatius and Irenæus, who affirme, Polycarpus was made Bishop of Smyrna, by St. John; but this must not be of undeniable authority.
For of Ignatius I shall affirme this, that All those who are any whit learned in Antiquity, know that five of his Epistles are spurious; and how unmingled those are which we allow to be his, we doe not know, who looke upon Antiquity at such a distance. But allow it to bee true, that Onesimus was Bishop of Ephesus, Polycarpus Bishop of Smyrna, & c. This may be true, but evinceth in no measure the Question in dispute; Which is not of a Bishop in generall, but such a Bishop.
The Authority of Tertullian also, is of the same credit: Hee tells us that Polycarpus was placed by Saint John at Smyrna; and at Rome Clement by Saint Peter. This no body will dispute (though I am not bound to beleeve it.) But where is the stresse of this Argument?
In the last place, that of Clement Alexandrinus is as much questioned as all the rest. But allow it to bee true, that John did appoint Bishops, they have gained nothing; for I shall allow that Christ also hath instituted Bishops, and that Bishops are Jure divino; yea, I will allow that they are to feed Christs flocke, to rule Christs inheritance, in Christs sense: but I shall never allow of these Bishops, which are now the subject of our dispute.
There are Three sorts of Bishops, as Beza saith: There are of Gods Institution, and they are those who have a power over their proper flock, with the rest of the Church; and no other. There are also of Mans Institution; and this ever overfloweth into the Neighbour Parish. And lastly, there is a Demonicall Bishop; and this is he who challengeth the Sword, as well as the Keyes.
This last may well be stiled Demonicall; for sure God never erected this order; nor Man in his right senses: Where it will then fixe, is cleere enough. Even on him, Whose darke Mysteries, most of these men have beene very well acquainted with.
The long Robe and the Sword doe not well agree. To see a Lawyer tyed to his Sword till he put off his Gowne, is not so comely; but to see a paire of Lawne sleeves to stifle a Scepter, if it were but on a stage, I would cry out, Spectatum admissi risum teneatis, Can you see it, and not burst out into laughter?
Chap. II.
Our Bishops Election, Delegation, &c. examined by Antiquity.
THus having run through that little Treatise, (yet with some wonder, that a person of his profession, piety, and knowne learning should doe that, which might in any sense seeme to impose on those whom hee loveth) I proceed to some other things, which I finde produced from Antiquity, by the greatest Patrons of that kinde of Episcopacy which we now oppose.
Yet by the way, I must note here also, That either none seeme to state the Question (betweene us) right; or else, all seeme to desert it.
Our Question (as I have often said) is not of the name of Bishop or his power in Ecclesiasticalls only; but also, and mainly of his Civill power, and Temporalls. Which all the Patrons of Episcopacy seeme to shun, as a dangerous Rock; and hovering aloofe off, goe about to prove by Antiquity, that Bishops had this Name, and some power even in the Primitive Church; which (though I thinke none can force me to beleeve, yet) I dispute not; But demand whether any Bishops had such power in Ecclesiasticis, & Civilibus, as ours now have in England.
Yet, because they insist so much on Antiquity, for Ecclesiasticall Episcopacy, I will be content to follow them there also; beleeving we shall finde no one foot-step (in true Antiquity) of such a Bishop as wee now have established in England, though we should strip him of all Civill power, and consider him only in Ecclesiasticis.
Shall I begin with his Election? which indeed is somewhat higher than they use (perhaps dare) to begin. I can produce many Antiquities to prove the Election of all Church Officers, was in the People; yea, and that for divers ages after the Apostles; who indeed at first appointed these themselves: and good reason why, when there were no People to choose their Officers, till converted by the Apostles; who afterward left This Power to the Whole Church, rightly constituted. And this continued in the Church for divers ages: as appeares by Constantines Epistle to the Church of Nice; Athanasius also ad Orthodoxos; And Saint Cyprians sixth Epistle; with many instances more, which might be, and daily are produced.
It is true, that after the Apostles, and purer times of the Church were gone, the Clergy began to lord it over the people, and to bereave them of their due priviledge; yea, oft times agreed among themselves to choose One Superintendent (as we may call him) whom they called Father, and Bishop; and in this perhaps they did not amisse, if this Bishops power rested only on the Clergy, and never reached to the people; who else sure by all reason should have had a vote in choosing any Officer, much more such a great Commander.
But let all the Patrons of Episcopacy produce me one sound Antiquity for such Election, as is now in use with us. Let them from undoubted Antiquity for three hundred yeares after Christ, (nay much more, for I easily see their evasion) let them, I say, shew me but one instance of our Conge d’eslire: It is the thing I speake of, not the Word.
Let them shew me (except in the darke times of Popery) power given to ten or twelve Men (except all the Clergy explicitely consented) to choose such a Bishop. And yet this is not halfe that which lies in our, Elections; which indeed are not at all made, by so much, as the Chapiter of any Cathedrall, but received only by those who dare not refuse it: but of this I spake before in the first Section.
I am Content to passe their Election, (which I perceive none of them care much to examine;) and come to the Execution of their Office. In which I might instance in two or three maine points; as sole Ordination, sole Jurisdiction, Delegation, &c.
I meet with none that take upon them to defend this last; which as a Great States-man observed many yeares since, was a thing at first view, most monstrous, and unreasonable. For, will any man living thinke it reasonable my Lord Keeper should, ad placitum, delegate whom hee will to keepe the Seale, and judge in Chancery, without consent of his Majesty and the State, that entrusteth him with this great Office? Yet These Men hold it fit to entrust a Vicar Generall, Chancellors, Officialls, Surrogates, (and yet under Officers) to keepe the Seale, yea, weild the Scepter of Christ, and all the Church, which yet they say is entrusted with them. But with whom have they left the sheepe in the Wildernesse? Were there nothing else but this, I cannot but hold our Episcopacy an intolerable Tyranny; seeing a Bishops Dog, (I am not much amisse) lording it over the People, Ministers, Gentry, Nobility, All: while his Master is perhaps Revelling, Dicing, or doing worse; for worse they doe.
Nor is this any way to be helped, while to one Lord Bishop is granted so vast a Territory; which yet hee commandeth as absolutely under that most significant terme of Diocesan, Primate, or Metropolitan, as any Temporall Prince can doe, by the name of Earle, Duke, King, Emperor, or any other.
I oft remember the dry Oxe-hide, that was brought to represent Alexanders great Dominions: But I see them so farre from standing on the middle, (to keep downe all) that indeed they oft touch it not at all; but are acting the Lord Temporall (I might say more) remote enough from their own Diocesse.
Which yet of it selfe is oft so large, that no one man living could sufficiently Visit and Over-see it, except he could get the Pope to Transubstantiate him also, and so get a Ubiquitarian Body. To supply which he is oft forced to puffe up his wide sleeves, and looke very big: And yet much, yea most of all his Office, must be done by Delegates; who are oft, yea usually the lowest dregs of basest men.
In good earnest, I would thanke any man, that can shew me one good Antiquity to countenance such Delegation of an entrusted Office, to Deputies, specially to such Deputies, as themselves doe not, cannot trust.
Doth any man dare, or can any man thinke it fit, to Delegate the Tuition or Education of a tender Prince, committed to his Charge or Care, by his Royall Father? I beseech you; Is not the flocke of Christ stiled by the Spirit of Christ, An Holy Priest-hood, a Royall People? Shall it then be fit, or lawfull for any man to transmit this trust to any whomsoever? especially to such a ctue of faithlesse Hirelings? God forbid.
Chap. III.
Of Ordination, whether proper onely to Bishops: or equally committed to all Presbyters: discussed by Ancient Authorities.
I Shall passe their Sole Jurisdiction also, being the Common Theme of all that write of this Question; specially when I finde some of themselves disclaime that Epithet of Sole: and if they can be content to leave this out, I have lesse to speake against them.
We come to Ordination; or to speake as they use, (though some of them love not to heare of it) Sole Ordination. This is the maine and Master-piece of all Episcopacy. All things else in the Church, they yeeld equally committed to Presbyters; onely Imposition of Hands, they say, is solely retained to the Bishop; so Downham, Bilson, and of late one of their owne, that offers to yeeld the Cause, for one example of Lawfull Ordination by Presbyters without a Bishop.
One example? what dare he say, France, Belgium, no parts of Germany hath Lawfull Ordination, though by sole Presbyters, without Bishops? Downham is somewhat more moderate, and yeelds such Orders Lawfull; but in case of Necessity, or at least some great Exigency: in which he hath the Charity to include the Reformed Churches abroad, though as he saith, They are of age, and might speake for themselves.
But they urge us to shew Antiquity allowing any such Ordination without a Bishop. It hath beene shewed, and yet never answerd (that I know) that some Councels have intimated enough; Presbyters were wont of old to Ordaine without Bishops.
As that of Ancyra, Can. 13. It shall not bee lawfull for Choriepiscopi, or Presbyters to Ordaine, without consent of the Bishop, [Editor: illegible character] [Editor: illegible character] έτἐρᾳ πα [Editor: illegible character] [Editor: illegible character] ιϰἰᾳ, In another Parish (for so the words are in Balsamon, though some of themselves translate the words very strangely.) Which cleerely intimates, That before this Canon, Presbyters and Choriepiscopi who had not still Ordination from three Bishops, though some had so,) did usually Ordain without the Bishops leave, (much more without his presence;) and that too in Other parishes besides their Own; Else it is strange the Councell should now forbid it, if It had never been done before. Nay, the Canon doth not now absolutely forbid it, (which is much to be marked) but onely commands, the Bishops leave should be asked to all such Ordinations. But if This Imposition of hands were a Sole property of Bishops, (as now some make it) the Bishop could not give leave, or depute others to do it. For, This, even among themselves is a received Axiome, Episcopus potest delegare ea quæ sunt Jurisdictionis, non ea que sunt Ordinis, A Bishop may delegate those things which concern Jurisdiction, but not those things which concern Order.
Hitherto also may be referred all those Canons that require Presbyters to Lay on their hands with the Bishop in Ordination: As Can. 3. Council. Carth. about the year 418. and that of Aken, 400. years after: Yea, and this was the practice of the Church in St Cyprians time, as appears by his 6. and 58. Epist. So Jerome in his Epistle to Rome; and St Ambrose among his Epistles Book 10. Yea, and This is our Law also; which requires Coadjutors to Bishops in Ordination: Consonant doubtlesse to the most Ancient practice of the Primitive Church, even in the A postles Times; as appears by that of Paul to Timothy, on whom were laid the Hands of the Presbytery; not of the Presbyterate, or one Presbyter, as learned Master Thorndick not onely yeelds, but proves; who yet is no enimy to Bishops.
Neither could I ever finde one good Antiquity against Ordination by Presbyters, or for Sole Ordination by Bishops. I finde indeed Collythus, and some others, Unpriested by Councels, because Ordained by Presbyters alone; but That Act of the Presbyters was done in faction, against the Bishop, and their fellow Brethren. Yea, and in most cases, if not in all, Those Orders (so annulled by Councels) were conferred by one Priest alone, and so were indeed as unlawfull, as if by one Bishop alone.
I might adde, that some Great men of good Note, have strongly maintained, all these Councels erred, which so Unpriested Those that had been Ordained by a Prebyter, or Presbyters, without a Bishop. Amongst These are some of Note in the Popish Church; It being a Common Instance among the School-men, disputing, Whether Orders once confer’d could be annul’d; and they all conclude the contrary. Yea, and many of these also strongly prove that Priests may as well Ordaine as Bishops; and their Reason seemes very good; for, say they, Seeing a Priest can Consecrate, and by Consecration Transubstantiate, (which is more,) Why can he not also Administer the Sacrament of Orders, which is lesse?
Yea, and some of them dare affirme, Neither Bishop nor Pope can licence Priests to give Ordination, except the Power of Ordination be de jure, in Presbyters: For they all yeeld the Pope himselfe cannot licence one that is not a Priest, to Consecrate the Hoste; because none but Priests have that Power of Consecration. And a Licence doth not confer Orders without Imposition of hands, as they all grant.
For my owne part, I ever thought that of Bucer most Rationall, Deus non simpliciter singularibus Personis, sed Ecclesiæ Ordinan di potestatem tradidit, God hath not committed the Power of Ordination to particular Persons, but to the Church. For so indeed it seemes the Worke of the whole Church, who are to Elect, to testifie also, and seale their Election by Laying on their hands: And the Presbytery are but the Churches servants in this Act. I could heartily wish it were reduced to this againe, which I fully conceive to be most agreeable to Right Reason, Scripture, and All Good (untainted) Antiquity. Yet till this be againe restored, I much desire the Prelates would leave off some of the Ceremonies, which I heare they use in it, (though not by Law I thinke,) lest they drive all good men from taking Orders.
Chap. IV.
Of the Name and Office of a Bishop in Scripture. How little or how much the Scripture makes for, or against Bishops: Divers Texts are discussed.
I Shall now passe from this kinde of Church Antiquity, and passe to the best Antiquity, the infallible Truth of God, in Holy Scripture. In it I shall shew there is little for, much against Bishops; whether we consider the Name or Office of a Bishop, as now it is setled.
The Name I finde but foure times in all the New Testament: In two of which, the Name is so indifferently used, that it maketh nothing towards an issue of this Question. Those are, 1 Tim. 3. verse 1, 2, 3. and 1 Pet. 2. 25. And what can be gained from hence, truely I see not.
In the other places it maketh against them, as I shall shew more at large by and by.
But the Word Elder; (a true Bishop) is used twenty severall times in the New Testament. And you shall finde the Apostles honouring this Name so much; that one of them stiles himselfe an Elder, but none calls himselfe a Bishop. Indeed Judas is so called. Who (as it were Prophetically) behaved himselfe so; that his Arch-Bishopricke was given to another. I doubt not but the Spirit fore-saw this Word would be quickly mounted high enough; so that it brands Judas first with this stile.
Of much more Majesty is the Word Presbyter, which signifies Senior. Under the Law Youth was bound to pay Tribute to Gray haires; and Senatus of old was so stiled, à Senioribus; Whereas Episcopus signifies nothing but an Over-seer: And such indeed Bishops have beene for many yeares.
Perhaps the Name of Bishop is sometimes (though rarely) used, that the wilfully blinde might stumble: But the Name Presbyter very frequent; that those who love Truth and Light, might still see such a Glympse that might Enlighten them in the midst of Egyptian darknesse: from which, I doubt not, but God will deliver all Christendome in due time.
I can finde as little also for the Office of a Bishop, as for his Name in Scripture, yea much lesse. I can finde our Saviour rebuking his Disciples, striving for precedency, saying, Hee that will be first shall be last. I can finde St. Peter saying, Lord it not over the flocke of Christ: And St. John branding Diotrephes with seeking the Preheminence.
But where shall we finde the usurped Office of our Bishops in all the Scripture? can they finde it (by a multiplying glasse) where ever they see the Name of Bishop, though but in a Postscript, of Saint Pauls Epistles, Whither I see many of them fly for their owne Name?
I must confesse I have found some Præscripts of Davids Psalmes (and other Texts) to bee now part of Scripture; but never yet found any Postscript of such Authority. I dare not therefore give it unto these;
Which, first, were never (that I could learne) received by the Church for Authentick Scripture; nor ever fully joyned to the Scripture, but by some distinctive note, till our Bishops times. Yea, some antient Copies have them not at all; as one very old Greeke Copy in Oxford Library, if I be not mis-informed.
Againe, these Postscripts have many Improbabilities, and some repugnancies, as many learned men observe.
As that of the first to Timothy; From Laodicea the chiefest City of Phrygia Pacatiana. Which sure was never so subscribed by Saint Paul, who would not have spoken of a First Epistle, when as yet there was no second, nor appearance of any. Againe, the Epithet Pacatiana came from Pacatianus a Roman Deputy, 300. yeares after Saint Paul wrote.
The Epistle to Titus is thus subscribed, (or rather superscribed,) To Titus, ordained the first Bishop of Creet; from Nicopolis of Macedonia: but it should have been added; Whither Saint Paul meant to come after the Epistle, but was not there at his writing; as appeares very probably from the third of the same Epistle, verse 12. But what meanes that Phrase, Bishop of the Church in Creet? was there but one Church in all Creet? This sounds not like the Scripture stile; which alwaies expresseth Nationall Congregations by Churches in the Plurall. But it may very well be, Titus was Bishop (or Pastor) but of one Church in Creet: so that we shall not need to contend about this.
Our Adversaries themselves yeeld, there cannot be much urged from these Subscriptions. Baronius, Serrarius; and the Rhemists, will ingenuously confesse so much; and Bishop Whitgift also against Mr. Cartwright.
The Postscripts failing; where will they shew either Name or Office of a Bishop as now it is used? I know their strong Fort, Tit. 1. 5. For this cause I left thee in Creet, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordaine Elders in every City, &c. Here they thinke the power of a Bishop is set forth at large.
But what if so? Wil they be content to be limited to this power? if so, we shall the sooner agree. I thinke no man ever thought, good Titus had a Commission here to draw the Civill Sword; or so much as to strike with his Church Keyes.
Let us a little examine this Commission; which seemes but a Briefe of a larger Patent which Saint Paul had given him before.
If we first examine the Date of this Commission; we shall finde it before any Church Government was setled; and so an Extraordinary Case, not fit, perhaps not lawfull, to be produced as a constant president.
Extraordinary Cases of Necessity, breake through the Ceremoniall, yea, Morall Law too. The Shew-Bread may refresh fainting David; Cain and Abel may marry their owne sisters to propagate the World; Samuel may be a Priest, though not of Aarons House, as was shewed before. And why then may not an Extraordinary way be taken in the first setling of Church Government, where there is yet none setled? Any man might now in the conversion of the Americans, or Chinois; give direction how to admit Members, elect Pastors, exercise the keyes, &c. This Titus did, and no more.
But secondly; in what manner his Commission was, I know not; and nothing can be proved from hence, til that be agreed upon. It is as probable he did it but instructive, exhortative, and not imperative, By way of instruction, and exhortation, not by way of command.
Timothy received his gift by imposition of Presbyteriall hands. If an extraordinary gift was conveyed in an ordinary way, Why might not an ordinary calling, and affaires of an ordinary nature, be managed by an extraordinary man, be carried forth in an extraordinary way? The contrary is not proved; and so this must till then, be Ineffectuall to them.
But thirdly, and lastly, I beseech you consider by what power he did it: by the power of an Evangelist. There are two sorts of them,
1. Who write.
2. Who proclaime the Gospell in an extraordinary way, as co-adjutors and messengers to the Apostles in this great worke.
Of this last sort certainely he was*. A Bishop he was not; for our adversaries doe all agree; that it is the duty of a Bishop curæ suæ incumbere, to watch over his charge: now this he did not, for if Creet was his Charge (which in no way; neither by Scripture nor Antiquity is proved) he did not attend it; for we finde him continually journeying up and downe; he leaveth Creet and commeth to Ephesus, from thence he is sent to Corinth; after that into Macedonia; from Macedonia he is returned to the Corinthians. Neither is to be found in History, that he ever returned to Creet. Thus, if I mistake not, the Text is lesse advantageous than the Postscript.
Some think to find Episcopacy established in that example of S. John, writing to the Angels of the seven Churches. But this is Argumentum longè petitum, a far fetcht argument.
Because Paul endorseth the Letter of a Corporation, or an Assembly, to the most eminent man in the Congregation; Therefore he shall have sole Jurisdiction; therefore the Mayor shall have sole power without the Aldermen; Est par ratio, The reason is the same.
When Paul writes to the Church of the Thessalonians (1 Thess. 5. v. 27.) commanding That Epistle to be read to all the holy Brethren; the Church of the Thessalonians should have Jurisdiction over other Churches: which truly I do not think to be a strong Argumentation.
Secondly, the Word is taken collectively for the Assembly and charge of Ministers, and not for One, as appeareth evidently Rev. 2. v. 24.) He saith, speaking to the Angel, To you, and to the rest in Thyatira: he puts the Angel in the plurall number, which he would not have done, had he written to a single Bishop.
Thirdly, these Epistles are written to the whole Church for the threats and promises are read to them, and the Epiphonema of every Epistle is this, He that hath an eare let him hear what is spoken to the Churches.
But yet if this superscription could give any advantage to the Angel, it would but extend to his own congregation.
The Laodicean Angel hath no influence upon the Philadelphian or the Smyrnite; & if that be not proved, nothing is gained in the point of Episcopacy, except it could be proved, that these Angels had in their care many congregations under these particular Churches: which never hath, nor ever will appear. I hope it is manifest to all men that they cannot establish Episcopacy by Scripture.
Secondly, there is much in Scripture against them; For the word Elder and Bishop is all one, Tit. 1. ver. 7. For this cause left I thee in Creet, that thou shouldst set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain Elders in every City, as I had appointed thee; for a Bishop must be blamelesse, as the Steward of God.
First, he sheweth Titus what manner of man an Elder must be, viz. Blamelesse; and now proveth it, because a Bishop must be blamelesse. As if I should write to Thomas to live soberly, because a Man must be sober; it necessarily followeth that Thomas is a man.
So that Phil. 1. he writes to the Bishops and Deacons at Philippi. Is it probable that a little Towne in Macedonia should have many Bishops, when one Bishop must have many Cities in his Diocesse? Those Who translated the Bible, foresaw This: And therefore Acts 20. They have translated the word Episcopus an Over-seer. Yet in other places they translate it Bishop. And the Jesuites say, Piæ fraudes sunt licitæ, Honest craft is lawfull.
The carriage of the Apostles, in severall places is remarkable: when they come to a City (as Act. 20.) They send for the Elders of the Church, never thinking of a Bishop, he is so inconsiderable a man. These places I hope make cleerly against them; So now I will endevour to shew what the Scripture holdeth forth for Church Government.
Chap. V.
What forme of Church Government seemes most consonant to Scripture. Whether Monarchicall, Aristocraticall, or Democraticall.
IN this search you will agree that the Government is fixed there, where you shall see setled the plenary and absolute power of Election of Officers, Decision of controversies, and Excommunication of those that transgresse.
This you will finde ministerially in the Officers, But initiativè, virtualiter, & conclusivè, originally, virtually, and conclusively, in the People.
The Officers are called Overseers, Rulers, and Elders, &c.
Some of these are to preach and administer the Sacraments, others to watch over mens manners, others to serve Tables, and look to the poor: All these are chosen by the People: but whensoever by their industry any delinquency is discovered, the whole matter is brought to the Church, and there the People and Elders do passe their definitive sentence.
Examine but where election of Officers, decision of controversies and excommunication of members are recorded, and you shall have them all in the Church; not representativè, but in the whole Church, consisting of Officers and other members.
As first for election, Act 1. 15. Peter speaks to the People, and telleth them they must chuse one in Judas his place, & ver. 23. It is said They appointed Two. It is true the lot divided which of them two should be the man, (a course in the like case not unlawfull to us at this day:) but the reducing of it to Two, was the act of the Church; though Peter was amongst them. So afterwards Timothy received his Evangelicall gift by the Imposition of Presbyteriall hands; which Presbyters were in this work, the servants of one present Congregation.
Secondly, Decision of Controversies, either in Cases of Conscience, or in point of manners. In cases of Conscience; when Paul and Barnabas had no small difference about Circumcision, they sent to Jerusalem where the Apostles, Elders, and Brethren meeting together, joyntly returned that answer which you finde Acts 15. 23, 24, 25.
Some would presse this place, this act of the Apostles further, and give to every Synod a Commanding Power; because it is said Act. 15. 28. It seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay no further burden upon you. Therefore they say a Synod hath a commanding and burdening Power.
But I cannot consent to that: for then the major part of the Churches in Europe, Africa, Presier Johns Country, might meet and command all the Churches of Christ (which God forbid, in what they pleased; and that jure divine: for God when, he giveth a rule to his Church, he speaketh to the whole Church of Christ, and not to any particular Congregation. I only presse it thus far, That the People were joyned even with the Apostles in that Great Synod.
The commanding power of the Synod lay in this, that the Apostles speak the mind of the Holy Ghost: But such authority is not left in us; and therefore no such Obligation upon others. Truly if there were such a power left us, I should with much scruple resist any act of such Government, whereof I could make a good construction; For many times the power Commanding is more dangerous than the thing Commanded: but there is no such power. Neither, as I said before, do I presse it with such a design.
In cases of Civill converse, Mat. 18. 17. We must make our addresses to the Church; and he that will not hear the Church must be as a Publican.
In that place the greatest dispute will be, What is meant by the Church? for some will say; Here is meant the Church representative; either in more, as the Presbytery, or in one, as the Bishop; and not the Church at large.
But I would labour to evince the contrary. Weigh either the Context, or the generall signification of the word Church, and I hope the true sense will be manifest.
For, Let us see how Church is taken in the Scripture: It is used sometimes figurativè; and sometimes properly. Figurativè, as when a particular house is called a Church; As, the Church in his house, Rom. 16. 5.
Secondly, When by Synecdoche the head is put for the whole; as Christ is called the Church, 1 Cor. 12. 12.
Thirdly, Collectivè, When all the Churches of Christ are called the Church, 1 Cor. 10. 32. It is used perhaps under some other figures, but it will be long to quote them all.
Secondly, It is used Properly in two phrases;
First, When the Congregation is called the Church; as the Church at Ephesus, Corinth, &c. Secondly, When the Congregations are called Churches; as the Churches of Galatia, and of Judæa. Thus it is used Properly, Thus Figuratively; but no where representatively [Editor: illegible word], the Ministers, the Presbyters, or the Bishops; or all these, for the Church. You shall find these and the Church contradistinct; as, To the Saints, the Bishops, and the Deacòns, 1 Phil. 1. 1. To the Church, and the Elders, Act. 15. 4.
I conceive we are bound to take a word in that sense which is currant in Scripture; except that sense cleerly crosse the scope and drift of the text.
You shall meet with that word 48. times in the New Testament, and no where signifying that which we call the Representative Church: Very often for the Saints themselves: As, 1 Cor. 1. vers. 15. 2 Cor. 1. vers. 1. 1 Thes. 1. vers. 1 Why should we not then take it in the same sense? Are not we then bound to expound the word Church in some of those significations which are frequent in Scripture; and not in that sense, which is so far from being found in the Text, that a Contradistinct phrase is, as I said before, rather used?
Againe, from the text, and context, That will appeare to be the meaning of the Spirit, and no other: The text is, Mat. 18. ver. 17. If he shall neglect to heare them, tell the Church; but if he neglect to heare the Church, let him be to thee as a heathen man, and a Publican. The context is in the 15. and 16. verses. If thy brother shall trespasse against thee, goe and tell him his fault betweene thee and him alone: If he shall heare thee, then hast thou gained thy brother; but if he will not heare thee, then take with thee one or two more; that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.
In the context and the text there are three things to be examined, before the true sense can be found out: First, Who are meant in that Gradation, in the 15, 16, 17. ver. Secondly, Who is meant by Thee. v. 17. Let him be to thee. Thirdly, what is meant by Publicans and sinners.
First, Who is meant in that Gradation. In the first place is meant the Party; in the second part of the Gradation, where it is said, Take with thee one or two more; is meant the Elders, or the Bishops, the Officers of the Church.
If you say, they are not there understood: yet I am confident you wil not, I am sure you cannot, say they are there excluded. If then the Spirit pointed at them, with the other members of the Church, or them solely; it would be an unnecessary thing, to bring him afterwards to them againe, as to the Representative Church.
Secondly, by Thee (v. 17.) is not meant only the Party, but every Christian, every Church member, to whomsoever the newes of such a miscarriage shal come: else this wil be a means to nourish particular parties tidings, (which the Scripture doth exceedingly shun) If by Gods Law he should be a Publican to one of the Church and not to another: If he be so to every member of the Church, this will be a hard Case, that if a Bishop, or an Elder, one, two, or more, shall passe the bitter sentence of Excommunication, hee must bee so to mee also, though I know nothing of it.
But some will say, that must be done before the Church. To which I answer, The word saith no such matter. And thus those who mis-expound the Scripture, must eck out the Scripture, to make good their own imagination.
But secondly, why should it bee complained of before the Church, if the deciding power be in Officers? Frustra fit per plura, quod fieri potest per pauciora, It is in vaine to have that done by many which may be done by a few.
But thirdly and lastly, if you will have the whole Church heare; it seemeth to me against all reason in the world, that the party deputed should have power, the party deputing being present. The Steward of a Court Leet, or Court Baron, is annihilated, if the Lord be there. All Officers vaile bonnet, when the party giving them power is present.
Why are Parliaments the representative body of the Kingdome, but because the Plough cannot stand? but because no place can containe the whole body? But if all the people could meet in Campo Martϊo, should those who now are but servants then be more than servants? surely the whole Church being present, foure or five by Gods Law shall not rule all, seeing Gods Law never appoints any standing Laws against the rules of nature.
In the third place we must enquire after the sense of Heathen and Publican: sc. the most odious of men. Is it possible that any Christian shall be to any Christian the most odious of men, for the sentence of a Judge which he never heard, neither hath right to heare?
Thus if you will be bound either by text or context, or the common acceptation of the word in the Scripture; by Church must be understood the whole congregation.
Againe, for excommunication of members, 1 Cor. 5. 13. S. Paul commandeth them, (sc. the whole Church) to put away that wicked person, and to deliver up such a one to Satan. 2 Cor. 2. They restore him, they forgive him.
Thus we see every where, that in election of Officers, in decision of controversies, in cases of conscience, in Excommunication, the whole Church disposeth every thing, not the Bishops, not the Presbyters alone.
I doe not observe the Church hath power in other things, but in these, and in all these, in election of Officers, in decision of controversies, and excommunication of delinquents, the whole power is in the Church.
I conceive then I have cleerely and briefly proved these three things:
1 That there is little in Scripture for Episcopacy; much lesse for such an Episcopacy as Ours.
2 Something against them.
3 Another Government cleerly delineated.
Chap. VI.
Of the consequents that may possibly follow the change of Church Government. Of the great danger of Schismes, Sects and Heresies. Of One new Sect to come in the last dayes. Whether Bishops can keepe the Church from Schismes, Sects, &c. What is, or who are the Cause of most Schismes amongst us.
IT being (as I conceive it is) cleered both from State-policy; Antiquity and Scripture, how incompatible Civill Government and such Episcopacy are, I hope we shall never hereafter be choaked with that Proverbe, No Bishop, no King. I doe most willingly pay very great reverence to a saying deliverd to us by many successions, from the wisedome of our fore-fathers; But I shall ever crave leave to question that Maxime which may justly seeme to me the birth either of Ignorance, or Ends. Antiquity must have no more authority than what it can maintaine, by reason frequent impostures of this nature command us to be circumspect; did not our Predecessors hold the Torrid Zone inhabitabilem a stu, too hot to live in? till Noahs Dove, Columbus discovered Land, the World was confined in the Arke of Europe, Africa, and Asia.
In Divinity, where an error is of most dangerous consequence, we have beene too credulous: how many hundred yeares did our fore-fathers swallow this pleasant bait, We must believe as the Church believeth? And, since the light of Reformation, Was not particular assurance of our Salvation delivered us, as an exact definition of our faith?
Wee have ventured our bodies as well as our soules upon these sands; for in the Art of Phisicke (though our Parents at a very great remotenesse were wiser) it hath passed for a currant position that Phlebotomy almost in any case was more than dangerous. And that men might pay dear for their learning, they have been as wise in Tenets of State-Policy.
Have not too many great ones closed in with Nero’s conclusion, me oderint dum metuant, Let them hate me so they fear me?
Lastly, Episcopacy hath been the basis, the superstructure, the All, the soul of Church Discipline for these many ages: but dabit his meliora Deus, God will deal better with us.
Some of these Tenets spring from invincible Ignorance; others have been the base pullulations of spirits enslaved to false ends: This, No Bishop no King (as I have fully proved) partakes of both; and therefore hath no weight with me, nor I hope shall ever hereafter be of credit with any body else; for we see that old received truthes are not alwayes to be entertained: and so I leave them with their maxime to the sentence of every judicious Reader.
There yet remaineth an objction or two, which must necessarily receive an answer, before I shut up this discourse. Obj. Allow there are some inconveniences, (yea great ones) in Episcopacie; yet ex malis minimum, of evils we must take the least it is better to bear these than groan under worse. If Episcopacy be taken away, Schismes and Heresies will break in as armed men; Tyranny is more eligible then Anarchy; the wofull sense of Anarchy begot that sad Proverb, It is as it was with Israel, when there was no King.
Ans. I do agree to this, that a confusion is a most lamentable condition; and that those times are very perillous, when every mans hand is up against his brother; Ephraim against Manasses, and Manasses against Ephraim: Yea, I do professe the distraction of Heresies, the most miserable of all. Civill conquassations disjoint the outward estate; but Heresies distract our souls, dismember our Churches, stave off Jew and Gentile, who know not whether part to beleeve, shake the weaker, cause heart-burning amongst the stronger, do exceedingly provoke God to wrath and displeasure. But first let us consider whether it be possible to be without Heresies and Schisms. Secondly, whether Episcopacy be not the efficient cause of the most grievous Schisms, and Heresies. Thirdly, whether Those which may justly be feared upon the removall of Episcopacy, be of such dangerous consequence, as to weigh down the keeping up of that Government, rather than to hazzard what inconveniences may there-hence follow.
And first to the first of these.
It will be cleer both from experience, and Scripture, and reason, that Heresies must come. Look over all Nations, and all times, and you shall finde them distracted with difference of opinions: How many severall Sects do you hear of amongst the Jews, and some of them extreme grosse? the Sadduces, the Pharisees, the Esseans, Herodians, with many more; though a great Critick reduce them to Three. Christ had no sooner committed the care of his Church to the Apostles, Disciples, and ordinary Ministers, but they were over-run with heresies: Yea, in their time, some were of Paul, some of Apollo, some of Cephas; in the interim Christ quite laid aside. In the Church of Pergamus, were there not some that held the Doctrine of the Nicolaitans? In Thyatira did not some of the Church listen to the Prophetesse Jezebel, who taught them to commit fornication, and to eat things offered unto Idols? Barnabas and Paul were at some difference: the doctrine of works was pressed upon the Galatians, and the resurrection from the dead questioned by the Corinthians.
Amongst Heathens (where Morality was their God) had you not the Peripateticks, the Scepticks, the Platonists, the Epicureans, and many other Sects? The Pope and Papacy have been much turmoyled with Schisms; and these Schisms have produced great confusions amongst them.
In the yeer of the Lord 420. Boniface the eighth being chosen, the Clergy chose Eulatius, and there they decreed one another Hereticks; Simmachus and Laurentius caused the same distraction in the yeer 499. 760. Pope Custantine being convinced of Schisms and bereft of both his eyes, he and Philip (another Pope) were deposed, and Stephen elected in their places. Thus it was 958. 973. 965. 1047. 1058. 1062. 1083. 1100. 1118. 1124. in the yeer of the Lord 1130. the disputes betwixt Gregory and Peter (both chosen Popes) were so famous that it was grown a Proverb and recorded in this verse.
Petrus habet Romans, totam Gregorius orbem, Peter possessed Rome, and Gregory the rest of the world.
Every twenty years had such changes as these, even till of late, that Church hath been vehemently turmoyled with all their learned. Amongst the School-men, some are Scotists, some Thomists: among the Polemiques, some Jesuites, some Dominicans. And all these wrangle each with other.
In the yeer of our Lord 1400. there was a great dispute about the Originall sinne of the Virgin Mary. Between 1215. and 1294. was that great Faction between the Guelfians and Gibelines (though both were Papists) One desending the authority of the Pope, the other of the Emperour. In some points of Controversie, Bellarmine (one of their ablest Writers) is not to be read without restriction, and not without licence of Superiors.
If we survey all Antiquity, we shall finde no one Century free from Hereticks. Ebion, Cerinthus, Marcion, Samusatenus, Novatians, Sabellians, Nepotians, Maniches, Arrians, Pelagians, with many others, have troubled the Church from time to time.
If you descend so low as our dayes, even among Protestants you shall meet with too too many Divisions. Luther and Calvin; and the English Church between both; a Calvinist for Doctrine, a Lutheran for Discipline. The Lutherans are divided in Rigidiores, & Molliores, the More rigid, and the More Moderate; and these differ toto Cœlo, as far as heaven and earth. The Calvinists have many disputes: How fiercely doth learned Erastus contend with Calvin and Beza, about Excommunication, denying the Church any such power?
The Church of England hath three maine Divisions: The Conformist, the Non-Conformist, and the Separatist. The Conformist hath the Orthodox Divine, contending with the Arminsan, Socinian, Pelagian, Anabaptist, and divers others; who yet All stile themselves Sonnes of the Church of England. The Non-conformist is uncertaine what he scrupleth; for some can dispence with one of the three Grand Nocent-innocent Ceremonies; some with another; some with neither. The Separatist is subdivided too (as they say) into Separatist, and Semi-separatist. Many other Divisions there also be, and will be, in Churches here.
Yea, it is clear in Reason, that Divisions, Sects, Schisms, and Heresies, must come; For, many are apt to advance themselves and undervalue all others: and Mens Brains being fertile of errors, after they have conceived they must bring forth; though the Gospel suffer never so much by it. And while This Temper is among men, you must still expect Schismes and Heresies.
The Scripture hath put this out of all doubt, it saith, Heresies must come. Christ came to set a Sword, not only betweene the Good and Bad, but even among Professors of the same Christian Religion; that Those who hold out to the End may have their Honour and Reward. It is to be marked that Christ doth not presse his people to seeke their freedome, till Rome be falling, and then he saith, Come out of her my People.
Yea, the Scripture foretelleth of one Heresie that is not yet (perhaps) come; it may be it is now in the Birth, sure it is not farre off: It is mentioned in the second of Timothy, the third Chapter, and some of the first verses.
- 1 This know also, that in the last days perillous times shall come.
- 2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankefull, unholy.
- 3 Without naturall affection, truce-breakers, false-accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good.
- 4 Traitors, heady, high minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God.
- 5 Having a form of Godlinesse, but denying the power thereof: from such turne away.
Expositors all agree This misery to be in the Waine: But in their agreement they differ very much; for some conceive the Papist is here understood; others apply it to the late Troublers of Israel, the Arminian, Socinian, and the worst sort of Episcopall men; that under the Notion of indifferent Ceremonies would have brought us to swallow down all Popery.
But under favour, I doubt neither of These, reach the full meaning of the Text. It cannot be the Papist, because it is not to rise till the Last Dayes. Indeed Popery is cleerely expressed in the 1 of Tim. the fourth, verse the 1, 2, 3. (as that most Learned and Reverend man Mr. Mead hath fully cleered in his most excellent piece on that Text) yet there it is said to rise in the Later Times (viz. of the Roman Empire;) but here these new Hereticks come not out till the Last (not only Later) Dayes, not only Times, but Dayes of those Times.
Againe, it seemes not to be the Arminian (or any of that Rable I mentioned but now.) For first, the Character of their Times is Perillous, as if it would intimate men indeed should be in danger, but yet escape, the Times being only perillous: But while Popery bore all before it, forced the whole Church into the Wildernesse, cloathed the Witnesses with Sackcloth, and at last prevailes to kill them: sure these Times are more than perillous. But perhaps there is no pressing force in This.
In the second place let us consider the Character of the Persons. First, they are expressed as Breakers of the Lawes of Civill Converse; and then as Hypocrites in Religion: the first of these beginneth at the second, and continueth to the fifth verse: The second is in the fifth and sixth verses. Let us view some passages in both.
Lovers of themselves, Covetous, Proud, &c. And have not men been such ever since Adam? Why then doth the Spirit speak of This, as a strange thing in the Last Dayes? Mr. Calvin saw this Objection, and therefore oft affirmes (That the Scripture may not seeme to speak Frigidè, unaptly. Here must be some new strange Crew of Men that act all These in a most eminent manner, even to the eye of all men.
But some will say, Are not the Papists so? Is not the corrupter part of Prelates such? Are not the Arminians of this temper? Certainely they are such, and in an eminent manner: and yet to me they seeme not the men the Spirit pointeth at in this place.
The maine Thing in which those men (here exprest) pride themselves, is not Learning, or Parts; But (if I be not much mistaken) somewhat beyond and within all these: That, I suppose, which seemes to them to be the Spirit. This, I conceive, is the Basis of all their vanity, pride, and insolence. They have the Spirit, and so know more than all the Learned, Pious, Godly Men in the world. They have the Spirit, they cannot sinne, they cannot erre; they will not pray, but when that Spirit moves. Adultery is but an act of the Flesh, but they are all Spirit, and no Flesh. What should these men doe with Naturall affections, they are all Spirit? in this case if they bee Traytors, High-minded, Heady, &c. Who will wonder? What may they not bee carried up to, by the imagination of the Spirit? But let them take heed, if they have any thing of God in them; let them be wise in this their day, for the time may come when it will bee too late. In the meane time I will say as Peter did to Simon, Pray (that if it be possible) this wickednesse of heart may bee forgiven.
If we look on the other part of their Character, Having a forme of Godlinesse, but denying the Power thereof, Creeping into the houses of silly women, Laden with divers Lusts, &c.
How can these be spoken of Arminians, Socinians, or our Prelates? It were to bee wished that most of These had so much as a Forme of Godlinesse. Sure the World is now growne too wise to take Duckings, and Cringings, Crossing, and Crouching, with all of this kinde, to be so much as a Forme of Godlinesse.
Doe These creep into Womens houses? the Socinians, and Arminians attempt no such pranks, that I know of. And the Patrons of Episcopacy use not much perswasion, but Club law: All else is in Corners.
It seemes very probable to me, that the Holy Ghost in This text points out some such, as the Family of Love, the Antinomians, and Grindletonians are, if (at least) they are not much belyed. And to these, I think, every piece of This Character will most properly belong. Yea, and the Close of it also, or the Issue of That Sect. They shall proceed no farther, for their folly shall bee made manifest to all men, which can hardly bee understood either of Arminianisme, or Prelacy, since That in severall names, This in severall dresses, hath been in the world above 1000. years.
Thus you see Sects, Schismes, and Heresies will stil come, and must come: And therefore if by keeping such Bishops we think to keep out all Divisions, we are much deceived. Which yet I speak not to take away watchfulnesse in Church. Governours, (who are still bound to suppresse Divisions as much as they can) but to convince men of This (if I can) that Episcopacy is never like to prevent Schismes: which I hope to cleere more fully in my subsequent discourse.
I could never conceive more than Two wayes, that in probability may bee like to quiet us in respect of Divisions. One of These we have no minde to try, and the other we may not if we would.
The Spaniard indeed by his cruell Inquisition, hath inclined his Subjects to a kinde of Vnity; but an Unity of Darknesse and Ignorance: so that the Remedy proves worse than the Disease. Neither will, or can Tyranny either Civill, or Ecclesiastick, bring forth better fruit.
The other Way is That of the Vnited Provinces (in the Low Countreyes) who let every Church please her selfe in her owne way, so long as she leaveth the State to her selfe. And how Religion doth flourish There, is known to most men. I will not dispute This now; only I wish heartily, men would remember, that even Nature her selfe as much abhors a forced violènt Vnion, as a Rent or Division.
But in the next place, let us seriously consider, whether the Bishops (as now they bee setled here) be not the Cause of most Sects, Schismes, and Heresies now amongst us.
Some of them will not deny themselves to be Arminians; and others cannot deny themselves Socinians. If at least they think we can understand their writings, printings, yea and Sermons, though These be very Rare.
Yea some doe not deny, but they may (at least) receive Orders from Rome; they meane a Pale, Mitre, and Cardinalls Hat, if they come All which we may yet better construe by their carriage to Priests and Jesuites, both in publique and private, which now we know more than by bare surmise. Many of these they countenance openly, and never question any, though it bee certainely knowne: wee had (they had) more such in London, than were good Ministers in all England almost.
All the Livings under most of our Bishops have been committed to the cure and care of superstitious Formalists, Arminians, Socinians, Papists, or Atheists. Yea, the Universities are much corrupted by their malignant influence; for Nero-like they think they have done nothing, till they have murdered their owne Mother. In a word, through the whole Kingdome, Preaching, Praying, Expounding, and the like exercises, both in publick & private, are severely suppressed, and in many places altogether forbidden (except such and such, more pernicious than profitable;) and al this by the Fathers of our Church, the Lords our Bishops. And is not this the most compendious way possible to beget and encrease Heresies?
They cry out of Schisme, Schisme, Sects and Schismes; and well they may: They make them, and it is strange they should not know them. When they laid such stumbling blocks (Reall Scandals, not only accepta, but data, not taken, but given,) in the way of good men, whose Consciences they have grievously burdened, and wounded with things (violently pressed on the greatest fines) that are so far from being indifferent, that many of them were point blank unlawfull: have they not by this even forced their brethren to separate themselves in Judgement and Practice, till they could finde some remote place that might separate their bodies also? Was not this in them the readiest way to produce Divisions, Separations, and (as they call it) Schismes in the Church? Rents are bad, I confesse, whereever they be violent; but yet then worst, when most out of the eye. Schismes in the Conscience are of greatest danger; and to prevent these, if I am forct to that, which they please to call a Schisme in the Church, Woe to him that so forceth me. Scandals, Schismes, and Divisions must come; but woe to him by whom they come. God forgive them in this particular.
I professe I take no pleasure in ripping up their foule, loathsome sores; I would they could bee throughly healed without launcing and opening I could give you a strange account of sad Divisions, which themselves have caused both to Church and State: I could tire you and my selfe in this, though I should begin but little higher than mine own time, mine own Knowledge.
In Queene Elizabeths time, many good men were cut off from the Church, some from the State; a sad Schisme! Some by violence laid asleep; Many suspended, silenced, deprived, cut off (by a strange Schisme,) from liberty, livings, (that I goe not higher;) And all this for one word, of their owne compounding, Non-Conformity: While they themselves are indeed the greatest Non-Conformists to all the Reformed Churches in Europe.
Surely, it would have savoured more of Humility, of Christianity, if they had suspected their owne Judgements and Opinions; allowing something to the Judgement, Learning, and Piety of those holy, worthy, pretious Saints, Calvin, Beza, Bucer, [Editor: illegible character] Martyr, Oecolampadius, Zuinglius, with many more, great, famous, and eminent Lights, in their times.
If they will stand for Conformity; Let any man living judge, whether it be fitter for some few Bishops, newly come out of grosse Popery, (and still retaining their old Popish Ceremonies,) to reforme, and conforme themselves to the Judgement and Practice of all Reformed Churches; or all Churches to subscribe to them.
As they began, so they continued: Christ and they being like parallell lines, though they should run out in infinitum, they would never meet: Nay rather, like the Crura of a Triangle, the farther they run (out from the Center) the more they differ, and are distant each from other.
Under King James, in a few yeares, foure or five hundred Reverend men were divided from their Livings, and Ministery: And was not this a cruell Schisme? Now also by Them was first forged that sharpe Rasor, (or, Book of Sports) with which they have since made great Divisions of heart.
But in our Gracious Kings Reigne, they have come to Cutting off Eares, Cheeks; and have yet struck deeper, and essay’d many Soule-Schismes; not only in the Hearts and Consciences of thousands of good men; but whole States also and Kingdomes, as much as in them lay.
While I heare the sad groanes, and see the bleeding wounds of Three Kingdomes at once, by their Schismes; I have almost forgotten the parting sighs, and farewell teares of ten thousand poore Christians, by Their Tyranny forc’d to abandon their native Country, and dearest acquaintance; while others were here violently detained in Fetters, some smoothered in Dungeons, some Dismembred, some driven out of house and Living, and forced to beg: All which yet would have bin born patiently, had not only all good men, but Goodnes it selfe, Learning, Religion, Piety, all that speaks any worth, bin altogether, not only discountenanced, but suppressed, smoothered, and by most exquisite Tortures almost forced to breath its last.
Yet that these Glorious Princes (under whom such Tyrannies have beene committed) may not suffer in your thoughts, Give me leave to speake some things on mine owne knowledge and experience, others from best intelligence. Queene Elizabeth, when she heard of Their miscarriages, fell on Them in most sharpe language, threatning Them, if they should ever doe the like againe to her Subjects.
King James offered faire discourse to the Non-Conformists; honoured Mr. Cartwright and others of them; disclaimed the Book of Sports: And being asked, why he made so many Bad Bishops, answered ingenuously, with a strong asseveration, That hee was very sorry, but could not helpe it; For, no good men would take the Office on them. And our Gracious Soveraigne (since some light dawned out of darknesse,) hath delivered our Sister Church of Scotland from that unhappy Generation.
For, now I hope the Clouds begin to breake away: Light springeth up, while Dark Iniquity is forced not only to shut her mouth, but hide her selfe and disappeare. Now the Sun againe mounteth up in our Horizon, and quickeneth the drooping spirits; so that many that were Bed-rid some moneths since, now begin to take up their Beds and walke, leaping up and blessing God.
Fire and Water may be restrained, but Light cannot; it will in at every cranny, and the more it is opposed, it shines the brighter: so that now to stint it, is to resist an enlightned, enflamed Multitude; which still was, and still will be Durissima Provincia, an hard taske.
Their mad outrage in all the three Kingdomes, of late, hath so incensed the common People, that in all mens eyes they are become most vile: and while all men reflect on their constant trade of mischeivous practices, the wisest begin to conclude, The very Calling hutts the Men, as much as these disgrace the Calling.
Thus we have by too too long, great, and sad experience, found it true, That our Prelates have been so far from preventing Divisions: that they have been the Parents and Patrons of most Errors, Heresies, Sects and Schismes, that now disturbe this Church and State.
Chap. VII.
The danger of Schismes and Sects more fully discussed: the Nature and Danger of Anabaptisme, Separatisme, and Unlicensed Preaching. The conclusion with an affectionate desire of Peace and Union.
But it may be, the Remedy will be worse than this Disease. Let us therefore, yet more exactly weigh all the Inconveniences that may attend the Change of this Church-Government, which we now dispute.
The Dangers which some have fancied may hence accrew to the State, have beene discussed in the former Section, to which more properly they doe belong. We have here only to consider such Evills as may have had influence into the Church, and Polity thereof.
Arminianisme, Socinianisme, Superstition, Idolatry, Popery, will pack away with them; being their Attendants, as was shewed before. What is there then to be feared? Anabaptisme, Brownisme, Separatisme; nay every body, every Lay-man will turne Preacher.
Suppose all this bee true, (which can bee but supposed;) Would it not be much better to hazzard the comming in of all these, than still to suffer our souls and bodies to be grownd to powder by these Tyrannicall, Antichristian Prelates, that under pretence of keeping out Separatism, introduce down right Popery, and a sink of almost all Errors and Heresies? Yea, and these Errors of the Right Hand (which these pretend so much to oppose) owe their birth to our Bishops also; as was but now, and might yet more fully be cleered. We all know, that within these ten years, all the Non-conformists in England, could not amount to more then one or two hundred: And now how many thousands there be, (yea of such that rise one pin higher then Old Non-conformity,) Themselves, perhaps, know much better then I: Yet our Bishops never were more active then in all this time. Whence then ariseth this New Non-conformity, or Separatisme, but out of our Bishops commotions? I will not say as the Fathers did of old, Exmartyrum sanguine pullulat Ecclesia, the Church doth spring out of the blood of the Martyrs: yet I must confesse, I begin to think there may be perhaps somewhat more of God in these (which they call new Schisms) then appears at first glympse.
I will not, I cannot, take on me to defend That, men usually call Anabaptism: Yet I conceive that Sect is Twofold: Some of them hold Free-will; Community of all things; deny Magistracy; and refuse to Baptize their Children. These truly are such Hereticks (or Atheists,) that I question whether any Divine should honour them so much as to dispute with them; much rather sure should Alexanders sword determine here, as of old at the Gordian knot, where it acquired this Motto, Que solvere non possum, dissecabo, What I cannot unty, I will cut asunder.
There is another sort of them, who only deny Baptisme to their Children, till they come to yeares of discretion, and then they baptize them; but in other things they agree with the Church of England.
Truly, These men are much to be pitied; And I could heartily wish, That before they be stigmatiz’d with that opprobrious brand of Schismatick, the Truth might be cleered to them. For I conceive, to Those that hold we may goe no farther than Scripture, for Doctrine or Discipline, it may be very easie to erre in this Point now in hand; since the Scripture seems not to have cleerly determined This particular.
The Analogy which Baptisme now hath with Circumcision in the old Law, is a fine Rhetoricall Argument, to illustrate a Point well proved before; but I somewhat doubt, whether it be proof enough, for that which some would prove by it: since (beside the vast difference in the Ordinances,) the persons to be Circumcised are stated by a positive Law, so expresse, that it leaves no place for scruple: but it is far otherwise in Baptism; Where all the designation of Persons fit to be partakers, for ought I know, is only, Such as beleeve. For this is the qualification that, with exactest search, I find the Scripture requires in persons to be baptized: And This it seems to require in All such persons. Now, how Infants can be properly said to beleeve, I am not yet fully resolved.
Yet many things prevaile very much with me in this point.
First, For ought I could ever learne, It was the constant custome of the purest and most Primitive Church, to baptize Infants of beleeving Parents; For I could never find the beginning and first Rise of this practice: Whereas it is very easie to track Heresies to their first Rising up, and letting foot in the Church.
Again, I find all Churches (even the most strict) have generally been of this judgment and practice: yea though there have been in all ages some, that much affected novelty, and had parts enough to discusse and cleer what they thought good to preach; yet was this scarce ever questioned by men of Note, till within these Last Ages. And sure, the constant judgment of the Churches of Christ, is much to be honoured, and heard in all things that contradict not Scripture.
Nor can I well cleer that of S. Paul (1 Cor. 7. 14.) Else were your Children Uncleane, but now are they Holy. I know some interpret it thus, If it be unlawfull for a beleever to live in wedlock with one that beleeveth not; Then have many of you lived a long time in unlawfull marriage; and so your very Children must be Illegitimate, and These also must be cast off (as Base-born:), But it is not so; for, Your Children are Holy; that is, Legitimate.
I confesse, This seems a very fair Interpretation; yet I much question, Whether This be all the Apostle means by that phrase Holy; especially when I reflect on the preceding words, The Unbeleever is Sanctified by the Beleever. Nor yet can I beleeve any Inherent Holinesse is here meant; but rather That Relative Church-Holinesse, which makes a man capable of admission to Holy Ordinances, and so to Baptisme yea and to the Lords Supper also, for ought I see; except perhaps Infants be excluded from This Sacrament, by that text, Let him that eateth, Examine himself, and so let him eat. As Women are excluded from Church-government & Preaching in Congregations, by That of the same Apostle, I permit not a Woman to speak; Let Women keep silence.
The second thing we feare so much, is Separation, or as some tearm it Brownisme; for I am not so well studied in these, as to give an exact difference betweene them, or properly to state or phrase either. Yet I think This also hath Latitude, and admits of difference. Before you passe any severe censure, be pleased to Hear these Poor men (you call Separatists;) Know their Tenets, and then Judge.
Their main Tenets (for ought I could ever learn) are about some few Points in Discipline, in which sure there is lesse danger, than in Doctrine, of which they dispute not.
First, they would admit none as members of their Assemblies, generally to partake with them in all the Ordinances, but such which seem Beleeving Saints, and so members of Christs true Church.
Secondly, they conceive every severall congregation (rightly constituted) hath within it self the power of the keyes, committed to it, without dependence on other Churches: Yet not denying the lawfull association of severall Churches, nor refusing the advice and counsell of Councels and Synods.
I shall crave leave to scan the first, & see how much it differeth in truth, from the received tenets of the Church of England.
I do conceive that England, Scotland, France, all Churches, even Rome it self will agree in this, that a Church is Cœtus Fidelium, A Company of Beleevers, Gathered together in the Name and power of Christ, to wait on him, in the way of his Ordinances revealed in his Word. In this I suppose we all agree; where then is that Chasma, that great Gulf of difference, which brands so many with the black spot of Separation?
All the difficulty lies in Stating who are beleeving Faithfull Saints, for of these onely all agree, a true Church consists. I beseech you let us call him a Beleever, and a Saint, whom the Scripture calls so, and we shall soon agree.
The Pope faith, he is a faithfull Saint, and a true Member of the Church; Who beleeveth as the Church beleeveth.
The Church of England saith, he is a Beleever (enough to make a Member of that Church,) that professeth the truth, though in his life he deny it.
Those men say he is a faithful Saint who professeth the truth, and to all appearance (for we cannot see the heart) practiseth as he professeth.
Now all men will agree, this last is a Beleeving Saint: And these will have none but this to be a Saint; and so none but this to be a Member of Christs Church.
I beseech you, is this such an error, to desire Profession and Practice to be conjoyned in one that is to be a Member of the Church of Christ?
When I desire a good Wife, a faithfull Servant, a constant Friend, a familiar companion; am I not as desirous to know the Heart as well as the Head, the will as well as Skill, Affection as well as Profession? And why then may I not do as much in choosing my Spirituall Friends; my constant companions in the worship and service of God?
Can any man by right, force me to marry such or such a woman, to take such a servant, to dwell with such a friend, to choose such a companion? And may any man force me then to be companion, in the neerest and most intimate converse of Spirituall Ordinances, with any one or more whom I dare not, I cannot, I may not trust, to be either friends to God or me, because what ere their lips professe, their life and wayes deny God, trample on the blood of Christ, despise, at least profane all his Ordinances.
I could heartily with some pity might be shewed to these poor mens souls. He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to his own Soul. And is it not then much better to keep these men off (as they do in Scotland and other Reformed Churches) till they give the Church satisfaction upon good ground of their Repentance and Faith, that so they, may not hurt themselves by Gods holy Ordinances?
Sacraments confirm, but do not conferre Grace; if they did so, the case were altered; but now they are like the Paradise of God, guarded with the Flaming Sword; so that the Tree in the midst of the Garden, (which is Christ) cannot be Touched by prophane hands.
The other Grand Heresie (men so much cry against) in Separation, is the Independence of their Congregations, as it was stated before.
But why should the Independence of One assembly, to a Province, or Nation, be more Schismaticall, then that of a Province, or Nation, to the whole World? Why may not Geneva be as Independent to France, as France may be to the other parts of Europes Continent? In Geneva, why may not one Congregation, be as independent to all Geneva besides, as Geneva is to all France besides? Doth indeed such a Wall, or River, or Sea, so limit and bound the Church within it, that it may be independent on any Church without it; and may not one Congregation within this River be as well independent on all other Assemblies within the same River or Sea?
Are there not some sparkling of this Truth, even amongst us in England? Have not we Peculiars? some Congregations exempt from the Jurisdiction of the Bishop within whose Diocesse they be? And I think no Separatist desireth more than this, That all Parishes (I mean all Congregations) should be Independent Peculiars.
Suppose an East Indi-Merchants Ship be cast on some remote Iland beyond China where there shall be no Inhabitant; may not in this Case, the men of this Ship gather together, choose out some one or more (of themselves) to Read, Preach, Administer the Sacraments? is not this a true Church, and so to be reputed while they beleeve the Truth, and do what they beleeve? Is there any one Essentiall part wanting to this Church, so Constituted?
If it be answered affirmatively, that there is yet wanting some Essentiall; I rejoyn, then it is not a true Church; nay so far from being vera Ecclesia, a true Church, that it is not vere Ecclesia, truly a Church: For He is not verè Homo, truly a Man, that wants something Essentiall to Man: nor is it verè Ecclesia, truly a Church, that wants any thing Essentiall to a Church.
If it be yeelded that in such a case there is nothing Essentiall wanting to This Church: I will again suppose that within a year or Two, another English Ship be cast on the same very Iland, and have such another Company or Church; I demand now whether it be necessary, that Both These Churches must needs joyn together, or at least depend One on the Other.
If it be not necessary, I have what I desire. If it be necessary, Then was not the former Church a True Church; because it wanted something Essentiall and Necessary to a Church; to wit, Dependence on some other Church.
If it be said, This Church did before depend on the whole Catholike Church, I will not gainsay it; so They mean only Thus much, that This Church was a true member of the True Church or Body of Christ; which is but made up of so many particular Congregations, as mans body of its particular members. And so This will be no more than to say, All the members of the Body are Parts of the Body, and conjoyned together, but onely subordinate to the Head. For, I suppose no man will say One of my hands is dependent on the Other; but both (as all the other members) dependent on my Head: so are all particular Churches (I mean Congregations) dependent on their Generall Head, Christ, but not on other of their fellow members.
If any man shall say, that Hands depend not onely on the Head, but also on the Arms, Shoulders, and Neck, which are between Them & the Head, on whom they ultimately depend.
I answer, It is true, the Hands are conjoyned to the Arms; These to the Shoulders; and Both by the Neck to the Head: but yet They depend not on any but the Head. I mean they are not directed and guided by the Dictates of Arm, Shoulder, or Neck, but only by the commands of the Head: so that there is only a bodily outward Continuity, and no virtuall Dependence, but on the Head. The Head sends out Animall Spirits, and by them guides my Hand, as my fancie pleascth. This Guiding or Directing Depends onely on the Head, not Arm, which (when I mean to move my Hand) is but as it were my Hands Servant, that must go and call, and lead my Hand (as a Gentleman-Usher) but not command it.
So are also all the Churches, all severall congregations; They are all members, and are all outwardly conjoyned One to another (through all the world) by the tendons and ligaments of Rivers, Seas, Hils, Vallies, and the like. Yea and some of These are neerer to Christ their Head; as they keep themselves purer; and walk more closely in dependence on Him. Yet All these Churches are but coordinate, not among themselves subordinate. They are but conjoyned each to other, not dependent each on other, but All on their Head; which alone can command and move them. Yea though perhaps some One Church may come between Christ and another Church (as the Arm between the Head and Hand) yet it is there but as a servant to call on, lead, help, uphold, (being so commanded by the Head) but not to command, dictate, or over-top its fellow-members.
You see here what Power we give to Synods and Councels, or all other Churches over one particular Church; to wit, a counselling, perswading (which sure is very prevailing) but not commanding Authority.
I doubt not but Christ doth sometimes require one Church to incite, exhort, admonish, and perswade another fellow-Church (though This be not required of any one Angel in the Apocalyps, towards another Church or Angel, yet I suppose it may be in some cases) yea and so that the Other Church may haply sin if she do not follow this call and counsell: yet not because it comes from her fellow-Church, (or any Synod) but because it comes from Christ her Head, that speaks through This Church to her fellow. As the Hand might justly be stiled rebellious that rejects the Animall Spirits sent from the Head, though they come through the Arm; Which is here in this case, not only a servant to the Head, but to the Hand also.
Yet doth not the Hand rebell, because it refuseth that which comes from the Arm, but because it came from the Head, but through the Arme as an instrument. For if ever the Arme impose ought on the Hand, which comes not from the Head (as it doth sometimes in a flux of putrid humours from an ulcer in the Arme) in this case the Arme erres in so imposing on the Hand, but the Hand rebels not in rejecting what the Arme so sends: because it comes not from the Head. On which (and on which alone) all the members virtually depend, and not on any one or more fellow-members.
All this while, though we dispute the Independency of Churches among themselves; yet we have not the least shadow of a Thought to withdraw any Church from the civill Magistrate; Nay, These men (whom our Bishops brand so with Separation) most cordially affirme that if Episcopacy can prove greater or better subjection, or but equall to Them, They will not scruple to subscribe to Them.
But alas, if we once give way to Dependence of Churches, must not the Church of England Depend on the Dutch, or the Dutch on England; as much as one Church in England must Depend on a Provinciall Church of Canterbury, or Nationall in all England?
And if the English Church must Depend on the Dutch, or Dutch on English; which shall be Inferior? This, or That? by This Dispute of Precedency, wee shall at length cast all Churches into such a confusion, as some of our Bishops Sees were heretofore, for superiority. Pompeius non admitt it superiorem, Cæsar non parem, Pompey could not endure a superior, nor Cæsar an equall. And now I conceive York is inferior to Canterbury, Durham to York; not by any Law Morall, or of Nature, but positive of State.
Yea, by This Dependence, will follow: farre greater Evill than This dispute and confusion about Precedency: For if One whole Church must so depend on another, then must also the Officers of This depend on Those of That Church; And if so, shall not all Church-Officers returne to the Pope at length, as to One Supreme Head on Earth?
If Geneva depend on France, why not France on Spain? Spain on Italy? Italy on Rome? Rome on the Pope? And had I begun a great deallower, should have come up higher to this Head.
Perhaps all the Inconveniences that can be objected on Independence, though they could not be answered (as I conceive they may) will not ballance this one inconvenience of Dependence. But no more of this.
The next Grand Inconvénience that may be feared on the removall of our Prelates is, Licentia prædicandi, A liberty of Preaching, not onely in that sense in which this phrase is used beyond the Seas, and was in that sense forbidden under our last Royall King James: That was Licentia quo ad Materians, A liberty in regard of the subject matter; This quo ad Personam, in regard of the Person.
Now they say; not onely every matter will be preached, what every Minister pleaseth, but also every Person will turn Preacher: Even Shoomakers, Coblers, Feltmakers, and any other.
God is the God of Order, and not of Confusion. And if Order is to be observed any where, it is sure in matter of Worship: For if through the Churches default Disorder breake in, at any craney, you shall finde the Breach grow wider and wider every day: Except the Cleft be stopt, the Ship may quickly sinke. And therefore I shall wholly agree, and joyne with them that endeavour with the first, to allay the very semblance and apparition (lesse than the least bubling up) of Disorder.
Onely this I could heartily wish, that Fire and Fagot may not determin this Controversie; that these men may not bee dealt with, as here some of the Martyrs in Queene Maries daies; for oft when the Bishops could not reply, they would start up and sweare by the Faith of their Body, that this was a dangerous, grosse, & Hereticall opinion; And all this was but a Prologue to that Tragedy, whose Epilogue was Flame and Fagot or at least the Fasces, a bundle of rods, to younger men.
We have oft seene some of these Preachers before the highest Tribunall in this Kingdome; For we thought it unreasonable (with those in the Acts) to condemne any before they were heard.
I was not their Judge alone, nor will I be at this time. Only that it may appeare I attended their pleading (as it becomes any in a Court of Justice) I will give the world an account, what Those men say for themselves; and so I shall leave them to be judged by wise men.
First, they conceive there be some Ordinances which are proper only to the Church, and Church-Officers, belonging only to Church Assemblies (such as is the Administration of Sacraments, the Conferring of Orders, and all of this nature) These they think Sacred, such as may not be touched by any but Church-Officers; and of These they say, let Vzzah take heed how he touch the Ark, though it shake.
But there are other Ordinances (they say) of a Middle nature; as they are exercised in a Church Assembly, by Church-Officers, They may truly be called Church-Ordinances; yet are such as may be used Out of Church Assemblies, and therefore probably by Other than Church-Officers, As Praying, Reading the Scripture, Cathechising, Exhortation, and the like; which (as they conceive) are not confined to the Church only, or Church Officers.
1. Because Heathens and Publicans may be admitted, nay ought to be invited, to These Ordinances. And it seemes no Mortall sinne, for a Lay-man in China, to call together a company of Heathens, and preach to them the Christian Religion, yet here is no True Church, till a Congregation will Embrace This Doctrine, and joyne in serving God.
2. They conceive Our State, by publick authority, hath and doth allow so much as This. For they see Clerks (even in publick Assemblies) Read Psalmes, Prayers, and oft some parts of Scripture; Deacons preach, yea and Baptize, and help to administer the Lords Supper; and yet no man takes them for compleat Ministers: yea of old, and perhaps now also by Law, they are not at all Clergymen.
3. Former Preachers have taught them, that every Master of a Family, may and must read, pray, catechise, and the like, in his owne Family, if hee have none there that can doe it better than himselfe. Therefore These seeme rather to come under the Notion of Private Duties rather than Publike Church-Ordinances; though sometime they be performed in Churches, yet other times they may be performed out of Churches, and by those that are not publike Church Officers.
Therefore these poore men (through their weaknesse) think such Ordinances free to be performed by any Christian, whether of the Clergy, or Laity. And their zeale makes them conceive, if God give gifts of Understanding, Memory, Judgement, and Utterance, and an Earnest Desire to doe good with these (lest they wrap up their Talent in a Napkin) They have the Maine (to wit, an inward) Call to performe these duties in their owne Families: or elsewhere, if they have an outward Call too.
For they solemnly professe, they hold it not fit to adresse or intrude themselves on any Congregation: But if any will come of themselves, either to their owne Families, or send for them, and desire to heare them, among some good men, they take this for a call, an outward call, to performe those duties, to that Congregation. For, they thinke the wayes of Gods Spirit are free, and not tied to a University man; so that having an inward call, they conceive the desire of any one Congregation, is outward call sufficient, though the Bishop call not.
Yea, some Exercises in Gods Worship, they thinke there be, which are warranted from the Gift that enables and not from the Call that invites: so that a man whom God hath enabled with Parts and Gifts, might use them, though no man Living call him. And this also is the Judgement of many Learned men; as of That Ingenuous, Worthy, Learned man Master Thorndicke, of late Touching on That of the Corinths.
So long then as they Encroach not on Ordinances appropriate to Church-Officers, they thinke they sinne not in performing other duties, where there are none that can, or will performe them better. They have learned Latine Enough to say, Bonum quò Communius, eò melius, What is Good, is made better by the commonnesse. They have read of Moses, wishing all the Lords People were Prophets; and that God would poure out his Spirit on them all.
Yea, they have heard that God promised to poure out his Spirit upon all Flesh, all Beleevers (as well Lay as Clergy) so that Young men should see Visions, and Old men dreame Dreames, and though this were begun to be accomplished even in our Saviours time, yet they (perhaps through ignorance) Expect it should be yet still more and more accomplished every day, till Knowledge cover the Earth, as Waters fill the Sea; even till there be no more need that any man should teach his neighbour, for all men shall know the Lord; and they poore men expect a new Heaven, and a new Earth, wherein there shall need no more Temples of stone, but all good men shall be Prophets, Priests, and Kings. In the meane time they say Waters must flow out of the bellies of all that believe, till at length the great Waters of the Sanctuary flow forth without measure.
Yea, they are much encouraged from the Practise of the Church in the Acts, where all the members, Every beleever,Acts 8. 4. 11. 19. being scattered by persecution, went about Preaching.
If it be Objected that this was an Extraordinary Case; at the first beginning of the Church, and in time of Persecution, &c.
They Answer, that they conceive almost as Extraordinary case in This Land, at This Time; Where the Church is so much unsetled, and hath been so much persecuted. In some places they see no Ministers; scarce any in some whole Shires, as in Cumberland, Westmorland, Northumberland, and especially in Wales: Where the Church is even yet scarce (& ne vix) so much as well begunne to be planted, or the Gospell Preached.
In other places, where there is some shew of a Church, some Ordinances, some Ministers; yet even here, they thinke the Church calleth for many more Ministers, at least for much more, and much better preaching than it yet hath.
Specially since the late cruell Tyranny of some Lording Prelates, hath almost quite put downe Ordinances, silenced Good Ministers, and forbidden Preaching; Having so detained the Truth (and smothered it) by unrighteousnesse, that there is scarce left the Face of a true Church. They conceive this an extraordinary time, an extraordinary Case, and Call, for all that are enabled by God, with Parts and Gifts, fit for such exercises.
And they conceive 30, or 40, or an 100. Good men of any one or more congregations, to be as Fit Judges of their parts and abilities every way, as One Lord Bishop and his ignorant (perhaps Drunken) Chaplain; who makes scruple of admitting any to Orders, but Bowers and Cringers, sinks of Superstition. Yet when they please, they can pose in an Ale-house, and lay hands (well quickned with angels) on Tapsters, Coblers, Butchers, and many such, that are so farre from the smell of a Colledge, that they never saw an A. B. C. or Primer to purpose, much lesse a Ferula in a Grammer School.
In the last place they solemnly professe they are ready to hear or read, any that either by writing, preaching, or private discourse shall inform them better than now they see or know. They would thank any man that will satisfie their consciences, and convince their judgment: For, they professe they are not acted by vain-glory, or faction, but conscience, and desire of propagating Truth, and spreading the Gospell, as God shall give them opportunities.
And supposing such parts, gifts, and abilities, fit for those duties; They conceive no man may upbraid them with poverty, or former living in a trade; which yet they think not altogether incompatible to Preaching: for they have read of Saint Paul (and others) intermixing his Sermons with making of Tents.
Yea though they have not such parts and gifts as S. Paul; yet they think the work of Preaching much more compatible with all works of the Hands, than with any one other study of the brain, or minde: and yet they see many Civill Lawyers take Livings, and have the Cure of Souls: Yea, and all their Lord Bishops have Two Callings, Two severall (opposite) Studies; and yet for all Those two, They can spend as much, or more time at Cards and Dice (or worse) than at either of their Callings.
Nor are they so tyed to their outward Callings, but if the Church shall think it fit, they are ready to give up all, and apply themselves wholly to the study of Scriptures, and work of the Ministery.
In the mean time they follow their Callings, (not living idlely, or going up and down Tatling as Busie-Bodies) but being diligent to serve God both with their hands, hearts also, yea and tongues too, if God shall call them, and give opportunity as well as abilities.
I would not be mistaken by my Reader. All this time I am speaking Their words, not my own; All that I desire is, that they may have a fair Hearing, before they be severely censured. And I move this the rather, because they are still ready to say, Most that condemn them never heard them: I could not but do what in me lyes, to remove This scandall.
It may be Expected I should now shew my own Opinion; and answer all These Things, which Those poor men say for themselves. But I must confesse I am already almost tyred with relating the Arguments of one part onely; so that I dare not set on the other.
Neither indeed do I think it needfull: Most of That which They say, being such, that it is not like to do much hurt; and so I think it not needfull to refute it. What must be refuted, may much better be done by Others of better Parts, and sounder judgements: for I know some that in One poor discourse of Truth, are by their wit able to finde all the seventeen Intellectuall Sinnes; how much more in a discourse of Error?
Onely by the way, I cannot but shew how weakly These poor Preachers answer some strong objections brought against them.
As This in the First place: That by This Course, All Errors and Heresies shall quickly come to be vented and maintained in the Church, when every man may Preach that will and what he will, without controul.
To This Argument, All their Answer, that I can remember, is This.
First, that They maintain not, that Any man may Preach that Will. No; They say it must be One of Parts, Gifts, and Abilities fit for a Preacher; and that not onely in his owne fancie, but in the Judgment of many Godly men: Who (being many) are as like to be fit and able to judge of Abilities on Their Tryall, as any One Bishops Chaplain; that yet useth to present to his Lord, after little or no posing, One whom he never heard speak, (much lesse Preach or Pray) before he came for Holy Orders.
Secondly, they say, They maintain not, that any such man (so Gifted and Called, being judged fit by the votes of many) may yet Preach what he will. No, they are as much limited, and kept within bounds, as if they were licensed by the Bishop.
For, if he Preach false Doctrine, either in matters of Church or State, they say the Bishops Keyes, or at least his Long Sword, may reach him as well in a Parlour, or some little Pulpit, as if he were a Licentiate in a Great Cathedrall. And if he Preach no false Doctrine, must he suffer (say they) for Preaching True?
It is true, No wise man living will blame (much lesse punish or fine) a man that speaks a good True Discourse of Law, or Physick, though he be Licentiate in neither; But These poor men consider not, the Case is not the same in Preaching a True discourse in Divinity. Yet let us give way, and they will speak more.
Again they say, Suppose they did hold (which they do not) that Any man living might Preach that would, and what he would; yet perhaps there would not follow so great Inconvenience as some imagine.
For, All such supposed Preachers are either Wise men or Fools. If Wise, they will Preach Wisely, and so do Good. If Fools, Foolishly, and so do no Hurt, or at least very little hurt: For, it is not for a Fool to broach an Heresie, and maintain it, or spread it much. No, Arrius, Pelagius, Arminius, and such, were men of the greatest Parts, but set wrong.
Yea suppose some of these Non-Licentiate Preachers be men of the greatest Parts possible, and so possible to become dangerous Hereticks; Doth the Heresie spread it self the more for not being Licensed? Might not This Great man do as much hurt (yea much more) if he were licensed, than now he is not?
If any answer, It is True, He is like to do more hurt, if Licensed; but therefore the Bishop in wisedome will not license him.
They rejoyn: First, it is probable One Bishop in This case will shew more care and conscience, than 20, or 30, good men in a Congregation, where This parted Man would preach?
But again, Suppose there be never a Good man (in all his Auditory;) or that all the Good men there, will not have care to suppresse This man from doing hurt: How shall, how can the Bishop do This? How can he keep him from venting, and spreading his Heresie?
First, when this man comes for a Licence to the Bishop, No man can tell how he means to preach, (when he is Licensed) except the Bishop perchance be a Prophet also, as well as a Priest and King?
Either he hath preached, (before his comming for This License) or he hath not. If he have not, No Bishop can tell how he will preach; nor can any wise man living commend him to the Bishop, as fit to make a good Preacher: since he that is the best Scholar living, and perhaps as good a man as any, yet may prove but an ill Preacher.
If he have preached before, and done well, without License. then it seems it is lawfull to preach without a License: for probation no doubt, (though most of late have denyed This.) But I ask, how long shall he be a Probationer? how many years, months, weeks? I hough he preach ten good Sermons, no man can tell, but in the next he means to broach an Heresie.
But alas These poor men see not how weak all this is. For, Is it not easie for three or four men, or a Bishops Chaplain to commend a man (be he Scholar, or Groom, or Butler, or what he will:) let the Bishop without seeing or smelling This man, give him his blessing blind-fold, and seal him a License, What hurt is in all This? For if this man preach well, the Church will get good: if ill, cannot the Bishop as soon pull him down again, as he set him up?
They answer, Suppose he may, (which is hard to suppose since Orders once given, leave an Indelible Character) why may nor ten or twenty men, Good men in a Congregation, as well set up a man, and try how he will prove? For if well, it is well; he will doe good: If ill, these ten or twenty men can as easily pull him downe againe, as set him up.
Not so. For the Bishop is still a very wise, discreet, good, holy man; and being entrusted by the Church, will have a speciall care, even more than a hundred others, to set up a good man, or else pull him quickly downe.
To this they yet answer, The Bishop cannot tell how or what he preacheth when he hath set him up, (except he can be present in all places, at least many at once, to heare all young Preachers, that he Licenseth;) and therefore though he would pull him downe, yet he cannot, because he cannot be still present to heare him. Though he come once, twice, ten times, yet the Preacher may hold in all his Heresie, till he see the Bishop absent, and sometimes he must be absent.
But may not the Congregation then goe and complaine to the Bishop, if their Preacher doe amisse? and upon complaint the Bishop will, may and must suppresse that error.
If he doe not (they say) they are still where they were. But if he doe censure this Preacher, on the complaint of the Congregation; Either he sees they complaine unjustly (and then he doth injustice in censuring upon an unjust complaint) or else hee mast yeeld they complaine justly; and then he also grants; that this Congregation hath wisdome enough to judge, whether a man preach well or ill; and if so, why may not the Congregation censure him for ill preaching, without complaint to one Bishop?
Sed frustra fit per plura; quod fieri potest per pauciora. And so I leave this, and come to another great Question, that is wont still to be propounded to these poore Non-Licensed Preachers.
It is this, why (if indeed they be fit, or seeme fit, or doe but think themselves fit to be Ministers, why then) do they not enter into Orders? or at least present themselves, shewing their desire to be in Holy Orders, if indeed they may be found fit for the Ministery, as they thinke themselves? Why doe they halt between two? either let them serve the Church wholly, and so be in Orders; or else let them forbear, and not meddle with dispensing of Holy Ordinances.
This seemed to me a very serious Question, and therefore I much desired to hear their Answers.
Some of them say, they know not yet whether they be worthy, or fit to take on them Those Greater Offices which follow Orders, onely they desire they may have leave, (as Probationers) to exercise, or keep Acts, before the Church; till the Church shall approve of them, and call them out (judging them faithfull) for higher employment, or generally to dispense all the Ordinances. In the mean time, They meddle only with such Ordinances, as they conceive not proper to Church Officers onely, but in some sort common to all Christians, yea to all men, as was said before.
Others say, they would gladly (with all their Hearts) be consecrated to God, and wholly give themselves up to his service and worship in the Ministry; but they are afraid to take Orders, as Orders are now conferred in This State. And yet in the mean time, they dare not abstain from Preaching, (where they have opportunity, and a Willing Auditory) lest they should detain the Truth, God hath revealed to them; and should be guilty of hiding their Talent in a Napkin. For they think they may do many things belonging (though not proper) to a Minister; though they be not, nor can be (as things now stand) in holy Orders. Their instance is David, who was a King, and of the Tribe of Judah, & so could be neither Priest nor Levite; yet they find King David often Preaching; else they understand not the meaning of Those Phrases, O come hither, and I will shew you what God hath done for my poor soul, and the like.
If these men in this be serious, and do not pretend Conscience, where it is some other Principle, that acts them to some low end: I cannot but much pity them; that if they be fit, they neither may be licensed, nor yet preach without License. But let us see why they dare not enter into Orders, and so be Licensed Ministers.
They answer, that they have not so much against Orders conferred by our Church, or the manner of conferring them, (though under some Bishops, This hath been very strange, and not warrantable either by Law of God or man, they conceive) as they have in their judgement and consciences, against the Power conferring them.
For they doubt not to affirme, that He (who ever he be) that taketh on himselfe power, which the Scripture hath not given him, to appoint, dictate or command, any one Thing either in Doctrine or Discipline; though the Thing it selfe might possibly be good, yet He that so dictates, is Antichristian; encroaching on the Regall Office of Christ; and so a Traytor in Religion.
Now they dare not touch That, which (how Good soever in it selfe, yet) comes in Power and Virtue of an Antichristian Traytor. Yea though such a one should command them a Thing very lawfull in it selfe, (as to weare a black cloath) yet if He have not Commission to command, from Scripture, they conceive He incurres a Premunire with God; because he takes on him to doe that (as an Officer) for which he is not fore-armed with lawfull authority. In this case they think they ought not to obey Him so commanding: because though the Thing in it selfe be lawfull to be done, yet they think him an unlawfull Commander, and so dare not obey; if for no other Reason, yet for This, that by obeying here, they shall betray not only their own Priviledges, (which yet are very precious) but also the Liberties and Priviledge of all the Subjects of Christ, even of the whole Church; so that they become Traytors to their spirituall Common-wealth.
They give This Instance in Civill Things. Suppose a Sheriffe, that is a lawfull Officer, come and command me to give him forty pound, of his owne head, without lawfull Authority to beck his command; they say, if in This case I give him forty shillings, I betray not only my owne priviledge (which perhaps I may doe) but also the whole Liberty of the Common-wealth, and so become (in Re) a Traytor to the State: though in it selfe it belawfull to give forty shillings to any man that asks; yet now I must not doe it, because This Officer commands it by unlawfull Authority, and so without Commission.
Nor yet that they think it necessary to stay disputing the Authority of a Commander, there where is no appearance of Ground for a doubt. But if once they see and know the command is grounded on no lawfull Authority; or do but really doubt whether the Power commanding, or the Thing commanded be lawfull: They conceive themselves bound to abstaine till their judgement be cleered, (which they professe to desire, and by all lawfull meanes to endeavour) lest while they doe, they be condemned in their owne consciences, because they doe not act in Faith: and what is not of Faith is sinne.
I must leave These Things to be discussed by men of better judgements. In the meane time I humbly desire againe I may not be mis-understood; for it is not in my thoughts to abet the least miscarriage in any one of these poore men: nor by any meanes to countenance any of them, in a way of exercising those Duties that are too high for their parts, and abilities which God hath given them. Yet if there be any of them that have extraordinary parts, and endowments of judgement, memory, and utterance; if God stirre up these to improve their Gifts to the best advantage, yet with all meeknesse and humility, I dare not condemne them till I heare them: for I know the Spirit of God is not tied to our Fancies, but yet the Spirit of the Prophets is subject to the Prophets.
I take not on me to warrant all the paths which some cut out to themselves: Yet I most affectionately entreat men not to contemne all things in those they now brand with their usuall staine of Separatisme; which phrase many use in such scorne, as if with one stab (of that Italian dagger) they could run through Body and Soule at once.
These whom they so brand, may maintaine some errors; may not carry on the truth in the glory of it; who is so pefect? but oft-times in the midst of thickest ore we finde the purest gold: discover their errors and reject them; but doe not refuse what is good, because they hold it forth but darkly: no truth can shine in its perfect lustre at the first: light is darknesse when it first appeareth.
Yet Light was on the first Creatures, and yet not perfected till the fourth Day, (and perhaps not fully then;) so was spirituall Light the beginning of Reformation, That New Creation; yet it was not perfect at first dawning, but encreaseth still by degrees, till it have quite chased away darknesse, and there be no more Night. All men yeeld there must be an encrease of light in the world; Now whether that be more probable to be in Doctrine or Discipline, judge yee.
At the first Rising out of Popery, the Church-lesse Church of the Albigenses, and Waldenses, (Holy Good men) began an admirable Reformation. This was much advanced by Jerome of Prague, and John Hus. Luther had many grosse errours, yet must not lose his place among these glorious Lights. After these appeareth Calvin, shining yet brighter both in Doctrine and Discipline. Since him our God hath raised up a more glorious Light among these Northerne Iles. And yet some went from us lately with a candle burning, brighter perhaps than ours; though it were lighted here. Thus Light dilating, and enlarging it selfe, seemeth to become more pure, more Light; more Glorious; and yet it seemes not to be Noone. The Light, still, will, must, cannot but encrease; why then doe wee shut our eyes? Let it not bee said of us, that Light came in & grew up among us, yet we would not use it (for we cannot but receive it) because we loved darknesse.
But why doe I wonder? If these things which are by many held but ceremoniall or circumstantiall truthes; are thus slighted, seeing the sweet workings of the Spirit, Truths of a more glorious Nature, are not only under-valued, but opposed, even by those who love Christ; it is a strange thing, men call, men long for new things; and yet if any doe hold forth new and quicke actings of the Spirit, they fall under censure, of those who forget that Text, Judge not, lest ye be Judged. Thus many times, good men doe not only neglect, but abuse light, yea, they doe both grieve and quench Gods Holy Spirit. A sad case! and so are still in some part carnall; and the Flesh not only lusteth, but warreth against the Spirit.
We are too too apt to slight the sweet breathings of Gods Spirit; which He is pleased to communicate to others when wee are destitute of the same Workings. Some Christians are as it were wholly legall; they Fast, they Pray, receive Sacraments, heare Sermons, pay every one his own, live inoffensively: This is well done, but This is not All: yet this they take for enjoying God in Christ Jesus. But alas! Quantum distat ab illo, How far from that is it? Non est vivere, sed valere vita, Life consists in being healthfull, and not barely in living. These men may well be saved hereafter, but in the mean time, they lose the sweetest part of their life here.
On the other side, if God please to communicate himself in any manner of sweetnesse, so that a man begins to taste and see how good Communion and acquaintance with God is; how easily it is interrupted by loose walking; how sweet it is when enjoyed; so that it ravisheth the soul, and filleth the whole Heart, that it cannot but flow out at the Lips, in sweet breathings of, for, and after God in Christ Jesus, God in Christ Jesus. This man is presently stained with a stained with a taint of Madnesse, and I know not what Enthusiasme. If one that hath tasted and experimentally found the sweetnesse of Peace of Conscience, and knows how unpossible it is to keep it, but by close walking with God; how easily it is broken; and how hardly it is made up again when broken: so that he is content to leave Friends, Living, Liberty, All, rather than to break his Peace, wound his Conscience, sin against God, in sinning against light, or acting against Doubts. O that man is beyond all Rule of Reason; He hath a Tang of Phrensie; one pust up with a spirit of self conceit; a Rank Separatist.
But sure it should not be so among Christians. Can we not dissent in judgment (specially in these lower points of Discipline, while we agree in Doctrine) but we must also disagree in Affection? A hard case!
I confesse there are many now that turn the Light of Truth, into a Life of loosnesse, vanity, and profanenesse; and we are all too too proneto This. There are some Enthusiasticks, who profane the Spirit. This I would resist with all my might. But let not all suffer with the wicked. Some without warrant run away from their Callings, and takeup a bare, empty, fruitlesse Profession of Christianity, without the least dramme of life or power; These men my soul hateth.
But when God shall so enlarge his Hand, and unveil his face, that the poore creature is brought into communion and acquaintance with his Creator: steered in all his wayes, by his pirit; and by it carried up above shame, feare, pleasure, comfort, losses, grave, and death it selfe; Let us not censure such Tempers, but blesse God for them. So far as Christ is in us, we shall love, prise, honour Christ, and the least particle of his Image in others: For we never prove ourselves true members of Christ more, than when we embrace his members with most enlarged, yet straitest Affections.
To this end, God assisting me, my desire, prayer, endeavour shall still be, as much as in melies, to follow peace and holinesse; and though there may haply be some little dissent betweene my darke judgement, weake conscience, and other Good men, that are much more cleare and strong; yet my prayer still shall be, to keepe the Unity of the Spirit in the Bond of Peace. And as many as walke after this Rule, Peace I hope shall still be on them, and the whole Israel of God.
The Stationer to the Reader.
Courteous Reader, I have thought good to translate divers Passages of this Treatise into English, (when part of the sense is contained in the Latine Phrase, or expreßion) that they who are unlearned, may be able more fully to understand and the meaning of what they read. Accept of my good intention, and Pardon me, both in that, by my English, I interrupt the smoothnesse of the Style; and also that I cannot so render the Latine, as to retain the elegancie and native beauty of the Authors expression. Farewell.
T.263 John Milton, The Reason of Church-Government Urged against Prelaty (Jan. or Feb., 1642).↩
This Text is available elsewhere in the OLL Collection
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date
Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.263 [1642.01] John Milton, The Reason of Church-Government Urged against Prelaty (Jan. or Feb., 1642).
Full titleabc
Estimated date of publicationabc
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationabc
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
(insert text of pamphlet here)
THE REASON OF CHURCH-GOVERNMENT URGED AGAINST PRELATY.
IN TWO BOOKS.
THE FIRST BOOK.
[FIRST PUBLISHED 1641.]
THE PREFACE.
In the publishing of human laws, which for the most part aim not beyond the good of civil society, to set them barely forth to the people without reason or preface, like a physical prescript, or only with threatenings, as it were a lordly command, in the judgment of Plato was thought to be done neither generously nor wisely. His advice was, seeing that persuasion certainly is a more winning and more manlike way to keep men in obedience than fear, that to such laws as were of principal moment, there should be used as an induction some well-tempered discourse, showing how good, how gainful, how happy it must needs be to live according to honesty and justice; which being uttered with those native colours and graces of speech, as true eloquence, the daughter of virtue, can best bestow upon her mother’s praises, would so incite, and in a manner charm, the multitude into the love of that which is really good, as to embrace it ever after, not of custom and awe, which most men do, but of choice and purpose, with true and constant delight. But this practice we may learn from a better and more ancient authority than any heathen writer hath to give us; and indeed being a point of so high wisdom and worth, how could it be but we should find it in that book, within whose sacred context all wisdom is unfolded? Moses, therefore, the only lawgiver that we can believe to have been visibly taught of God, knowing how vain it was to write laws to men whose hearts were not first seasoned with the knowledge of God and of his works, began from the book of Genesis, as a prologue to his laws; which Josephus right well hath noted: that the nation of the Jews, reading therein the universal goodness of God to all creatures in the creation, and his peculiar favour to them in his election of Abraham their ancestor from whom they could derive so many blessings upon themselves, might he moved to obey sincerely, by knowing so good a reason of their obedience. If then, in the administration of civil justice, and under the obscurity of ceremonial rights, such care was had by the wisest of the heathen, and by Moses among the Jews, to instruct them at least in a general reason of that government to which their subjection was required; how much more ought the members of the church, under the gospel, seek to inform their understanding in the reason of that government, which the church claims to have over them! Especially for that church hath in her immediate cure those inner parts and affections of the mind, where the seat of reason is having power to examine our spiritual knowledge, and to demand from us, in God’s behalf, a service entirely reasonable. But because about the manner and order of this government, whether it ought to Edition: current; Page: [46] be presbyterial or prelatical, such endless question, or rather uproar, is arisen in this land, as may be justly termed what the fever is to the physicians, the eternal reproach of our divines, whilst other profound clerks of late, greatly, as they conceive, to the advancement of prelaty, are so earnestly meting out the Lydian proconsular Asia, to make good the prime metropolis of Ephesus, as if some of our prelates in all haste meant to change their soil, and become neighbours to the English bishop of Chalcedon; and whilst good Breerwood as busily bestirs himself in our vulgar tongue, to divide precisely the three patriarchates of Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch; and whether to any of these England doth belong: I shall in the mean while not cease to hope, through the mercy and grace of Christ, the head and husband of his church, that England shortly is to belong, neither to see patriarchal nor see prelatical, but to the faithful feeding and disciplining of that ministerial order, which the blessed apostles constituted throughout the churches; and this I shall assay to prove, can be no other than presbyters and deacons. And if any man incline to think I undertake a task too difficult for my years, I trust through the supreme enlightening assistance far otherwise; for my years, be they few or many, what imports it? So they bring reason, let that be looked on: and for the task, from hence that the question in hand is so needful to be known at this time, chiefly by every meaner capacity, and contains in it the explication of many admirable and heavenly privileges reached out to us by the gospel, I conclude the task must be easy: God having to this end ordained his gospel, to be the revelation of his power and wisdom in Christ Jesus. And this is one depth of his wisdom, that he could so plainly reveal so great a measure of it to the gross distorted apprehension of decayed mankind. Let others, therefore, dread and shun the Scriptures for their darkness; I shall wish I may deserve to be reckoned among those who admire and dwell upon them for their clearness. And this seems to be the cause why in those places of holy writ, wherein is treated of church-government, the reasons thereof are not formally and professedly set down, because to him that heeds attentively the drift and scope of Christian profession, they easily imply themselves; which thing further to explain, having now prefaced enough, I shall no longer defer.
CHAPTER I.
That church-government is prescribed in the gospel, and that to say otherwise is unsound.
The first and greatest reason of church government we may securely, with the assent of many on the adverse part, affirm to be, because we find it so ordained and set out to us by the appointment of God in the Scriptures; but whether this be presbyterial, or prelatical, it cannot be brought to the scanning, until I have said what is meet to some who do not think it for the ease of their inconsequent opinions, to grant that church-discipline is platformed in the Bible, but that it is left to the discretion of men. To this conceit of theirs I answer, that it is both unsound and untrue; for there is not that thing in the world of more grave and urgent importance throughout the whole life of man, than is discipline. What need I instance? He that hath read with judgment, of nations and commonwealths, of cities and camps, of peace and war, sea and land, will readily Edition: current; Page: [47] agree that the flourishing and decaying of all civil societies, all the moments and turnings of human occasions, are moved to and fro as upon the axle of discipline. So that whatsoever power or sway in mortal things, weaker men have attributed to fortune, I durst with more confidence (the honour of Divine Providence ever saved) ascribe either to the vigour or the slackness of discipline. Nor is there any sociable perfection in this life, civil or sacred, that can be above discipline; but she is that which with her musical cords preserves and holds all the parts thereof together. Hence in those perfect armies of Cyrus in Xenophon, and Scipio in the Roman stories, the excellence of military skill was esteemed, not by the not needing, but by the readiest submitting to the edicts of their commander. And certainly discipline is not only the removal of disorder; but if any visible shape can be given to divine things, the very visible shape and image of virtue, whereby she is not only seen in the regular gestures and motions of her heavenly paces as she walks, but also makes the harmony of her voice audible to mortal ears. Yea, the angels themselves, in whom no disorder is feared, as the apostle that saw them in his rapture describes, are distinguished and quaternioned into the celestial princedoms and satrapies, according as God himself has writ his imperial decrees through the great provinces of heaven. The state also of the blessed in paradise, though never so perfect, is not therefore left without discipline, whose golden surveying reed, marks out and measures every quarter and circuit of New Jerusalem. Yet is it not to be conceived, that those eternal effluences of sanctity and love in the glorified saints should by this means be confined and cloyed with repetition of that which is prescribed, but that our happiness may orb itself into a thousand vagancies of glory and delight, and with a kind of eccentrical equation be, as it were, an invariable planet of joy and felicity; how much less can we believe that God would leave his frail and feeble, though not less beloved, church here below to the perpetual stumble of conjecture and disturbance in this our dark voyage, without the card and compass of discipline! Which is so hard to be of man’s making, that we may see even in the guidance of a civil state to worldly happiness, it is not for every learned, or every wise man, though many of them consult in common, to invent or frame a discipline: but if it be at all the work of man, it must be of such a one as is a true knower of himself, and in whom contemplation and practice, wit, prudence, fortitude, and eloquence, must be rarely met, both to comprehend the hidden causes of things, and span in his thoughts all the various effects that passion or complexion can work in man’s nature; and hereto must his hand be at defiance with gain, and his heart in all virtues heroic; so far is it from the ken of these wretched projectors of ours, that bescrawl their pamphlets every day with new forms of government for our church. And therefore all the ancient lawgivers were either truly inspired, as Moses, or were such men as with authority enough might give it out to be so, as Minos, Lycurgus, Numa, because they wisely forethought that men would never quietly submit to such a discipline as had not more of God’s hand in it than man’s. To come within the narrowness of household government, observation will show us many deep counsellors of state and judges to demean themselves incorruptly in the settled course of affairs, and many worthy preachers upright in their lives, powerful in their audience: but look upon either of these men where they are left to their own disciplining at home, and you shall soon perceive, for all their single knowledge and uprightness, how deficient they are in the regulating of their own family; not only in what may concern the virtuous and decent composure of their minds in their several places, but that Edition: current; Page: [48] which is of a lower and easier performance, the right possessing of the outward vessel, their body, in health or sickness, rest or labour, diet or abstinence, whereby to render it more pliant to the soul, and useful to the commonwealth: which if men were but as good to discipline themselves, as some are to tutor their horses and hawks, it could not be so gross in most households. If then it appear so hard, and so little known how to govern a house well, which is thought of so easily discharge, and for every man’s undertaking; what skill of man, what wisdom, what parts can be sufficient to give laws and ordinances to the elect household of God? If we could imagine that he had left it at random without his provident and gracious ordering, who is he so arrogant, so presumptuous, that durst dispose and guide the living ark of the Holy Ghost, though he should find it wandering in the field of Bethshemesh, without the conscious warrant of some high calling? But no profane insolence can parallel that which our prelates dare avouch, to drive outrageously, and shatter the holy ark of the church, not borne upon their shoulders with pains and labour in the word, but drawn with rude oxen their officials, and their own brute inventions. Let them make shows of reforming while they will, so long as the church is mounted upon the prelatical cart, and not as it ought, between the hands of the ministers, it will but shake and totter; and he that sets to his hand, though with a good intent to hinder the shogging of it, in this unlawful wagonry wherein it rides, let him beware it be not fatal to him as it was to Uzza. Certainly if God be the father of his family the church, wherein could he express that name more, than in training it up under his own allwise and dear economy, not turning it loose to the havoc of strangers and wolves, that would ask no better plea than this, to do in the church of Christ whatever humour, faction, policy, or licentious will, would prompt them to? Again, if Christ be the Church’s husband, expecting her to be presented before him a pure unspotted virgin, in what could he show his tender love to her more, than in prescribing his own ways, which he best knew would be to the improvement of her health and beauty, with much greater care, doubtless, than the Persian king could appoint for his queen Esther those maiden dietings and set prescriptions of baths and odours, which may render her at last more amiable to his eye? For of any age or sex, most unfitly may a virgin be left to an uncertain and arbitrary education. Yea, though she be well instructed, yet is she still under a more strait tuition, especially if betrothed. In like manner the church bearing the same resemblance, it were not reason to think she should be left destitute of that care, which is as necessary and proper to her as instruction. For public preaching indeed is the gift of the Spirit, working as best seems to his secret will; but discipline is the practice work of preaching directed and applied, as is most requisite, to particular duty; without which it were all one to the benefit of souls, as it would be to the cure of bodies, if all the physicians in London should get into the several pulpits of the city, and, assembling all the diseased in every parish, should begin a learned lecture of pleurisies, palsies, lethargies, to which perhaps none there present were inclined; and so, without so much as feeling one pulse, or giving the least order to any skilful apothecary, should dismiss them from time to time, some groaning, some languishing, some expiring, with this only charge, to look well to themselves, and do as they hear. Of what excellence and necessity then church-discipline is, how beyond the faculty of man to frame, and how dangerous to be left to man’s invention, who would be every foot turning it to sinister ends; how properly also it is the work of God as father, and of Christ as husband of the church, we have by thus much heard.
CHAPTER II.
That church-government is set down in Holy Scripture, and that to say otherwise is untrue.
As therefore it is unsound to say, that God hath not appointed any set government in his church, so it is untrue. Of the time of the law there can be no doubt; for to let pass the first institution of priests and Levites, which is too clear to be insisted upon, when the temple came to be built, which in plain judgment could breed no essential change, either in religion, or in the priestly government; yet God, to show how little he could endure that men should be tampering and contriving in his worship, though in things of less regard, gave to David for Solomon, not only a pattern and model of the temple, but a direction for the courses of the priests and Levites, and for all the work of their service. At the return from the captivity, things were only restored after the ordinance of Moses and David; or if the least alteration be to be found, they had with them inspired men, prophets; and it were not sober to say they did aught of moment without divine intimation. In the prophecy of Ezekiel, from the 40th chapter onward, after the destruction of the temple, God, by his prophet, seeking to wean the hearts of the Jews from their old law, to expect a new and more perfect reformation under Christ, sets out before their eyes the stately fabric and constitution of his Church, with all the ecclesiastical functions appertaining; indeed the description is as sorted best to the apprehension of those times, typical and shadowy, but in such manner as never yet came to pass, nor ever must literally, unless we mean to annihilate the gospel. But so exquisite and lively the description is in pourtraying the new state of the church, and especially in those points where government seems to be most active, that both Jews and Gentiles might have good cause to be assured, that God, whenever he meant to reform his church, never intended to leave the government thereof, delineated here in such curious architecture, to be patched afterwards, and varnished over with the devices and embellishings of man’s imagination. Did God take such delight in measuring out the pillars, arches, and doors of a material temple? Was he so punctual and circumspect in lavers, altars, and sacrifices soon after to be abrogated, lest any of these should have been made contrary to his mind? Is not a far more perfect work, more agreeable to his perfections, in the most perfect state of the church militant, the new alliance of God to man? Should not he rather now by his own prescribed discipline have cast his line and level upon the soul of man, which is his rational temple, and, by the divine square and compass thereof, form and regenerate in us the lovely shapes of virtues and graces, the sooner to edify and accomplish that immortal stature of Christ’s body, which is his church, in all her glorious lineaments and proportions? And that this indeed God hath done for us in the gospel we shall see with open eyes, not under a veil. We may pass over the history of the Acts and other places, turning only to those epistles of St. Paul to Timothy and Titus where the spiritual eye may discern more goodly and gracefully erected, than all the magnificence of temple or tabernacle, such a heavenly structure of evangelical discipline, so diffusive of knowledge and charity to the prosperous increase and growth of the church, that it cannot be wondered if that elegant and artful symmetry of the promised new temple in Ezekiel, and all those sumptuous things under the law, were Edition: current; Page: [50] made to signify the inward beauty and splendour of the Christian church thus governed. And whether this be commanded, let it now be judged. St. Paul after his preface to the first of Timothy, which he concludes in the 17th verse with Amen, enters upon the subject of this epistle, which is to establish the church-government, with a command: “This charge I commit to thee, son Timothy: according to the prophecies which went before on thee, that thou by them mightest war a good warfare.” Which is plain enough thus expounded: This charge I commit to thee, wherein I now go about to instruct thee how thou shalt set up church-discipline, that thou mightest war a good warfare, bearing thyself constantly and faithfully in the ministry, which, in the first to the Corinthians, is also called a warfare; and so after a kind of parenthesis concerning Hymenæus, he returns to his command, though under the mild word of exhorting, chap. ii. ver. 1, “I exhort therefore;” as if he had interrupted his former command by the occasional mention of Hymenæus. More beneath in the 14th verse of the third chapter, when he had delivered the duties of bishops or presbyters, and deacons, not once naming any other order in the church, he thus adds; “These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly; (such necessity it seems there was;) but if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God.” From this place it may be justly asked, whether Timothy by this here written, might know what was to be known concerning the orders of church governors or no? If he might, then, in such a clear text as this, may we know too without further jangle; if he might not, then did St. Paul write insufficiently, and moreover said not true, for he saith here he might know; and I persuade myself he did know ere this was written, but that the apostle had more regard to the instruction of us, than to the informing of him. In the fifth chapter, after some other church-precepts concerning discipline, mark what a dreadful command follows, ver. 21: “I charge thee before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things.” And as if all were not yet sure enough, he closes up the epistle with an adjuring charge thus; “I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus, that thou keep this commandment:” that is, the whole commandment concerning discipline, being the main purpose of the epistle: although Hooker would fain have this denouncement referred to the particular precept going before, because the word commandment is in the singular number, not remembering that even in the first chapter of this epistle, the word commandment is used in a plural sense, ver. 5: “Now the end of the commandment is charity;” and what more frequent than in like manner to say the law of Moses? So that either to restrain the significance too much, or too much to enlarge it, would make the adjuration either not so weighty or not so pertinent. And thus we find here that the rules of church-discipline are not only commanded, but hedged about with such a terrible impalement of commands, as he that will break through wilfully to violate the least of them, must hazard the wounding of his conscience even unto death. Yet all this notwithstanding, we shall find them broken well nigh all by the fair pretenders even of the next ages. No less to the contempt of him whom they feign to be the archfounder of prelaty, St. Peter, who, by what he writes in the fifth chapter of his first epistle, should seem to be for another man than tradition reports him: there he commits to the presbyters only full authority, both of feeding the flock and episcopating; and commands that obedience be given to them as to the mighty hand of God, which is his mighty ordinance. Yet all this was as nothing to repel the venturous boldness of innovation Edition: current; Page: [51] that ensued, changing the decrees of God that are immutable, as if they had been breathed by man. Nevertheless when Christ, by those visions of St. John, foreshows the reformation of his church, he bids him take his reed, and mete it out again after the first pattern, for he prescribes no other. “Arise, said the angel, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.” What is there in the world can measure men but discipline? Our word ruling imports no less. Doctrine indeed is the measure, or at least the reason of the measure, it is true; but unless the measure be applied to that which it is to measure, how can it actually do its proper work? Whether therefore discipline be all one with doctrine, or the particular application thereof to this or that person, we all agree that doctrine must be such only as is commanded; or whether it be something really differing from doctrine, yet was it only of God’s appointment, as being the most adequate measure of the church and her children, which is here the office of a great evangelist, and the reed given him from heaven. But that part of the temple which is not thus measured, so far is it from being in God’s tuition or delight, that in the following verse he rejects it; however in show and visibility it may seem a part of his church, yet inasmuch as it lies thus unmeasured, he leaves it to be trampled by the Gentiles; that is, to be polluted with idolatrous and gentilish rites and ceremonies. And that the principal reformation here foretold is already come to pass, as well in discipline as in doctrine, the state of our neighbour churches afford us to behold. Thus, through all the periods and changes of the church, it hath been proved, that God hath still reserved to himself the right of enacting church-government.
CHAPTER III.
That it is dangerous and unworthy the gospel, to hold that church-government is to be patterned by the law, as bishop Andrews and the primate of Armagh maintain.
We may return now from this interposing difficulty thus removed, to affirm, that since church-government is so strictly commanded in God’s word, the first and greatest reason why we should submit thereto is because God hath so commanded. But whether of these two, prelaty or presbytery, can prove itself to be supported by this first and greatest reason, must be the next dispute: wherein this position is to be first laid down, as granted; that I may not follow a chase rather than an argument, that one of these two, and none other, is of God’s ordaining; and if it be, that ordinance must be evident in the gospel. For the imperfect and obscure institution of the law, which the apostles themselves doubt not ofttimes to vilify, cannot give rules to the complete and glorious ministration of the gospel, which looks on the law as on a child, not as on a tutor. And that the prelates have no sure foundation in the gospel, their own guiltiness doth manifest; they would not else run questing up as high as Adam to fetch their original, as it is said one of them lately did in public. To which assertion, had I heard it, because I see they are so insatiable of antiquity, I should have gladly assented, and confessed them yet more ancient: for Lucifer, before Adam, was the first prelate angel; and both he, as is commonly thought, and our forefather Adam, as we all know, for aspiring above their orders, were miserably degraded. But others, better Edition: current; Page: [52] advised, are content to receive their beginning from Aaron and his sons, among whom bishop Andrews of late years, and in these times the primate of Armagh, for their learning are reputed the best able to say what may be said in this opinion. The primate, in his discourse about the original of episcopacy newly revised, begins thus: “The ground of episcopacy is fetched partly from the pattern prescribed by God in the Old Testament, and partly from the imitation thereof brought in by the apostles.” Herein I must entreat to be excused of the desire I have to be satisfied, how, for example, the ground of episcopacy is fetched partly from the example of the Old Testament, by whom next, and by whose authority. Secondly, how the church-government under the gospel can be rightly called an imitation of that in the Old Testament; for that the gospel is the end and fulfilling of the law, our liberty also from the bondage of the law, I plainly read. How then the ripe age of the gospel should be put to school again, and learn to govern herself from the infancy of the law, the stronger to imitate the weaker, the freeman to follow the captive, the learned to be lessoned by the rude, will be a hard undertaking to evince from any of those principles, which either art or inspiration hath written. If any thing done by the apostles may be drawn howsoever to a likeness of something mosaical, if it cannot be proved that it was done of purpose in imitation, as having the right thereof grounded in nature, and not in ceremony or type, it will little avail the matter. The whole judaic law is either political, (and to take pattern by that, no Christian nation ever thought itself obliged in conscience,) or moral, which contains in it the observation of whatsoever is substantially and perpetually true and good, either in religion or course of life. That which is thus moral, besides what we fetch from those unwritten laws and ideas which nature hath engraven in us, the gospel, as stands with her dignity most, lectures to her from her own authentic handwriting and command, not copies out from the borrowed manuscript of a subservient scroll, by way of imitating: as well might she be said in her sacrament of water, to imitate the baptism of John. What though she retain excommunication used in the synagogue, retain the morality of the sabbath? She does not therefore imitate the law her underling, but perfect her. All that was morally delivered from the law to the gospel, in the office of the priests and Levites, was, that there should be a ministry set apart to teach and discipline the church; both which duties the apostles thought good to commit to the presbyters. And if any distinction of honour were to be made among them, they directed it should be to those that not only rule well, but especially to those that labour in the word and doctrine. By which we are told that laborious teaching is the most honourable prelaty that one minister can have above another in the gospel; if therefore the superiority of bishopship be grounded on the priesthood as a part of the moral law, it cannot be said to be an imitation; for it were ridiculous that morality should imitate morality, which ever was the same thing. This very word of patterning or imitating, excludes episcopacy from the solid and grave ethical law, and betrays it to be a mere child of ceremony, or likelier some misbegotten thing, that having plucked the gay feathers of her obsolete bravery, to hide her own deformed barrenness, now vaunts and glories in her stolen plumes. In the mean while, what danger there is against the very life of the gospel, to make in any thing the typical law her pattern, and how impossible in that which touches the priestly government, I shall use such light as I have received, to lay open. It cannot be unknown by what expressions the holy apostle St. Paul spares not to explain to us the nature and condition of the law, calling those ordinances, which were the chief Edition: current; Page: [53] and essential offices of the priests, the elements and rudiments of the world, both weak and beggarly. Now to breed, and bring up the children of the promise, the heirs of liberty and grace, under such a kind of government as is professed to be but an imitation of that ministry, which engendered to bondage the sons of Agar; how can this be but a foul injury and derogation, if not a cancelleng of that birthright and immunity, which Christ hath purchased for us with his blood? For the ministration of the law, consisting of carnal things, drew to it such a ministry as consisted of carnal respects, dignity, precedence, and the like. And such a ministry established in the gospel, as is founded upon the points and terms of superiority, and nests itself in worldly honours, will draw to it, and we see it doth, such a religion as runs back again to the old pomp and glory of the flesh: for doubtless there is a certain attraction and magnetic force betwixt the religion and the ministerial form thereof. If the religion be pure, spiritual, simple, and lowly, as the gospel most truly is, such must the face of the ministry be. And in like manner, if the form of the ministry be grounded in the worldly degrees of authority, honour, temporal jurisdiction, we see with our eyes it will turn the inward power and purity of the gospel into the outward carnality of the law; evaporating and exhaling the internal worship into empty conformities, and gay shows. And what remains then, but that we should run into as dangerous and deadly apostacy as our lamentable neighbours the papists, who, by this very snare and pitfall of imitating the ceremonial law, fell into that irrecoverable superstition, as must needs make void the covenant of salvation to them that persist in this blindness.
CHAPTER IV.
That it is impossible to make the priesthood of Aaron a pattern whereon to ground episcopacy.
That which was promised next is, to declare the impossibility of grounding evangelic government in the imitation of the Jewish priesthood; which will be done by considering both the quality of the persons, and the office itself. Aaron and his sons were the princes of their tribe, before they were sanctified to the priesthood: that personal eminence, which they held above the other Levites, they received not only from their office, but partly brought it into their office; and so from that time forward the priests were not chosen out of the whole number of the Levites, as our bishops, but were born inheritors of the dignity. Therefore, unless we shall choose our prelates only out of the nobility, and let them run in a blood, there can be no possible imitation of lording over their brethren in regard of their persons altogether unlike. As for the office, which was a representation of Christ’s own person more immediately in the high-priest, and of his whole priestly office in all the other, to the performance of which the Levites were but servitors and deacons, it was necessary there should be a distinction of dignity between two functions of so great odds. But there being no such difference among our ministers, unless it be in reference to the deacons, it is impossible to found a prelaty upon the imitation of this priesthood: for wherein, or in what work, is the office of a prelate excellent above that of a pastor? In ordination you will say; but flatly against Scripture: for there we know Timothy received ordination by the hands of the presbytery, notwithstanding all the vain delusions Edition: current; Page: [54] that are used to evade that testimony, and maintain an unwarrantable usurpation. But wherefore should ordination be a cause of setting up a superior degree in the church? Is not that whereby Christ became our Saviour a higher and greater work, than that whereby he did ordain messengers to preach and publish him our Saviour? Every minister sustains the person of Christ in his highest work of communicating to us the mysteries of our salvation, and hath the power of binding and absolving; how should he need a higher dignity, to represent or execute that which is an inferior work in Christ? Why should the performance of ordination, which is a lower office, exalt a prelate, and not the seldom discharge of a higher and more noble office, which is preaching and administering, much rather depress him? Verily, neither the nature nor the example of ordination doth any way require an imparity between the ordainer and the ordained; for what more natural than every like to produce his like, man to beget man, fire to propagate fire? And in examples of highest opinion, the ordainer is inferior to the ordained; for the pope is not made by the precedent pope, but by cardinals, who ordain and consecrate to a higher and greater office than their own.
CHAPTER V.
To the arguments of bishop Andrews and the Primate.
It follows here to attend to certain objections in a little treatise lately printed among others of like sort at Oxford, and in the title said to be out of the rude draughts of bishop Andrews: and surely they be rude draughts indeed, insomuch that it is marvel to think what his friends meant, to let come abroad such shallow reasonings with the name of a man so much bruited for learning. In the twelfth and twenty-third pages he seems most notoriously inconstant to himself; for in the former place he tells us he forbears to take any argument of prelaty from Aaron, as being the type of Christ. In the latter he can forbear no longer, but repents him of his rash gratuity, affirming, that to say, Christ being come in the flesh, his figure in the high priest ceaseth, is the shift of an anabaptist; and stiffly argues, that Christ being as well king as priest, was as well fore-resembled by the kings then, as by the high priest: so that if his coming take away the one type, it must also the other. Marvellous piece of divinity! and well worth that the land should pay six thousand pounds a year for in a bishopric; although I read of no sophister among the Greeks that was so dear, neither Hippias nor Protagoras, nor any whom the Socratic school famously refuted without hire. Here we have the type of the king sewed to the tippet of the bishop, subtilely to cast a jealousy upon the crown, as if the right of kings, like Meleager in the Metamorphosis, were no longer-lived than the firebrand of prelaty. But more likely the prelates fearing (for their own guilty carriage protests they do fear) that their fair days cannot long hold, practise by possessing the king with this most false doctrine, to engage his power for them, as in his own quarrel, that when they fall they may fall in a general ruin; just as cruel Tiberius would wish:
“When I die let the earth be rolled in flames.”
But where, O bishop, doth the purpose of the law set forth Christ to us as a king? That which never was intended in the law, can never be abolished as a part thereof. When the law was made, there was no king: Edition: current; Page: [55] if before the law, or under the law, God by a special type in any king would foresignify the future kingdom of Christ, which is not yet visibly come; what was that to the law? The whole ceremonial law (and types can be in no law else) comprehends nothing but the propitiatory office of Christ’s priesthood, which being in substance accomplished, both law and priesthood fades away of itself, and passes into air like a transitory vision, and the right of kings neither stands by any type nor falls. We acknowledge that the civil magistrate wears an authority of God’s giving, and ought to be obeyed as his vicegerent. But to make a king a type, we say is an abusive and unskilful speech, and of a moral solidity makes it seem a ceremonial shadow: therefore your typical chain of king and priest must unlink. But is not the type of priest taken away by Christ’s coming? No, saith this famous protestant bishop of Winchester, it is not; and he that saith it is, is an anabaptist. What think ye, readers, do ye not understand him? What can be gathered hence, but that the prelate would still sacrifice? Conceive him, readers, he would missificate. Their altars, indeed, were in a fair forwardness; and by such arguments as these they were setting up the molten calf of their mass again, and of their great hierarch the pope. For if the type of priest be not taken away, then neither of the high priest, it were a strange beheading; and high priest more than one there cannot be, and that one can be no less than a pope. And this doubtless was the bent of his career, though never so covertly. Yea, but there was something else in the high priest, besides the figure as is plain by St. Paul’s acknowledging him. It is true, that in the 17th of Deut., whence this authority arises to the priest in matters too hard for the secular judges, as must needs be many in the occasions of those times, involved with ceremonial niceties, no wonder though it be commanded to inquire at the mouth of the priests, who besides the magistrates their colleagues, had the oracle of urim to consult with. And whether the high priest Ananias had not encroached beyond the limits of his priestly authority, or whether he used it rightly, was no time then for St. Paul to contest about. But if this instance be able to assert any right of jurisdiction to the clergy, it must impart it in common to all ministers, since it were a great folly to seek for counsel in a hard intricate scruple from a dunce prelate, when there might be found a speedier solution from a grave and learned minister, whom God hath gifted with the judgment of urim, more amply ofttimes than all the prelates together; and now in the gospel hath granted the privilege of this oraculous ephod alike to all his ministers. The reason therefore of imparity in the priests, being now, as is aforesaid, really annulled both in their person and in their representative office, what right of jurisdiction soever can be from this place levitically bequeathed, must descend upon the ministers of the gospel equally, as it finds them in all other points equal. Well, then, he is finally content to let Aaron go; Eleazar will serve his turn, as being a superior of superiors, and yet no type of Christ in Aaron’s lifetime. O thou that wouldest wind into any figment, or phantasm, to save thy mite! yet all this will not fadge, though it be cunningly interpolished by some second hand with crooks and emendations: hear then, the type of Christ in some one particular, as of entering yearly into the holy of holies, and such like, rested upon the high priest only as more immediately personating our Saviour: but to resemble his whole satisfactory office, all the lineage of Aaron was no more than sufficient. And all or any of the priests, considered separately without relation to the highest, are but as a lifeless trunk, and signify nothing. And this shows the excellence of Christ’s sacrifice, who at once and in one person fulfilled that which many hundreds of priests many times repeating had Edition: current; Page: [56] enough to foreshow. What other imparity there was among themselves, we may safely suppose it depended on the dignity of their birth and family, together with the circumstances of a carnal service, which might afford many priorities. And this I take to be the sum of what the bishop hath laid together to make plea for prelaty by imitation of the law: though indeed, if it may stand, it will infer popedom all as well. Many other courses he tries, enforcing himself with much ostentation of endless genealogies, as if he were the man that St. Paul forewarns us of in Timothy, but so unvigorously, that I do not fear his winning of many to his cause, but such as doting upon great names are either over-weak, or over-sudden of faith. I shall not refuse, therefore, to learn so much prudence as I find in the Roman soldier that attended the cross, not to stand breaking of legs, when the breath is quite out of the body, but pass to that which follows. The primate of Armagh at the beginning of his tractate seeks to avail himself of that place in the sixty-sixth of Isaiah, “I will take of them for priests and Levites, saith the Lord,” to uphold hereby such a form of superiority among the ministers of the gospel, succeeding those in the law, as the Lord’s-day did the sabbath. But certain if this method may be admitted of interpreting those prophetical passages concerning Christian times and a punctual correspondence, it may with equal probability be urged upon us, that we are bound to observe some monthly solemnity answerable to the new moons, as well as the Lord’s-day which we keep in lieu of the sabbath: for in the 23d verse the prophet joins them in the same manner together, as before he did the priests and Levites, thus: “And it shall come to pass that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the Lord.” Undoubtedly, with as good consequence may it be alleged from hence, that we are to solemnize some religious monthly meeting different from the sabbath, as from the other any distinct formality of ecclesiastical orders may be inferred. This rather will appear to be the lawful and unconstrained sense of the text, that God, in taking of them for priests and Levites, will not esteem them unworthy, though Gentiles, to undergo any function in the church, but will make of them a full and perfect ministry, as was that of the priests and Levites in their kind. And bishop Andrews himself, to end the controversy, sends us a candid exposition of this quoted verse from the 24th page of his said book, plainly deciding that God, by those legal names there of priests and Levites, means our presbyters and deacons; for which either ingenuous confession, or slip of his pen, we give him thanks, and withal to him that brought these treatises into one volume, who, setting the contradictions of two learned men so near together, did not foresee. What other deducements or analogies are cited out of St. Paul, to prove a likeness between the ministers of the Old and New Testament, having tried their sinews, I judge they may pass without harm-doing to our cause. We may remember, then, that prelaty neither hath nor can have foundation in the law, nor yet in the gospel; which assertion, as being for the plainness thereof a matter of eyesight rather than of disquisition, I voluntarily omit; not forgetting to specify this note again, that the earnest desire which the prelates have to build their hierarchy upon the sandy bottom of the law, gives us to see abundantly the little assurance, which they find to rear up their high roofs by the authority of the gospel, repulsed as it were from the writings of the apostles, and driven to take sanctuary among the Jews. Hence that open confession of the primate before mentioned: “Episcopacy is fetched partly from the pattern of the Old Testament, and partly from the New as an imitation of the Old;” though nothing can be more rotten in divinity than such Edition: current; Page: [57] a position as this, and is all one as to say, episcopacy is partly of divine institution, and partly of man’s own carving. For who gave the authority to fetch more from the pattern of the law, than what the apostles had already fetched, if they fetched any thing at all, as hath been proved they did not? So was Jeroboam’s episcopacy partly from the pattern of the law, and partly from the pattern of his own carnality; a party-coloured and a party-membered episcopacy: and what can this be else than a monstrous? Others therefore among the prelates, perhaps not so well able to brook, or rather to justify, this foul relapsing to the old law, have condescended at last to a plain confessing, that both the names and offices of bishops and presbyters at first were the same, and in the Scriptures nowhere distinguished. This grants the remonstrant in the fifth section of his defence, and in the preface to his last short answer. But what need respect be had, whether he grant or grant it not, when as through all antiquity, and even in the loftiest times of prelaty, we find it granted? Jerome, the learnedest of the fathers, hides not his opinion, that custom only, which the proverb calls a tyrant, was the maker of prelaty; before his audacious workmanship the churches were ruled in common by the presbyters: and such a certain truth this was esteemed, that it became a decree among the papal canons compiled by Gratian. Anselm also of Canterbury, who, to uphold the points of his prelatism, made himself a traitor to his country, yet, commenting the epistles to Titus and the Philippians, acknowledges, from the clearness of the text, what Jerome and the church rubric hath before acknowledged. He little dreamed then, that the weeding-hook of reformation would after two ages pluck up his glorious poppy from insulting over the good corn. Though since some of our British prelates, seeing themselves pressed to produce Scripture, try all their cunning, if the New Testament will not help them, to frame of their own heads, as it were with wax, a kind of mimic bishop limned out to the life of a dead priesthood: or else they would strain us out a certain figurative prelate, by wringing the collective allegory of those seven angels into seven single rochets. Howsoever, since it thus appears that custom was the creator of prelaty, being less ancient than the government of presbyters, it is an extreme folly to give them the hearing that tell us of bishops through so many ages: and if against their tedious muster of citations, sees, and successions, it be replied that wagers and church-antiquities, such as are repugnant to the plain dictate of Scripture, are both alike the arguments of fools, they have their answer. We rather are to cite all those ages to an arraignment before the word of God, wherefore, and what pretending, how presuming they durst alter that divine institution of presbyters, which the apostles, who were no various and inconstant men, surely had set up in the churches; and why they choose to live by custom and catalogue, or, as St. Paul saith, by sight and visibility, rather than by faith? But, first, I conclude, from their own mouths, that God’s command in Scripture, which doubtless ought to be the first and greatest reason of church-government, is wanting to prelaty. And certainly we have plenteous warrant in the doctrine of Christ, to determine that the want of this reason is of itself sufficient to confute all other pretences, that may be brought in favour of it.
CHAPTER VI.
That prelaty was not set up for prevention of schism, as is pretended; or if it were, that it performs not what it was first set up for, but quite the contrary.
Yet because it hath the outside of a specious reason, and specious things we know are aptest to work with human lightness and frailty, even against the solidest truth that sounds not plausibly, let us think it worth the examining for the love of infirmer Christians, of what importance this their second reason may be. Tradition they say hath taught them, that, for the prevention of growing schism, the bishop was heaved above the presbyter. And must tradition then ever thus to the world’s end be the perpetual cankerworm to eat out God’s commandments? Are his decrees so inconsiderate and so fickle, that when the statutes of Solon or Lycurgus shall prove durably good to many ages, his, in forty years, shall be found defective, ill-contrived, and for needful causes to be altered? Our Saviour and his apostles did not only foresee, but foretell and forewarn us to look for schism. Is it a thing to be imagined of God’s wisdom, or at least of apostolic prudence, to set up such a government in the tenderness of the church as should incline, or not be more able than any others to oppose itself to schism? It was well known what a bold lurker schism was, even in the household of Christ, between his own disciples and those of John the Baptist about fasting; and early in the Acts of the Apostles the noise of schism had almost drowned the proclaiming of the gospel; yet we read not in Scripture, that any thought was had of making prelates, no not in those places where dissension was most rife. If prelaty had been then esteemed a remedy against schism, where was it more needful than in that great variance among the Corinthians, which St. Paul so laboured to reconcile? and whose eye could have found the fittest remedy sooner than his? And what could have made the remedy more available, than to have used it speedily? And lastly, what could have been more necessary, than to have written it for our instruction? Yet we see he neither commended it to us, nor used it himself. For the same division remaining there, or else bursting forth again more than twenty years after St. Paul’s death, we find in Clement’s epistle, of venerable authority, written to the yet factious Corinthians, that they were still governed by presbyters. And the same of other churches out of Hermas, and divers other the scholars of the apostles, by the late industry of the learned Salmasius appears. Neither yet did this worthy Clement, St. Paul’s disciple, though writing to them to lay aside schism, in the least word advise them to change the presbyterian government into prelaty. And therefore if God afterward gave or permitted this insurrection of episcopacy, it is to be feared he did it in his wrath, as he gave the Israelites a king. With so good a will doth he use to alter his own chosen government once established. For mark whether this rare device of man’s brain, thus preferred before the ordinance of God, had better success than fleshly wisdom, not counselling with God, is wont to have. So far was it from removing schism, that if schism parted the congregations before, now it rent and mangled, now it raged. Heresy begat heresy with a certain monstrous haste of pregnancy in her birth, at once born and bringing forth. Contentions, before brotherly, were now hostile. Men went to choose their bishop as they went to a pitched field, and the day of his election was like the sacking of a city, sometimes Edition: current; Page: [59] ended with the blood of thousands. Nor this among heretics only, but men of the same belief, yea, confessors; and that with such odious ambition, that Eusebius, in his eighth book, testifies he abhorred to write. And the reason is not obscure, for the poor dignity, or rather burden, of a parochial presbyter could not engage any great party, nor that to any deadly feud: but prelaty was a power of that extent and sway, that if her election were popular, it was seldom not the cause of some faction or broil in the church. But if her dignity came by favour of some prince, she was from that time his creature, and obnoxious to comply with his ends in state, were they right or wrong. So that, instead of finding prelaty an impeacher of schism or faction, the more I search, the more I grow into all persuasion to think rather that faction and she, as with a spousal ring, are wedded together, never to be divorced. But here let every one behold the just and dreadful judgment of God meeting with the audacious pride of man, that durst offer to mend the ordinances of heaven. God, out of the strife of men, brought forth by his apostles to the church that beneficent and ever-distributing office of deacons, the stewards and ministers of holy alms: man, out of the pretended care of peace and unity, being caught in the snare of his impious boldness to correct the will of Christ, brought forth to himself upon the church that irreconcilable schism of perdition and apostasy, the Roman antichrist; for that the exaltation of the pope arose out of the reason of prelaty, it cannot be denied. And as I noted before, that the pattern of the high priest pleaded for in the gospel, (for take away the head priest, the rest are but a carcase,) sets up with better reason a pope than an archbishop; for if prelaty must still rise and rise till it come to a primate, why should it stay there? when as the catholic government is not to follow the division of kingdoms, the temple best representing the universal church, and the high priest the universal head: so I observe here, that if to quiet schism there must be one head of prelaty in a land, or monarchy, rising from a provincial to a national primacy, there may, upon better grounds of repressing schism, be set up one catholic head over the catholic church. For the peace and good of the church is not terminated in the schismless estate of one or two kingdoms, but should be provided for by the joint consultation of all reformed Christendom: that all controversy may end in the final pronounce or canon of one archprimate or protestant pope. Although by this means, for aught I see, all the diameters of schism may as well meet and be knit up in the centre of one grand falsehood. Now let all impartial men arbitrate what goodly inference these two main reasons of the prelates have, that by a natural league of consequence make more for the pope than for themselves; yea, to say more home, are the very womb for a new subantichrist to breed in, if it be not rather the old force and power of the same man of sin counterfeiting protestant. It was not the prevention of schism but it was schism itself, and the hateful thirst of lording in the church, that first bestowed a being upon prelaty; this was the true cause, but the pretence is still the same. The prelates, as they would have it thought, are the only mauls of schism. Forsooth if they be put down, a deluge of innumerable sects will follow; we shall be all Brownists, Familists, Anabaptists. For the word Puritan seems to be quashed, and all that heretofore were counted such, are now Brownists. And thus do they raise an evil report upon the expected reforming grace that God hath bid us hope for; like those faithless spies, whose carcases shall perish in the wilderness of their own confused ignorance, and never taste the good of reformation. Do they keep away schism? If to bring a numb and chill stupidity of soul, an unactive blindness of mind, upon the people by their leaden doctrine, or no Edition: current; Page: [60] doctrine at all; if to persecute all knowing and zealous Christians by the violence of their courts, be to keep away schism, they keep schism away indeed: and by this kind of discipline all Italy and Spain is as purely and politically kept from schism as England hath been by them. With as good a plea might the dead-palsy boast to a man, It is I that free you from stitches and pains, and the troublesome feeling of cold and heat, of wounds and strokes; if I were gone, all these would molest you. The winter might as well vaunt itself against the spring, I destroy all noisome and rank weeds, I keep down all pestilent vapours; yes, and all wholesome herbs, and all fresh dews, by your violent and hidebound frost: but when the gentle west winds shall open the fruitful bosom of the earth, thus over-girded by your imprisonment, then the flowers put forth and spring, and then the sun shall scatter the mists, and the manuring hand of the tiller shall root up all that burdens the soil without thank to your bondage. But far worse than any frozen captivity is the bondage of prelates; for that other, if it keep down any thing which is good within the earth, so doth it likewise that which is ill; but these let out freely the ill, and keep down the good, or else keep down the lesser ill, and let out the greatest. Be ashamed at last to tell the parliament, ye curb schismatics, whenas they know ye cherish and side with papists, and are now as it were one party with them; and it is said they help to petition for ye. Can we believe that your government strains in good earnest at the petty gnats of schism, whenas we see it makes nothing to swallow the camel heresy of Rome, but that indeed your thoats are of the right pharisaical strain? where are those schismatics, with whom the prelates hold such hot skirmish? show us your acts, those glorious annals which your courts of loathed memory lately deceased have left us? Those schismatics I doubt me will be found the most of them such as whose only schism was to have spoken the truth against your high abominations and cruelties in the church; this is the schism ye hate most, the removal of your criminous hierarchy. A politic government of yours, and of a pleasant conceit, set up to remove those as a pretended schism, that would remove you as a palpable heresy in government. If the schism would pardon ye that, she might go jagged in as many cuts and slashes as she pleased for you. As for the rending of the church, we have many reasons to think it is not that which ye labour to prevent, so much as the rending of your pontifical sleeves: that schism would be the sorest schism to you; that would be Brownism and Anabaptism indeed. If we go down, say you, (as if Adrian’s wall were broken,) a flood of sects will rush in. What sects? What are their opinions? Give us the inventory: it will appear both by your former prosecutions and your present instances, that they are only such to speak of, as are offended with your lawless government, your ceremonies, your liturgy, an extract of the mass-book translated. But that they should be contemners of public prayer, and churches used without superstition, I trust God will manifest it ere it long to be as false a slander, as your former slanders against the Scots. Noise it till ye be hoarse, that a rabble of sects will come in; it will be answered ye, no rabble, sir priest, but an unanimous multitude of good protestants will then join to the church, which now, because of you, stand separated. This will be the dreadful consequence of your removal. As for those terrible names of sectaries and schismatics, which ye have got together, we know your manner of fight, when the quiver of your arguments, which is ever thin, and weakly stored, after the first brunt is quite empty, your course is to betake ye to your other quiver of slander, wherein lies your best archery. And whom you could not move by sophistical arguing, them you think to confute by scandalous misnaming; thereby inciting the Edition: current; Page: [61] blinder sort of people to mislike and deride sound doctrine and good Christianity, under two or three vile and hateful terms. But if we could easily endure and dissolve your doughtiest reasons in argument, we shall more easily bear the worst of your unreasonableness in calumny and false report: especially being foretold by Christ, that if he our master were by your predecessors called Samaritan and Beelzebub, we must not think it strange if his best disciples in the reformation as at first by those of your tribe they were called Lollards and Hussites, so now by you be termed Puritans and Brownists. But my hope is, that the people of England will not suffer themselves to be juggled thus out of their faith and religion by a mist of names cast before their eyes, but will search wisely by the Scriptures, and look quite through this fraudulent aspersion of a disgraceful name into the things themselves: knowing that the primitive Christians in their times were accounted such as are now called Familists and Adamites, or worse. And many on the prelatic side, like the church of Sardis, have a name to live, and yet are dead; to be protestants, and are indeed papists in most of their principles. Thus persuaded, this your old fallacy we shall soon unmask, and quickly apprehend how you prevent schism, and who are your schismatics. But what if ye prevent and hinder all goods means of preventing schism? That way which the apostles used, was to call a council; from which, by any thing that can be learned from the fifteenth of the Acts, no faithful Christian was debarred, to whom knowledge and piety might give entrance. Of such a council as this every parochial consistory is a right homogeneous and constituting part, being in itself, as it were, a little synod, and towards a general assembly moving upon her own basis in an even and firm progression, as those smaller squares in battle unite in one great cube, the main phalanx, an emblem of truth and steadfastness. Whereas, on the other side, prelaty ascending by a gradual monarchy from bishop to archbishop, from thence to primate, and from thence, for there can be no reason yielded neither in nature nor in religion, wherefore, if it have lawfully mounted thus high, it should not be a lordly ascendant in the horoscope of the church, from primate to patriarch, and so to pope: I say prelaty thus ascending in a continual pyramid upon pretence to perfect the church’s unity, if notwithstanding it be found most needful, yea the utmost help to darn up the rents of schism by calling a council, what does it but teach us that prelaty is of no force to effect this work, which she boasts to be her masterpiece; and that her pyramid aspires and sharpens to ambition, not to perfection or unity? This we know, that as often as any great schism disparts the church, and synods be proclaimed, the presbyters have as great right there, and as free vote of old, as the bishops, which the canon law conceals not. So that prelaty, if she will seek to close up divisions in the church, must be forced to dissolve and unmake her own pyramidal figure, which she affirms to be of such uniting power, whenas indeed it is the most dividing and schismatical form that geometricians know of, and must be fain to inglobe or incube herself among the presbyters; which she hating to do, sends her haughty prelates from all parts with their forked mitres, the badge of schism, or the stamp of his cloven foot whom they serve I think, who, according to their hierarchies acuminating still higher and higher in a cone of prelaty, instead of healing up the gashes of the church, as it happens in such pointed bodies meeting, fall to gore one another with their sharp spires for upper place and precedence, till the council itself proves the greatest schism of all. And thus they are so far from hindering dissension, that they have made unprofitable, and even noisome, the chiefest remedy we have to keep Christendom at one, which is by councils: and these, if we rightly consider apostolic example, Edition: current; Page: [62] are nothing else but general presbyteries. This seemed so far from the apostles to think much of, as if hereby their dignity were impaired, that, as we may gather by those epistles of Peter and John, which are likely to be latest written, when the church grew to a settling, like those heroic patricians of Rome (if we may use such comparison) hastening to lay down their dictatorship, they rejoiced to call themselves, and to be as fellow-elders among their brethren; knowing that their high office was but as the scaffolding of the church yet unbuilt, and would be but a troublesome disfigurement, so soon as the building was finished. But the lofty minds of an age or two after, such was their small discerning, thought it a poor indignity, that the high-reared government of the church should so on a sudden, as it seemed to them, squat into a presbytery. Next, or rather, before councils, the timeliest prevention of schism is to preach the gospel abundantly and powerfully throughout all the land, to instruct the youth religiously, to endeavour how the Scriptures may be easiest understood by all men; to all which the proceedings of these men have been on set purpose contrary.
But how, O prelates, should you remove schism? and how should you not remove and oppose all the means of removing schism? when prelaty is a schism itself from the most reformed and most flourishing of our neighbour churches abroad, and a sad subject of discord and offence to the whole nation at home. The remedy which you allege, is the very disease we groan under; and never can be to us a remedy but by removing itself. Your predecessors were believed to assume this pre-eminence above their brethren, only that they might appease dissension. Now God and the church call upon you, for the same reason, to lay it down, as being to thousands of good men offensive, burdensome, intolerable. Surrender that pledge, which, unless you foully usurped it; the church gave you, and now claims it again, for the reason she first lent it. Discharge the trust committed to you, prevent schism; and that ye can never do, but by discharging yourselves. That government which ye hold, we confess, prevents much, hinders much, removes much; but what? the schisms and grievances of the church? no, but all the peace and unity, all the welfare not of the church alone, but of the whole kingdom. And if it be still permitted ye to hold, will cause the most sad, I know not whether separation be enough to say, but such a wide gulf of distraction in this land, as will never close her dismal gap until ye be forced, (for of yourselves you will never do as that Roman, Curtius, nobly did,) for the church’s peace and your country’s, to leap into the midst, and be no more seen. By this we shall know whether yours be that ancient prelaty, which you say was first constituted for the reducement of quiet and unanimity into the church, for then you will not delay to prefer that above your own preferment. If otherwise, we must be confident that your prelaty is nothing else but your ambition, an insolent preferring of yourselves above your brethren; and all your learned scraping in antiquity, even to disturb the bones of old Aaron and his sons in their graves, is but to maintain and set upon our necks a stately and severe dignity, which you called sacred, and is nothing in very deed but a grave and reverend gluttony, a sanctimonious avarice; in comparison of which, all the duties and dearnesses which ye owe to God or to his church, to law, custom, or nature, ye have resolved to set at nought. I could put you in mind what counsel Clement, a fellow-labourer with the apostles, gave to the presbyters of Corinth, whom the people, though unjustly, sought to remove. “Who among you,” saith he, “is noble-minded, who is pitiful, who is charitable? let him say thus, If for me this sedition, this enmity, Edition: current; Page: [63] these differences be, I willingly depart, I go my ways; only let the flock of Christ be at peace with the presbyters that are set over it. He that shall do this,” saith he, “shall get him great honour in the Lord, and all places will receive him.” This was Clement’s counsel to good and holy men, that they should depart rather from their just office, than by their stay to ravel out the seamless garment of concord in the church. But I have better counsel to give the prelates, and far more acceptable to their ears; this advice in my opinion is fitter for them: cling fast to your pontificial sees, bate not, quit yourselves like barons, stand to the utmost for your haughty courts and votes in parliament. Still tell us, that you prevent schism, though schism and combustion be the very issue of your bodies, your first-born; and set your country a bleeding in a prelatical mutiny, to fight for your pomp, and that ill-favoured weed of temporal honour, that sits dishonourably upon your laic shoulders; that ye may be fat and fleshy, swoln with high thoughts and big with mischievous designs, when God comes to visit upon you all this fourscore years’ vexation of his church under your Egyptian tyranny. For certainly of all those blessed souls which you have persecuted, and those miserable ones which you have lost, the just vengeance does not sleep.
CHAPTER VII.
That those many sects and schisms by some supposed to be among us, and that rebellion in Ireland, ought not to be a hinderance, but a hastening of reformation.
As for those many sects and divisions rumoured abroad to be amongst us, it is not hard to perceive, that they are partly the mere fictions and false alarms of the prelates, thereby to cast amazements and panic terrors into the hearts of weaker Christians, that they should not venture to change the present deformity of the church, for fear of I know not what worse inconveniences. With the same objected fears and suspicions, we know that subtle prelate Gardner sought to divert the reformation. It may suffice us to be taught by St. Paul, that there must be sects for the manifesting of those that are sound-hearted. These are but winds and flaws to try the floating vessel of our faith, whether it be stanch and sail well, whether our ballast be just, our anchorage and cable strong. By this is seen who lives by faith and certain knowledge, and who by credulity and the prevailing opinion of the age; whose virtue is of an unchangeable grain, and whose of a slight wash. If God come to try our constancy, we ought not to shrink or stand the less firmly for that, but pass on with more steadfast resolution to establish the truth, though it were through a lane of sects and heresies on each side. Other things men do to the glory of God; but sects and errors, it seems, God suffers to be for the glory of good men, that the world may know and reverence their true fortitude and undaunted constancy in the truth. Let us not therefore make these things an incumbrance, or an excuse of our delay in reforming, which God sends us as an incitement to proceed with more honour and alacrity: for if there were no opposition, where were the trial of an unfeigned goodness and magnanimity? Virtue that wavers is not virtue, but vice revolted from itself, and after a while returning. The actions of just and pious men do not darken in their middle Edition: current; Page: [64] course; but Solomon tells us, they are as the shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day. But if we shall suffer the trifling doubts and jealousies of future sects to overcloud the fair beginnings of purposed reformation, let us rather fear that another proverb of the same wise man be not upbraided to us, that “the way of the wicked is as darkness, they stumble at they know not what.” If sects and schisms be turbulent in the unsettled estate of a church, while it lies under the amending hand, it best beseems our Christian courage to think they are but as the throes and pangs that go before the birth of reformation, and that the work itself is now in doing. For if we look but on the nature of elemental and mixed things, we know they cannot suffer any change of one kind or quality into another, without the struggle of contrarieties. And in things artificial, seldom any elegance is wrought without a superfluous waste and refuse in the transaction. No marble statue can be politely carved, no fair edifice built, without almost as much rubbish and sweeping. Insomuch that even in the spiritual conflict of St. Paul’s conversion, there fell scales from his eyes, that were not perceived before. No wonder then in the reforming of a church, which is never brought to effect without the fierce encounter of truth and falsehood together, if, as it were, the splinters and shards of so violent a jousting, there fall from between the shock many fond errors and fanatic opinions, which, when truth has the upper hand, and the reformation shall be perfected, will easily be rid out of the way, or kept so low, as that they shall be only the exercise of our knowledge, not the disturbance or interruption of our faith. As for that which Barclay, in his “Image of Minds,” writes concerning the horrible and barbarous conceits of Englishmen in their religion, I deem it spoken like what he was, a fugitive papist traducing the island whence he sprung. It may be more judiciously gathered from hence, that the Englishman of many other nations is least atheistical, and bears a natural disposition of much reverence and awe towards the Deity; but in his weakness and want of better instruction, which among us too frequently is neglected, especially by the meaner sort, turning the bent of his own wits, with a scrupulous and ceaseless care, what he might do to inform himself aright of God and his worship, he may fall not unlikely sometimes, as any other landman, into an uncouth opinion. And verily if we look at his native towardliness in the roughcast without breeding, some nation or other may haply be better composed to a natural civility and right judgment than he. But if he get the benefit once of a wise and well rectified nurture, which must first come in general from the godly vigilance of the church, I suppose that wherever mention is made of countries, manners, or men, the English people, among the first that shall be praised, may deserve to be accounted a right pious, right honest, and right hardy nation. But thus while some stand dallying and deferring to reform for fear of that which should mainly hasten them forward, lest schism and error should increase, we may now thank ourselves and our delays, if instead of schism a bloody and inhuman rebellion be strook in between our slow movings. Indeed against violent and powerful opposition there can be no just blame of a lingering dispatch. But this I urge against those that discourse it for a maxim, as if the swift opportunities of establishing or reforming religion were to attend upon the phlegm of state business. In state many things at first are crude and hard to digest, which only time and deliberation can supple and concoct. But in religion, wherein is no immaturity, nothing out of season, it goes far otherwise. The door of grace turns upon smooth hinges, wide opening to send out, but soon shutting to recall the precious offers of mercy to a nation: which, unless watchfulness and zeal, Edition: current; Page: [65] two quicksighted and ready-handed virgins, be there in our behalf to receive, we lose: and still the oftener we lose, the straiter the door opens, and the less is offered. This is all we get by demurring in God’s service. It is not rebellion that ought to be the hinderance of reformation, but it is the want of this which is the cause of that. The prelates which boast themselves the only bridlers of schism, God knows have been so cold and backward both there and with us to repress heresy and idolatry, that either through their carelessness or their craft, all this mischief is befallen. What can the Irish subjects do less in God’s just displeasure against us, than revenge upon English bodies the little care that our prelates have had of their souls? Nor hath their negligence been new in that island, but ever notorious in Queen Elizabeth’s days, as Camden their known friend forbears not to complain. Yet so little are they touched with remorse of these their cruelties, (for these cruelties are theirs, the bloody revenge of those souls which they have famished,) that when as against our brethren the Scots, who, by their upright and loyal deeds, have now brought themselves an honourable name to posterity, whatsoever malice by slander could invent, rage in hostility attempt, they greedily attempted; toward these murderous Irish, the enemies of God and mankind, a cursed offspring of their own connivance, no man takes notice but that they seem to be very calmly and indifferently affected. Where then should we begin to extinguish a rebellion, that hath its cause from the misgovernment of the church? where, but at the church’s reformation, and the removal of that government, which pursues and wars with all good Christians under the name of schismatics, but maintains and fosters all papists and idolaters as tolerable Christians? And if the sacred Bible may be our light, we are neither without example, nor the witness of God himself, that the corrupted state of the church is both the cause of tumult and civil wars, and that to stint them, the peace of the church must first be settled. “Now, for a long season,” saith Azariah to King Asa, “Israel hath been without the true God, and without a teaching priest, and without law: and in those times there was no peace to him that went out, nor to him that came in, but great vexations were upon all the inhabitants of the countries. A nation was destroyed of nation, and city of city, for God did vex them with all adversity. Be ye strong therefore,” saith he to the reformers of that age, “and let not your hands be weak, for your work shall be rewarded.” And in those prophets that lived in the times of reformation after the captivity, often doth God stir up the people to consider, that while establishment of church-matters was neglected, and put off, there “was no peace to him that went out or came in; for I,” saith God, “had set all men every one against his neighbour.” But from the very day forward that they went seriously and effectually about the welfare of the church, he tells them, that they themselves might perceive the sudden change of things into a prosperous and peaceful condition. But it will here be said, that the reformation is a long work, and the miseries of Ireland are urgent of a speedy redress. They be indeed; and how speedy we are, the poor afflicted remnant of our martyred countrymen that sit there on the seashore, counting the hours of our delay with their sighs, and the minutes with their falling tears, perhaps with the distilling of their bloody wounds, if they have not quite by this time cast off, and almost cursed the vain hope of our foundered ships and aids, can best judge how speedy we are to their relief. But let their succours be hasted, as all need and reason is; and let not therefore the reformation, which is the chiefest cause of success and victory, be still procrastinated. They of the captivity in their greatest extremities could find both counsel and hands enough at Edition: current; Page: [66] once to build, and to expect the enemy’s assault. And we, for our parts, a populous and mighty nation, must needs be fallen into a strange plight either of effeminacy or confusion, if Ireland, that was once the conquest of one single earl with his private forces, and the small assistance of a petty Kernish prince, should now take up all the wisdom and prowess of this potent monarchy, to quell a barbarous crew of rebels, whom, if we take but the right course to subdue, that is, beginning at the reformation of our church, their own horrid murders and rapes will so fight against them, that the very sutlers and horse-boys of the camp will be able to rout and chase them, without the staining of any noble sword. To proceed by other method in this enterprise, be our captains and commanders never so expert, will be as great an error in the art of war, as any novice in soldiership ever committed. And thus I leave it as a declared truth, that neither the fear of sects, no, nor rebellion, can be a fit plea to stay reformation, but rather to push it forward with all possible diligence and speed.
THE SECOND BOOK.
How happy were it for this frail, and as it may be called mortal life of man, since all earthly things which have the name of good and convenient in our daily use, are withal so cumbersome and full of trouble, if knowledge, yet which is the best and lightsomest possession of the mind, were, as the common saying is, no burden; and that what it wanted of being a load to any part of the body, it did not with a heavy advantage overlay upon the spirit! For not to speak of that knowledge that rests in the contemplation of natural causes and dimensions, which must needs be a lower wisdom, as the object is low, certain it is, that he who hath obtained in more than the scantiest measure to know any thing distinctly of God, and of his true worship, and what is infallibly good and happy in the state of man’s life, what in itself evil and miserable, though vulgarly not so esteemed; he that hath obtained to know this, the only high valuable wisdom indeed, remembering also that God, even to a strictness, requires the improvement of these his entrusted gifts, cannot but sustain a sorer burden of mind, and more pressing, than any supportable toil or weight which the body can labour under, how and in what manner he shall dispose and employ those sums of knowledge and illumination, which God hath sent him into this world to trade with. And that which aggravates the burden more, is, that having received amongst his allotted parcels, certain precious truths, of such an orient lustre as no diamond can equal; which nevertheless he has in charge to put off at any cheap rate, yea, for nothing to them that will; the great merchants of this world, fearing that this course would soon discover and disgrace the false glitter of their deceitful wares, wherewith they abuse the people, like poor Indians with beads and glasses, practise by all means how they may suppress the vending of such rarities, and at such a cheapness as would undo them, and turn their trash upon their hands. Therefore by gratifying the corrupt desires of men in fleshly doctrines, they stir them up to persecute with hatred and contempt all those that seek to bear themselves uprightly in this their spiritual factory: which they foreseeing, though they cannot but testify of truth, and the excellency of that heavenly traffic which they bring, against what opposition or danger soever, Edition: current; Page: [67] yet needs must it sit heavily upon their spirits, that, being in God’s prime intention, and their own, selected heralds of peace, and dispensers of treasure inestimable, without price to them that have no peace, they find in the discharge of their commission, that they are made the greatest variance and offence, a very sword and fire both in house and city over the whole earth. This is that which the sad prophet Jeremiah laments: “Wo is me, my mother, that thou hast borne me, a man of strife and contention!” And although divine inspiration must certainly have been sweet to those ancient prophets, yet the irksomeness of that truth which they brought was so unpleasant unto them, that everywhere they call it a burden. Yea, that misterious book of revelation, which the great evangelist was bid to eat, as it had been some eyebrightening electuary of knowledge and foresight, though it were sweet in his mouth, and in the learning, it was bitter in his belly, bitter in the denouncing. Nor was this hid from the wise poet Sophocles, who in that place of his tragedy, where Tiresias is called to resolve king Œdipus in a matter which he knew would be grievous, brings him in bemoaning his lot that he knew more than other men. For surely to every good and peaceable man, it must in nature needs be a hateful thing to be the displeaser and molester of thousands; much better would it like him doubtless to be the messenger of gladness and contentment, which is his chief intended business to all mankind, but that they resist and oppose their own true happiness. But when God commands to take the trumpet, and blow a dolorous or jarring blast, it lies not in man’s will what he shall say, or what he shall conceal. If he shall think to be silent as Jeremiah did, because of the reproach and derision he met with daily, “and all his familiar friends watched for his halting,” to be revenged on him for speaking the truth, he would be forced to confess as he confessed; “his word was in my heart as a burning fire shut up in my bones; I was weary with forbearing and could not stay.” Which might teach these times not suddenly to condemn all things that are sharply spoken or vehemently written as proceeding out of stomach, virulence, and ill nature; but to consider rather, that if the prelates have leave to say the worst that can be said, or do the worst that can be done, while they strive to keep to themselves, to their great pleasure and commodity, those things which they ought to render up, no man can be justly offended with him that shall endeavour to impart and bestow, without any gain to himself, those sharp and saving words which would be a terror and a torment in him to keep back. For me, I have determined to lay up as the best treasure and solace of a good old age, if God vouchsafe it me, the honest liberty of free speech from my youth, where I shall think it available in so dear a concernment as the church’s good. For if I be, either by disposition or what other cause, too inquisitive, or suspicious of myself and mine own doings, who can help it? But this I foresee, that should the church be brought under heavy oppression, and God have given me ability the while to reason against that man that should be the author of so foul a deed; or should she, by blessing from above on the industry and courage of faithful men, change this her distracted estate into better days, without the least furtherance or contribution of those few talents, which God at that present had lent me; I foresee what stories I should hear within myself, all my life after, of discourage and reproach. Timorous and ungrateful, the church of God is now again at the foot of her insulting enemies, and thou bewailest; what matters it for thee, or thy bewailing? When time was, thou couldst not find a syllable of all that thou hast read, or studied, to utter in her behalf. Yet ease and leisure was given thee for thy retired thoughts, out of the sweat of other men. Edition: current; Page: [68] Thou hast the diligence, the parts, the language of a man, if a vain subject were to be adorned or beautified; but when the cause of God and his church was to be pleaded, for which purpose that tongue was given thee which thou hast, God listened if he could hear thy voice among his zealous servants, but thou wert dumb as a beast; from henceforward be that which thine own brutish silence hath made thee. Or else I should have heard on the other ear; slothful, and ever to be set light by, the church hath now overcome her late distresses after the unwearied labours of many her true servants that stood up in her defence; thou also wouldst take upon thee to share amongst them of their joy: but wherefore thou? Where canst thou show any word or deed of thine which might have hastened her peace? Whatever thou dost now talk, or write, or look, is the alms of other men’s active prudence and zeal. Dare not now to say or do any thing better than thy former sloth and infancy; or if thou darest, thou dost impudently to make a thrifty purchase of boldness to thyself, out of the painful merits of other men; what before was thy sin is now thy duty, to be abject and worthless. These, and such like lessons as these, I know would have been my matins duly, and my even-song. But now by this little diligence, mark what a privilege I have gained with good men and saints, to claim my right of lamenting the tribulations of the church, if she should suffer, when others, that have ventured nothing for her sake, have not the honour to be admitted mourners. But if she lift up her drooping head and prosper, among those that have something more than wished her welfare, I have my charter and freehold of rejoicing to me and my heirs. Concerning therefore this wayward subject against prelaty, the touching whereof is so distasteful and disquietous to a number of men, as by what hath been said I may deserve of charitable readers to be credited, that neither envy nor gall hath entered me upon this controversy, but the enforcement of conscience only, and a preventive fear lest the omitting of this duty should be against me, when I would store up to myself the good provision of peaceful hours: so, lest it should be still imputed to me, as I have found it hath been, that some self-pleasing humour of vain-glory hath incited me to contest with men of high estimation, now while green years are upon my head; from this needless surmisal I shall hope to dissuade the intelligent and equal auditor, if I can but say successfully that which in this exigent behoves me; although I would be heard only, if it might be, by the elegant and learned reader, to whom principally for a while I shall beg leave I may address myself. To him it will be no new thing, though I tell him that if I hunted after praise, by the ostentation of wit and learning, I should not write thus out of mine own season when I have neither yet completed to my mind the full circle of my private studies, although I complain not of any insufficiency to the matter in hand; or were I ready to my wishes, it were a folly to commit any thing elaborately composed to the careless and interrupted listening of these tumultuous times. Next, if I were wise only to my own ends, I would certainly take such a subject as of itself might catch applause, whereas this hath all the disadvantages on the contrary, and such a subject as the publishing whereof might be delayed at pleasure, and time enough to pencil it over with all the curious touches of art, even to the perfection of a faultless picture; whenas in this argument the not deferring is of great moment to the good speeding, that if solidity have leisure to do her office, art cannot have much. Lastly, I should not choose this manner of writing, wherein knowing myself inferior to myself, led by the genial power of nature to another task, I have the use, as I may account, but of my left hand. And though I shall be foolish in saying Edition: current; Page: [69] more to this purpose, yet, since it will be such a folly, as wisest men go about to commit, having only confessed and so committed, I may trust with more reason, because with more folly, to have courteous pardon. For although a poet, soaring in the high reason of his fancies, with his garland and singing robes about him, might, without apology, speak more of himself than I mean to do; yet for me sitting here below in the cool element of prose, a mortal thing among many readers of no empyreal conceit, to venture and divulge unusual things of myself, I shall petition to the gentler sort, it may not be envy to me. I must say therefore, that after I had for my first years, by the ceaseless diligence and care of my father, (whom God recompense!) been exercised to the tongues, and some sciences, as my age would suffer, by sundry masters and teachers both at home and at the schools, it was found, that whether aught was imposed me by them that had the overlooking, or betaken to of mine own choice in English, or other tongue, prosing or versing, but chiefly this latter, the style, by certain vital signs it had, was likely to live. But much latelier in the private academies of Italy, whither I was favoured to resort, perceiving that some trifles which I had in memory, composed at under twenty or thereabout, (for the manner is, that every one must give some proof of his wit and reading there,) met with acceptance above what was looked for; and other things, which I had shifted in scarcity of books and conveniences to patch up amongst them, were received with written encomiums, which the Italian is not forward to bestow on men of this side the Alps; I began thus far to assent both to them and divers of my friends here at home, and not less to an inward prompting which now grew daily upon me, that by labour and intense study, (which I take to be my portion in this life,) joined with the strong propensity of nature, I might perhaps leave something so written to aftertimes, as they should not willingly let it die. These thoughts at once possessed me, and these other; that if I were certain to write as men buy leases, for three lives and downward, there ought no regard be sooner had than to God’s glory, by the honour and instruction of my country. For which cause, and not only for that I knew it would be hard to arrive at the second rank among the Latins, I applied myself to that resolution, which Ariosto followed against the persuasions of Bembo, to fix all the industry and art I could unite to the adorning of my native tongue; not to make verbal curiosities the end, (that were a toilsome vanity,) but to be an interpreter and relater of the best and sagest things, among mine own citizens throughout this island in the mother dialect. That what the greatest and choicest wits of Athens, Rome, or modern Italy, and those Hebrews of old did for their country, I, in my proportion, with this over and above, of being a Christian, might do for mine; not caring to be once named abroad, though perhaps I could attain to that, but content with these British islands as my world; whose fortune hath hitherto been, that if the Athenians, as some say, made their small deeds great and renowned by their eloquent writers, England hath had her noble achievements made small by the unskilful handling of monks and mechanics.
Time serves not now, and perhaps I might seem too profuse to give any certain account of what the mind at home, in the spacious circuits of her musing, hath liberty to propose to herself, though of highest hope and hardest attempting; whether that epic form whereof the two poems of Homer, and those other two of Virgil and Tasso, are a diffuse, and the book of Job a brief model: or whether the rules of Aristotle herein are strictly to be kept, or nature to be followed, which in them that know art, and use judgment, is no transgression, but an enriching of art: and lastly, what Edition: current; Page: [70] king or knight, before the conquest, might be chosen in whom to lay the pattern of a Christian hero. And as Tasso gave to a prince of Italy his choice whether he would command him to write of Godfrey’s expedition against the Infidels, or Belisarius against the Goths, or Charlemagne against the Lombards; if to the instinct of nature and the emboldening of art aught may be trusted, and that there be nothing adverse in our climate, or the fate of this age, it haply would be no rashness, from an equal diligence and inclination, to present the like offer in our own ancient stories; or whether those dramatic constitutions, wherein Sophocles and Euripides reign, shall be found more doctrinal and exemplary to a nation. The Scripture also affords us a divine pastoral drama in the Song of Solomon, consisting of two persons, and a double chorus, as Origen rightly judges. And the Apocalypse of St. John is the majestic image of a high and stately tragedy, shutting up and intermingling her solemn scenes and acts with a sevenfold chorus of hallelujahs and harping symphonies: and this my opinion the grave authority of Pareus, commenting that book, is sufficient to confirm. Or if occasion shall lead, to imitate those magnific odes and hymns, wherein Pindarus and Callimachus are in most things worthy, some others in their frame judicious, in their matter most an end faulty. But those frequent songs throughout the law and prophets beyond all these, not in their divine argument alone, but in the very critical art of composition, may be easily made appear over all the kinds of lyric poesy to be incomparable. These abilities, wheresoever they be found, are the inspired gift of God rarely bestowed, but yet to some (though most abuse) in every nation: and are of power, beside the office of a pulpit, to imbreed and cherish in a great people the seeds of virtue and public civility, to allay the perturbations of the mind, and set the affections in right tune; to celebrate in glorious and lofty hymns the throne and equipage of God’s almightiness, and what he works, and what he suffers to be wrought with high providence in his church; to sing victorious agonies of martyrs and saints, the deeds and triumphs of just and pious nations, doing valiantly through faith against the enemies of Christ; to deplore the general relapses of kingdoms and states from justice and God’s true worship. Lastly, whatsoever in religion is holy and sublime, in virtue amiable or grave, whatsoever hath passion or admiration in all the changes of that which is called fortune from without, or the wily subtleties and refluxes of man’s thoughts from within; all these things with a solid and treatable smoothness to paint out and describe. Teaching over the whole book of sanctity and virtue, through all the instances of example, with such delight to those especially of soft and delicious temper, who will not so much as look upon truth herself, unless they see her elegantly dressed; that whereas the paths of honesty and good life appear now rugged and difficult, though they be indeed easy and pleasant, they will then appear to all men both easy and pleasant, though they were rugged and difficult indeed. And what a benefit this would be to our youth and gentry, may be soon guessed by what we know of the corruption and bane, which they suck in daily from the writings and interludes of libidinous and ignorant poetasters, who having scarce ever heard of that which is the main consistence of a true poem, the choice of such persons as they ought to introduce, and what is moral and decent to each one; do for the most part lay up vicious principles in sweet pills to be swallowed down, and make the taste of virtuous documents harsh and sour. But because the spirit of man cannot demean itself lively in this body, without some recreating intermission of labour and serious things, it were happy for the commonwealth, if our magistrates, as in those famous governments of old, would take into Edition: current; Page: [71] their care, not only the deciding of our contentious law cases and brawls, but the managing of our public sports and festival pastimes; that they might be, not such as were authorized a while since, the provocations of drunkenness and lust, but such as may inure and harden our bodies by martial exercises to all warlike skill and performance; and may civilize, adorn, and make discreet our minds by the learned and affable meeting of frequent academies, and the procurement of wise and artful recitations, sweetened with eloquent and graceful inticements to the love and practice of justice, temperance, and fortitude, instructing and bettering the nation at all opportunities, that the call of wisdom and virtue may be heard every where, as Solomon saith; “She crieth without, she uttereth her voice in the streets, in the top of high places, in the chief concourse, and in the openings of the gates.” Whether this may not be, not only in pulpits, but after another persuasive method, at set and solemn paneguries, in theatres, porches, or what other place or way, may win most upon the people to receive at once both recreation and instruction; let them in authority consult. The thing which I had to say, and those intentions which have lived within me ever since I could conceive myself any thing worth to my country, I return to crave excuse that urgent reason hath plucked from me, by an abortive and foredated discovery. And the accomplishment of them lies not but in a power above man’s to promise; but that none hath by more studious ways endeavoured, and with more unwearied spirit that none shall, that I dare almost aver of myself, as far as life and free leisure will extend; and that the land had once enfranchised herself from this impertinent yoke of prelaty, under whose inquisitorious and tyrannical duncery, no free and splendid wit can flourish. Neither do I think it shame to covenant with any knowing reader, that for some few years yet I may go on trust with him toward the payment of what I am now indebted, as being a work not to be raised from the heat of youth, or the vapours of wine; like that which flows at waste from the pen of some vulgar amourist, or the trencher fury of a rhyming parasite; nor to be obtained by the invocation of dame memory and her siren daughters, but by devout prayer to that eternal Spirit, who can enrich with all utterance and knowledge, and sends out his seraphim, with the hallowed fire of his altar, to touch and purify the lips of whom he pleases: to this must be added industrious and select reading, steady observation, insight into all seemly and generous arts and affairs; till which in some measure be compassed, at mine own peril and cost, I refuse not to sustain this expectation from as many as are not loth to hazard so much credulity upon the best pledges that I can give them. Although it nothing content me to have disclosed thus much before-hand, but that I trust hereby to make it manifest with what small willingness I endure to interrupt the pursuit of no less hopes than these, and leave a calm and pleasing solitariness, fed with cheerful and confident thoughts, to embark in a troubled sea of noises and hoarse disputes, put from beholding the bright countenance of truth in the quiet and still air of delightful studies, to come into the dim reflection of hollow antiquities sold by the seeming bulk, and there be fain to club quotations with men whose learning and belief lies in marginal stuffings, who, when they have, like good sumpters, laid ye down their horse-loads of citations and fathers at your door, with a rhapsody of who and who were bishops here or there, ye may take off their packsaddles, their day’s work is done, and episcopacy, as they think, stoutly vindicated. Let any gentle apprehension, that can distinguish learned pains from unlearned drudgery, imagine what pleasure or profoundness can be in this, or what honour to deal against such adversaries. But were it the meanest under-service, if Edition: current; Page: [72] God by his secretary conscience enjoin it, it were sad for me if I should draw back; for me especially, now when all men offer their aid to help, ease, and lighten the difficult labours of the church, to whose service, by the intentions of my parents and friends, I was destined of a child, and in mine own resolutions: till coming to some maturity of years, and perceiving what tyranny had invaded the church, that he who would take orders must subscribe slave, and take an oath withal, which, unless he took with a conscience that would retch, he must either straight perjure, or split his faith; I thought it better to prefer a blameless silence before the sacred office of speaking, bought and begun with servitude and forswearing. Howsoever thus church-outed by the prelates, hence may appear the right I have to meddle in these matters, as before the necessity and constraint appeared.
CHAPTER I.
That prelaty opposeth the reason and end of the gospel three ways; and first, in her outward form.
After this digression, it would remain that I should single out some other reason, which might undertake for prelaty to be a fit and lawful church-government; but finding none of like validity with these that have already sped according to their fortune, I shall add one reason why it is not to be thought a church-government at all, but a church-tyranny, and is at hostile terms with the end and reason of Christ’s evangelic ministry. Albeit I must confess to be half in doubt whether I should bring it forth or no, it being so contrary to the eye of the world, and the world so potent in most men’s hearts, that I shall endanger either not to be regarded, or not to be understood; for who is there almost that measures wisdom by simplicity, strength by suffering, dignity by lowliness? Who is there that counts it first to be last, something to be nothing, and reckons himself of great command in that he is a servant? Yet God, when he meant to subdue the world and hell at once, part of that to salvation, and this wholly to perdition, made choice of no other weapons or auxiliaries than these, whether to save or to destroy. It had been a small mastery for him to have drawn out his legions into array, and flanked them with his thunder; therefore he sent foolishness to confute wisdom, weakness to bind strength, despisedness to vanquish pride: and this is the great mystery of the gospel made good in Christ himself, who, as he testifies, came not to be ministered to, but to minister; and must be fulfilled in all his ministers till his second coming. To go against these principles St. Paul so feared, that if he should but affect the wisdom of words in his preaching, he thought it would be laid to his charge that he had made the cross of Christ to be of none effect. Whether, then, prelaty do not make of none effect the cross of Christ, by the principles it hath so contrary to these, nullifying the power and end of the gospel, it shall not want due proof, if it want not due belief. Neither shall I stand to trifle with one that would tell me of quiddities and formalities, whether prelaty or prelateity, in abstract notion be this or that; it suffices me that I find it in his skin, so I find it inseparable, or not oftener otherwise than a phœnix hath been seen; although I persuade me, that whatever faultiness was but superficial to prelaty at the beginning, is now, by the just judgment of God, long since branded and inworn into the very essence thereof. First, therefore, if to do the work of Edition: current; Page: [73] the gospel, Christ our Lord took upon him the form of a servant; how can his servant in this ministry take upon him the form of a lord? I know Bilson hath deciphered us all the gallantries of signore and monsignore, and monsieur, as circumstantially as any punctualist of Castile, Naples, or Fountain-Bleau, could have done: but this must not so compliment us out of our right minds, as to be to learn that the form of a servant was a mean, laborious, and vulgar life, aptest to teach; which form Christ thought fittest, that he might bring about his will according to his own principles, choosing the meaner things of this world, that he might put under the high. Now, whether the pompous garb, the lordly life, the wealth, the haughty distance of prelaty, be those meaner things of the world, whereby God in them would manage the mystery of his gospel, be it the verdict of common sense. For Christ saith in St. John, “The servant is not greater than his lord, nor he that is sent, greater than he that sent him;” and adds, “If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them.” Then let the prelates well advise, if they neither know, nor do these things, or if they know, and yet do them not, wherein their happiness consists. And thus is the gospel frustrated by the lordly form of prelaty.
CHAPTER II.
That the ceremonious doctrine of prelaty opposeth the reason and end of the gospel.
That which next declares the heavenly power, and reveals the deep mystery of the gospel, is the pure simplicity of doctrine, accounted the foolishness of this world, yet crossing and confounding the pride and wisdom of the flesh. And wherein consists this fleshly wisdom and pride? In being altogether ignorant of God and his worship? No surely, for men are naturally ashamed of that. Where then? It consists in a bold presumption of ordering the worship and service of God after man’s own will in traditions and ceremonies. Now if the pride and wisdom of the flesh were to be defeated and confounded, no doubt but in that very point wherein it was proudest, and thought itself wisest, that so the victory of the gospel might be the more illustrious. But our prelates, instead of expressing the spiritual power of their ministry, by warring against this chief bulwark and strong hold of the flesh, have entered into fast league with the principal enemy against whom they were sent, and turned the strength of fleshly pride and wisdom against the pure simplicity of saving truth. First, mistrusting to find the authority of their order in the immediate institution of Christ, or his apostles, by the clear evidence of Scripture, they fly to the carnal supportment of tradition; when we appeal to the Bible, they to the unwieldly volumes of tradition: and do not shame to reject the ordinance of him that is eternal, for the perverse iniquity of sixteen hundred years; choosing rather to think truth itself a liar, than that sixteen ages should be taxed with an error; not considering the general apostasy that was foretold, and the church’s flight into the wilderness. Nor is this enough; instead of showing the reason of their lowly condition from divine example and command, they seek to prove their high pre-eminence from human consent and authority. But let them chant while they will of prerogatives, we shall tell them of Scripture; of custom, we of Scripture; of acts and statutes, still of Scripture; till the quick and piercing word enter to the dividing of Edition: current; Page: [74] their souls, and the mighty weakness of the gospel throw down the weak mightiness of man’s reasoning. Now for their demeanour within the church, how have they disfigured and defaced that more than angelic brightness, the unclouded serenity of Christian religion, with the dark overcasting of superstitious copes and flaminical vestures, wearing on their backs, and I abhor to think, perhaps in some worse place, the inexpressible image of God the Father? Tell me, ye priests, wherefore this gold, wherefore these robes and surplices over the gospel? Is our religion guilty of the first trespass, and hath need of clothing to cover her nakedness? What does this else but cast an ignominy upon the perfection of Christ’s ministry, by seeking to adorn it with that which was the poor remedy of our shame? Believe it, wondrous doctors, all corporeal resemblances of inward holiness and beauty are now past; he that will clothe the gospel now, intimates plainly that the gospel is naked, uncomely, that I may not say reproachful. Do not, ye church-maskers, while Christ is clothing upon our barrenness with his righteous garment to make us acceptable in his Father’s sight; do not, as ye do, cover and hide his righteous verity with the polluted clothing of your ceremonies, to make it seem more decent in your own eyes. “How beautiful,” saith Isaiah, “are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth salvation!” Are the feet so beautiful, and is the very bringing of these tidings so decent of itself? What new decency can then be added to this by your spinstry? Ye think by these gaudy glisterings to stir up the devotion of the rude multitude; ye think so, because ye forsake the heavenly teaching of St. Paul for the hellish sophistry of papism. If the multitude be rude, the lips of the preacher must give knowledge, and not ceremonies. And although some Christians be new-born babes comparatively to some that are stronger, yet in respect of ceremony, which is but a rudiment of the law, the weakest Christian hath thrown off the robes of his minority, and is a perfect man, as to legal rites. What children’s food there is in the gospel, we know to be no other than the “sincerity of the word, that they may grow thereby.” But is here the utmost of your outbraving the service of God? No. Ye have been bold, not to set your threshold by his threshold, or your posts by his posts; but your sacrament, your sign, call it what you will, by his sacrament, baptizing the Christian infant with a solemn sprinkle, and unbaptizing for your own part with a profane and impious forefinger; as if when ye had laid the purifying element upon his forehead, ye meant to cancel and cross it out again with a character not of God’s bidding. O but the innocence of these ceremonies! O rather the sottish absurdity of this excuse. What could be more innocent than the washing of a cup, a glass, or hands, before meat, and that under the law, when so many washings were commanded, and by long tradition? yet our Saviour detested their customs, though never so seeming harmless, and charges them severely, that they had transgressed the commandments of God by their traditions, and worshipped him in vain. How much more then must these, and much grosser ceremonies now in force, delude the end of Christ’s coming in the flesh against the flesh, and stifle the sincerity of our new covenant, which hath bound us to forsake all carnal pride and wisdom, especially in matters of religion? Thus we see again how prelaty, failing in opposition to the main end and power of the gospel, doth not join in that mysterious work of Christ, by lowliness to confound height, by simplicity of doctrine the wisdom of the world, but contrariwise hath made itself high in the world and the flesh, to vanquish things by the world accounted low, and made itself wise in tradition and fleshly ceremony, to confound the purity of doctrine which is the wisdom of God.
CHAPTER III.
That prelatical jurisdiction opposeth the reason and end of the gospel and of state.
The third and last consideration remains, whether the prelates in their function do work according to the gospel, practising to subdue the mighty things of this world by things weak, which St. Paul hath set forth to be the power and excellence of the gospel; or whether in more likelihood they band themselves with the prevalent things of this world, to overrun the weak things which Christ hath made choice to work by: and this will soonest be discerned by the course of their jurisdiction. But here again I find my thoughts almost in suspense betwixt yea and no, and am nigh turning mine eye which way I may best retire, and not proceed in this subject, blaming the ardency of my mind that fixed me too attentively to come thus far. For truth, I know not how, hath this unhappiness fatal to her, ere she can come to the trial and inspection of the understanding; being to pass through many little wards and limits of the several affections and desires, she cannot shift it, but must put on such colours and attire, as those pathetic handmaids of the soul please to lead her in to their queen: and if she find so much favour with them, they let her pass in her own likeness; if not, they bring her into the presence habited and coloured like a notorious falsehood. And contrary, when any falsehood comes that way, if they like the errand she brings, they are so artful to counterfeit the very shape and visage of truth, that the understanding not being able to discern the fucus which these inchantresses with such cunning have laid upon the feature sometimes of truth, sometimes of falsehood interchangeably, sentences for the most part one for the other at the first blush, according to the subtle imposture of these sensual mistresses, that keep the ports and passages between her and the object. So that were it not for leaving imperfect that which is already said, I should go near to relinquish that which is to follow. And because I see that most men, as it happens in this world, either weakly or falsely principled, what through ignorance, and what through custom of licence, both in discourse and writing, by what hath been of late written in vulgar, have not seemed to attain the decision of this point: I shall likewise assay those wily arbitresses who in most men have, as was heard, the sole ushering of truth and falsehood between the sense and the soul, with what loyalty they will use me in convoying this truth to my understanding; the rather for that by as much acquaintance as I can obtain with them, I do not find them engaged either one way or other. Concerning therefore ecclesiastical jurisdiction, I find still more controversy, who should administer it, than diligent inquiry made to learn what it is: for had the pains been taken to search out that, it had been long ago enrolled to be nothing else but a pure tyrannical forgery of the prelates; and that jurisdictive power in the church there ought to be none at all. It cannot be conceived that what men now call jurisdiction in the church, should be other thing than a Christian censorship; and therefore it is most commonly and truly named ecclesiastical censure. Now if the Roman censor, a civil function, to that severe assize of surveying and controlling the privatest and slyest manners of all men and all degrees, had no jurisdiction, no courts of plea or inditement, no punitive force annexed; whether it were that to this manner of correction the intanglement of suits was improper, or that the notice of those upright inquisitors extended to such the most covert and spirituous vices Edition: current; Page: [76] as would slip easily between the wider and more material grasp of the law; or that it stood more with the majesty of that office to have no other sergeants or maces about them but those invisible ones of terror and shame; or, lastly, were it their fear, lest the greatness of this authority and honour, armed with jurisdiction, might step with ease into a tyranny: in all these respects, with much more reason undoubtedly ought the censure of the church be quite divested and disentailed of all jurisdiction whatsoever. For if the course of judicature to a political censorship seem either too tedious, or too contentious, much more may it to the discipline of the church, whose definitive decrees are to be speedy, but the execution of rigour slow, contrary to what in legal proceedings is most usual; and by how much the less contentious it is, by so much will it be the more Christian. And if the censor, in his moral episcopacy, being to judge most in matters not answerable by writ or action, could not use an instrument so gross and bodily as jurisdiction is, how can the minister of the gospel manage the corpulent and secular trial of bill and process in things merely spiritual? Or could that Roman office, without this juridical sword or saw, strike such a reverence of itself into the most undaunted hearts, as with one single dash of ignominy to put all the senate and knighthood of Rome into a tremble? Surely much rather might the heavenly ministry of the evangel bind herself about with far more piercing beams of majesty and awe, by wanting the beggarly help of halings and amercements in the use of her powerful keys. For when the church without temporal support is able to do her great works upon the unforced obedience of men, it argues a divinity about her. But when she thinks to credit and better her spiritual efficacy, and to win herself respect and dread by strutting in the false vizard of worldly authority, it is evident that God is not there, but that her apostolic virtue is departed from her, and hath left her key-cold; which she perceiving as in a decayed nature, seeks to the outward fomentations and chafings of worldly help, and external flourishes, to fetch, if it be possible, some motion into her extreme parts, or to hatch a counterfeit life with the crafty and artificial heat of jurisdiction. But it is observable, that so long as the church, in true imitation of Christ, can be content to ride upon an ass, carrying herself and her government along in a mean and simple guise, she may be, as he is, a lion of the tribe of Judah; and in her humility all men with loud hosannas will confess her greatness. But when despising the mighty operation of the Spirit by the weak things of this world, she thinks to make herself bigger and more considerable, by using the way of civil force and jurisdiction, as she sits upon this lion, she changes into an ass, and instead of hosannas, every man pelts her with stones and dirt. Lastly, if the wisdom of the Romans feared to commit jurisdiction to an office of so high esteem and dread as was the censor’s, we may see what a solecism in the art of policy it hath been, all this while through Christendom to give jurisdiction to ecclesiastical censure. For that strength, joined with religion, abused and pretended to ambitious ends, must of necessity breed the heaviest and most quelling tyranny not only upon the necks, but even to the souls of men: which if Christian Rome had been so cautelous to prevent in her church, as pagan Rome was in her state, we had not had such a lamentable experience thereof as now we have from thence upon all Christendom. For although I said before, that the church coveting to ride upon the lionly form of jurisdiction, makes a transformation of herself into an ass, and becomes despicable, that is, to those whom God hath enlightened with true knowledge; but where they remain yet in the relics of superstition, this is the extremity of their bondage and blindness, that while they think they do obeisance to the lordly vision of a Edition: current; Page: [77] lion, they do it to an ass, that through the just judgment of God is permitted to play the dragon among them because of their wilful stupidity. And let England here well rub her eyes, lest by leaving jurisdiction and church-censure to the same persons, now that God hath been so long medicining her eyesight, she do not with her over-politic fetches mar all, and bring herself back again to worship this ass bestriding a lion. Having hitherto explained, that to ecclesiastical censure no jurisdictive power can be added, without a childish and dangerous oversight in policy, and a pernicious contradiction in evangelical discipline, as anon more fully; it will be next to declare wherein the true reason and force of church-censure consists, which by then it shall be laid open to the root; so little is it that I fear lest any crookedness, any wrinkle or spot should be found in presbyterian government, that if Bodin the famous French writer, though a papist, yet affirms that the commonwealth which maintains this discipline will certainly flourish in virtue and piety; I dare assure myself, that every true protestant will admire the integrity, the uprightness, the divine and gracious purposes thereof, and even for the reason of it so coherent with the doctrine of the gospel, beside the evidence of command in Scripture, will confess it to be the only true church-government; and that contrary to the whole end and mystery of Christ’s coming in the flesh, a false appearance of the same is exercised by prelaty. But because some count it rigorous, and that hereby men shall be liable to a double punishment, I will begin somewhat higher, and speak of punishment; which, as it is an evil, I esteem to be of two sorts, or rather two degrees only, a reprobate conscience in this life, and hell in the other world. Whatever else men call punishment or censure, is not properly an evil, so it be not an illegal violence, but a saving medicine ordained of God both for the public and private good of man; who consisting of two parts, the inward and the outward, was by the eternal Providence left under two sorts of cure, the church and the magistrate. The magistrate hath only to deal with the outward part, I mean not of the body alone, but of the mind in all her outward acts, which in Scripture is called the outward man. So that it would be helpful to us if we might borrow such authority as the rhetoricians by patent may give us, with a kind of promethean skill to shape and fashion this outward man into the similitude of a body, and set him visible before us; imagining the inner man only as the soul. Thus then the civil magistrate looking only upon the outward man, (I say as a magistrate, for what he doth further, he doth it as a member of the church,) if he find in his complexion, skin, or outward temperature, the signs and marks, or in his doings the effects of injustice, rapine, lust, cruelty, or the like, sometimes he shuts up as in frenetic or infectious diseases; or confines within doors as in every sickly estate. Sometimes he shaves by penalty or mulct, or else to cool and take down those luxuriant humours which wealth and excess have caused to abound. Otherwhiles he sears, he cauterizes, he scarifies, lets blood; and finally, for utmost remedy cuts off. The patients, which most an end are brought into his hospital, are such as are far gone, and beside themselves, (unless they be falsely accused,) so that force is necessary to tame and quiet them in their unruly fits, before they can be made capable of a more humane cure. His general end is the outward peace and welfare of the commonwealth, and civil happiness in this life. His particular end in every man is, by the infliction of pain, damage, and disgrace, that the senses and common perceivance might carry this message to the soul within, that it is neither easeful, profitable, nor praiseworthy in this life to do evil. Which must needs tend to the good of man, whether he be to live or die; and be undoubtedly the first means Edition: current; Page: [78] to a natural man, especially an offender, which might open his eyes to a higher consideration of good and evil, as it is taught in religion. This is seen in the often penitence of those that suffer, who, had they escaped, had gone on sinning to an immeasurable heap, which is one of the extremest punishments. And this is all that the civil magistrate, as so being, confers to the healing of man’s mind, working only by terrifying plasters upon the rind and orifice of the sore; and by all outward appliances, as the logicians say, a posteriori, at the effect, and not from the cause; not once touching the inward bed of corruption, and that hectic disposition to evil, the source of all vice and obliquity against the rule of law. Which how insufficient it is to cure the soul of man, we cannot better guess than by the art of bodily physic. Therefore God, to the intent of further healing man’s depraved mind, to this power of the magistrate, which contents itself with the restraint of evil-doing in the external man, added that which we call censure, to purge it, and remove it clean out of the inmost soul.
In the beginning this authority seems to have been placed, as all both civil and religious rites once were, only in each father of a family; afterwards among the heathen, in the wise men and philosophers of the age; but so as it was a thing voluntary, and no set government. More distinctly among the Jews, as being God’s peculiar people, where the priests, Levites, prophets, and at last the scribes and pharisees, took charge of instructing and overseeing the lives of the people. But in the gospel, which is the straightest and the dearest covenant can be made between God and man, we being now his adopted sons, and nothing fitter for us to think on than to be like him, united to him, and, as he pleases to express it, to have fellowship with him; it is all necessity that we should expect this blessed efficacy of healing our inward man to be ministered to us in a more familiar and effectual method than ever before. God being now no more a judge after the sentence of the law, nor, as it were, a schoolmaster of perishable rites, but a most indulgent father, governing his church as a family of sons in their discreet age: and therefore, in the sweetest and mildest manner of paternal discipline, he hath committed his other office of preserving in healthful constitution the inner man, which may be termed the spirit of the soul, to his spiritual deputy the minister of each congregation; who being best acquainted with his own flock, hath best reason to know all the secretest diseases likely to be there. And look by how much the internal man is more excellent and noble than the external, by so much is his cure more exactly, and more thoroughly, and more particularly to be performed. For which cause the Holy Ghost by the apostles joined to the minister, as assistant in this great office, sometimes a certain number of grave and faithful brethren, (for neither doth the physician do all in restoring his patient, he prescribes, another prepares the medicine, some tend, some watch, some visit,) much more may a minister partly not see all, partly err as a man: besides, that nothing can be more for the mutual honour and love of the people to their pastor, and his to them, than when in select numbers and courses they are seen partaking and doing reverence to the holy duties of discipline by their serviceable and solemn presence, and receiving honour again from their employment, not now any more to be separated in the church by veils and partitions as laics and unclean, but admitted to wait upon the tabernacle as the rightful clergy of Christ, a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifice in that meet place, to which God and the congregation shall call and assign them. And this all Christians ought to know, that the title of clergy St. Peter gave to all God’s people, till pope Higinus and the succeeding prelates took it from them, Edition: current; Page: [79] appropriating that name to themselves and their priests only; and condemning the rest of God’s inheritance to an injurious and alienate condition of laity, they separated from them by local partitions in churches, through their gross ignorance and pride imitating the old temple, and excluding the members of Christ from the property of being members, the bearing of orderly and fit offices in the ecclesiastical body; as if they had meant to sew up that Jewish veil, which Christ by his death on the cross rent in sunder. Although these usurpers could not so presently overmaster the liberties and lawful titles of God’s freeborn church; but that Origen, being yet a layman, expounded the Scriptures publicly, and was therein defended by Alexander of Jerusalem, and Theoctistus of Cæsarea, producing in his behalf divers examples, that the privilege of teaching was anciently permitted to many worthy laymen: and Cyprian in his epistles professes he will do nothing without the advice and assent of his assistant laics. Neither did the first Nicene council, as great and learned as it was, think it any robbery to receive in, and require the help and presence of many learned lay brethren, as they were then called. Many other authorities to confirm this assertion, both out of Scripture and the writings of next antiquity, Golartius hath collected in his notes upon Cyprian; whereby it will be evident, that the laity, not only by apostolic permission, but by consent of many of the ancientest prelates, did participate in church-offices as much as is desired any lay elder should now do. Sometimes also not the elders alone, but the whole body of the church is interested in the work of discipline, as oft as public satisfaction is given by those that have given public scandal. Not to speak now of her right in elections. But another reason there is in it, which though religion did not commend to us, yet moral and civil prudence could not but extol. It was thought of old in philosophy, that shame, or to call it better, the reverence of our elders, our brethren, and friends, was the greatest incitement to virtuous deeds, and the greatest dissuasion from unworthy attempts that might be. Hence we may read in the Iliad, where Hector being wished to retire from the battle, many of his forces being routed, makes answer, that he durst not for shame, lest the Trojan knights and dames should think he did ignobly. And certain it is, that whereas terror is thought such a great stickler in a commonwealth, honourable shame is a far greater, and has more reason: for where shame is, there is fear; but where fear is, there is not presently shame. And if any thing may be done to inbreed in us this generous and Christianly reverence one of another, the very nurse and guardian of piety and virtue, it cannot sooner be than by such a discipline in the church, as may use us to have in awe the assemblies of the faithful, and to count it a thing most grievous, next to the grieving of God’s Spirit, to offend those whom he hath put in authority, as a healing superintendence over our lives and behaviours, both to our own happiness, and that we may not give offence to good men, who, without amends by us made, dare not, against God’s command, hold communion with us in holy things. And this will be accompanied with a religious dread of being outcast from the company of saints, and from the fatherly protection of God in his church, to consort with the devil and his angels. But there is yet a more ingenuous and noble degree of honest shame, or, call it, if you will, an esteem, whereby men bear an inward reverence toward their own persons. And if the love of God, as a fire sent from heaven to be ever kept alive upon the altars of our hearts, be the first principle of all godly and virtuous actions in men, this pious and just honouring of ourselves is the second, and may be thought as the radical moisture and fountain-head, whence every laudable and worthy enterprise issues forth. And Edition: current; Page: [80] although I have given it the name of a liquid thing, yet it is not incontinent to bound itself, as humid things are, but hath in it a most restraining and powerful abstinence to start back, and glob itself upward from the mixture of any ungenerous and unbeseeming motion, or any soil wherewith it may peril to stain itself. Something I confess it is to be ashamed of evil-doing in the presence of any; and to reverence the opinion and the countenance of a good man rather than a bad, fearing most in his sight to offend, goes so far as almost to be virtuous; yet this is but still the fear of infamy, and many such, when they find themselves alone, saving their reputation, will compound with other scruples, and come to a close treaty with their dearer vices in secret. But he that holds himself in reverence and due esteem, both for the dignity of God’s image upon him, and for the price of his redemption, which he thinks is visibly marked upon his forehead, accounts himself both a fit person to do the noblest and godliest deeds, and much better worth than to deject and defile, with such a debasement, and such a pollution as sin is, himself so highly ransomed and ennobled to a new friendship and filial relation with God. Nor can he fear so much the offence and reproach of others, as he dreads and would blush at the reflection of his own severe and modest eye upon himself, if it should see him doing or imagining that which is sinful, though in the deepest secrecy. How shall a man know to do himself this right, how to perform his honourable duty of estimation and respect towards his own soul and body? which way will lead him best to this hill-top of sanctity and goodness, above which there is no higher ascent but to the love of God, which from this self-pious regard cannot be asunder? No better way doubtless, than to let him duly understand, that as he is called by the high calling of God, to be holy and pure, so is he by the same appointment ordained, and by the church’s call admitted, to such offices of discipline in the church, to which his own spiritual gifts, by the example of apostolic institution, have authorized him. For we have learned that the scornful term of laic, the consecrating of temples, carpets, and table-cloths, the railing in of a repugnant and contradictive mount Sinai in the gospel, as if the touch of a lay Christian, who is nevertheless God’s living temple, could profane dead judaisms, the exclusion of Christ’s people from the offices of holy discipline through the pride of a usurping clergy, causes the rest to have an unworthy an abject opinion of themselves, to approach to holy duties with a slavish fear, and to unholy doings with a familiar boldness. For seeing such a wide and terrible distance between religious things and themselves, and that in respect of a wooden table, and the perimeter of holy ground about it, a flaggon pot, and a linen corporal, the priest esteems their layships unhallowed and unclean, they fear religion with such a fear as loves not, and think the purity of the gospel too pure for them, and that any uncleanness is more suitable to their unconsecrated estate. But when every good Christian, thoroughly acquainted with all those glorious privileges of sanctification and adoption, which render him more sacred than any dedicated altar or element, shall be restored to his right in the church, and not excluded from such place of spiritual government, as his Christian abilities, and his approved good life in the eye and testimony of the church shall prefer him to, this and nothing sooner will open his eyes to a wise and true valuation of himself, (which is so requisite and high a point of Christianity,) and will stir him up to walk worthy the honourable and grave employment wherewith God and the church hath dignified him; not fearing lest he should meet with some outward holy thing in religion, which his lay-touch or presence might profane; but lest something unholy from within his own heart should dishonour and Edition: current; Page: [81] profane in himself that priestly unction and clergy-right whereto Christ hath entitled him. Then would the congregation of the Lord soon recover the true likeness and visage of what she is indeed, a holy generation, a royal priesthood, a saintly communion, the household and city of God. And this I hold to be another considerable reason why the functions of church-government ought to be free and open to any Christian man, though never so laic, if his capacity, his faith, and prudent demeanour, commend him. And this the apostles warrant us to do. But the prelates object, that this will bring profaneness into the church: to whom may be replied, that none have brought that in more than their own irreligious courses, nor more driven holiness out of living into lifeless things. For whereas God, who hath cleansed every beast and creeping worm, would not suffer St. Peter to call them common or unclean, the prelate bishops, in their printed orders hung up in churches, have proclaimed the best of creatures, mankind, so unpurified and contagious, that for him to lay his hat or his garment upon the chancel-table, they have defined it no less heinous, in express words, than to profane the table of the Lord. And thus have they by their Canaanitish doctrine, (for that which was to the Jew but Jewish, is to the Christian no better than Canaanitish,) thus have they made common and unclean, thus have they made profane, that nature which God hath not only cleansed, but Christ also hath assumed. And now that the equity and just reason is so perspicuous, why in ecclesiastic censure the assistance should be added of such as whom not the vile odour of gain and fees, (forbid it, God, and blow it with a whirlwind out of our land!) but charity, neighbourhood, and duty to church-government hath called together, where could a wise man wish a more equal, gratuitous, and meek examination of any offence, that he might happen to commit against Christianity, than here? Would he prefer those proud simoniacal courts? Thus therefore the minister assisted attends his heavenly and spiritual cure: where we shall see him both in the course of his proceeding, and first in the excellency of his end, from the magistrate far different, and not more different than excelling. His end is to recover all that is of man, both soul and body, to an everlasting health; and yet as for worldly happiness, which is the proper sphere wherein the magistrate cannot but confine his motion without a hideous exorbitancy from law, so little aims the minister, as his intended scope, to procure the much prosperity of this life, that ofttimes he may have cause to wish much of it away, as a diet puffing up the soul with a slimy fleshiness, and weakening her principal organic parts. Two heads of evil he has to cope with, ignorance and malice. Against the former he provides the daily manna of incorruptible doctrine, not at those set meals only in public, but as oft as he shall know that each infirmity or constitution requires. Against the latter with all the branches thereof, not meddling with that restraining and styptic surgery, which the law uses, not indeed against the malady, but against the eruptions, and outermost effects thereof; he on the contrary, beginning at the prime causes and roots of the disease, sends in those two divine ingredients of most cleansing power to the soul, admonition and reproof; besides which two there is no drug or antidote that can reach to purge the mind, and without which all other experiments are but vain, unless by accident. And he that will not let these pass into him, though he be the greatest king, as Plato affirms, must be thought to remain impure within, and unknowing of those things wherein his pureness and his knowledge should most appear. As soon therefore as it may be discerned that the Christian patient, by feeding otherwhere on meats not allowable, but of evil juice, hath disordered his diet, and spread Edition: current; Page: [82] an ill humour through his veins, immediately disposing to a sickness; the minister, as being much nearer both in eye and duty than the magistrate, speeds him betimes to overtake that diffused malignance with some gentle potion of admonishment; or if aught be obstructed, puts in his opening and discussive confections. This not succeeding after once or twice, or oftener, in the presence of two or three his faithful brethren appointed thereto, he advises him to be more careful of his dearest health, and what it is that he so rashly hath let down into the divine vessel of his soul, God’s temple. If this obtain not, he then, with the counsel of more assistants, who are informed of what diligence hath been already used, with more speedy remedies lays nearer siege to the entrenched causes of his distemper, not sparing such fervent and well aimed reproofs as may best give him to see the dangerous estate wherein he is. To this also his brethren and friends intreat, exhort, adjure; and all these endeavours, as there is hope left, are more or less repeated. But if neither the regard of himself, nor the reverence of his elders and friends prevail with him to leave his vicious appetite; then as the time urges, such engines of terror God hath given into the hand of his minister, as to search the tenderest angles of the heart: one while he shakes his stubbornness with racking convulsions nigh despair, otherwhiles with deadly corrosives he gripes the very roots of his faulty liver to bring him to life through the entry of death. Hereto the whole church beseech him, beg of him, deplore him, pray for him. After all this performed with what patience and attendance is possible, and no relenting on his part, having done the utmost of their cure, in the name of God and of the church they dissolve their fellowship with him, and holding forth the dreadful sponge of excommunion, pronounce him wiped out of the list of God’s inheritance, and in the custody of Satan till he repent. Which horrid sentence, though it touch neither life nor limb, nor any worldly possession, yet has it such a penetrating force, that swifter than any chemical sulphur, or that lightning which harms not the skin, and rifles the entrails, it scorches the inmost soul. Yet even this terrible denouncement is left to the church for no other cause but to be as a rough and vehement cleansing medicine, where the malady is obdurate, a mortifying to life, a kind of saving by undoing. And it may be truly said that as the mercies of wicked men are cruelties, so the cruelties of the church are mercies. For if repentance sent from Heaven meet this lost wanderer, and draw him out of that steep journey wherein he was hasting towards destruction, to come and reconcile to the church, if he bring with him his bill of health, and that he is now clear of infection, and of no danger to the other sheep; then with incredible expressions of joy all his brethren receive him, and set before him those perfumed banquets of Christian consolation; with precious ointments bathing and fomenting the old, and now to be forgotten stripes, which terror and shame had inflicted; and thus with heavenly solaces they cheer up his humble remorse, till he regain his first health and felicity. This is the approved way, which the gospel prescribes; these are the “spiritual weapons of holy censure, and ministerial warfare, not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds, casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.” What could be done more for the healing and reclaiming that divine particle of God’s breathing, the soul, and what could be done less? he that would hide his faults from such a wholesome curing as this, and count it a twofold punishment, as some do, is like a man, that having foul diseases about him, perishes for shame, and the fear he has of a rigorous incision to come upon his flesh. We shall be Edition: current; Page: [83] able by this time to discern whether prelatical jurisdiction be contrary to the gospel or no. First, therefore, the government of the gospel being economical and paternal, that is, of such a family where there be no servants, but all sons in obedience, not in servility, as cannot be denied by him that lives but within the sound of Scripture; how can the prelates justify to have turned the fatherly orders of Christ’s household, the blessed meekness of his lowly roof, those ever-open and inviting doors of his dwelling house, which delight to be frequented with only filial accesses; how can they justify to have turned these domestic privileges into the bar of a proud judicial court, where fees and clamours keep shop and drive a trade, where bribery and corruption solicits, paltering the free and moneyless power of discipline with a carnal satisfaction by the purse? Contrition, humiliation, confession, the very sighs of a repentant spirit, are there sold by the penny. That undeflowered and unblemishable simplicity of the gospel, not she herself, for that could never be, but a false-whited, a lawny resemblance of her, like that air-born Helena in the fables, made by the sorcery of prelates, instead of calling her disciples from the receipt of custom, is now turned publican herself; and gives up her body to a mercenary whoredom under those fornicated arches, which she calls God’s house, and in the sight of those her altars, which she hath set up to be adored, makes merchandise of the bodies and souls of men. Rejecting purgatory for no other reason, as it seems, than because her greediness cannot defer, but had rather use the utmost extortion of redeemed penances in this life. But because these matters could not be thus carried without a begged and borrowed force from worldly authority, therefore prelaty, slighting the deliberate and chosen council of Christ in his spiritual government, whose glory is in the weakness of fleshly things, to tread upon the crest of the world’s pride and violence by the power of spiritual ordinances, hath on the contrary made these her friends and champions, which are Christ’s enemies in this his high design, smothering and extinguishing the spiritual force of his bodily weakness in the discipline of his church with the boisterous and carnal tyranny of an undue, unlawful, and ungospel-like jurisdiction. And thus prelaty, both in her fleshly supportments, in her carnal doctrine of ceremony and tradition, in her violent and secular power, going quite counter to the prime end of Christ’s coming in the flesh, that is, to reveal his truth, his glory, and his might, in a clean contrary manner than prelaty seeks to do, thwarting and defeating the great mystery of God; I do not conclude that prelaty is antichristian, for what need I? the things themselves conclude it. Yet if such like practices, and not many worse than these of our prelates, in that great darkness of the Roman church, have not exempted both her and her present members from being judged to be antichristian in all orthodoxal esteem; I cannot think but that it is the absolute voice of truth and all her children to pronounce this prelaty, and these her dark deeds in the midst of this great light wherein we live, to be more antichristian than antichrist himself.
THE CONCLUSION.
The mischief that prelaty does in the state.
I add one thing more to those great ones that are so fond of prelaty: this is certain, that the gospel being the hidden might of Christ, as hath been heard, that ever a victorious power joined with it, like him in the Revelation that went forth on the white horse with his bow and his crown conquering and to conquer. If we let the angel of the gospel ride on his own way, he does his proper business, conquering the high thoughts, and the proud reasonings of the flesh, and brings them under to give obedience to Christ with the salvation of many souls. But if ye turn him out of his road, and in a manner force him to express his irresistible power by a doctrine of carnal might, as prelaty is, he will use that fleshly strength, which ye put into his hands, to subdue your spirits by a servile and blind superstition; and that again shall hold such dominion over your captive minds, as returning with an insatiate greediness and force upon your worldly wealth and power, wherewith to deck and magnify herself, and her false worships, he shall spoil and havoc your estates, disturb your ease, diminish your honour, enthral your liberty under the swelling mood of a proud clergy, who will not serve or feed your souls with spiritual food; look not for it, they have not wherewithal, or if they had, it is not in their purpose. But when they have glutted their ungrateful bodies, at least, if it be possible that those open sepulchres should ever be glutted, and when they have stuffed their idolish temples with the wasteful pillage of your estates, will they yet have any compassion upon you, and that poor pittance which they have left you; will they be but so good to you as that ravisher was to his sister, when he had used her at his pleasure; will they but only hate ye, and so turn ye loose? No, they will not, lords and commons, they will not favour ye so much. What will they do then, in the name of God and saints, what will these manhaters yet with more despite and mischief do? I will tell ye, or at least remember ye, (for most of ye know it already,) that they may want nothing to make them true merchants of Babylon, as they have done to your souls, they will sell your bodies, your wives, your children, your liberties, your parliaments, all these things; and if there be aught else dearer than these, they will sell at an outcry in their pulpits to the arbitrary and illegal dispose of any one that may hereafter be called a king, whose mind shall serve him to listen to their bargain. And by their corrupt and servile doctrines boring our ears to an everlasting slavery, as they have done hitherto, so will they yet do their best to repeal and erase every line and clause of both our great charters. Nor is this only what they will do, but what they hold as the main reason and mystery of their advancement that they must do; be the prince never so just and equal to his subjects, yet such are their malicious and depraved eyes, that they so look on him, and so understand him, as if he required no other gratitude or piece of service from them than this. And indeed they stand so opportunely for the disturbing or the destroying of a state, being a knot of creatures, whose dignities, means, and preferments have no foundation in the gospel as they themselves acknowledge, but only in the prince’s favour, and to continue so long to them, as by pleasing him they shall deserve: whence it must needs be they should bend all their intentions and services to no other ends but to his, that if it should happen that a tyrant (God Edition: current; Page: [85] turn such a scourge from us to our enemies) should come to grasp the sceptre, here were his spearmen and his lances, here were his firelocks ready, he should need no other pretorian band nor pensionary than these, if they could once with their perfidious preachments awe the people. For although the prelates in time of popery were sometimes friendly enough to Magna Charta, it was because they stood upon their own bottom, without their main dependence on the royal nod: but now being well acquainted that the protestant religion, if she will reform herself rightly by the Scriptures, must undress them of all their gilded vanities, and reduce them as they were at first, to the lowly and equal order of presbyters, they know it concerns them nearly to study the times more than the text, and to lift up their eyes to the hills of the court, from whence only comes their help; but if their pride grow weary of this crouching and observance, as ere long it would, and that yet their minds climb still to a higher ascent of worldly honour, this only refuge can remain to them, that they must of necessity contrive to bring themselves and us back again to the pope’s supremacy; and this we see they had by fair degrees of late been doing. These be the two fair supporters between which the strength of prelaty is borne up, either of inducing tyranny, or of reducing popery. Hence also we may judge that prelaty is mere falsehood. For the property of truth, is, where she is publicly taught to unyoke and set free the minds and spirits of a nation first from the thraldom of sin and superstition, after which all honest and legal freedom of civil life cannot be long absent; but prelaty, whom the tyrant custom begot, a natural tyrant in religion, and in state the agent and minister of tyranny, seems to have had this fatal gift in her nativity, like another Midas, that whatsoever she should touch, or come near either in ecclesial or political government, it should turn, not to gold, though she for her part could wish it, but to the dross and scum of slavery, breeding and settling both in the bodies and the souls of all such as do not in time, with the sovereign treacle of sound doctrine, provide to fortify their hearts against her hierarchy. The service of God who is truth, her liturgy confesses to be perfect freedom; but her works and her opinions declare, that the service of prelaty is perfect slavery, and by consequence perfect falsehood. Which makes me wonder much that many of the gentry, studious men as I hear, should engage themselves to write and speak publicly in her defence; but that I believe their honest and ingenuous natures coming to the universities to store themselves with good and solid learning, and there unfortunately fed with nothing else but the scragged and thorny lectures of monkish and miserable sophistry, were sent home again with such a scholastical bur in their throats, as hath stopped and hindered all true and generous philosophy from entering, cracked their voices for ever with metaphysical gargarisms, and hath made them admire a sort of formal outside men prelatically addicted, whose unchastened and unwrought minds were never yet initiated or subdued under the true lore of religion or moral virtue, which two are the best and greatest points of learning; but either slightly trained up in a kind of hypocritical and hackney course of literature to get their living by, and dazzle the ignorant, or else fondly over-studied in useless controversies, except those which they use with all the specious and delusive subtlety they are able, to defend their prelatical Sparta; having a gospel and church-government set before their eyes, as a fair field wherein they might exercise the greatest virtues and the greatest deeds of Christian authority, in mean fortunes and little furniture of this world; (which even the sage heathen writers, and those old Fabritii and Curii well knew to be a manner of working, than which nothing could Edition: current; Page: [86] liken a mortal man more to God, who delights most to work from within himself, and not by the heavy luggage of corporeal instruments;) they understand it not, and think no such matter, but admire and dote upon worldly riches and honours, with an easy and intemperate life, to the bane of Christianity: yea, they and their seminaries shame not to profess, to petition, and never leave pealing our ears, that unless we fat them like boars, and cram them as they list with wealth, with deaneries and pluralities, with baronies and stately preferments, all learning and religion will go underfoot. Which is such a shameless, such a bestial plea, and of that odious impudence in churchmen, who should be to us a pattern of temperance and frugal mediocrity, who should teach us to contemn this world and the gaudy things thereof, according to the promise which they themselves require from us in baptism, that should the Scripture stand by and be mute, there is not that sect of philosophers among the heathen so dissolute, no not Epicurus, nor Aristippus with all his Cyrenaic rout, but would shut his school-doors against such greasy sophisters; not any college of mountebanks, but would think scorn to discover in themselves with such a brazen forehead the outrageous desire of filthy lucre. Which the prelates make so little conscience of, that they are ready to fight, and if it lay in their power, to massacre all good Christians under the names of horrible schismatics, for only finding fault with their temporal dignities, their unconscionable wealth and revenues, their cruel authority over their brethren that labour in the word, while they snore in their luxurious excess: openly proclaiming themselves now in the sight of all men, to be those which for awhile they sought to cover under sheep’s clothing, ravenous and savage wolves, threatening inroads and bloody incursions upon the flock of Christ, which they took upon them to feed, but now claim to devour as their prey. More like that huge dragon of Egypt, breathing out waste and desolation to the land, unless he were daily fattened with virgin’s blood. Him our old patron St. George, by his matchless valour slew, as the prelate of the garter that reads his collect can tell. And if our princes and knights will imitate the fame of that old champion, as by their order of knighthood solemnly taken they vow, far be it that they should uphold and side with this English dragon; but rather to do as indeed their oaths bind them, they should make it their knightly adventure to pursue and vanquish this mighty sail-winged monster, that menaces to swallow up the land, unless her bottomless gorge may be satisfied with the blood of the king’s daughter the church; and may, as she was wont, fill her dark and infamous den with the bones of the saints. Nor will any one have reason to think this as too incredible or too tragical to be spoken of prelaty, if he consider well from what a mass of slime and mud the slothful, the covetous, and ambitious hopes of church-promotions and fat bishoprics, she is bred up and nuzzled in, like a great Python, from her youth, to prove the general poison both of doctrine and good discipline in the land. For certainly such hopes and such principles of earth as these wherein she welters from a young one, are the immediate generation both of a slavish and tyrannous life to follow, and a pestiferous contagion to the whole kingdom, till like that fenborn serpent she be shot to death with the darts of the sun, the pure and powerful beams of God’s word. And this may serve to describe to us in part, what prelaty hath been, and what, if she stand, she is like to be towards the whole body of people in England. Now that it may appear how she is not such a kind of evil, as hath any good or use in it, which many evils have, but a distilled quintessence, a pure elixir of mischief, peslilent alike to all; I shall show briefly, ere I conclude, that the prelates, as Edition: current; Page: [87] they are to the subjects a calamity, so are they the greatest underminers and betrayers of the monarch, to whom they seem to be most favourable. I cannot better liken the state and person of a king than to that mighty Nazarite Samson; who being disciplined from his birth in the precepts and the practice of temperance and sobriety, without the strong drink of injurious and excessive desires, grows up to a noble strength and perfection with those his illustrious and sunny locks, the laws, waving and curling about his godlike shoulders. And while he keeps them about him undiminished and unshorn, he may with the jawbone of an ass, that is, with the word of his meanest officer, suppress and put to confusion thousands of those that rise against his just power. But laying down his head among the strumpet flatteries of prelates, while he sleeps and thinks no harm, they wickedly shaving off all those bright and weighty tresses of his laws, and just prerogatives, which were his ornament and strength, deliver him over to indirect and violent counsels, which, as those Philistines, put out the fair and far-sighted eyes of his natural discerning, and make him grind in the prison-house of their sinister ends and practices upon him: till he, knowing this prelatical razor to have bereft him of his wonted might nourish again his puissant hair, the golden beams of law and right: and they sternly shook, thunder with ruin upon the heads of those his evil counsellors, but not without great affliction to himself. This is the sum of their loyal service to kings; yet these are the men that still cry, The king, the king, the Lord’s anointed. We grant it, and wonder how they came to light upon any thing so true; and wonder more, if kings be the Lord’s anointed, how they dare thus oil over and besmear so holy an unction with the corrupt and putrid ointment of their base flatteries; which, while they smooth the skin, strike inward and envenom the lifeblood. What fidelity kings can expect from prelates, both examples past, and our present experience of their doings at this day, whereon is grounded all that hath been said, may suffice to inform us. And if they be such clippers of regal power, and shavers of the laws, how they stand affected to the law-giving parliament, yourselves, worthy peers and commons, can best testify; the current of whose glorious and immortal actions hath been only opposed by the obscure and pernicious designs of the prelates, until their insolence broke out to such a bold affront, as hath justly immured their haughty looks within strong walls. Nor have they done any thing of late with more diligence, than to hinder or break the happy assembling of parliaments, however needful to repair the shattered and disjointed frame of the commonwealth; or if they cannot do this, to cross, to disenable, and traduce all parliamentary proceedings. And this, if nothing else, plainly accuses them to be no lawful members of the house, if they thus perpetually mutiny against their own body. And though they pretend, like Solomon’s harlot, that they have right thereto, by the same judgment that Solomon gave, it cannot belong to them, whenas it is not only their assent, but their endeavour continually to divide parliaments in twain; and not only by dividing, but by all other means to abolish and destroy the free use of them to all posterity. For the which, and for all their former misdeeds, whereof this book and many volumes more cannot contain the moiety, I shall move ye, lords, in the behalf I dare say of many thousand good Christians, to let your justice and speedy sentence pass against this great malefactor prelaty. And yet in the midst of rigour I would beseech ye to think of mercy; and such a mercy, (I fear I shall overshoot with a desire to save this falling prelaty,) such a mercy (if I may venture to say it) as may exceed that which for only ten righteous persons would have saved Sodom. Not that Edition: current; Page: [88] I shall advise ye to contend with God, whether he or you shall be more merciful, but in your wise esteems to balance the offences of those peccant cities with these enormous riots of ungodly misrule, that prelaty hath wrought both in the church of Christ, and in the state of this kingdom. And if ye think ye may with a pious presumption strive to go beyond God in mercy, I shall not be one now that would dissuade ye. Though God for less than ten just persons would not spare Sodom, yet if you can find, after due search, but only one good thing in prelaty, either to religion or civil government, to king or parliament, to prince or people, to law, liberty, wealth, or learning, spare her, let her live, let her spread among ye, till with her shadow all your dignities and honours, and all the glory of the land be darkened and obscured. But on the contrary, if she be found to be malignant, hostile, destructive to all these, as nothing can be surer, then let your severe and impartial doom imitate the divine vengeance; rain down your punishing force upon this godless and oppressing government, and bring such a Dead sea of subversion upon her, that she may never in this land rise more to afflict the holy reformed church, and the elect people of God.
T.13 (8.5.) John Hare, The Marine Mercury (6 January, 1642).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (26 Jan. 2016)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (26 Jan. 2016)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.13 [1642.01.06] (8.5). John Hare, The Marine Mercury (6 January, 1642).
Full titleJohn Hare, The Marine Mercury. Or, a true relation of the strange appearance of a Man-Fish about three miles within the River of Thames, having a Musket in one hand, and a Petititon in the other. Credibly Reported by six Saylors, who both saw and talkt with the Monster, whose names here following are inserted. Whereunto is added a Relation how Sir Simon Heartley with the Company gave battell to a company of Rebels, and slew 500, tooke 4. Colours, and routed 1500 more: this being performed on the 6. of Ianuary. 1641. The Saylors names. Nicholas Truderow. Humfrey Hearnshaw. Sim. Seamanle. Iosias Otter. Alexander Waterrat. Tim Bywater. Written by John Hare, Gent.
Printed in the yeare, 1642.
6 January, 1642.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 60; Thomason E. 131. (26.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
The strange Relation of the appearance of a Man-fish armed, comming towards London.
THere is scarce any man of noble and generous quality, (if they would strive to be compleat in the highest degree) but may be perfected by travell, which is the true salt and season of a Gentleman. Now there is none so qualified, and hath seen the wonders of the deep, that can thinke this story impossible, for there are not so many strange creatures by land, but there are farre stranger by water; nor any resemblance of any beast upon earth, but the sea produces the like for shape and lineaments, which cannot admit of the least contradiction, but to the ignorant, and those that will beleeve no further then their weake sight can discerne.
This story was written by a Gentleman from the mouthes of these men, which certainly could not be deluded by any shadow or phantasme, being hardy and spiritfull persons, though of a coorse and rough conversation; the sense and truth of the relation is not altered: as they did deliver it, it is here set downe, onely drest in better language for the delight of the Reader: which was thus.
The third day after the guarding of the worthy Members to Westminster, being the 14. of this instant month, after the City by land, and the Sailors by water had expressed their deare affection to the noblest of Assemblies, the Saylors comming off with good approbation, and having satisfaction in the businesse they expected, departed to their severall employments. Now six of them being in a shipboat some league and a half within the mouth of the river of Thames, this Monster appeared. At the first sight they were much dismayd, but afterward they taking heart (some of them having beene at seafights) made them the more adventurous: for the approach of this Monster was very terrible; having broad fiery eyes, haire blacke and curled, his brest armed with shining skales, so that by the reflection of the Sunne they became so blinde and dazled, that hee might have taken or slaine every man of them, he having a musket in one hand, and a large paper in the other hand, which seemed to them a Petition.
By which posture they did imagine that what he could not get by intreaty, he would by force or fear attaine, but after they had passed some words with this man-fish, he seemed rather an Angel sent to guard this Kingdome, then an enemy to hurt us, for he shewed himselfe so debonarie and full of curtesie as if he had beene tutored in the absolutest Court in Christendome; telling them he came inspired by providence for the good and flourishing estate of this Kingdome, and the armed hand he advanced, was to put us in minde of our security, which hath beene the overthrow of the famous Monarchies, and in the other hand was the intelligence of all the dangers and plots of forraine Princes against us; they being illiterate men could not understand many other high expressions that hee pleased to deliver himselfe in, which here is lost because they understood not bracagraphy, yet they humbly confessed their ignorance, and withall their occupation, and told him they were sailors, but they humbly intreated him to keepe on his course towards London, with his Embassy to the Worthies of the land, for they did not thinke themselves worthy to give him audience; he with a serene and cheerfull humility answered, we are all Courtiers to Neptune, and as the cavalleers to land Princes do ride great horses to shew the generosity of their spirit, and activity of body, so doe we mount the aquatick beast of our elements, as the whale, sword-fish and thrasher, which last are kept on purpose to ride our sea stages; at which word (by the motion of his lower parts) he sprang from them with that violence, that no artificiall motion could bee so swift, for by some strange fish he was carried under water which they could not perceive, he went from them about a league, and returned in lesse then two minutes, telling them that our barbarey Roebuck and Hart were but meer Dromedaries to that hee rode on, and that within halfe an houre he could be in the remotest parts of the Ocean for the discovery of the most intricate designes that were in agitation: they being all of them in a deep silence, did not know what to say or thinke of him, whether he were a deity or a mortall creature, he perceived them astonished, gently lifted up himselfe, and with a smiling countenance, said he would deliver us something for our instruction, then he read to them out of his paper this newes.
That within six minutes he came from the narrow feas from the French fleet which was intended for Catalonia in the Spanish dominions, but they had rather come for little England if once these botches of distractions would run and burst into confusion.
He told them also of a letter he had to shew from the French Generall, to the King of France, of his hopes of the enterprise, with the doubts & encoragements, but because it was in the originall, and they no linguists, he spared his further relation till his comming to London.
That a mighty fleet of Turkes had lately met with a Spanish fleet that came for Ireland, which had beaten the Spaniard, and hindred them in that expedition; so that if a timely aid be sent, the kingdome may be easily recovered from those bloudy rebells.
Having ended this newes, he sprang from us as before, steering his course directly towards London.
ON our Epiphany last, being 6. Ian. 1641. Sir Simon Heartley with his company chasing a parcel of Rebells neare Monno, his spies giving him intelligence no aid could suddenly assist them, set upon the Rebells, where for foure houres there was a hot skirmish, and on both sides many men fell; but Sir Simon so bravely behaved himselfe that day, that his men plaid so hot on the Rebells having the advantage of the winde, that in the end they forced the Rebells to leave their workes, and at that time there war 500. of the Rebells slaine and taken, and about the number of 1500. utterly routed, also 4. of the Rebells Colours taken in this fight; this by the providence of God was performed to the damage of the Rebells, and the encouragement of the Protestants.
FINIS.
T.264 John Milton, An Apology against a Pamphlet (for Smectymnuus) (April, 1642). ↩
This Text is available elsewhere in the OLL Collection
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date
Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.264 [1642.04] John Milton, An Apology against a Pamphlet (for Smectymnuus) (April, 1642).
Full titleabc
Estimated date of publicationabc
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationabc
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
(insert text of pamphlet here)
AN APOLOGY FOR SMECTYMNUUS.
[first published 1642.]
If, readers, to that same great difficulty of well-doing what we certainly know, were not added in most men as great a carelessness of knowing what they and others ought to do, we had been long ere this, no doubt but all of us, much farther on our way to some degree of peace and happiness in this kingdom. But since our sinful neglect of practising that which we know to be undoubtedly true and good, hath brought forth among us, through God’s just anger, so great a difficulty now to know that which otherwise might be soon learnt, and hath divided us by a controversy of great importance indeed, but of no hard solution, which is the more our punishment; I resolved (of what small moment soever I might be thought) to stand on that side where I saw both the plain authority of Scripture leading, and the reason of justice and equity persuading; with this opinion, which esteems it more unlike a Christian to be a cold neuter in the cause of the church, than the law of Solon made it punishable after a sedition in the state. And because I observe that fear and dull disposition, lukewarmness and sloth, are not seldomer wont to cloak themselves under the affected name of moderation, than true and lively zeal is customably disparaged with the term of indiscretion, bitterness, and choler; I could not to my thinking honour a good cause more from the heart, than by defending it earnestly, as oft as I could judge it to behove me, notwithstanding any false name that could be invented to wrong or under-value an honest meaning. Wherein although I have not doubted to single forth more than once such of them as were thought the chief and most nominated opposers on the other side, whom no man else undertook; if I have done well either to be confident of the truth, whose force is best seen against the ablest resistance, or to be jealous and tender of the hurt that might be done among the weaker by the intrapping authority of great names titled to false opinions; or that it be lawful to attribute somewhat to gifts of God’s imparting, which I boast not, but thankfully acknowledge, and fear also lest at my certain account they be reckoned to me rather many than few; or if, lastly, it be but justice not to defraud of due esteem the wearisome labours and studious watchings, wherein I have spent and tired out almost a whole youth, I shall not distrust to be acquitted of presumption: knowing, that if heretofore all ages have received with favour and good acceptance the early industry of him that hath been hopeful, it were but hard measure now, if the freedom of any timely spirit should be oppressed merely by the big and blunted fame of his elder adversary; and that his sufficiency must be now sentenced, not by pondering the reason he shows, but by calculating the years he brings. However, as my purpose is not, nor hath been formerly, to look on my adversary abroad, through the deceiving glass of other men’s great opinion of him, but at home, where I may find him in the proper light of his own worth; so now against the rancour of an evil tongue, from which I never thought so absurdly, as that I of all men should be exempt, I must be forced to proceed from the unfeigned and diligent inquiry of my own conscience at home, (for better way I know not, readers,) to give a more true account of myself Edition: current; Page: [122] abroad than this modest confuter, as he calls himself, hath given of me. Albeit, that in doing this I shall be sensible of two things which to me will be nothing pleasant; the one is, that not unlikely I shall be thought too much a party in mine own cause, and therein to see least: the other, that I shall be put unwillingly to molest the public view with the vindication of a private name; as if it were worth the while that the people should care whether such a one were thus or thus. Yet those I entreat who have found the leisure to read that name, however of small repute, unworthily defamed, would be so good and so patient as to hear the same person not unneedfully defended. I will not deny but that the best apology against false accusers is silence and sufferance, and honest deeds set against dishonest words. And that I could at this time most easily and securely, with the least loss of reputation, use no other defence, I need not despair to win belief; whether I consider both the foolish contriving and ridiculous aiming of these his slanderous bolts, shot so wide of any suspicion to be fastened on me, that I have oft with inward contentment perceived my friends congratulating themselves in my innocence, and my enemies ashamed of their partner’s folly: or whether I look at these present times wherein most men, now scarce permitted the liberty to think over their own concernments, have removed the seat of their thoughts more outward to the expectation of public events: or whether the examples of men, either noble or religious, who have sat down lately with a meek silence and sufferance under many libellous endorsements, may be a rule to others, I might well appease myself to put up any reproaches in such an honourable society of fellow-sufferers, using no other defence. And were it that slander would be content to make an end where it first fixes, and not seek to cast out the like infamy upon each thing that hath but any relation to the person traduced, I should have pleaded against this confuter by no other advocates than those which I first commended, silence and sufferance, and speaking deeds against faltering words. But when I discerned his intent was not so much to smite at me, as through me to render odious the truth which I had written, and to stain with ignominy that evangelic doctrine which opposes the tradition of prelaty; I conceived myself to be now not as mine own person, but as a member incorporate into that truth whereof I was persuaded, and whereof I had declared openly to be a partaker. Whereupon I thought it my duty, if not to myself yet to the religious cause I had in hand, not to leave on my garment the least spot or blemish in good name, so long as God should give me to say that which might wipe it off. Lest those disgraces, which I ought to suffer, if it so befall me, for my religion, through my default religion be made liable to suffer for me. And, whether it might not something reflect upon those reverent men, whose friend I may be thought in writing the Animadversions, was not my last care to consider; if I should rest under these reproaches, having the same common adversary with them, it might be counted small credit for their cause to have found such an assistant, as this babbler hath devised me. What other thing in his book there is of dispute or question, in answering thereto I doubt not to be justified; except there be who will condemn me to have wasted time in throwing down that which could not keep itself up. As for others, who notwithstanding what I can allege have yet decreed to misinterpret the intents of my reply, I suppose they would have found as many causes to have misconceived the reasons of my silence.
To begin therefore an apology for those animadversions, which I writ against the Remonstrant in defence of Smectymnuus; since the preface, which was purposely set before them, is not thought apologetical enough, it will be best to acquaint ye, readers, before other things, what the meaning Edition: current; Page: [123] was to write them in that manner which I did. For I do not look to be asked wherefore I writ the book, it being no difficulty to answer, that I did it to those ends, which the best men propose to themselves when they write: but wherefore in that manner, neglecting the main bulk of all that specious antiquity, which might stun children, and not men, I chose rather to observe some kind of military advantages; to await him at his foragings, at his waterings, and whenever he felt himself secure, to solace his vein in derision of his more serious opponents. And here let me have pardon, readers, if the remembrance of that which he hath licensed himself to utter contemptuously of those reverend men, provoke me to do that over again, which some expect I should excuse as too freely done; since I have two provocations, his latest insulting in his short answer, and their final patience. I had no fear, but that the authors of Smectymnuus, to all the show of solidity, which the Remonstrant could bring, were prepared both with skill and purpose to return a sufficing answer, and were able enough to lay the dust and pudder in antiquity, which he and his, out of stratagem, are wont to raise; but when I saw his weak arguments headed with sharp taunts, and that his design was, if he could not refute them, yet at least with quips and snapping adages to vapour them out, which they, bent only upon the business, were minded to let pass; by how much I saw them taking little thought for their own injuries, I must confess I took it as my part the less to endure that my respected friends, through their own unnecessary patience, should thus lie at the mercy of a coy flirting style; to be girded with frumps and curtal gibes, by one who makes sentences by the statute, as if all above three inches long were confiscate. To me it seemed an indignity, that whom his whole wisdom could not move from their place, them his impetuous folly should presume to ride over. And if I were more warm than was meet in any passage of that book, which yet I do not yield, I might use therein the patronage of no worse an author than Gregory Nyssen, who mentioning his sharpness against Eunomius in the defence of his brother Basil, holds himself irreprovable in that “it was not for himself, but in the cause of his brother; and in such cases,” saith he, “perhaps it is worthier pardon to be angry than to be cooler.” And whereas this confuter taxes the whole discourse of levity, I shall show ye readers, wheresoever it shall be objected in particular, that I have answered with as little lightness as the Remonstrant hath given example. I have not been so light as the palm of a bishop, which is the lightest thing in the world when he brings out his book of ordination: for then, contrary to that which is wont in releasing out of prison, any one that will pay his fees is laid hands on. Another reason; it would not be amiss though the Remonstrant were told, wherefore he was in that unusual manner beleaguered; and this was it, to pluck out of the heads of his admirers the conceit that all who are not prelatical, are gross-headed, thick-witted, illiterate, shallow. Can nothing then but episcopacy teach men to speak good English, to pick and order a set of words judiciously? Must we learn from canons and quaint sermonings interlined with barbarous Latin, to illumine a period, to wreath an enthymema with masterous dexterity? I rather incline, as I have heard it observed, that a Jesuit’s Italian when he writes, is ever naught, though he be born and bred a Florentine, so to think, that from like causes we may go near to observe the same in the style of a prelate. For doubtless that indeed according to art is most eloquent, which turns and approaches nearest to nature from whence it came; and they express nature best, who in their lives least wander from her safe leading, which may be called regenerate reason. So that how he should be truly eloquent who is not withal a good man, Edition: current; Page: [124] I see not. Nevertheless, as oft as is to be dealt with men who pride themselves in their supposed art, to leave them inexcusable wherein they will not be bettered; there be of those that esteem prelaty a figment, who yet can pipe if they can dance, nor will be unfurnished to show, that what the prelates admire and have not, others have and admire not. The knowledge whereof, and not of that only, but of what the Scripture teacheth us how we ought to withstand the perverters of the gospel, were those other motives, which gave the Animadversions no leave to remit a continual vehemence throughout the book. For as in teaching doubtless the spirit of meekness is most powerful, so are the meek only fit persons to be taught: as for the proud, the obstinate, and false doctors of men’s devices, be taught they will not, but discovered and laid open they must be. For how can they admit of teaching, who have the condemnation of God already upon them for refusing divine instruction? That is, to be filled with their own devices, as in the Proverbs we may read: therefore we may safely imitate the method that God uses; “with the froward to be froward, and to throw scorn upon the scorner,” whom, if any thing, nothing else will heal. And if the “righteous shall laugh at the destruction of the ungodly,” they may also laugh at the pertinacious and incurable obstinacy, and at the same time be moved with detestation of their seducing malice, who employ all their wits to defend a prelaty usurped, and to deprave that just government, which pride and ambition, partly by fine fetches and pretences, partly by force, hath shouldered out of the church. And against such kind of deceivers openly and earnestly to protest, lest any one should be inquisitive wherfore this or that man is forwarder than others, let him know that this office goes not by age or youth, but to whomsoever God shall give apparently the will, the spirit, and the utterance. Ye have heard the reasons for which I thought not myself exempted from associating with good men in their labours towards the church’s welfare; to which, if any one brought opposition, I brought my best resistance. If in requital of this, and for that I have not been negligent toward the reputation of my friends, I have gained a name bestuck, or as I may say, bedecked with the reproaches and reviles of this modest confuter; it shall be to me neither strange nor unwelcome, as that which could not come in a better time.
Having rendered an account what induced me to write those animadversions in that manner as I writ them, I come now to see what the confutation hath to say against them; but so as the confuter shall hear first what I have to say against his confutation. And because he pretends to be a great conjector at other men by their writings, I will not fail to give ye, readers, a present taste of him from his title, hung out like a tolling sign post to call passengers, not simply a confutation, but “a modest confutation,” with a laudatory of itself obtruded in the very first word. Whereas a modest title should only inform the buyer what the book contains without further insinuation; this officious epithet so hastily assuming the modesty which others are to judge of by reading, not the author to anticipate to himself by forestalling, is a strong presumption, that his modesty, set there to sale in the frontispiece, is not much addicted to blush. A surer sign of his lost shame he could not have given, than seeking thus unseasonably to prepossess men of his modesty. And seeing he hath neither kept his word in the sequel, nor omitted any kind of boldness in slandering, it is manifest his purpose was only to rub the forehead of his title with this word modest, that he might not want colour to be the more impudent throughout his whole confutation. Next, what can equally savour of injustice and plain arrogance, as to prejudice and forecondemn his adversary in the title for “slanderous Edition: current; Page: [125] and scurrilous,” and as the Remonstrant’s fashion is, for frivolous, tedious, and false, not staying till the reader can hear him proved so in the following discourse? Which is one cause of a suspicion that in setting forth this pamphlet the Remonstrant was not unconsulted with: thus his first address was “an humble remonstrance by a dutiful son of the church,” almost as if he had said, her white-boy. His next was, “a defence” (a wonder how it escaped some praising adjunct) “against the frivolous and false exceptions against Smectymnuus,” sitting in the chair of his title-page upon his poor cast adversaries both as a judge and party, and that before the jury of readers can be impannelled. His last was “a short answer to a tedious vindication;” so little can he suffer a man to measure either with his eye or judgment, what is short or what tedious, without his preoccupying direction: and from hence is begotten this “modest confutation against a slanderous and scurrilous libel.” I conceive, readers, much may be guessed at the man and his book, what depth there is, by the framing of his title; which being in this Remonstrant so rash and unadvised as ye see, I conceit him to be near akin to him who set forth a passion sermon with a formal dedicatory in great letters to our Saviour. Although I know that all we do ought to begin and end in his praise and glory, yet to inscribe him in a void place with flourishes, as a man in compliment uses to trick up the name of some esquire, gentleman, or lord paramount at common law, to be his bookpatron, with the appendant from of a ceremonious presentment, will ever appear among the judicious to be but an insulse and frigid affectation. As no less was that before his book against the Brownists, to write a letter to a Prosopopœia, a certain rhetorized woman whom he calls mother, and complains of some that laid whoredom to her charge; and certainly had he folded his epistle with a superscription to be delivered to that female figure by any post or carrier, who were not a ubiquitary, it had been a most miraculous greeting. We find the primitive doctors, as oft as they writ to churches, speaking to them as to a number of faithful brethren and sons, and not to make a cloudy transmigration of sexes in such a familiar way of writing as an epistle ought to be, leaving the tract of common address, to run up, and tread the air in metaphorical compellations, and many fond utterances better let alone. But I step again to this emblazoner of his title-page, (whether it be the same man or no, I leave it in the midst,) and here I find him pronouncing without reprieve, those animadversions to be a slanderous and scurrilous libel. To which I, readers, that they are neither slanderous, nor scurrilous, will answer in what place of his book he shall be found with reason, and not ink only, in his mouth. Nor can it be a libel more than his own, which is both nameless and full of slanders; and if in this that it freely speaks of things amiss in religion, but established by act of state, I see not how Wickliff and Luther, with all the first martyrs and reformers, could avoid the imputation of libelling. I never thought the human frailty of erring in cases of religion, infamy to a state, no more than to a council: it had therefore been neither civil nor Christianly, to derogate the honour of the state for that cause, especially when I saw the parliament itself piously and magnanimously bent to supply and reform the defects and oversights of their forefathers, which to the godly and repentant ages of the Jews were often matter of humble confessing and bewailing, not of confident asserting and maintaining. Of the state therefore, I found good reason to speak all honourable things, and to join in petition with good men that petitioned: but against the prelates, who were the only seducers and misleaders of the state to constitute the government of the church not rightly, methought I had not vehemence enough. And thus, readers, by Edition: current; Page: [126] the example which he hath set me, I have given ye two or three notes of him out of his title-page; by which his firstlings fear not to guess boldly at his whole lump, for that guess will not fail ye; and although I tell him keen truth, yet he may bear with me, since I am like to chase him into some good knowledge, and others, I trust, shall not misspend their leisure. For this my aim is, if I am forced to be unpleasing to him whose fault it is, I shall not forget at the same time to be useful in something to the stander-by.
As therefore he began in the title, so in the next leaf he makes it his first business to tamper with his reader by sycophanting and misnaming the work of his adversary. He calls it “a mime thrust forth upon the stage, to make up the breaches of those solemn scenes between the prelates and the Smectymnuans.” Wherein while he is so over-greedy to fix a name of ill sound upon another, note how stupid he is to expose himself or his own friends to the same ignominy; likening those grave controversies to a piece of stagery, or scenework, where his own Remonstrant, whether in buskin or sock, must of all right be counted the chief player, be it boasting Thraso, or Davus that troubles all things, or one who can shift into any shape, I meddle not; let him explicate who hath resembled the whole argument to a comedy, for “tragical,” he says, “were too ominous.” Nor yet doth he tell us what a mime is, whereof we have no pattern from ancient writers, except some fragments, which contain many acute and wise sentences. And this we know in Laertius, that the mimes of Sophron were of such reckoning with Plato, as to take them nightly to read on, and after make them his pillow. Scaliger describes a mime to be a poem intimating any action to stir up laughter. But this being neither poem, nor yet ridiculous, how is it but abusively taxed to be a mine? For if every book, which may by chance excite to laugh here and there, must be termed thus, then may the dialogues of Plato, who for those his writings, hath obtained the surname of divine, be esteemed as they are by that detractor in Athenæus, no better than mimes. Because there is scarce one of them, especially wherein some notable sophister lies sweating and turmoiling under the inevitable and merciless dilemmas of Socrates, but that he who reads, were it Saturn himself, would be often robbed of more than a smile. And whereas he tells us, that “scurrilous Mime was a personated grim lowering fool,” his foolish language unwrittingly writes fool upon his own friend, for he who was there personated was only the Remonstrant; the author is ever distinguished from the person he introduces. But in an ill hour hath this unfortunate rashness stumbled upon the mention of miming, that he might at length cease, which he hath not yet since he stepped in, to gall and hurt him whom he would aid. Could he not beware, could he not bethink him, was he so uncircumspect as not to foresee, that no sooner would that word mime be set eye on in the paper, but it would bring to mind that wretched pilgrimage over Minshew’s dictionary called “Mundus alter et idem,” the idlest and paltriest mime that ever mounted upon bank? Let him ask “the author of those toothless satires,” who was the maker, or rather the anticreator of that universal foolery, who he was, who like that other principal of the Manichees the arch evil one, when he had looked upon all that he had made and mapped out, could say no other but contrary to the divine mouth, that it was all very foolish. That grave and noble invention, which the greatest and sublimest wits in sundry ages, Plato in Critias, and our two famous countrymen, the one in his “Utopia,” the other in his “New Atlantis,” chose, I may not say as a field, but as a mighty continent, wherein to display the largeness of their spirits, by teaching this our world better and exacter things than were yet known or used: this petty previcator of America, Edition: current; Page: [127] the zany of Columbus, (for so he must be till his world’s end,) having rambled over the huge topography of his own vain thoughts, no marvel if he brought us home nothing but a mere tankard drollery, a venereous parjetory for stews. Certainly, he that could endure with a sober pen, to sit and devise laws for drunkards to carouse by, I doubt me whether the very soberness of such a one, like an unliquored Silenus, were not stark drunk. Let him go now and brand another man injuriously with the name of Mime, being himself the loosest and most extravagant Mime that hath been heard of, whom no less than almost half the world could serve for stage-room to play the Mime in. And let him advise again with Sir Francis Bacon, whom he cites to confute others, what it is “to turn the sins of Christendoin into a mimical mockery, to rip up the saddest vices with a laughing countenance,” especially where neither reproof nor better teaching is adjoined. Nor is my meaning, readers, to shift off a blame from myself, by charging the like upon my accuser, but shall only desire, that sentence may be respited, till I can come to some instance whereto I may give answer.
Thus having spent his first onset, not in confuting, but in a reasonless defaming of the book, the method of his malice hurries him to attempt the like against the author; not by proofs and testimonies, but “having no certain notice of me,” as he professes, “further than what he gathers from the animadversions,” blunders at me for the rest, and flings out stray crimes at a venture, which he could never, though he be a serpent, suck from any thing that I have written, but from his own stuffed magazine, and hoard of slanderous inventions, over and above that which he converted to venom in the drawing. To me, readers, it happens as a singular contentment; and let it be to good men no light satisfaction, that the slanderer here confesses, he has “no further notice of me than his own conjecture.” Although it had been honest to have inquired, before he uttered such infamous words, and I am credibly informed he did inquire; but finding small comfort from the intelligence which he received, whereon to ground the falsities which he had provided, thought it his likeliest course under a pretended ignorance to let drive at random, lest he should lose his odd ends, which from some penurious book of characters he had been culling out and would fain apply. Not caring to burden me with those vices, whereof, among whom my conversation hath been, I have been ever least suspected; perhaps not without some subtlety to cast me into envy, by bringing on me a necessity to enter into mine own praises. In which argument I know every wise man is more unwillingly drawn to speak, than the most repining ear can be averse to hear. Nevertheless, since I dare not wish to pass this life unpersecuted of slanderous tongues, for God hath told us that to be generally praised is woeful, I shall rely on his promise to free the innocent from causeless aspersions: whereof nothing sooner can assure me, than if I shall feel him now assisting me in the just vindication of myself, which yet I could defer, it being more meet, that to those other matters of public debatement in this book I should give attendance first, but that I fear it would but harm the truth for me to reason in her behalf, so long as I should suffer my honest estimation to lie unpurged from these insolent suspicions. And if I shall be large, or unwonted in justifying myself to those who know me not, for else it would be needless, let them consider that a short slander will ofttimes reach further than a long apology; and that he who will do justly to all men, must begin from knowing how, if it so happen, to be not unjust to himself. I must be thought, if this libeller (for now he shows himself to be so) can find belief, after an inordinate and riotous youth spent at the university, to have been at length “vomited out thence.” For which Edition: current; Page: [128] commodious lie, that he may be encouraged in the trade another time, I thank him; for it hath given me an apt occasion to acknowledge publicly with all grateful mind, that more than ordinary favour and respect, which I found above any of my equals at the hands of those courteous and learned men, the fellows of that college wherein I spent some years: who at my parting, after I had taken two degrees, as the manner is, signified many ways, how much better it would content them that I would stay; as by many letters full of kindness and loving respect, both before that time, and long after, I was assured of their singular good affection towards me. Which being likewise propense to all such as were for their studious and civil life worthy of esteem, I could not wrong their judgments, and upright intentions, so much as to think I had that regard from them for other cause, than that I might be still encouraged to proceed in the honest and laudable courses, of which they apprehended I had given good proof. And to those ingenuous and friendly men, who were ever the countenances of virtuous and hopeful wits, I wish the best and happiest things, that friends in absence wish one to another. As for the common approbation or dislike of that place, as now it is, that I should esteem or disesteem myself, or any other the more for that; too simple and too credulous is the confuter, if he think to obtain with me, or any right discerner. Of small practice were that physician, who could not judge by what both she or her sister hath of long time vomited, that the worser stuff she strongly keeps in her stomach, but the better she is ever kecking at, and is queasy. She vomits now out of sickness: but ere it will be well with her, she must vomit by strong physic. In the mean time that suburb sink, as this rude scavenger calls it, and more than scurrilously taunts it with the plague, having a worse plague in his middle entrail, that suburb wherein I dwell shall be in my account a more honourable place than his university. Which as in the time of her better health, and mine own younger judgment, I never greatly admired, so now much less. But he follows me to the city, still usurping and forging beyond his book notice, which only he affirms to have had; “and where my morning haunts are, he wisses not.” It is wonder, that being so rare an alchymist of slander, he could not extract that, as well as the university vomit, and the suburb sink which his art could distill so cunningly; but because his limbec fails him, to give him and envy the more vexation, I will tell him. Those morning haunts are where they should be, at home; not sleeping, or concocting the surfeits of an irregular feast, but up and stirring, in winter often ere the sound of any bell awake men to labour, or to devotion; in summer as oft with the bird that first rouses, or not much tardier, to read good authors, or cause them to be read, till the attention be weary, or memory have its full fraught: then with useful and generous labours preserving the body’s health and hardiness to render lightsome, clear, and not lumpish obedience to the mind, to the cause of religion, and our country’s liberty, when it shall require firm hearts in sound bodies to stand and cover their stations, rather than to see the ruin of our protestation, and the inforcement of a slavish life. These are the morning practices; proceed now to the afternoon; “in playhouses,” he says, “and the bordelloes.” Your intelligence, unfaithful spy of Canaan? He gives in his evidence, that “there he hath traced me.” Take him at his word, readers, but let him bring good sureties ere ye dismiss him, that while he pretended to dog others, he did not turn in for his own pleasure: for so much in effect he concludes against himself, not contented to be caught in every other gin, but he must be such a novice, as to be still hampered in his own hemp. In the animadversions, saith he, I find the mention of old cloaks, false beards, Edition: current; Page: [129] nightwalkers, and salt lotion; therefore the animadverter haunts playhouses and bordelloes; for if he did not, how could he speak of such gear? Now that he may know what it is to be a child, and yet to meddle with edged tools, I turn his antistrophon upon his own head; the confuter knows that these things are the furniture of playhouses and bordelloes; therefore by the same reason “the confuter himself hath been traced in those places.” Was it such a dissolute speech, telling of some politicians who were wont to evesdrop in disguises, to say they were often liable to a nightwalking cudgeller, or the emptying of a urinal? What if I had writ as your friend the author of the aforesaid mime, “Mundus alter et idem,” to have been ravished like some young Cephalus or Hylas, by a troop of camping housewives in Viraginea, and that he was there forced to swear himself an uxorious varlet; then after a long servitude to have come into Aphrodisia that pleasant country, that gave such a sweet smell to his nostrils among the shameless courtezans of Desvergonia? Surely he would have then concluded me as constant at the bordello, as the galley-slave at his oar. But since there is such necessity to the hearsay of a tire, a periwig, or a vizard, that plays must have been seen, what difficulty was there in that? when in the colleges so many of the young divines, and those in next aptitude to divinity, have been seen so often upon the stage, writhing and unboning their clergy limbs to all the antic and dishonest gestures of Trinculoes, buffoons, and bawds; prostituting the shame of that ministry, which either they had, or were nigh having, to the eyes of courtiers and court ladies, with their grooms and mademoiselles. There while they acted and overacted, among other young scholars, I was a spectator; they thought themselves gallant men, and I thought them fools; they made sport, and I laughed; they mispronounced, and I misliked; and to make up the atticism, they were out, and I hissed. Judge now whether so many good text-men were not sufficient to instruct me of false beards and vizards, without more expositors; and how can this confuter take the face to object to me the seeing of that, which his reverend prelates allow, and incite their young disciples to act? For if it be unlawful to sit and behold a mercenary comedian personating that which is least unseemly for a hireling to do, how much more blameful is it to endure the sight of as vile things acted by persons either entered or presently to enter into the ministry; and how much more foul and ignominious for them to be the actors!
But because as well by this upbraiding to me the bordelloes, as by other suspicious glancings in his book, he would seem privily to point me out to his readers, as one whose custom of life were not honest, but licentious; I shall intreat to be borne with, though I digress; and in a way not often trod, acquaint ye with the sum of my thoughts in this matter, through the course of my years and studies. Although I am not ignorant how hazardous it will be to do this under the nose of the envious, as it were in skirmish to change the compact order, and instead of outward actions, to bring inmost thoughts into front. And I must tell ye, readers, that by this sort of men I have been already bitten at; yet shall they not for me know how slightly they are esteemed, unless they have so much learning as to read what in Greek απειϱοϰαλία is, which, together with envy, is the common disease of those who censure books that are not for their reading. With me it fares now, as with him whose outward garment hath been injured and illbedighted; for having no other shift, what help but to turn the inside outwards, especially if the lining be of the same, or, as it is sometimes, much better? So if my name and outward demeanour be not evident enough to defend me, I must make trial, if the discovery of my inmost thoughts can: wherein of Edition: current; Page: [130] two purposes both honest, and both sincere, the one perhaps I shall not miss; although I fail to gain belief with others, of being such as my perpetual thoughts shall here disclose me, I may yet not fail of success in persuading some to be such really themselves, as they cannot believe me to be more than I what fain. I had my time, readers, as others have, who have good learning bestowed upon them, to be sent to those places, where the opinion was, it might be soonest attained; and as the manner is, was not unstudied in those authors which are most commended; whereof some were grave orators and historians, whose matter methought I loved indeed, but as my age then was, so I understood them; others were the smooth elegiac poets, whereof the schools are not scarce, whom both for the pleasing sound of their numerous writing, which in imitation I found most easy, and most agreeable to nature’s part in me, and for their matter, which what it is, there be few who know not, I was so allured to read, that no recreation came to me better welcome: for that it was then those years with me which are excused, though they be least severe, I may be saved the labour to remember ye. Whence having observed them to account it the chief glory of their wit, in that they were ablest to judge, to praise, and by that could esteem themselves worthiest to love those high perfections, which under one or other name they took to celebrate; I thought with myself by every instinct and presage of nature, which is not wont to be false, that what emboldened them to this task, might with such diligence as they used embolden me; and that what judgment, wit, or elegance was my share, would herein best appear, and best value itself, by how much more wisely, and with more love of virtue I should choose (let rude ears be absent) the object of not unlike praises: for albeit these thoughts to some will seem virtuous and commendable, to others only pardonable, to a third sort perhaps idle; yet the mentioning of them now will end in serious. Nor blame it, readers, in those years to propose to themselves such a reward, as the noblest dispositions above other things in this life have sometimes preferred: whereof not to be sensible when good and fair in one person meet, argues both a gross and shallow judgment, and withal an ungentle; and swainish breast; for by the firm settling of these persuasions, I became, to my best memory, so much a proficient, that if I found those authors any where speaking unworthy things of themselves, or unchaste of those names which before they had extolled; this effect it wrought with me, from that time forward their art I still applauded, but the men I deplored; and above them all, preferred the two famous renowners of Beatrice and Laura, who never write but honour of them to whom they devote their verse, displaying sublime and pure thoughts, without transgression. And long it was not after, when I was confirmed in this opinion, that he who would not be frustrate of his hope to write well hereafter in laudable things, ought himself to be a true poem; that is, a composition and pattern of the best and honourablest things; not presuming to sing high praises of heroic men, or famous cities, unless he have in himself the experience and the practice of all that which is praiseworthy. These reasonings, together with a certain niceness of nature, an honest haughtiness, and self-esteem either of what I was, or what I might be, (which let envy call pride,) and lastly that modesty, whereof though not in the titlepage, yet here I may be excused to make some beseeming profession; all these uniting the supply of their natural aid together, kept me still above those low descents of mind, beneath which he must deject and plunge himself, that can agree to salable and unlawful prostitution.
Next, (for hear me out now, readers,) that I may tell ye whither my Edition: current; Page: [131] younger feet wandered; I betook me among those lofty fables and romances, which recount in solemn cantoes the deeds of knighthood founded by our victorious kings, and from hence had in renown over all Christendom. There I read it in the oath of every knight, that he should defend to the expense of his best blood, or of his life, if it so befel him, the honour and chastity of virgin or matron; from whence even then I learned what a noble virtue chastity sure must be, to the defence of which so many worthies, by such a dear adventure of themselves had sworn; and if I found in the story afterward, any of them, by word or deed, breaking that oath, I judged it the same fault of the poet, as that which is attributed to Homer, to have written indecent things of the gods: only this my mind gave me, that every free and gentle spirit, without that oath, ought to be born a knight, nor needed to expect the gilt spur, or the laying of a sword upon his shoulder to stir him up both by his counsel and his arms, to secure and protect the weakness of any attempted chastity. So that even these books, which to many others have been the fuel of wantonness and loose living, I cannot think how, unless by divine indulgence, proved to me so many incitements, as you have heard, to the love and steadfast observation of that virtue which abhors the society of bordelloes. Thus from the laureat fraternity of poets, riper years and the ceaseless round of study and reading led me to the shady spaces of philosophy; but chiefly to the divine volumes of Plato, and his equal Xenophon: where, if I should tell ye what I learnt of chastity and love, I mean that which is truly so, whose charming cup is only virtue, which she bears in her hand to those who are worthy; (the rest are cheated with a thick intoxicating potion, which a certain sorceress, the abuser of love’s name, carries about;) and how the first and chiefest office of love begins and ends in the soul, producing those happy twins of her divine generation, knowledge and virtue: with such abstracted sublimities as these, it might be worth your listening, readers, as I may one day hope to have ye in a still time, when there shall be no chiding; not in these noises, the adversary, as ye know, barking at the door, or searching for me at the bordelloes, where it may be he has lost himself, and raps up without pity the sage and rheumatic old prelatess, with all her young Corinthian laity, to inquire for such a one. Last of all, not in time, but as perfection is last, that care was ever had of me, with my earliest capacity, not to be negligently trained in the precepts of Christian religion: this that I have hitherto related, hath been to show, that though Christianity had been but slightly taught me, yet a certain reservedness of natural disposition, and moral discipline, learnt out of the noblest philosophy, was enough to keep me in disdain of far less incontinences than this of the bordello. But having had the doctrine of Holy Scripture, unfolding those chaste and high mysteries, with timeliest care infused, that “the body is for the Lord, and the Lord for the body;” thus also I argued to myself, that if unchastity in a woman, whom St. Paul terms the glory of man, be such a scandal and dishonour, then certainly in a man, who is both the image and glory of God, it must, though commonly not so thought, be much more deflowering and dishonourable; in that he sins both against his own body, which is the perfecter sex, and his own glory, which is in the woman; and that which is worst, against the image and glory of God which is in himself. Nor did I slumber over that place, expressing such high rewards of ever accompanying the Lamb, with those celestial songs to others inapprehensible, but not to those who were not defiled with women, which doubtless means fornication; for marriage must not be called a defilement. Thus large I have purposely been, that if I have been justly taxed with this crime, it may come upon me, after all this Edition: current; Page: [132] my confession, with a tenfold shame: but if I have hitherto deserved no such opprobrious word, or suspicion, I may hereby engage myself now openly to the faithful observation of what I have professed. I go on to show you the unbridled impudence of this loose railer, who, having once begun his race, regards not how far he flies out beyond all truth and shame; who from the single notice of the Animadversions, as he protests, will undertake to tell ye the very clothes I wear, though he be much mistaken in my wardrobe: and like a son of Belial, without the hire of Jezebel, charges me “of blaspheming God and the king,” as ordinarily as he imagines “me to drink sack and swear,” merely because this was a shred in his commonplace book, and seemed to come off roundly, as if he were some empiric of false accusations, to try his poisons upon me, whether they would work or no. Whom what should I endeavour to refute more, whenas that book, which is his only testimony, returns the lie upon him; not giving him the least hint of the author to be either a swearer or a sack drinker. And for the readers, if they can believe me, principally for those reasons which I have alleged, to be of life and purpose neither dishonest nor unchaste, they will be easily induced to think me sober both of wine and of word; but if I have been already successless in persuading them, all that I can further say, will be but vain; and it will be better thrift to save two tedious labours, mine of excusing, and theirs of needless hearing.
Proceeding further, I am met with a whole ging of words and phrases not mine, for he hath maimed them, and, like a sly depraver, mangled them in this his wicked limbo, worse than the ghost of Deiphobus appeared to his friend Æneas. Here I scarce know them, and he that would, let him repair to the place in that book where I set them: for certainly this tormentor of semicolons is as good at dismembering and slitting sentences, as his grave fathers the prelates have been at stigmatizing and slitting noses. By such handicraft as this, what might he not traduce? Only that odour, which being his own, must needs offend his sense of smelling, since he will needs bestow his foot among us, and not allow us to think he wears a sock, I shall endeavour it may be offenceless to other men’s ears. The Remonstrant, having to do with grave and reverend men his adversaries, thought it became him to tell them in scorn, that “the bishop’s foot had been in their book and confuted it;” which when I saw him arrogate, to have done that with his heels that surpassed the best consideration of his head, to spurn a confutation among respected men, I questioned not the lawfulness of moving his jollity to bethink him, what odour a sock would have in such painful business. And this may have chanced to touch him more nearly than I was aware; for indeed a bishop’s foot that hath all his toes maugre the gout, and a linen sock over it, is the aptest emblem of the prelate himself; who being a pluralist, may under one surplice, which is also linen, hide four benefices, besides the metropolitan toe, and sends a fouler stench to heaven, than that which this young queasiness retches at. And this is the immediate reason here why our enraged confuter, that he may be as perfect a hypocrite as Caiaphas, ere he be a high-priest, cries out, “Horrid blasphemy!” and, like a recreant Jew, calls for stones. I beseech ye, friends, ere the brickbats fly, resolve me and yourselves, is it blasphemy, or any whit disagreeing from Christian meekness, whenas Christ himself, speaking of unsavoury traditions, scruples not to name the dunghill and the jakes, for me to answer a slovenly wincer of a confutation, that if he would needs put his foot to such a sweaty service, the odour of his sock was like to be neither musk nor benjamin? Thus did that foolish monk in a barbarous declamation accuse Petrarch of blasphemy for dispraising the French wines. But this Edition: current; Page: [133] which follows is plain bedlam stuff, this is the demoniac legion indeed, which the Remonstrant feared had been against him, and now he may see is for him. “You that love Christ,” saith he, “and know this mis creant wretch, stone him to death, lest you smart for his impunity.” What thinks the Remonstrant? does he like that such words as these should come out of his shop, out of his Trojan horse? To give the watch-word like a Guisian of Paris to a mutiny or massacre; to proclaim a croisade against his fellow Christian now in this troublous and divided time of the kingdom? If he do, I shall say that to be the Remonstrant, is no better than to be a Jesuit; and that if he and his accomplices could do as the rebels have done in Ireland to the protestants, they would do in England the same to them that would no prelates. For a more seditious and butcherly speech no cell of Loyola could have belched against one who in all his writings spake not, that any man’s skin should be raised. And yet this cursing Shimei, a hurler of stones, as well as a railer, wants not the face instantly to make as though he “despaired of victory, unless a modest defence would get it him.” Did I err at all, readers, to foretell ye, when first I met with his title, that the epithet of modest there was a certain red portending sign, that he meant ere long to be most tempestuously bold and shameless? Nevertheless, “he dares not say but there may be hid in his nature as much venomous atheism and profanation, as he thinks hath broke out at his adversary’s lips; but he hath not the sore running upon him,” as he would intimate I have. Now trust me not, readers, if I be not already weary of pluming and footing this sea-gull, so open he lies to strokes, and never offers at another, but brings home the dorre upon himself. For if the sore be running upon me, in all judgment I have escaped the disease; but he who hath as much hid in him, as he hath voluntarily confessed, and cannot expel it, because he is dull, (for venomous atheism were no treasure to be kept within him else,) let him take the part he hath chosen, which must needs follow, to swell and burst with his own inward venom.
SECTION I.
But mark, readers, there is a kind of justice observed among them that do evil, but this man loves injustice in the very order of his malice. For having all this while abused the good name of his adversary with all manner of licence in revenge of his Remonstrant, if they be not both one person, or as I am told, father and son, yet after all this he calls for satisfaction, whenas he himself hath already taken the utmost farthing. “Violence hath been done,” says he, “to the person of a holy and religious prelate.” To which, something in effect to what St. Paul answered of Ananias, I answer, “I wist not, brethern, that he was a holy and religious prelate;” for evil is written of those who would be prelates. And finding him thus in disguise without his superscription or phylactery either of holy or prelate, it were no sin to serve him as Longchamp bishop of Ely was served in his disguise at Dover: he hath begun the measure nameless, and when he pleases we may all appear as we are. And let him be then what he will, he shall be to me so as I find him principled. For neither must prelate or archprelate hope to exempt himself from being reckoned as one of the vulgar, which is for him only to hope whom true wisdom and the contempt of vulgar opinions exempts, it being taught us in the Psalms, that he who is in honour and understandeth not, is as the beasts that perish. And now first “the manner Edition: current; Page: [134] of handling that cause,” which I undertook, he thinks is suspicious, as if the wisest and the best words were not ever to some or other suspicious. But where is the offence, the disagreement from Christian meekness, or the precept of Solomon in answering folly? When the Remonstrant talks of froth and scum, I tell him there is none, and bid him spare his ladle: when he brings in the mess with keal, beef, and brewess, what stomach in England could forbear to call for flanks and briskets? Capon and white broth having been likely sometimes in the same room with Christ and his apostles, why does it trouble him, that it should be now in the same leaf, especially where the discourse is not continued, but interrupt? And let him tell me, is he wont to say grace, doth he not then name holiest names over the steam of costliest superfluities? Does he judge it foolish or dishonest, to write that among religious things, which, when he talks of religious things, he can devoutly chew? Is he afraid to name Christ where those things are written in the same leaf, whom he fears not to name while the same things are in his mouth? Doth not Christ himself teach the highest things by the similitude of old bottles and patched clothes? Doth he not illustrate best things by things most evil? his own coming to be as a thief in the night, and the righteous man’s wisdom to that of an unjust steward? He might therefore have done better to have kept in his canting beggars, and heathen altar, to sacrifice his threadbare criticism of Bomolochus to an unseasonable goddess fit for him called Importunity, and have reserved his Greek derivation till he lecture to his fresh men, for here his itching pedantry is but flouted.
But to the end that nothing may be omitted, which may farther satisfy any conscionable man, who, notwithstanding what I could explain before the Animadversions, remains yet unsatified concerning that way of writing which I there defended, but this confuter, whom it pinches, utterly disapproves; I shall essay once again, and perhaps with more success. If therefore the question were in oratory, whether a vehement vein throwing out indignation or scorn upon an object that merits it, were among the aptest ideas of speech to be allowed, it were my work, and that an easy one, to make it clear both by the rules of best rhetoricians, and the famousest examples of the Greek and Roman orations. But since the religion of it is disputed, and not the art, I shall make use only of such reasons and authorities, as religion cannot except against. It will be harder to gainsay, than for me to evince, that in the teaching of men diversely tempered, different ways are to be tried. The Baptist, we know, was a strict man, remarkable for austerity and set order of life. Our Saviour, who had all gifts in him, was Lord to express his indoctrinating power in what sort him best seemed; sometimes by a mild and familiar converse; sometimes with plain and impartial home-speaking, regardless of those whom the auditors might think he should have had in more respect; other while, with bitter and ireful rebukes, if not teaching, yet leaving excuseless those his wilful impugners. What was all in him, was divided among many others the teachers of his church; some to be severe and ever of a sad gravity, that they may win such, and check sometimes those who be of nature over-confident and jocund; others were sent more cheerful, free, and still as it were at large, in the midst of an untrespassing honesty; that they who are so tempered, may have by whom they might be drawn to salvation, and they who are too scrupulous, and dejected of spirit, might be often strengthened with wise consolations and revivings: no man being forced wholly to dissolve that groundwork of nature which God created in him, the sanguine to empty out all his sociable liveliness, the choleric to expel quite the unsinning predominance of his anger; but that each radical humour and passion, Edition: current; Page: [135] wrought upon and corrected as it ought, might be made the proper mould and foundation of every man’s peculiar gifts and virtues. Some also were indued with a staid moderation and soundness of argument, to teach and convince the rational and soberminded; yet not therefore that to be thought the only expedient course of teaching, for in times of opposition, when either against new herersies arising, or old corruptions to be reformed, this cool unpassionate mildness of positive wisdom is not enough to damp and astonish the proud resistance of carnal and false doctors, then (that I may have leave to soar awhile as the poets use) Zeal, whose substance is ethereal, arming in complete diamond, ascends his fiery chariot drawn with two blazing meteors, figured like beasts, out of a higher breed than any the zodiac yields, resembling two of those four which Ezekiel and St. John saw; the one visaged like a lion, to express power, high authority, and indignation; the other of countenance like a man, to cast derision and scorn upon perverse and fraudulent seducers: with these the invincible warrior, Zeal, shaking loosely the slack reins, drives over the heads of scarlet prelates, and such as are insolent to maintain traditions, bruising their stiff necks under his flaming wheels. Thus did the true prophets of old combat with the false; thus Christ himself, the fountain of meekness, found acrimony enough to be still galling and vexing the prelatical pharisees. But ye will say, these had immediate warrant from God to be thus bitter; and I say so much the plainer is it proved, that there may be a sanctified bitterness against the enemies of truth. Yet that ye may not think inspiration only the warrant thereof, but that it is as any other virtue, of moral and general observation, the example of Luther may stand for all, whom God made choice of before others to be of highest eminence and power in reforming the church; who, not of revelation, but of judgment, writ so vehemently against the chief defenders of old untruths in the Romish church, that his own friends and favourers were many times offended with the fierceness of his spirit; yet he being cited before Charles the Fifth to answer for his books, and having divided them into three sorts, whereof one was of those which he had sharply written, refused, though upon deliberation given him, to retract or unsay any word therein, as we may read in Sleidan. Yea, he defends his eagerness, as being “of an ardent spirit, and one who could not write a dull style;” and affirmed, “he thought it God’s will, to have the inventions of men thus laid open, seeing that matters quietly handled were quickly forgot.” And herewithal how useful and available God hath made his tart rhetoric in the church’s cause, he often found by his own experience. For when he betook himself to lenity and moderation, as they call it, he reaped nothing but contempt both from Cajetan and Erasmus, from Cocleus, from Ecchius, and others; insomuch that blaming his friends, who had so counselled him, he resolved never to run into the like error: if at other times he seem to excuse his vehemence, as more than what was meet, I have not examined through his works, to know how far he gave way to his own fervent mind; it shall suffice me to look to mine own. And this I shall easily aver, though it may seem a hard saying, that the Spirit of God, who is purity itself, when he would reprove any fault severely, or but relate things done or said with indignation by others, abstains not from some words not civil at other times to be spoken. Omitting that place in Numbers at the killing of Zimri and Cosbi; done by Phineas in the height of zeal, related, as the rabbins expound, not without an obscene word; we may find in Deuteronomy and three of the prophets, where, God, denouncing bitterly the punishments of idolaters, tells them in a term immodest to be uttered in cool blood, that their wives shall be defiled openly. But these, they will say, were honest words Edition: current; Page: [136] in that age when they were spoken. Which is more than any rabbin can prove; and certainly had God been so minded, he could have picked such words as should never have come into abuse. What will they say to this? David going against Nabal, in the very same breath when he had just before named the name of God, he vows not “to leave any alive of Nabal’s house that pisseth against the wall.” But this was unadvisedly spoken, you will answer, and set down to aggravate his infirmity. Turn then to the first of Kings, where God himself uses the phrase “I will cut off from Jeroboam him that pisseth against the wall.” Which had it been an unseemly speech in the heat of an earnest expression, then we must conclude that Jonathan or Onkelos the targumists were of cleaner language than he that made the tongue; for they render it as briefly, “I will cut off all who are at years of discretion,” that is to say, so much discretion as to hide nakedness. Whereas God, who is the author both of purity and eloquence, chose this phrase as fittest in that vehement character wherein he spake. Otherwise that plain word might have easily been forborne: which the masoreths and rabbinical scholiasts, not well attending, have often used to blur the margent with Keri instead of Ketiv, and gave us this insulse rule out of their Talmud, “That all words which in the law are written obscenely, must be changed to more civil words:” fools, who would teach men to read more decently than God thought good to write. And thus I take it to be manifest, that indignation against men and their actions notoriously bad hath leave and authority ofttimes to utter such words and phrases, as in common talk were not so mannerly to use. That ye may know, not only as the historian speaks, “that all those things for which men plough, build, or sail, obey virtue,” but that all words, and whatsoever may be spoken, shall at some time in an unwonted manner wait upon her purposes.
Now that the confutant may also know as he desires, what force of teaching there is sometimes in laughter; I shall return him in short, that laughter being one way of answering “a fool according to his folly,” teaches two sorts of persons, first, the fool himself “not to be wise in his own conceit,” as Solomon affirms; which is certainly a great document to make an unwise man know himself. Next, it teacheth the hearers, in as much as scorn is one of those punishments, which belong to men carnally wise, which is oft in Scripture declared; for when such are punished, “the simple are thereby made wise,” if Solomon’s rule be true. And I would ask, to what end Elijah mocked the false prophets? was it to show his wit, or to fulfil his humour? Doubtless we cannot imagine that great servant of God had any other, end, in all which he there did, but to teach and instruct the poor misled people. And we may frequently read, that many of the martyrs in the midst of their troubles were not sparing to deride and scoff their superstitious persecutors. Now may the confutant advise again with Sir Francis Bacon, whether Elijah and the martyrs did well to turn religion into a comedy or satire; “to rip up the wounds of idolatry and superstition with a laughing countenance:” so that for pious gravity the author here is matched and overmatched, and for wit and morality in one that follows:
- “—laughing to teach the truth
- What hinders? as some teachers give to boys
- Junkets and knacks that they may learn apace.”
Thus Flaccus in his first satire, and his tenth:
- “—Jesting decides great things
- Stronglier and better oft than earnest can.”
I could urge the same out of Cicero and Seneca, but he may content him with this. And henceforward, if he can learn, may know as well what are Edition: current; Page: [137] the bounds and objects of laughter and vehement reproof, as he hath known hitherto how to deserve them both. But lest some may haply think, or thus expostulate with me after this debatement, who made you the busy almoner to deal about this dole of laughter and reprehension, which no man thanks your bounty for? To the urbanity of that man I should answer much after this sort: that I, friend objector, having read of heathen philosophers, some to have taught, that whosoever would but use his ear to listen, might hear the voice of his guiding genius ever before him, calling, and as it were pointing to that way which is his part to follow; others, as the stoics, to account reason, which they call the Hegemonicon, to be the common Mercury conducting without error those that give themselves obediently to be led accordingly: having read this, I could not esteem so poorly of the faith which I profess, that God had left nothing to those who had forsaken all other doctrines for his, to be an inward witness and warrant of what they have to do, as that they should need to measure themselves by other men’s measures, how to give scope or limit to their proper actions; for that were to make us the most at a stand, the most uncertain and accidental wanderers in our doings, of all religions in the world. So that the question ere while moved, who is he that spends thus the benevolence of laughter and reproof so liberally upon such men as the prelates, may return with a more just demand, who he is not of place and knowledge never so mean, under whose contempt and jerk these men are not deservedly fallen? Neither can religion receive any wound by disgrace thrown upon the prelates, since religion and they surely were never in such amity. They rather are the men who have wounded religion, and their stripes must heal her. I might also tell them what Electra in Sophocles, a wise virgin, answered her wicked mother, who thought herself too violently reproved by her the daughter:
- ’Tis you that say it, not I; you do the deeds,
- And your ungodly deeds find me the words.
If therefore the Remonstrant complain of libels, it is because he feels them to be right aimed. For I ask again, as before in the Animadversions, how long is it since he hath disrelished libels? We never heard the least mutter of his voice against them while they flew abroad without control or check, defaming the Scots and Puritans. And yet he can remember of none but Lysimachus Nicanor, and “that he misliked and censured.” No more but of one can the Remonstrant remember? What if I put him in mind of one more? What if of one more whereof the Remonstrant in many likelihoods may be thought the author? Did he never see a pamphlet intitled after his own fashion, “A Survey of that foolish, seditious, scandalous profane Libel, the Protestation protested?” The child doth not more expressly refigure the visage of his father, than that book resembles the style of the Remonstrant, in those idioms of speech, wherein he seems most to delight: and in the seventeenth page, three lines together are taken out of the Remonstrance word for word, not as a citation, but as an author borrows from himself. Whoever it be, he may as justly be said to have libelled, as he against whom he writes: there ye shall find another man than is here made show of; there he bites as fast as this whines. “Vinegar in the ink” is there “the antidote of vipers.” Laughing in a religious controversy is there “a thrifty physic to expel his melancholy.” In the mean time the testimony of Sir Francis Bacon was not misalleged, complaining that libels on the bishops’ part were uttered openly; and if he hoped the prelates had no intelligence with the libellers, he delivers it but as his favourable opinion. But had he contradicted himself, how could I assoil him here, more than a Edition: current; Page: [138] little before, where I know not how, by entangling himself, he leaves an aspersion upon Job, which by any else I never heard laid to his charge? For having affirmed that “there is no greater confusion than the confounding of jest and earnest,” presently he brings the example of Job, “glancing at conceits of mirth, when he sat among the people with the gravity of a judge upon him.” If jest and earnest be such a confusion, then were the people much wiser than Job, for “he smiled, and they believed him not.” To defend libels, which is that whereof I am next accused, was far from my purpose. I had not so little share in good name, as to give another that advantage against myself. The sum of what I said was, that a more free permission of writing at some times might be profitable, in such a question especially wherein the magistrates are not fully resolved; and both sides have equal liberty to write, as now they have. Not as when the prelates bore sway, in whose time the books of some men were confuted, when they who should have answered were in close prison, denied the use of pen or paper. And the divine right of episcopacy was then valiantly asserted, when he who would have been respondent must have bethought himself withal how he could refute the Clink or the Gatehouse. If now therefore they be pursued with bad words, who persecuted others with bad deeds, it is a way to lessen tumult rather than to increase it; whenas anger thus freely vented, spends itself ere it break out into action, though Machiavel, whom he cites, or any other Machiavelian priest, think the contrary.
SECTION III.
Now, readers, I bring ye to his third section; wherein very cautiously and no more than needs, lest I should take him for some chaplain at hand, some squire of the body to his prelate, one that serves not at the altar only, but at the court cupboard, he will bestow on us a pretty model of himself; and sobs me out of half a dozen phthisical mottoes wherever he had them, hopping short in the measure of convulsion-fits; in which labour the agony of his wit having escaped narrowly, instead of well-sized periods, he greets us with a quantity of thumb-ring posies. “He has a fortune therefore good, because he is content with it.” This is a piece of sapience not worth the brain of a fruit trencher; as if content were the measure of what is good or bad in the gift of fortune. For by this rule a bad man may have a good fortune, because he may be ofttimes content with it for many reasons which have no affinity with virtue, as love of ease, want of spirit to use more, and the like. “And therefore content,” he says, “because it neither goes before, nor comes behind his merit.” Belike then if his fortune should go before his merit, he would not be content, but resign, if we believe him, which I do the less, because he implies, that if it came behind his merit, he would be content as little. Whereas if a wise man’s content should depend upon such a therefore, because his fortune came not behind his merit, how many wise men could have content in this world? In his next pithy symbol, I dare not board him, for he passes all the seven wise masters of Greece, attributing to himself that which on my life Solomon durst not: “to have affections so equally tempered, that they neither too hastily adhere to the truth before it be fully examined, nor too lazily afterward.” Which, unless he only were exempted out of the corrupt mass of Adam, born without sin original, and living without actual, is impossible. Had Solomon, (for it behoves me to instance in the wisest, dealing with such a transcendant Edition: current; Page: [139] sage as this,) had Solomon affections so equally tempered, as “not adhering too lazily to the truth,” when God warned him of his halting in idolatry? do we read that he repented hastily? did not his affections lead him hastily from an examined truth, how much more would they lead him slowly to it? Yet this man, beyond a stoic apathy, sees truth as in a rapture, and cleaves to it; not as through the dim glass of his affections, which, in this frail mansion of flesh, are ever unequally tempered, pushing forward to error, and keeping back from truth ofttimes the best of men. But how far this boaster is from knowing himself, let his preface speak. Something I thought it was, that made him so quick-sighted to gather such strange things out of the Animadversions, whereof the least conception could not be drawn from thence, of “suburb-sinks,” sometimes “out of wit and clothes,” sometimes “in new serge, drinking sack, and swearing;” now I know it was this equal temper of his affections, that gave him to see clearer than any fennel-rubbed serpent. Lastly, he has resolved “that neither person nor cause shall improper him.” I may mistake his meaning, for the word ye hear is “improper.” But whether if not a person, yet a good parsonage or impropriation bought out for him, would not “improper” him, because there may be a quirk in the word, I leave it for a canonist to resolve.
SECTION IV.
And thus ends this section, or rather dissection, of himself, short ye will say both in breadth and extent, as in our own praises it ought to be, unless wherein a good name hath been wrongfully attainted. Right; but if ye look at what he ascribes to himself, “that temper of his affections,” which cannot any where be but in Paradise, all the judicious panegyrics in any language extant, are not half so prolix. And that well appears in his next removal. For what with putting his fancy to the tiptoe in this description of himself, and what with adventuring presently to stand upon his own legs without the crutches of his margin, which is the sluice most commonly that feeds the drought of his text, he comes so lazily on in a simile, with his “armful of weeds,” and demeans himself in the dull expression so like a dough-kneaded thing, that he has not spirit enough left him so far to look to his syntax, as to avoid nonsense. For it must be understood there that the stranger, and not he who brings the bundle, would be deceived in censuring the field, which this hipshot grammarian cannot set into right frame of construction, neither here in the similitude, nor in the following reddition thereof; which being to this purpose, that “the faults of the best picked out, and presented in gross, seem monstrous; this,” saith he, “you have done, in pinning on his sleeve the faults of others;” as if to pick out his own faults, and to pin the faults of others upon him, were to do the same thing. To answer therefore how I have culled out the evil actions of the Remonstrant from his virtues, I am acquitted by the dexterity and conveyance of his nonsense, losing that for which he brought his parable. But what of other men’s faults I have pinned upon his sleeve, let him show. For whether he were the man who termed the martyrs Foxian confessors, it matters not; he that shall step up before others to defend a church-government, which wants almost no circumstance, but only a name, to be a plain popedom, a government which changes the fatherly and ever-teaching discipline of Christ into that lordly and uninstructing jurisdiction, which properly Edition: current; Page: [140] makes the pope Antichrist, makes himself an accessory to all the evil committed by those, who are armed to do mischief by that undue government; which they, by their wicked deeds, do, with a kind of passive and unwitting obedience to God, destroy; but he, by plausible words and traditions against the Scripture, obstinately seeks to maintain. They, by their own wickedness ruining their own unjust authority, make room for good to succeed; but he, by a show of good upholding the evil which in them undoes itself, hinders the good which they by accident let in. Their manifest crimes serve to bring forth an ensuing good, and hasten a remedy against themselves; and his seeming good tends to reinforce their self-punishing crimes and his own, by doing his best to delay all redress. Shall not all the mischief which other men do be laid to his charge, if they do it by that unchurch-like power which he defends? Christ saith, “he that is not with me, is against me; and he that gathers not with me, scatters.” In what degree of enmity to Christ shall we place that man then, who so is with him, as that it makes more against him; and so gathers with him, that it scatters more from him? Shall it avail that man to say he honours the martyrs’ memory, and treads in their steps? No; the pharisees confessed as much of the holy prophets. Let him, and such as he, when they are in their best actions, even at their prayers, look to hear that which the pharisees heard from John the Baptist when they least expected, when they rather looked for praise from him; “generation of vipers, who hath warned ye to flee from the wrath to come?” Now that ye have started back from the purity of Scripture, which is the only rule of reformation, to the old vomit of your traditions; now that ye have either troubled or leavened the people of God, and the doctrine of the gospel, with scandalous ceremonies and mass-borrowed liturgies, do ye turn the use of that truth which ye profess, to countenance that falsehood which ye gain by? We also reverence the martyrs, but rely only upon the Scriptures. And why we ought not to rely upon the martyrs, I shall be content with such reasons as my confuter himself affords me; who is, I must needs say for him, in that point as officious an adversary as I would wish to any man. For, “first,” saith he, “there may be a martyr in a wrong cause, and as courageous in suffering as the best; sometimes in a good cause with a forward ambition displeasing to God. Other whiles they that story of them out of blind zeal or malice, may write many things of them untruly.” If this be so, as ye hear his own confession, with what safety can the Remonstrant rely upon the martyrs as “patrons of his cause,” whenas any of those who are alleged for the approvers of our liturgy or prelaty, might have been, though not in a wrong cause, martyrs? Yet whether not vainly ambitious of that honour, or whether not misreported or misunderstood in those their opinions, God only knows. The testimony of what we believe in religion must be such as the conscience may rest on to be infallible and incorruptible, which is only the word of God.
SECTION V.
His fifth section finds itself aggrieved that the Remonstrant should be taxed with the illegal proceeding of the high commission, and oath ex officio: and first, “whether they were illegal or no, it is more than he knows.” See this malevolent fox! that tyranny which the whole kingdom cried out against as stung with adders and scorpions, that tyranny which the parliament, in compassion of the church and commonwealth, hath dissolved Edition: current; Page: [141] and fetched up by the roots, for which it hath received the public thanks and blessings of thousands; this obscure thorn-eater of malice and detraction as well as of quodlibets and sophisms, knows not whether it were illegal or not. Evil, evil would be your reward, ye worthies of the parliament, if this sophister and his accomplices had the censuring or the sounding forth of your labours. And that the Remonstrant cannot wash his hands of all the cruelties exercised by the prelates, is past doubting. They scourged the confessors of the gospel, and he held the scourger’s garments. They executed their rage; and he, if he did nothing else, defended the government with the oath that did it, and the ceremonies which were the cause of it; does he think to be counted guiltless?
SECTION VI.
In the following section I must foretell ye, readers, the doings will be rough and dangerous, the baiting of a satire. And if the work seem more trivial or boisterous than for this discourse, let the Remonstrant thank the folly of this confuter, who could not let a private word pass, but he must make all this blaze of it. I had said, that because the Remonstrant was so much offended with those who were tart against the prelates, sure he loved toothless satires, which I took were as improper as a toothed sleekstone. This champion from behind the arras cries out, that those toothless satires were of the Remonstrant’s making; and arms himself here tooth and nail, and horn to boot, to supply the want of teeth, or rather of gums in the satires. And for an onset tells me, that the simile of a sleekstone “shows I can be as bold with a prelate as familiar with a laundress.” But does it not argue rather the lascivious promptness of his own fancy, who, from the harmless mention of a sleekstone, could neigh out the remembrance of his old conversation among the viraginian trollops? For me, if he move me, I shall claim his own oath, the oath ex officio against any priest or prelate in the kingdom, to have ever as much hated such pranks as the best and chastest of them all. That exception which I made against toothless satires, the confuter hopes I had from the satirist, but is far deceived; neither have I ever read the hobbling distich which he means. For this good hap I had from a careful education, to be inured and seasoned betimes with the best and elegantest authors of the learned tongues, and thereto brought an ear that could measure a just cadence, and scan without articulating: rather nice and humorous in what was tolerable, than patient to read every drawling versifier. Whence lighting upon this title of “toothless satires,” I will not conceal ye what I thought, readers, that sure this must be some sucking satire, who might have done better to have used his coral, and made an end of breeding, ere he took upon him to wield a satire’s whip. But when I heard him talk of “scowering the rusty swords of elvish knights,” do not blame me, if I changed my thought, and concluded him some desperate cutler. But why “his scornful muse could never abide with tragic shoes her ancles for to hide,” the pace of the verse told me that her mawkin knuckles were never shapen to that royal buskin. And turning by chance to the sixth satire of his second book, I was confirmed; where having begun loftily “in Heaven’s universal alphabet,” he falls down to that wretched poorness and frigidity, as to talk of “Bridge street in Heaven, and the Ostler of Heaven,” and there wanting other matter to catch him a heat, (for certain he was in the frozen zone miserably benummed,) Edition: current; Page: [142] with thoughts lower than any beadle betakes him to whip the signposts of Cambridge alehouses, the ordinary subject of freshmen’s tales, and in a strain as pitiful. Which for him who would be counted the first English satire, to abase himself to, who might have learned better among the Latin and Italian satirists, and in our own tongue form the “Vision and Creed of Pierce Plowman,” besides others before him, manifested a presumptuous undertaking with weak and unexamined shoulders. For a satire as it was born out of a tragedy, so ought to resemble his parentage, to strike high, and adventure dangerously at the most eminent vices among the greatest persons, and not to creep into every blind tap-house, that fears a constable more than a satire. But that such a poem should be toothless, I still affirm it to be a bull, taking away the essence of that which it calls itself. For if it bite neither the persons nor the vices, how is it a satire? And if it bite either, how is it toothless? So that toothles satires are as much as if he had said toothless teeth. What we should do therefore with this learned comment upon teeth and horns, which hath brought this confutant into his pedantic kingdom of Cornucopia, to reward him for glossing upon horns even to the Hebrew root, I know not; unless we should commend him to be lecturer in East-cheap upon St. Luke’s day, when they send their tribute to that famous haven by Deptford. But we are not like to escape him so. For now the worm of criticism works in him, he will tell us the derivation of “German rutters, of meat, and of ink,” which doubtless, rightly applied with some gall in it, may prove good to heal this tetter of pedagogism that bespreads him, with such a tenesmus of originating, that if he be an Arminian, and deny original sin, all the etymologies of his book shall witness, that his brain is not meanly tainted with that infection.
SECTION VII.
His seventh section labours to cavil out the flaws which were found in the Remonstrant’s logic; who having laid down for a general proposition, that “civil polity is variable and arbitrary,” from whence was inferred logically upon him, that he had concluded the polity of England to be arbitrary, for general includes particular; here his defendant is not ashamed to confess, that the Remonstrant’s proposition was sophistical by a fallacy called ad plures interrogationes: which sounds to me somewhat strange, that a Remonstrant of that pretended sincerity should bring deceitful and double-dealing propositions to the parliament. The truth is, he had let slip a shrewd passage ere he was aware, not thinking the conclusion would turn upon him with such a terrible edge, and not knowing how to wind out of the briars, he, or his substitute, seems more willing to lay the integrity of his logic to pawn, and grant a fallacy in his own major, where none is, than to be forced to uphold the inference. For that distinction of possible, and lawful, is ridiculous to be sought for in that proposition; no man doubting that it is possible to change the form of civil polity; and that it is held lawful by that major, the word “arbitrary” implies. Nor will this help him, to deny that it is arbitrary “at any time, or by any undertakers,” (which are the limitations invented by him since,) for when it stands as he will have it now by his second edition, “civil polity is variable, but not at any time, or by any undertakers,” it will result upon him, belike then at some time, and by some undertakers it may. And so he goes on mincing the matter, till he meets with something in Sir Francis Bacon; then he takes Edition: current; Page: [143] heart again, and holds his major at large. But by and by, as soon as the shadow of Sir Francis hath left him, he falls off again warping, and warping, till he come to contradict himself in diameter; and denies flatly that it is “either variable or arbitrary, being once settled.” Which third shift is no less a piece of laughter: for, before the polity was settled, how could it be variable, whenas it was no polity at all, but either an anarchy or a tyranny? That limitation therefore, of aftersettling, is a mere tautology. So that, in fine, his former assertion is now recanted, and “civil polity is neither variable nor arbitrary.”
SECTION VIII.
Whatever else may persuade me, that this confutation was not made without some assistance or advice of the Remonstrant, yet in this eighth section that his hand was not greatly intermixed, I can easily believe. For it begins with this surmise, that “not having to accuse the Remonstrant to the king, I do it to the parliament;” which conceit of the man clearly shoves the king out of the parliament, and makes two bodies of one. Whereas the Remonstrant, in the epistle to his last “Short Answer,” gives his supposal, “that they cannot be severed in the rights of their several concernments.” Mark, readers, if they cannot be severed in what is several, (which casts a bull’s eye to go yoke with the toothless satires,) how should they be severed in their common concernments, the welfare of the land, by due accusation of such as are the common grievances, among which I took the Remonstrant to be one? And therefore if I accused him to the parliament, it was the same as to accuse him to the king? Next he casts it into the dish of I know not whom, “that they flatter some of the house, and libel others whose consciences made them vote contrary to some proceedings.” Those some proceedings can be understood of nothing else but the deputy’s execution. And can this private concoctor of malecontent, at the very instant when he pretends to extol the parliament, afford thus to blur over, rather than to mention, that public triumph of their justice and constancy, so high, so glorious, so reviving to the fainted commonwealth, with such a suspicious and murmuring expression as to call it some proceedings? And yet immediately he falls to glossing, as if he were the only man that rejoiced at these times. But I shall discover to ye, readers, that this his praising of them is as full of nonsense and scholastic foppery, as his meaning he himself discovers to be full of close malignity. His first encomium is, “that the sun looks not upon a braver, nobler convocation than is that of king, peers, and commons.” One thing I beg of ye, readers, as ye bear any zeal to learning, to elegance, and that which is called decorum in the writing of praise, especially on such a noble argument, ye would not be offended, though I rate this cloistered lubber according to his deserts. Where didst thou learn to be so aguish, so pusillanimous, thou losel bachelor of arts, as against all custom and use of speech to term the high and sovereign court of parliament, a convocation? Was this the flower of all the synonimas and voluminous papers, whose best folios are predestined to no better end than to make winding-sheets in Lent for pilchers? Couldst thou presume thus with one word’s speaking to clap as it were under hatches the king with all his peers and gentry into square caps and monkish hoods? How well dost thou now appear to be a chip of the old block, that could find “Bridge street and alehouses in heaven?” Why didst Edition: current; Page: [144] thou not, to be his perfect imitator, liken the king to the vicechancellor, and the lords, to the doctors? Neither is this an indignity only but a reproach, to call that inviolable residence of justice and liberty, by such an odious name as now a “convocation” is become, which would be nothing injured, though it were styled the house of bondage, whereout so many cruel tasks, so many unjust burdens have been laden upon the bruised consciences of so many Christians throughout the land. But which of those worthy deeds, whereof we and our posterity must confess this parliament to have done so many and so noble, which of those memorable acts comes first into his praises? None of all, not one. What will he then praise them for? Not for any thing doing, but for deferring to do, for deferring to chastise his lewd and insolent compriests: not that they have deferred all, but that he hopes they will remit what is yet behind. For the rest of his oratory that follows, so just is it in the language of stall epistle nonsense, that if he who made it can understand it, I deny not but that he may deserve for his pains a cast doublet. When a man would look he should vent something of his own, as ever in a set speech the manner is with him that knows any thing, he lest we should not take notice enough of his barren stupidity, declares it by alphabet, and refers us to odd remnants in his topics. Nor yet content with the wonted room of his margin, but he must cut out large docks and creeks into his text, to unlade the foolish frigate of his unseasonable authorities, not therewith to praise the parliament, but to tell them what he would have them do. What else there is, he jumbles together in such a lost construction, as no man, either lettered or unlettered, will be able to piece up. I shall spare to transcribe him, but if I do him wrong let me be so dealt with.
Now although it be a digression from the ensuing matter, yet because it shall not be said I am apter to blame others than to make trial myself, and that I may after this harsh discord touch upon a smoother string awhile to entertain myself and him that list, with some more pleasing fit, and not the least to testify the gratitude which I owe to those public benefactors of their country, for the share I enjoy in the common peace and good by their incessant labours; I shall be so troublesome to this declaimer for once, as to show him what he might have better said in their praise; wherein I must mention only some few things of many, for more than that to a digression may not be granted. Although certainly their actions are worthy not thus to be spoken of by the way, yet if hereafter it befall me to attempt something more answerable to their great merits, I perceive how hopeless it will be to reach the height of their praises at the accomplishment of that expectation that waits upon their noble deeds, the unfinishing whereof already surpasses what others before them have left enacted with their utmost performance through many ages. And to the end we may be confident that what they do, proceeds neither from uncertain opinion, nor sudden counsels, but from mature wisdom, deliberate virtue, and dear affection to the public good; I shall begin at that which made them likeliest in the eyes of good men to effect those things for the recovery of decayed religion and the commonwealth, which they who were best minded had long wished for, but few, as the times then were desperate, had the courage to hope for. First, therefore, the most of them being either of ancient and high nobility, or at least of known and well reputed ancestry, which is a great advantage towards virtue one way, but in respect of wealth, ease, and flattery, which accompany a nice and tender education, is as much a hinderance another way: the good which lay before them they took, in imitating the worthiest of their progenitors; and the evil which assaulted their younger years by the Edition: current; Page: [145] temptation of riches, high birth, and that usual bringing up, perhaps too favourable and too remiss, through the strength of an inbred goodness, and with the help of divine grace, that had marked them out for no mean purposes, they nobly overcame. Yet had they a greater danger to cope with; for being trained up in the knowledge of learning, and sent to those places which were intended to be the seed plots of piety and the liberal arts, but were become the nurseries of superstition and empty speculation, as they were prosperous against those vices which grow upon youth out of idleness and superfluity, so were they happy in working off the harms of their abused studies and labours; correcting by the clearness of their own judgment the errors of their misinstruction, and were, as David was, wiser than their teachers. And although their lot fell into such times, and to be bred in such places, where if they chanced to be taught any thing good, or of their own accord had learnt it, they might see that presently untaught them by the custom and ill example of their elders; so far in all probability was their youth from being misled by the single power of example, as their riper years were known to be unmoved with the baits of preferment, and undaunted for any discouragement and terror which appeared often to those that loved religion and their native liberty; which two things God hath inseparably knit together, and hath disclosed to us, that they who seek to corrupt our religion, are the same that would enthral our civil liberty. Thus in the midst of all disadvantages and disrespects, (some also at last not without imprisonment and open disgraces in the cause of their country,) having given proof of themselves to be better made and framed by nature to the love and practice of virtue, than others under the holiest precepts and best examples have been headstrong and prone to vice; and having in all the trials of a firm ingrafted honesty not oftener buckled in the conflict than given every opposition the foil; this moreover was added by favour from heaven, as an ornament and happiness to their virtue, that it should be neither obscure in the opinion of men, nor eclipsed for want of matter equal to illustrate itself; God and man consenting in joint approbation to choose them out as worthiest above others to be both the great reformers of the church, and the restorers of the commonwealth. Nor did they deceive that expectation which with the eyes and desires of their country was fixed upon them; for no sooner did the force of so much united excellence meet in one globe of brightness and efficacy, but encountering the dazzled resistance of tyranny, they gave not over, though their enemies were strong and subtle, till they had laid her groveling upon the fatal block; with one stroke winning again our lost liberties and charters, which our forefathers after so many battles could scarce maintain. And meeting next, as I may so resemble, with the second life of tyranny (for she was grown an ambiguous monster, and to be slain in two shapes) guarded with superstition, which hath no small power to captivate the minds of men otherwise most wise, they neither were taken with her mitred hypocrisy, nor terrified with the push of her bestial horns, but breaking them, immediately forced her to unbend the pontifical brow, and recoil; which repulse only given to the prelates (that we may imagine how happy their removal would be) was the producement of such glorious effects and consequences in the church, that if I should compare them with those exploits of highest fame in poems and panegyrics of old, I am certain it would but diminish and impair their worth, who are now my argument; for those ancient worthies delivered men from such tyrants as were content to inforce only an outward obedience, letting the mind be as free as it could; but these have freed us from a doctrine of tyranny, that offered violence and corruption even to the inward persuasion. They set at liberty nations and Edition: current; Page: [146] cities of men good and bad mixed together; but these opening the prisons and dungeons, called out of darkness and bonds the elect martyrs and witnesses of their Redeemer. They restored the body to ease and wealth; but these, the oppressed conscience to that freedom which is the chief prerogative of the gospel; taking off those cruel burdens imposed not by necessity, as other tyrants are wont for a safeguard of their lives, but laid upon our necks by the strange wilfulness and wantonness of a needless and jolly persecutor called Indifference. Lastly, some of those ancient deliverers have had immortal praises for preserving their citizens from a famine of corn. But these, by this only repulse of an unholy hierarchy, almost in a moment replenished with saving knowledge their country nigh famished for want of that which should feed their souls. All this being done while two armies in the field stood gazing on, the one in reverence of such nobleness quietly gave back and dislodged; the other, spite of the unruliness, and doubted fidelity in some regiments, was either persuaded or compelled to disband and retire home. With such a majesty had their wisdom begirt itself, that whereas others had levied war to subdue a nation that sought for peace, they sitting here in peace could so many miles extend the force of their single words, as to overawe the dissolute stoutness of an armed power secretly stirred up and almost hired against them. And having by a solemn protestation vowed themselves and the kingdom anew to God and his service, and by a prudent foresight above what their fathers thought on, prevented the dissolution and frustrating of their designs by an untimely breaking up; notwithstanding all the treasonous plots against them, all the rumours either of rebellion or invasion, they have not been yet brought to change their constant resolution, ever to think fearlessly of their own safeties, and hopefully of the commonwealth: which hath gained them such an admiration from all good men, that now they hear it as their ordinary surname, to be saluted the fathers of their country, and sit as gods among daily petitions and public thanks flowing in upon them. Which doth so little yet exalt them in their own thoughts, that, with all gentle affability and courteous acceptance, they both receive and return that tribute of thanks which is tendered them; testifying their zeal and desire to spend themselves as it were piece-meal upon the grievances and wrongs of their distressed nation; insomuch that the meanest artizans and labourers, at other times also women, and often the younger sort of servants assembling with their complaints, and that sometimes in a less humble guise than for petitioners, have gone with confidence, that neither their meanness would be rejected, nor their simplicity contemned; nor yet their urgency distasted either by the dignity, wisdom, or moderation of that supreme senate; nor did they depart unsatisfied. And indeed, if we consider the general concourse of suppliants, the free and ready admittance, the willing and speedy redress in what is possible, it will not seem much otherwise, than as if some divine commission from heaven were descended to take into hearing and commiseration the long remediless afflictions of this kingdom; were it not that none more than themselves labour to remove and divert such thoughts, lest men should place too much confidence in their persons, still referring us and our prayers to him that can grant all, and appointing the monthly return of public fasts and supplications. Therefore the more they seek to humble themselves, the more does God, by manifest signs and testimonies, visibly honour their proceedings; and sets them as the mediators of this his covenant, which he offers us to renew. Wicked men daily conspire their hurt, and it comes to nothing; rebellion rages in our Irish province, but, with miraculous and lossless victories of few against many, is daily discomfited and Edition: current; Page: [147] broken; if we neglect not this early pledge of God’s inclining towards us, by the slackness of our needful aids. And whereas at other times we count it ample honour when God vouchsafes to make man the instrument and subordinate worker of his gracious will, such acceptation have their prayers found with him, that to them he hath been pleased to make himself the agent, and immediate performer of their desires; dissolving their difficulties when they are thought inexplicable, cutting out ways for them where no passage could be seen; as who is there so regardless of divine Providence, that from late occurrences will not confess? If therefore it be so high a grace when men are preferred to be but the inferior officers of good things from God, what is it when God himself condescends, and works with his own hands to fulfil the requests of men? Which I leave with them as the greatest praise that can belong to human nature: not that we should think they are at the end of their glorious progress, but that they will go on to follow his Almighty leading, who seems to have thus covenanted with them; that if the will and the endeavour shall be theirs the performance and the perfecting shall his. Whence only it is that I have not feared, though many wise men have miscarried in praising great designs before the utmost event, because I see who is their assistant, who is their confederate, who hath engaged his omnipotent arm to support and crown with success their faith, their fortitude, their just and magnanimous actions, till he have brought to pass all that expected good which, his servants trust, is in his thoughts to bring upon this land in the full and perfect reformation of his church.
Thus far I have digressed, readers, from my former subject; but into such a path, as I doubt not ye will agree with me, to be much fairer and more delightful than the roadway I was in. And how to break off suddenly into those jarring notes which this confuter hath set me, I must be wary, unless I can provide against offending the ear, as some musicians are wont skilfully to fall out of one key into another, without breach of harmony. By good luck therefore, his ninth section is spent in mournful elegy, certain passionate soliloquies, and two whole pages of interrogatories that praise the Remonstrant even to the sonneting of “his fresh cheek, quick eyes, round tongue, agile hand, and nimble invention.”
In his tenth section he will needs erect figures, and tell fortunes; “I am no bishop,” he says, “I was never born to it.” Let me tell therefore this wizard, since he calculates so right, that he may know there be in the world, and I among those, who nothing admire his idol a bishopric; and hold that it wants so much to be a blessing, as that I rather deem it the merest, the falsest, the most unfortunate gift of fortune. And were the punishment and misery of being a prelate bishop terminated only in the person, and did not extend to the affliction of the whole diocese, if I would wish any thing in the bitterness of soul to mine enemy, I would wish him the biggest and fattest bishopric. But he proceeds; and the familiar belike informs him, that “a rich widow, or a lecture, or both would content me:” whereby I perceive him to be more ignorant in his art of divining than any gipsy. For this I cannot omit without ingratitude to that Providence above, who hath ever bred me up in plenty, although my life hath not been unexpensive in learning, and voyaging about; so long as it shall please him to lend me what he hath hitherto thought good, which is enough to serve me in all honest and liberal occasions, and something over besides, I were unthankful to that highest bounty, if I should make myself so poor, as to solicit needily any such kind of rich hopes as this fortune-teller dreams of. And that he may further learn how his astrology is wide all the houses of heaven in spelling marriages, I care not if I tell him thus much professedly, though it be the Edition: current; Page: [148] losing of my rich hopes, as he calls them, that I think with them who, both in prudence and elegance of spirit, would choose a virgin of mean fortunes honestly bred, before the wealthiest widow. The fiend therefore, that told our Chaldean the contrary, was a lying fiend. His next venom he utters against a prayer, which he found in the Animadversions, angry it seems to find any prayers but in the service book; he dislikes it, and I therefore like it the better. “It was theatrical,” he says; and yet it consisted most of Scripture language; it had no rubric to be sung in an antic cope upon the stage of a high altar. “It was bigmouthed,” he says; no marvel, if it were framed as the voice of three kingdoms; neither was it a prayer so much as a hymn in prose, frequent both in the prophets, and in human authors; therefore the style was greater than for an ordinary prayer. “It was an astonishing prayer.” I thank him for that confession, so it was intended to astound and to astonish the guilty prelates; and this confuter confesses, that with him it wrought that effect. But in that which follows, he does not play the soothsayer, but the diabolic slanderer of prayers. “It was made,” he says, “not so much to please God, or to benefit the weal public,” (how dares the viper judge that?) “but to intimate,” saith he, “your good abilities to her that is your rich hopes, your Maronilla.” How hard is it when a man meets with a fool, to keep his tongue from folly! That were miserable indeed to be a courtier of Maronilla, and withal of such a hapless invention, as that no way should be left me to present my meaning but to make myself a canting probationer of orisons. The Remonstrant, when he was as young as I, could
- “Teach each hollow grove to sound his love,
- Wearying echo with one changeless word.”
-
—Toothless Satires.
And so he well might, and all his auditory besides with his “teach each.”
- “Whether so me list my lovely thoughts to sing,
- Come dance ye nimble dryads by my side,
- Whiles I report my fortunes or my loves.”
-
—Toothless Satires.
Delicious! he had that whole bevy at command whether in morrice or at maypole; whilst I by this figure-caster must be imagined in such distress as to sue to Maronilla, and yet left so impoverished of what to say, as to turn my liturgy into my lady’s psalter. Believe it, graduate, I am not altogether so rustic, and nothing so irreligious, but as far distant from a lecturer, as the merest laic, for any consecrating hand of a prelate that shall ever touch me. Yet I shall not decline the more for that, to speak my opinion in the controversy next moved, “whether the people may be allowed for competent judges of a minister’s ability.” For how else can be fulfilled that which God hath promised, to pour out such abundance of knowledge upon all sorts of men in the times of the gospel? How should the people examine the doctrine which is taught them, as Christ and his apostles continually bid them do? How should they “discern and beware of false prophets, and try every spirit,” if they must be thought unfit to judge of the minister’s abilities? The apostles ever laboured to persuade the Christian flock, that they “were called in Christ to all perfectness of spiritual knowledge, and full assurance of understanding in the mystery of God.” But the non-resident and plurality-gaping prelates, the gulfs and whirlpools of benefices, but the dry pits of all sound doctrine, that they may the better preach what they list to their sheep, are still possessing them that they are sheep indeed, without judgment, without understanding, “the very beasts of mount Sinai,” as this confuter calls them; which words of theirs may serve to condemn them out of their own mouths, and to show the gross contrarieties that are in their opinions: for while none think the people so void of knowledge as Edition: current; Page: [149] the prelates think them, none are so backward and malignant as they to bestow knowledge upon them; both by suppressing the frequency of sermons, and the printed explanations of the English Bible. No marvel if the people turn beasts, when their teachers themselves, as Isaiah calls them, “are dumb and greedy dogs, that can never have enough, ignorant, blind, and cannot understand; who, while they all look their own way, every one for his gain from his quarter,” how many parts of the land are fed with windy ceremonies instead of sincere milk; and while one prelate enjoys the nourishment and right of twenty ministers, how many waste places are left as dark as “Galilee of the Gentiles, sitting in the region and shadow of death,” without preaching minister, without light. So little care they of beasts to make them men, that by their sorcerous doctrine of formalities, they take the way to transform them out of Christian men into judaizing beasts. Had they but taught the land, or suffered it to be taught, as Christ would it should have been in all plenteous dispensation of the word, then the poor mechanic might have so accustomed his ear to good teaching, as to have discerned between faithful teachers and false. But now, with a most inhuman cruelty, they who have put out the people’s eyes, reproach them of their blindness; just as the Pharisees their true fathers were wont, who could not endure that the people should be thought competent judges of Christ’s doctrine, although we know they judged far better than those great rabbies: yet “this people,” said they, “that know not the law is accursed.” We need not the authority of Pliny brought to tell us, the people cannot judge of a minister: yet that hurts not. For as none can judge of a painter, or statuary, but he who is an artist, that is, either in the practice or theory, which is often separated from the practice, and judges learnedly without it; so none can judge of a Christian teacher, but he who hath either the practice, or the knowledge of Christian religion, though not so artfully digested in him. And who almost of the meanest Christians hath not heard the Scriptures often read from his childhood, besides so many sermons and lectures more in number than any student hath heard in philosophy, whereby he may easily attain to know when he is wisely taught, and when weakly? whereof three ways I remember are set down in Scripture; the one is to read often the best of books written to this purpose, that not the wise only, but the simple and ignorant, may learn by them; the other way to know of a minister is, by the life he leads, whereof the meanest understanding may be apprehensive. The last way to judge aright in this point is, when he who judges, lives a Christian life himself. Which of these three will the confuter affirm to exceed the capacity of a plain artizan? And what reason then is there left, wherefore he should be denied his voice in the election of his minister, as not thought a competent discerner? It is but arrogance therefore, and the pride of a metaphysical fume, to think that “the mutinous rabble” (for so he calls the Christian congregation) “would be so mistaken in a clerk of the university,” that were to be their minister. I doubt me those clerks, that think so, are more mistaken in themselves; and what with truanting and debauchery, what with false grounds and the weakness of natural faculties in many of them, (it being a maxim in some men to send the simplest of their sons thither,) perhaps there would be found among them as many unsolid and corrupted judgments both in doctrine and life, as in any other two corporations of like bigness. This is undoubted, that if any carpenter, smith, or weaver, were such a bungler in his trade, as the greater number of them are in their profession, he would starve for any custom. And should he exercise his manufacture as little as they do their talents, he would forget his art; and should he mistake Edition: current; Page: [150] his tools as they do theirs, he would mar all the work he took in hand. How few among them that know to write or speak in a pure style; much less to distinguish the ideas, and various kinds of style; in Latin barbarous, and oft not without solecisms, declaiming in rugged and miscellaneous gear blown together by the four winds, and in their choice preferring the gay rankness of Apuleius, Arnobius, or any modern fustianist, before the native Latinisms of Cicero. In the Greek tongue most of them unlettered, or “unentered to any sound proficiency in those attic masters of moral wisdom and eloquence.” In the Hebrew text, which is so necessary to be understood, except it be some few of them, their lips are utterly uncircumcised. No less are they out of the way in philosophy, pestering their heads with the sapless dotages of old Paris and Salamanca. And that which is the main point, in their sermons affecting the comments and postils of friars and Jesuits, but scorning and slighting the reformed writers; insomuch that the better sort among them will confess it a rare matter to hear a true edifying sermon in either of their great churches; and that such as are most hummed and applauded there, would scarcely be suffered the second hearing in a grave congregation of pious Christians. Is there cause why these men should overwean, and be so queasy of the rude multitude, lest their deep worth should be undervalued for want of fit umpires? No, my matriculated confutant, there will not want in any congregation of this island, that hath not been altogether famished or wholly perverted with prelatish leaven; there will not want divers plain and solid men, that have learned by the experience of a good conscience, what it is to be well taught, who will soon look through and through both the lofty nakedness of your latinizing barbarian, and the finical goosery of your neat sermon actor. And so I leave you and your fellow “stars,” as you term them, “of either horizon,” meaning I suppose either hemisphere, unless you will be ridiculous in your astronomy: for the rational horizon in heaven is but one, and the sensible horizons in earth are innumerable; so that your allusion was as erroneous as your stars. But that you did well to prognosticate them all at lowest in the horizon; that is, either seeming bigger than they are through the mist and vapour which they raise, or else sinking and wasted to the snuff in their western socket.
SECTION XI.
His eleventh section intends I know not what, unless to clog us with the residue of his phlegmatic sloth, discussing with a heavy pulse the “expedience of set forms;” which no question but to some, and for some time may be permitted, and perhaps there may be usefully set forth by the church a common directory of public prayer, especially in the administration of the sacraments. But that it should therefore be enforced where both minister and people profess to have no need, but to be scandalized by it, that, I hope, every sensible Christian will deny: and the reasons of such denial the confuter himself, as his bounty still is to his adversary, will give us out of his affirmation. First saith he, “God in his providence hath chosen some to teach others, and pray for others, as ministers and pastors.” Whence I gather, that however the faculty of others may be, yet that they whom God hath set apart to his ministry, are by him endued with an ability of prayer; because their office is to pray for others, and not to be the lip-working deacons of other men’s appointed words. Nor is it easily credible, that he Edition: current; Page: [151] who can preach well, should be unable to pray well; whereas it is indeed the same ability to speak affirmatively, or doctrinally, and only by changing the mood, to speak prayingly. In vain therefore do they pretend to want utterance in prayer, who can find utterance to preach. And if prayer be the gift of the Spirit, why do they admit those to the ministry, who want a main gift of their function, and prescribe gifted men to use that which is the remedy of another man’s want; setting them their tasks to read, whom the Spirit of God stands ready to assist in his ordinance with the gift of free conceptions? What if it be granted to the infirmity of some ministers (though such seem rather to be half ministers) to help themselves with a set form, shall it therefore be urged upon the plenteous graces of others? And let it be granted to some people while they are babes in Christian gifts, were it not better to take it away soon after, as we do loitering books and interlineary translations from children; to stir up and exercise that portion of the Spirit which is in them, and not impose it upon congregations who not only deny to need it, but as a thing troublesome and offensive, refuse it? Another reason which he brings for liturgy, is “the preserving of order, unity, and piety;” and the same shall be my reason against liturgy. For I, readers, shall always be of this opinion, that obedience to the Spirit of God, rather than to the fair seeming pretences of men, is the best and most dutiful order that a Christian can observe. If the Spirit of God manifest the gift of prayer in his minister, what more seemly order in the congregation, than to go along with that man in our devoutest affections? For him to abridge himself by reading, and to forestall himself in those petitions, which he must either omit, or vainly repeat, when he comes into the pulpit under a show of order, is the greatest disorder. Nor is unity less broken, especially by our liturgy, though this author would almost bring the communion of saints to a communion of liturgical words. For what other reformed church holds communion with us by our liturgy, and does not rather dislike it? And among ourselves, who knows it not to have been a perpetual cause of disunion?
Lastly, it hinders piety rather than sets it forward, being more apt to weaken the spiritual faculties, if the people be not weaned from it in due time; as the daily pouring in of hot waters quenches the natural heat. For not only the body and the mind, but also the improvement of God’s Spirit, is quickened by using. Whereas they who will ever adhere to liturgy, bring themselves in the end to such a pass by over much leaning, as to lose even the legs of their devotion. These inconveniences and dangers follow the compelling of set forms: but that the toleration of the English liturgy now in use is more dangerous than the compelling of any other, which the reformed churches use, these reasons following may evince. To contend that it is fantastical, if not senseless in some places, were a copious argument, especially in the Responsories. For such alterations as are there used must be by several persons; but the minister and the people cannot so sever their interests, as to sustain several persons; he being the only mouth of the whole body which he presents. And if the people pray, he being silent, or they ask any one thing, and he another, it either changes the property, making the priest the people, and the people the priest, by turns, or else makes two persons and two bodies representative where there should be but one. Which, if it be nought else, must needs be a strange quaintness in ordinary prayer. The like, or worse, may be said of the litany, wherein neither priest nor people speak any entire sense of themselves throughout the whole, I know not what to name it; only by the timely contribution of their parted stakes, closing up as it were the schism of a sliced prayer, they Edition: current; Page: [152] pray not in vain, for by this means they keep life between them in a piece of gasping sense, and keep down the sauciness of a continual rebounding nonsense. And hence it is, that as it hath been far from the imitation of any warranted prayer, so we all know it hath been obvious to be the pattern of many a jig. And he who hath but read in good books of devotion and no more, cannot be so either of ear or judgment unpractised to distinguish what is grave, pathetical, devout, and what not, but will presently perceive this liturgy all over in conception lean and dry, of affections empty and unmoving, of passion, or any height whereto the soul might soar upon the wings of zeal, destitute and barren; besides errors, tautologies, impertinences, as those thanks in the woman’s churching for her delivery from sunburning and moonblasting, as if she had been travailing not in her bed, but in the deserts of Arabia. So that while some men cease not to admire the incomparable frame of our liturgy, I cannot but admire as fast what they think is become of judgment and taste in other men, that they can hope to be heard without laughter. And if this were all, perhaps it were a compliable matter. But when we remember this our liturgy where we found it, whence we had it, and yet where we left it, still serving to all the abominations of the antichristian temple, it may be wondered now we can demur whether it should be done away or no, and not rather fear we have highly offended in using it so long. It hath indeed been pretended to be more ancient than the mass, but so little proved, that whereas other corrupt liturgies have had withal such a seeming antiquity, as that their publishers have ventured to ascribe them with their worst corruptions either to St. Peter, St. James, St. Mark, or at least to Chrysostom or Basil, ours hath been never able to find either age or author allowable, on whom to father those things therein which are least offensive, except the two creeds, for Te Deum has a smatch in it of Limbus Patrum: as if Christ had not “opened the kingdom of heaven” before he had “overcome the sharpness of death.” So that having received it from the papal church as an original creature, for aught can be shown to the contrary, formed and fashioned by workmasters ill to be trusted, we may be assured that if God loathe the best of an idolater’s prayer, much more the conceited fangle of his prayer. This confuter himself confesses that a community of the same set from in prayers, is that which “makes church and church truly one;” we then using a liturgy far more like to the mass book than to any protestant set form, by his own words must have more communion with the Romish church, than with any of the reformed. How can we then not partake with them the curse and vengeance of their superstition, to whom we come so near in the same set form and dress of our devotion? Do we think to sift the matter finer than we are sure God in his jealousy will, who detested both the gold and the spoil of idolatrous cities, and forbad the eating of things offered to idols? Are we stronger than he, to brook that which his heart cannot brook? It is not surely because we think that prayers are no where to be had but at Rome? That were a foul scorn and indignity cast upon all the reformed churches, and our own: if we imagine that all the godly ministers of England are not able to newmould a better and more pious liturgy than this which was conceived and infanted by an idolatrous mother, how basely were that to esteem of God’s Spirit, and all the holy blessings and privileges of a true church above a false! Hark ye, prelates, is this your glorious mother of England, who, whenas Christ hath taught her to pray, thinks it not enough unless she add thereto the teaching of Antichrist? How can we believe ye would refuse to take the stipend of Rome, when ye shame not to live upon the almsbasket of her prayers? Will ye persuade us, that ye Edition: current; Page: [153] can curse Rome from your hearts, when none but Rome must teach ye to pray? Abraham disdained to take so much as a thread or a shoelatchet from the king of Sodom, though no foe of his, but a wicked king; and shall we receive our prayers at the bounty of our more wicked enemies, whose gifts are no gifts, but the instruments of our bane? Alas! that the Spirit of God should blow as an uncertain wind, should so mistake his inspiring, so misbestow his gifts promised only to the elect, that the idolatrous should find words acceptable to present God with, and abound to their neighbours, while the true professors of the gospel can find nothing of their own worth the constituting, wherewith to worship God in public! Consider if this be to magnify the church of England, and not rather to display her nakedness to all the world. Like therefore as the retaining of this Romish liturgy is a provocation to God, and a dishonour to our church, so is it by those ceremonies, those purifyings and offerings at the altar, a pollution and disturbance to the gospel itself; and a kind of driving us with the foolish Galatians to another gospel. For that which the apostles taught hath freed us in religion from the ordinances of men, and commands that “burdens be not laid” upon the redeemed of Christ; though the formalist will say, What, no decency in God’s worship? Certainly, readers, the worship of God singly in itself, the very act of prayer and thanksgiving, with those free and unimposed expressions which from a sincere heart unbidden come into the outward gesture, is the greatest decency that can be imagined. Which to dress up and garnish with a devised bravery abolished in the law, and disclaimed by the gospel, adds nothing but a deformed ugliness; and hath ever afforded a colourable pretence to bring in all those traditions and carnalities that are so killing to the power and virtue of the gospel. What was that which made the Jews, figured under the names of Aholah and Aholibah, go a whoring after all the heathen’s inventions, but that they saw a religion gorgeously attired and desirable to the eye? What was all that the false doctors of the primitive church and ever since have done, but “to make a fair show in the flesh,” as St. Paul’s words are? If we have indeed given a bill of divorce to popery and superstition, why do we not say as to a divorced wife, Those things which are yours take them all with you, and they shall sweep after you? Why were not we thus wise at our parting from Rome? Ah! like a crafty adulteress she forgot not all her smooth looks and enticing words at her parting; yet keep these letters, these tokens, and these few ornaments; I am not all so greedy of what is mine, let them preserve with you the memory of what I am? No, but of what I was, once fair and lovely in your eyes. Thus did those tender-hearted reformers dotingly suffer themselves to be overcome with harlot’s language. And she like a witch, but with a contrary policy, did not take something of theirs, that she still might have power to bewitch them, but for the same intent left something of her own behind her. And that her whorish cunning should prevail to work upon us her deceitful ends, though it be sad to speak, yet such is our blindness, that we deserve. For we are deep in dotage. We cry out sacrilege and misdevotion against those who in zeal have demolished the dens and cages of her unclean wallowings. We stand for a popish liturgy as for the ark of our covenant. And so little does it appear our prayers are from the heart, that multitudes of us declare, they know not how to pray but by rote. Yet they can learnedly invent a prayer of their own to the parliament, that they may still ignorantly read the prayers of other men to God. They object, that if we must forsake all that is Rome’s, we must bid adieu to our creed; and I had thought our creed had been of the Apostles, for so it bears title. But if it be hers, let her Edition: current; Page: [154] take it. We can want no creed, so long as we want not the Scriptures. We magnify those who, in reforming our church, have inconsiderately and blamefully permitted the old leaven to remain and sour our whole lump. But they were martyrs; true, and he that looks well into the book of God’s providence, if he read there that God for this their negligence and halting brought all that following persecution upon this church, and on themselves, perhaps will be found at the last day not to have read amiss.
SECTION XII.
But now, readers, we have the port within sight; his last section, which is no deep one, remains only to be forded, and then the wished shore. And here first it pleases him much, that he had descried me, as he conceives, to be unread in the councils. Concerning which matter it will not be unnecessary to shape him this answer; that some years I had spent in the stories of those Greek and Roman exploits, wherein I found many things both nobly done, and worthily spoken; when coming in the method of time to that age wherein the church had obtained a Christian emperor, I so prepared myself, as being now to read examples of wisdom and goodness among those who were foremost in the church, not elsewhere to be paralleled; but, to the amazement of what I expected, I found it all quite contrary; excepting in some very few, nothing but ambition, corruption, contention, combustion; insomuch that I could not but love the historian Socrates, who, in the proem to his fifth book professes, “he was fain to intermix affairs of state, for that it would be else an extreme annoyance to hear in a continued discourse the endless brabbles and counter-plottings of the bishops.” Finding, therefore, the most of their actions in single to be weak, and yet turbulent; full of strife, and yet flat of spirit; and the sum of their best councils there collected, to be most commonly in questions either trivial and vain, or else of short and easy decision, without that great bustle which they made; I concluded that if their single ambition and ignorance was such, then certainly united in a council it would be much more; and if the compendious recital of what they there did was so tedious and unprofitable, then surely to set out the whole extent of their tattle in a dozen volumes would be a loss of time irrecoverable. Besides that which I had read of St. Martin, who for his last sixteen years could never be persuaded to be at any council of the bishops. And Gregory Nazianzen betook him to the same resolution, affirming to Procopius, “that of any council or meeting of bishops he never saw good end; nor any remedy thereby of evil in the church, but rather an increase. For,” saith he, “their contentions and desire of lording no tongue is able to express.” I have not, therefore, I confess, read more of the councils save here and there; I should be sorry to have been such a prodigal of my time: but that which is better, I can assure this confuter, I have read into them all. And if I want any thing yet, I shall reply something toward that which in the defence of Muræna was answered by Cicero to Sulpitius the lawyer. If ye provoke me (for at no hand else will I undertake such a frivolous labour) I will in three months be an expert councilist. For, be not deceived, readers, by men that would overawe your ears with big names and huge tomes that contradict and repeal one another, because they can cram a margin with citations. Do but winnow their chaff from their wheat, ye shall see their great heap shrink and wax thin past belief. From hence he passes to inquire wherefore I should Edition: current; Page: [155] blame the vices of the prelates only, seeing the inferior clergy is known to be as faulty. To which let him hear in brief; that those priests whose vices have been notorious, are all prelatical, which argues both the impiety of that opinion, and the wicked remissness of that government. We hear not of any which are called nonconformists, that have been accused of scandalous living; but are known to be pious or at least sober men. Which is a great good argument that they are in the truth and prelates in the error. He would be resolved next, “What the corruption of the universities concern the prelates?” And to that let him take this, that the Remonstrant having spoken as if learning would decay with the removal of prelates, I showed him that while books were extant and in print, learning could not readily be at a worse pass in the universities than it was now under their government. Then he seeks to justify the pernicious sermons of the clergy, as if they upheld sovereignty; whenas all Christian sovereignty is by law, and to no other end but to the maintenance of the common good. But their doctrine was plainly the dissolution of law, which only sets up sovereignty, and the erecting of an arbitrary sway according to private will, to which they would enjoin a slavish obedience without law; which is the known definition of a tyrant, and a tyrannised people. A little beneath he denies that great riches in the church are the baits of pride and ambition; of which error to undeceive him, I shall allege a reputed divine authority, as ancient as Constantine, which his love to antiquity must not except against; and to add the more weight, he shall learn it rather in the words of our old poet Gower than in mine, that he may see it is no new opinion, but a truth delivered of old by a voice from Heaven, and ratified by long experience.
- “This Constantine which heal hath found,
- Within Rome anon let found
- Two churches which he did make
- For Peter and for Paul’s sake:
- Of whom he had a vision,
- And yafe thereto possession
- Of lordship and of world’s good,
- But how so that his will was good
- Toward the pope and his franchise,
- Yet hath it proved otherwise
- To see the working of the deed
- For in chronick thus I read,
- Anon as he hath made the yeft,
- A voice was heard on high the left,
- Of which all Rome was adrad,
- And said, this day venim is shad
- In holy Church, of temporal
- That meddleth with the spiritual;
- And how it stant in that degree,
- Yet may a man the sooth see.
- God amend it when he will,
- I can thereto none other skill.”
But there were beasts of prey, saith he, before wealth was bestowed on the church. What, though, because the vultures had then but small pickings, shall we therefore go and fling them a full gorge? If they for lucre use to creep into the church undiscernibly, the more wisdom will it be so to provide that no revenue there may exceed the golden mean; for so, good pastors will be content, as having need of no more, and knowing withal the precept and example of Christ and his apostles, and also will be less tempted to ambition. The bad will have but small matter whereon to set their mischief awork; and the worst and subtlest heads will not come at all, when they shall see the crop nothing answerable to their capacious greediness; for small temptations allure but dribbling offenders; but a great purchase Edition: current; Page: [156] will call such as both are most able of themselves, and will be most enabled hereby to compass dangerous projects. But, saith he, “a widow’s house will tempt as well as a bishop’s palace.” Acutely spoken! because neither we nor the prelates can abolish widows’ houses, which are but an occasion taken of evil without the church, therefore we shall set up within the church a lottery of such prizes as are the direct inviting causes of avarice and ambition, both unnecessary and harmful to be proposed, and most easy, most convenient, and needful to be removed. “Yea, but they are in a wise dispenser’s hand.” Let them be in whose hand they will, they are most apt to blind, to puff up, and pervert, the most seeming good. And how they have been kept from vultures, whatever the dispenser’s care hath been, we have learned by our miseries. But this which comes next in view, I know not what good vein or humour took him when he let drop into his paper; I that was ere while the ignorant, the loiterer, on the sudden by his permission am now granted “to know something.” And that “such a volley of expressions” he hath met withal, “as he would never desire to have them better clothed.” For me, readers, although I cannot say that I am utterly untrained in those rules which best rhetoricians have given, or unacquainted with those examples which the prime authors of eloquence have written in any learned tongue; yet true eloquence I find to be none, but the serious and hearty love of truth: and that whose mind soever is fully possessed with a fervent desire to know good things, and with the dearest charity to infuse the knowledge of them into others, when such a man would speak, his words (by what I can express) like so many nimble and airy servitors trip about him at command, and in well-ordered files, as he would wish, fall aptly into their own places. But now to the remainder of our discourse. Christ refused great riches and large honours at the devil’s hand. But why, saith he, “as they were tendered by him from whom it was a sin to receive them.” Timely remembered: why is it not therefore as much a sin to receive a liturgy of the masses’ giving, were it for nothing else but for the giver? “But he could make no use of such a high estate,” quoth the confuter, opportunely. For why then should the servant take upon him to use those things which his master had unfitted himself to use that he might teach his ministers to follow his steps in the same ministry? But “they were offered him to a bad end.” So they prove to the prelates, who, after their preferment, most usually change the teaching labour of the word, into the unteaching ease of lordship over consciences and purses. But he proceeds, “God enticed the Israelites with the promise of Canaan;” did not the prelates bring as slavish minds with them, as the Jews brought out of Egypt? they had left out that instance. Besides that it was then the time, whenas the best of them, as St. Paul saith, “was shut up unto the faith under the law their schoolmaster,” who was forced to entice them as children with childish enticements. But the gospel is our manhood, and the ministry should be the manhood of the gospel, not to look after, much less so basely to plead for earthly rewards. “But God incited the wisest man, Solomon with these means.” Ah, confuter of thyself, this example hath undone thee; Solomon asked an understanding heart, which the prelates have little care to ask. He asked no riches, which is their chief care; therefore was the prayer of Solomon pleasing to God; he gave him wisdom at his request, and riches without asking, as now he gives the prelates riches at their seeking, and no wisdom because of their perverse asking. But he gives not over yet, “Moses had an eye to the reward.” To what reward, thou man that lookest with Balaam’s eyes? To what reward had the faith of Moses an eye? He that had forsaken all the greatness of Egypt, and Edition: current; Page: [157] chose a troublesome journey in his old age through the wilderness, and yet arrived not at his journey’s end. His faithful eyes were fixed upon that incorruptible reward, promised to Abraham and his seed in the Messiah; he sought a heavenly reward, which could make him happy, and never hurt him, and to such a reward every good man may have a respect; but the prelates are eager of such rewards as cannot make them happy, but can only make them worse. Jacob, a prince born, vowed that if God would “but give him bread to eat and raiment to put on, then the Lord should be his God.” But the prelates of mean birth, and ofttimes of lowest, making show as if they were called to the spiritual and humble ministry of the gospel, yet murmur, and think it a hard service, unless, contrary to the tenor of their profession, they may eat the bread and wear the honours of princes’ so much more covetous and base they are than Simon Magus, for he proffered a reward to be admitted to that work, which they will not be meanly hired to. But, saith he, “Are not the clergy members of Christ? why should not each member thrive alike?” Carnal textman! as if worldly thriving were one of the privileges we have by being in Christ, and were not a providence ofttimes extended more liberally to the Infidel than to the Christian. Therefore must the ministers of Christ not be over rich or great in the world, because their calling is spiritual, not secular; because they have a special warfare, which is not to be entangled with many impediments; because their master Christ gave them this precept, and set them this example, told them this was the mystery of his coming, by mean things and persons to subdue mighty ones; and lastly, because a middle estate is most proper to the office of teaching, whereas higher dignity teaches far less, and blinds the teacher. Nay, saith the confuter, fetching his last endeavour, “the prelates will be very loth to let go their baronies, and votes in parliament,” and calls it “God’s cause,” with an insufferable impudence. “Not that they love the honours and the means,” good men and generous! “but that they would not have their country made guilty of such a sacrilege and injustice!” A worthy patriot for his own corrupt ends. That which he imputes as sacrilege to his country, is the only way left them to purge that abominable sacrilege out of the land, which none but the prelates are guilty of; who for the discharge of one single duty, receive and keep that which might be enough to satisfy the labours of many painful ministers better deserving than themselves; who possess huge benefices for lazy performances, great promotions only for the execution of a cruel disgospelling jurisdiction; who engross many pluralities under a nonresident and slubbering dispatch of souls; who let hundreds of parishes famish in one diocese, while they the prelates are mute, and yet enjoy that wealth that would furnish all those dark places with able supply: and yet they eat, and yet they live at the rate of earls, and yet hoard up; they who chase away all the faithful shepherds of the flock, and bring in a dearth of spiritual food, robbing thereby the church of her dearest treasure, and sending herds of souls starveling to hell, while they feast and riot upon the labours of hireling curates, consuming and purloining even that which by their foundation is allowed, and left to the poor, and to reparations of the church. These are they who have bound the land with the sin of sacrilege, from which mortal engagement we shall never be free, till we have totally removed with one labour, as one individual thing, prelaty and sacrilege. And herein will the king be a true defender of the faith, not by paring or lessening, but by distributing in due proportion the maintenance of the church, that all parts of the land may equally partake the plentiful and diligent preaching of the faith, the scandal of ceremonies thrown out that delude and circumvent the faith; and the usurpation of prelates Edition: current; Page: [158] laid level, who are in words the fathers, but in their deeds, the oppugners of the faith. This is that which will best confirm him in that glorious title. Thus ye have heard, readers, how many shifts and wiles the prelates have invented to save their ill-got booty. And if it be true, as in Scripture it is foretold, that pride and covetousness are the sure marks of those false prophets which are to come; then boldly conclude these to be as great seducers as any of the latter times. For between this and the judgment day do not look for any arch deceivers, who in spite of reformation will use more craft, or less shame to defend their love of the world and their ambition, than these prelates have done. And if ye think that soundness of reason, or what force of argument soever, will bring them to an ingenuous silence, ye think that which will never be. But if ye take that course which Erasmus was wont to say Luther took against the pope and monks; if ye denounce war against their mitres and their bellies, ye shall soon discern that turban of pride, which they wear upon their heads, to be no helmet of salvation, but the mere metal and hornwork of papal jurisdiction; and that they have also this gift, like a certain kind of some that are possessed, to have their voice in their bellies, which, being well drained and taken down, their great oracle, which is only there, will soon be dumb; and the divine right of episcopacy, forthwith expiring, will put us no more to trouble with tedious antiquities and disputes.
T.14 (8.6.) Anon., A Question Answered (21 April, 1642).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.14 [1642.04.21] (8.6) Anon., A Question Answered (21 April, 1642).
Full titleAnon., A Question Answered: How Laws are to be understood, and obedience yeelded? Necessary for the present state of things, Touching the Militia.
Printed for the good of the Commonweale.
21 April, 1642.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 101; Thomason 669.f.6 (7.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
Necessary for the present state of things, Touching the Militia.
Question.
NOw in our extreame distractions, when forraigne forces threaten, and probably are invited, and a malignant and Popish party at home offended? The Devill hath cast a bone, and rais’d a contestation between the King and Parliament touching the Militia, His Majestie claimes the disposing of it to be in him by right of Law; The Parliament saith rebus sic stantibus, and nolenti Rege, the Ordering of it is in them?
Answer.
WHich Question, may receive its solution by this distinction. That there is in Laws an equitable, and a litterall sence. His Majesty (let it be granted) is intrusted by Law with the Militia, but it’s for the good and preservation of the Republique, against Forraigne Invasions or domesticke rebellions. For it cannot be supposed that the Parliament would ever by Law intrust the King with the Militia against themselves, or the Commonwealth, that intrusts them to provide for their weale, not for their woe. So that when there is certain appearance or grounded suspition, that the Letter of the Law shall be improved against the equity of it (that is, the publicke good, whether of the body reall or representative) then the Commander going against its equity, gives liberty to the Commanded to refuse obedience to the Letter: for the Law taken abstract from its originall reason and end, is made a shell without a kernell, a shadow without a substance, and a body without a soule. It is the execution of Laws according to their equity and reason, which (as I may say) is the spirit that gives life to Authority, the Letter kills.
Nor need this equity be expressed in the Law, being so naturally implyed and supposed in all Laws that are not meerely Imperiall, from that analogie which all bodies Politicke hold with the Naturall; whence all government and Governours borrow a proportionable respect; And therfore when the Militia of an Army is committed to the Generall, it is not with any expresse condition, that he shall not turn the mouths of his Cannons against his own Souldiers, for that is so naturally and necessarily implyed, that its needlesse to be expressed, insomuch as if he did attempt or command such a thing against the nature of his trust and place, it did ipso facto estate the Army, in a right of disobedience, except we thinke that obedience binds Men to cut their owne throats, or at least their companions.
And indeed if this distinction be not allowed, then the legall and mixt Monarchy is the greatest Tiranny, for if Laws invest the King in an absolute power, and the letter be not controled by the equity, then whereas Other Kings that are absolute Monarcks and rule by will, and not by Law, are Tyrants perforce. Those that rule by Law and not by will, have hereby a Tiranny confer’d upon them legally, and so the very end of Laws, which is to give bounds and limits to the exorbitant wills of Princes, is by the Lawes themselves disapointed, for they hereby give corrobaration (and much more Iustification to an arbitrary Tyranny, by making it legall, not assumed; which Laws are ordained to crosse nor countenance: and therefore is the letter (where it seems absolute) alwaies to receive quallification from the equity, else the foresaid absurdity must follow.
Printed for the good of the Commonweale.
T.284 [1642.06.18] Charles I, His Majesties Answer to XIX Propositions made by both Houses of Parliament (18 June, 1642)↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date

Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.284 [1642.06.18] Charles I, His Majesties Answer to XIX Propositions made by both Houses of Parliament (18 June, 1642).
Full titleCharles I, 1600-1649
XIX.
PROPOSITIONS
Made
By both Houses of Parliament, to the Kings most Excellent Majestie:
With His Majesties Answer thereunto.
¶By the King.
Our expresse pleasure is, That this Our Answer be read and published throughout all Churches and Chappels of the Kingdom of England and Dominion of Wales,
By the severall Parsons, Vicars, or Curats of the same.
YORK:
Printed by Robert Barker, Printer to the Kings most Excellent Majestie: And by the Assignes of John Bill.
1642.
abc
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationabc
Malcolm/Editor’s Introduction
After Charles abandoned London in January 1642 for what he hoped would be the more loyal North, the two houses of Parliament at Westminster attempted to negotiate with him through a series of published declarations, remonstrances, answers, and open letters. These reached a constitutional climax in June with Parliament’s publication on 1 June of the Nineteen Propositions, proposals that would have sharply and permanently circumscribed the king’s powers, and Charles’s response on 18 June.
Charles’s “Answer to the Nineteen Propositions” has become even more famous than the propositions themselves. This answer has been heralded for its endorsement of England’s mixed and balanced constitution and for its reliance upon law for support. Of chief significance, however, is the king’s acceptance of the concept that he is not above the three estates assembled in Parliament but in fact is one of the three estates. The Answer was written for Charles by two of his moderate advisers, Sir John Colepeper and Lucius Cary, Viscount Falkland—men who had worked in the Long Parliament the previous year to rein in the expanded royal prerogative. The passage in which the king endorses the idea of being one of three estates in Parliament—thus excluding the bishops from membership and reducing the position of the Crown to coordinate membership—was penned by Colepeper. It is unclear whether Falkland fully endorsed the Answer’s concession that the king was one of the three estates. He later pleaded inadvertence, claimed Colepeper had been misled by some lawyers, and that clergymen had misunderstood. Sir Edward Hyde, the best known of Charles’s moderate advisers, was unhappy with the concession and tried to delay publication. It is even unclear whether the king actually read the crucial passage, although he assuredly glanced at, and gave his approval to, the lengthy reply. In important respects it does not reflect views Charles espoused before or afterward.
Whatever confusion reigned among the king’s advisers, however willingly, reluctantly, or unknowingly the king complied, the Answer publicly altered the basis of royal defense and argument.
There is much of interest in the entire reply. Because historians have focused almost exclusively upon its crucial constitutional concessions, however, the answer has seldom been reprinted in its entirety. As a result its tone has been misread. The reply reprinted here was published by royal order at York and is unusual in providing the text of both the Nineteen Propositions and the king’s Answer. In earnest of the king’s desire that the Answer be widely published and read in churches throughout England and Wales, six further editions were printed in 1642. It is notable that two editions published in 1643 either omitted the reference to the three estates of Parliament or the entire section on the English constitution.
Text of Pamphlet
XIX. Propositions made by both Houses of Parliament, to the Kings most excellent Majestie, touching the differences between His Majestie and the said Houses.
Your Majestie’s most humble and faithfull Subjects, the Lords and Commons in Parliament, having nothing in their thoughts and desires more precious and of higher esteem (next to the Honour and immediate Service of God) than the just and faithfull performance of their Dutie to your Majestie and this Kingdom, and being very sensible of the great distractions and distempers, and of the imminent Dangers and Calamities which those Distractions and Distempers are like to bring upon your Majestie and your Subjects: All which have proceeded from the subtill Insinuations, mischievous Practises, and evill Counsels of Men disaffected to God’s true Religion, your Majestie’s Honor and Safetie, and the publike Peace and Prosperitie of your people: After a serious observation of the Causes of those Mischiefs, do in all Humilitie and Sinceritie present to your Majestie their most dutifull Petition and Advice; That out of your Princely Wisdom, for the establishing your own Honour and Safetie, and gracious tendernesse of the welfare and securitie of your Subjects and Dominions, You will be pleased to Grant and Accept these their humble Desires and Propositions, as the most necessarie effectuall means, through God’s blessing, of removing those Jealousies and Differences which have unhappily fallen betwixt You and your People, and procuring both your Majestie and them a constant course of Honour, Peace, and Happinesse.
I. That the Lords, and others of your Majestie’s Privie Councell, and such great Officers and Ministers of State, either at home or beyond the Seas, may be put from your Privie Councell, and from those Offices and Imployments, excepting such as shall be approved of by both Houses of Parliament; And that the Persons put into the Places and Imployments of those that are removed, may be approved of by both Houses of Parliament; And that all Privie Councellors shall take an Oath for the due execution of their Places, in such forme as shall be agreed upon by both Houses of Parliament.
II. That the great Affairs of the Kingdom may not be Concluded or Transacted by the Advise of private men, or by any unknown or unsworn Councellors; but that such Matters as concern the Publike, and are proper for the high Court of Parliament, which is your Majestie’s great and supreme Councell, may be Debated, Resolved, and Transacted only in Parliament, and not elsewhere. And such as shall presume to do anything to the contrary, shall be reserved to the Censure and Judgement of Parliament: And such other matters of State as are proper for your Majestie’s Privie Councell, shall be debated and concluded by such of the Nobility and Others, as shall from time to time be chosen for that place by approbation of both Houses of Parliament. That no publicke Act concerning the Affairs of the Kingdom, which are proper for your Privie Councell, may be esteemed of any validity, as proceeding from the Royall Authority, unlesse it be done by the advice and consent of the major part of your Councell, attested under their hands. And that your Councell may be limited to a certain number, not exceeding five and twenty, nor under fifteen; and if any Councellor’s place happen to be void in the Intervals of Parliament, it shall not be supplied without the Assent of the major part of the Councell; which choice shall be confirmed at the next sitting of the Parliament, or else to be void.
III. That the Lord high Steward of England, Lord high Constable, Lord Chancellour, or Lord Keeper of the great Seal, Lord Treasurer, Lord Privie Seal, the Earle Marshall, Lord Admirall, Warden of the Cinque-Ports, chief Governour of Ireland, Chancellour of the Exchequer, Master of the Wards, Secretaries of State, two chief Justices, and chief Baron, may be alwayes chosen with the approbation of both Houses of Parliament: And in the Intervals of Parliaments by assent of the major part of the Councell, in such manner as is before expressed in the choice of Councellors.
IV. That he or they unto whom the Government and education of the King’s Children shall be committed, shall be approved of by both Houses of Parliament; and in the Intervals of Parliaments, by the assent of the major part of the Councell, in such manner as is before exprest in the choice of Councellors: And that all such Servants as are now about them, against whom both Houses shall have any just exception, shall be removed.
V. That no Marriage shall be Concluded, or Treated for any of the King’s Children, with any Forraign Prince, or other Person whatsoever abroad, or at home, without the consent of Parliament, under the penalty of a Premunire unto such as shall so Conclude or Treate any Marriage as aforesaid. And that the said Penalty shall not be pardoned or dispensed with, but by the consent of both Houses of Parliament.
VI. That the Laws in force against Jesuites, Priests, and Popish Recusants, be strictly put in execution, without any Toleration or Dispensation to the contrary; and that some more effectuall Course may be Enacted, by Authoritie of Parliament, to disable them from making any disturbance in the State, or eluding the Law by Trusts, or otherwise.
VII. That the Votes of Popish Lords in the House of Peers, may be taken away, so long as they continue Papists; and that His Majestie would consent to such a Bill as shall be drawn for the Education of the Children of Papists by Protestants in the Protestant Religion.
VIII. That your Majestie will be pleased to Consent, That such a Reformation be made of the Church-Government, and Liturgie as both Houses of Parliament shall advise, wherein they intend to have Consultations with Divines, as is expressed in the Declaration to that purpose; and that your Majestie will contribute your best Assistance to them for the raising of a sufficient Maintenance for Preaching Ministers thorowout the Kingdom: And that your Majestie will be pleased to give your consent to Laws for the taking away of Innovations and Superstition, and of Pluralities, and against Scandalous Ministers.
IX. That your Majestie will be pleased to rest satisfied with that Course that the Lords and Commons have appointed for Ordering the Militia,1 untill the same shall be further setled by a Bill: And that you will recall your Declarations and Proclamations against the Ordinance made by the Lords and Commons concerning it.
X. That such Members of either House of Parliament, as have, during this present Parliament, been put out of any Place and Office,2 may either be restored to that Place and Office, or otherwise have satisfaction for the same, upon the Petition of that House, whereof he or they are Members.
XI. That all Privie Councellors and Judges may take an Oath, the form whereof to be agreed on, and setled by Act of Parliament, for the maintaining of the Petition of Right, and of certain Statutes made by this Parliament, which shall be mentioned by both Houses of Parliament: And that an enquiry of the Breaches and Violations of those Laws may be given in charge by the Justices of the King’s-Bench every Tearm, and by the Judges of Assize in their Circuits, and Justices of Peace at the Sessions, to be presented and punished according to Law.
XII. That all the Judges and all Officers placed by approbation of both Houses of Parliament, may hold their Places, Quam diu bene se gesserint.3
XIII. That the justice of Parliament may passe upon all Delinquents, whether they be within the Kingdom, or fled out of it; And that all Persons cited by either House of Parliament, may appear and abide the censure of Parliament.
XIIII. That the Generall Pardon offered by your Majestie, may be granted with such Exceptions, as shall be advised by both Houses of Parliament.
XV. That the Forts and Castles of this Kingdom, may be put under the Command and Custody of such Persons as your Majestie shall appoint, with the approbation of your Parliaments: and in the intervals of Parliament, with the approbation of the major part of the Councell, in such manner as is before expressed in the choice of Councellors.
XVI. That the extraordinary Guards, and Millitary Forces,4 now attending your Majestie, may be removed and discharged; and that for the future you will raise no such Guards or extraordinary Forces, but according to the Law, in case of actuall Rebellion or Invasion.
XVII. That your Majestie will be pleased to enter into a more strict Alliance with the States of the United Provinces, and other neighbour Princes and States of the Protestant Religion, for the defence and maintenance thereof against all Designes and Attempts of the Pope and his Adherents, to subvert and suppresse it, whereby your Majestie will obtain a great accesse of Strength and Reputation, and your Subjects be much encouraged and enabled in a Parliamentary way, for your aid and assistance in restoring your Royall Sister and her Princely Issue to those Dignities and Dominions which belong unto them,5 and relieving the other distressed Protestant Princes who have suffered in the same Cause.
XVIII. That your Majestie will be pleased, by Act of Parliament, to cleer the Lord Kimbolton, and the five Members of the House of Commons,6 in such manner that future Parliaments may be secured from the consequence of that evill precedent.
XIX. That your Majestie will be graciously pleased to passe a Bill for restraining Peers made hereafter from Sitting or Voting in Parliament; unlesse they be admitted thereunto with the consent of both Houses of Parliament.
And these our humble desires being granted by your Majestie, we shall forthwith apply ourselves to regulate your present Revenue, in such sort, as may be for your best advantage; and likewise to settle such an ordinary and constant increase of it as shall be sufficient to support your Royall Dignitie in Honour and plenty, beyond the proportion of any former Grants of the Subjects of this Kingdom to your Majestie’s Royall Predecessors. We shall likewise put the Town of Hull into such hands as your Majestie shall appoint,7 with the Consent and Approbation of Parliament; and deliver up a just accompt of all the Magazine; and cheerfully imploy the uttermost of our Power and Endeavour in the reall expression and performance of our most dutifull and loyall affections to the preserving and maintaining the Royall Honour, Greatnesse, and Safetie of your Majestie and your Posterity.
His Majesties Answer to the Nineteen Propositions of Both Houses of Parliament.
Before we shall give you Our Answer to your Petition and Propositions, we shall tell you, That we are now cleerly satisfied, why the Method, which we traced out to you by Our Message of the twentieth of January,8 and have since so often pressed upon you, as the proper way to compose the Distractions of this Kingdom, and render it truly happy, hath been hitherto declined, and is at length thought fit to be lookt upon. We now see plainly (and desire that you, and all other Our good Subjects, should do so too) that the Caballists of this Businesse, have, with great prudence, reserved themselves untill due preparations should be made for their designe.
If they had unseasonably vented such Propositions, as the wisdom and modesty of your Predecessors never thought fit to offer to any of Our Progenitors, nor We in honour or regard to Our Regall Authoritie (which God hath intrusted Us with for the good of Our people) could receive without just indignation, (and such many of your present Propositions are) their hopes would soon have been blasted, and those persons to whom Offices, Honours, Power and Commands were designed, by such ill-timing of their Businesse, would have failed of their expectation, not without a brand upon the attempt. Therefore, before any of this nature should appear, they have (certainly with great wisdom in the conduct of it) thought fit to remove a troublesome rub in their way, the Law. To this end (that they might undermine the very foundations of it) a new Power hath been assumed to interpret and declare Laws without Us, by extemporary Votes, without any case judicially before either house, (which is in effect the same thing as to make Laws without Us) Orders and Ordinances made only by both houses (tending to a pure Arbitrary power) were pressed upon the people, as Laws, and their obedience required to them.
Their next step was to erect an upstart Authority without Us (in whom, and only in whom, the Laws of this Realm have placed that power) to command the Militia; (very considerable to this their designe). In further Order to it, they have wrested from Us Our Magazine and Town of Hull, and bestird Sir John Hotham in his boldfaced Treason.9 They have prepared and directed to the people, unprecedented Invectives against Our Government, thereby (as much as lay in their power) to weaken Our just Authoritie and due esteem amongst them. They have as injuriously, as presumptuously (though we conceive by this time Impudence itself is ashamed of it) attempted to cast upon Us Aspersions of an unheard of nature, as if We had favoured a Rebellion in Our own bowels. They have likewise broached new Doctrine, That we are obliged to passe all Laws that shall be offered to Us by both Houses (howsoever Our own Judgement and Conscience shall be unsatisfied with them) a point of policie, as proper for their present businesse, as destructive to all Our Rights of Parliament. And so with strange shamelesnesse will forget a clause in a Law still in force, made in the second yeer of King Henry the fifth, wherein both Houses of Parliament do acknowledge, That it is of the King’s Regalitie to grant or deny such of their Petitions as pleaseth himself. They have interpreted Our necessary Guard, legally assembled for the defence of Us and Our Children’s Persons, against a Traitor in open Rebellion against Us, to be with intent to levie war against Our Parliament (the thought whereof Our very soul abhorreth) thereby to render Us odious to Our people. They have so awed Our good Subjects with Pursuivants,10 long chargeable Attendance, heavie Censures, & illegal Imprisonments, that few of them durst offer to present their tendernesse of Our sufferings, their own just grievances, and their sense of those violations of the Law (the birthright of every Subject of this Kingdom) though in an humble Petition directed to both Houses; and if any did, it was stifled in the birth, called Sedition, and burnt by the common Hangman. They have restrained the attendance of Our ordinary and necessary houshold servants, and seized upon those small sums of Money which Our credit had provided to buy Us Bread; with Injunctions, That none shall be suffered to be conveyed or returned to Us to York, or any of Our Peers or Servants with Us; so that (in effect) they have blocked Us up in that County. They have filled the ears of the people with the noise of Fears and Jealousies (though taken up upon trust) tales of Skippers, Salt Fleets, and such like, by which alarms they might prepare them to receive such impressions as might best advance this Designe, when it should be ripe. And now, it seems, they think We are sufficiently prepared for these bitter Pills. We are in a handsome posture to receive these humble desires (which probably are intended to make way for a superfetation or a (yet) higher nature (if we had not made this discovery to you) for they doe not tell Us this is all). In them We must observe, That these Contrivers (the better to advance their true ends) disguised, as much as they could their intents, with a mixture of some things really to be approved by every honest man; others, specious and popular and some which are already granted by Us. All which are cunningly twisted and mixed with those other things of their main designe of ambition and private Interest, in hope that at the first view, every eye may not so cleerly discern them in their proper colours.
We would not be understood, That We intend to fix this Designe upon both, or either House of Parliament, We utterly professe against it, being most confidenct of the Loyaltie, good Affections, and Integritie of the Intentions of that great Bodie; and knowing well, That very many of both Houses were absent, and many dissented from all those particulars We complain of. But we do beleeve, and accordingly professe to all the world, That the malignity of this Designe (as dangerous to the Laws of this Kingdom, the Peace of the same, and Liberties of all Our good Subjects, as to Ourself and Our just Prerogative) hath proceeded from the subtill Informations, mischievous Practises, and evill Counsels, of ambitious, turbulent Spirits, disaffected to God’s true Religion, and the unity of the Professors thereof, Our Honour and Safety, and the publike Peace and Prosperitie of Our people, not without a strong Influence upon the very Actions of both Houses. But how faultie soever others are, We shall (with God’s assistance) endeavour to discharge Our dutie with uprightnesse of heart. And therefore since these Propositions come to Us in the name of both Houses of Parliament, We shall take a more particular notice of every of them.
If the 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 9. 10. 15. 16. 19. Demands had been writ and printed in a tongue unknown to Us and Our people, it might have been possible We and they might have charitably beleeved the Propositions to be such, as might have been in Order to the ends pretended in the Petition, (to wit) The establishing of Our Honour and Safetie, the welfare and securitie of Our Subjects and Dominions, & the removing those Jealousies and Differences, which are said to have unhappily fallen betwixt Us and Our people, and procuring both Us and them a constant course of Honour, Peace, and Happinesse. But being read and understood by all, We cannot but assure Ourself, that this Profession joined to these Propositions, will rather appear a Mockery and a Scorn. The Demands being such, as we were unworthy of the trust reposed in Us by the Law, and of Our dessent, from so many great and famous Ancestors, if We could be brought to abandon that power which only can inable Us to perform what We are sworn to, in protecting Our people and the Laws, and so assume others into it, as to devest Ourself of it; although not only Our present condition (which it can hardly be) were more necessitous than it is, and We were both vanquisht, and a Prisoner, and in a worse condition than ever the most unfortunate of Our Predecessors have been reduced to, by the most criminall of their Subjects. And though the Bait laid to draw Us to it, and to keep Our Subjects from Indignation at the mention of it, The promises of a plentifull and unparalleled Revenue, were reduced from generalls (which signifie nothing) to clear and certain particulars, since such a Bargain would have but too great a resemblance of that of Esau’s, if we should part with such Flowers of Our Crown as are worth all the rest of the Garland, and have been transmitted to Us from so many Ancestors, and have been found so usefull and necessary for the welfare and security of Our Subjects, for any present necessitie, or for any low and sordid considerations of wealth and gain. And therefore all Men knowing that those accommodations are most easily made and most exactly observed, that are grounded upon reasonable and equall Conditions; We have great cause to beleeve, That the Contrivers of these had no intention of setling any firm Accommodation; but to increase those Jealousies, and widen that division, which (not by Our fault) is now unhappily fallen between Us and both Houses.
It is asked, That all the Lords, and others of Our Privy Councell, and such (We know now what you mean by such, but We have cause to think you mean all) great Officers and Ministers of State, either at home, or beyond the Seas, (for Care is taken to leave out no person or place, that Our dishonour may be sure not to be bounded within this Kingdom, though no subtill Insinuations at such a distance can probably be beleeved to have been the cause of Our distractions and Dangers) should be put from Our Privie Councell, and from those Offices and Imployments, unlesse they be approved by both Houses of Parliament, how faithfull soever We have found them to Us and the Publike, and how far soever they have been from offending against any Law, the only Rule they had, or any others ought to have to walk by. We therefore, to this part of this Demand, return you this Answer, That We are willing to grant that they shall take a larger Oath than you yourselves desire in your eleventh Demand, for maintaining not of any part but of the whole Law; and We have and do assure you, that We will be carefull to make election of such persons in those places of Trust, as shall have given good Testimonies of their abilities and integreities, and against whom there can be no just cause of exception, whereon reasonably to ground a diffidence, that if We have, or shall be mistaken in Our election, We have, and do assure you, That there is no man so neer to Us in place or affection, whom We will not leave to the Justice of the Law, if you shall bring a particular Charge and sufficient Proofs against him; and that We have given you (the best pledge of the effects of such a promise on Our part, and the best securitie for the performance of their duty on theirs) a Trienniall Parliament,11 the apprehension of whose Justice will, in all probability, make them wary how they provoke it, and Us wary how We chuse such, as by the discoverie of their faults may in any degree seem to discredit Our election. But that, without any shadow of a fault objected, only perhaps because they follow their conscience, and preserve the established Laws, and agree not in such Votes, or assent not to such Bills, as some persons, who have now too great an Influence even upon both Houses, judge or seem to judge, to be for the Publique good, and as are agreeable to that new Utopia of Religion and Government, into which they endevour to transform this Kingdom; (for We remember what Names, and for what Reasons you left out in the Bill offered Us concerning the Militia, which you had yourselves recommended in the Ordinance). We will never consent to the displacing of any, whom for their former merits from, and affection to Us and the publike, We have intrusted, since We conceive, That to do so, would take away both from the affection of Our Servants, the care of Our Service, and the honour of Our Justice. And We the more wonder, that it should be askt by you of Us, since it appears by the twelfth Demand, That yourselves count it reasonable, after the present turn is served, That the Judges and Officers, who are then placed, may hold their places quam diu se bene gesserint; and We are resolved to be as carefull of those We have chosen, as you are of those you would chuse, and to remove none, till they appear to Us to have otherwise behaved themselves, or shall be evicted by legall proceedings to have done so.
But this Demand (as unreasonable as it is) is but one link of a great Chain, and but the first round of that Ladder, by which Our Just, Ancient, Regall Power is endeavoured to be fetched down to the ground: For it appears plainly, That it is not with the persons now chosen, but with Our chusing, that you are displeased: For you demand, That the persons put into the places and imployments of those, who shall be removed, may be approved by both Houses; which is so far (as to some it may at first sight appear) from being lesse than the power of nomination, that of two things (of which We will never grant either). We would sooner be content, That you should nominate, and We approve, then you approve, and We nominate; the meer nomination being so far from being anything, That if We could do no more, We would never take the pains to do that, when We should only hazard those, whom We esteemed, to the scorn of a refusall, if they happened not to be agreeable, not only to the Judgement, but to the Passion, Interest, or Humour of the present major part of either House: Not to speak now of the great Factions, Animosities, and Divisions which this Power would introduce in both Houses, between both Houses, and in the severall Countreys, for the choice of persons to be sent to that place where that power was, and between the persons that were so chosen. Neither is this strange Potion prescribed to Us only for once, for the cure of a present, pressing, desperate Disease, but for a Diet to Us and Our Posteritie. It is demanded, That Our Councellors, all chief Officers both of Law and State, Commanders of Forts and Castles, and all Peers hereafter made (as to Voting, without which how little is the rest) be approved of (that is, chosen) by them from time to time; and rather than it should ever be left to the Crown (to whom it only doth and shall belong) if any place fall void in the intermission of Parliament; the major part of the approved Councell is to approve them. Neither is it only demanded, That We should quit the power and right Our Predecessors have had of appointing Persons in these places, but for Councellors, We are to be restrained as well in the number as in the persons, and a power must be annext to these places, which their Predecessors had not; and indeed if this power were past to them, it were not fit We should be trusted to chuse those who were to be trusted as much as We.
It is demanded, That such matters as concern the publike, and are proper for the high Court of Parliament (which is Our great and supream Councell) may be debated, resolved and transacted only in Parliament, and not elsewhere, and such as presume to do anything to the contrary shall be reserved to the Censure and Judgement of Parliament, and such other matters of State, as are proper of Our Privie Councell, shall be debated and concluded by such of Our Nobility (though indeed, if being made by Us, they may not Vote without the consent of both Houses, We are rather to call them Your Nobility) and others, as shall be from time to time chosen for that place, by approbation of both Houses of Parliament; and that no publike Act concerning the affairs of the Kingdom, which are proper for Our Privie Councell, may be esteemed of any validitie, as proceeding from the Royall Authority, unlesse it be done by the Advice and Consent of the major part of Our Councell, attested under their hands: Which Demands are of that Nature, that to grant them were in effect at once to depose both Ourself and Our Posteritie.
These being past, we may be waited on bare-headed; we may have Our hand kissed; The Stile of Majestie continued to Us; And the King’s Authoritie, declared by both Houses of Parliament, may be still the Stile of your Commands. We may have Swords and Maces carried before Us, and please Ourself with the sight of a Crown and Scepter, (and yet even these Twigs would not long flourish, when the Stock upon which they grew were dead) but as to true and reall Power We should remain but the outside, but the Picture, but the signe of a King. We were ever willing that Our Parliament should Debate, Resolve, & Transact such matters as are proper for them, as far as they are proper for them. And We heartily wish, that they would be as carefull not to extend their Debates and Resolutions beyond what is proper to them, that multitudes of things punishable, and causes determinable by the Ordinarie Judicatures, may not be entertained in Parliament, and to cause a long, chargeable, fruitlesse attendance of Our people, and (by degrees) draw to you as well all the causes, as all the faults of Westminster-Hall, and divert your proper businesse. That the course of Law be no wayes diverted, much lesse disturbed, as was actually done by the stop of the proceedings against a Riot in Southwark,12 by Order of the House of Commons, in a time so riotous and tumultuous, as much increased the danger of popular Insolencies, by such a countenance to Riots, and discountenance of Law. That you descend not to the leasure of recommending Lecturers to Churches, nor ascend to the Legislative power, by commanding (the Law not having yet commanded it) that they whom you recommend be received, although neither the Parson nor Bishop do approve of them; And that the Refusers (according to the course so much formerly complained of to have been used at the Councell Table) be not sent for to attend to shew cause. At least, that you would consider Conveniencie, if not Law, and recommend none, but who are well known to you to be Orthodox, Learned, and Moderate, or at least such as have taken Orders, and are not notorious depravers of the Book of Common Prayer; A care which appeareth by the Discourses, Sermons and persons of some recommended by you, not to have been hitherto taken, and it highly concerns both you in dutie, and the Common-wealth in the consequences, that it should have been taken; That neither one estate transact what is proper for two, nor two what is proper for three, and consequently, that (contrary to Our declared will) Our Forts may not be seized; Our Arms may not be removed; Our Moneys may not be stopt; Our legall Directions may not be countermanded by you, nor We desired to countermand them Ourself, nor such entrances made upon a Reall War against Us, upon pretence of all imaginarie War against you, and a Chimaera of necessitie. So far do you passe beyond your limits, whilest you seem by your Demand to be strangely straitened within them. At least We could have wisht you would have expressed, what matters you meant as fit to be transacted only in Parliament, and what you meant by only in Parliament. You have (of late) been perswaded by the new doctrines of some few, to think that proper for your debates, which hath not used to be at all debated within those walls, but been trusted wholly with Our Predecessors and Us, and to transact those things which without the Regall Authority, since there were Kings of this Kingdom, were never transacted. It therefore concerns Us the more that you speak out, and that both We and Our people may either know the bottom of your Demands, or know them to be bottomlesse. What concerns more the Publike, and is more (indeed) proper for the high Court of Parliament, than the making of Laws, which not only ought there to be transacted, but can be transacted no where else; but then you must admit Us to be a part of the Parliament, you must not (as the sence is of this part of this Demand, if it have any) deny the freedom of Our Answer, when We have as much right to reject what We think unreasonable, as you have to propose what you think convenient or necessary; nor is it possible Our Answers either to Bills, or any other Propositions should be wholly free, if We may not use the Libertie of every one of you, and of every Subject, and receive advice (without their danger who shall give it) from any person known or unknown, sworn or unsworn, in these matters in which the Manage of Our Vote is trusted by the Law, to Our own Judgement and Conscience, which how best to inform, is (and ever shall be) left likewise to Us; and most unreasonable it were that two Estates, proposing something to the Third, that Third should be bound to take no advice, whether it were fit to passe, but from those two that did propose it. We shall ever in these things which are trusted wholly to Us by the Law, not decline to hearken to the Advice of Our great Councell, and shall use to hear willingly the free debates of Our Privie Councell (whensoever We may be suffered to have them for sending for) and they shall not be terrified from that freedom, by Votes (and Brands of Malignants, and Enemies to the State, for advising what no Law forbids to advise) but We will retain Our Power of admitting no more to any Councell than the Nature of the businesse requires, and of discoursing with whom We please, of what We please, and informing Our Understanding by debate with any Persons, who may be well able to Inform and Advise Us in some particular, though their Qualities, Education or other Abilities may not make them so fit to be of Our sworn Councell, and not tie Ourself up not to hear anymore than twenty five (and those not chosen absolutely by Us) out of a Kingdom so replenished with Judicious and Experienced Persons in severall kindes. And though we shall (with the proportionable Consideration due to them) alwayes weigh the Advices both of Our Great and Privie Councell, yet We shall also look upon their Advices, as Advices, not as Commands or Impositions; upon them as Our Councellors, not as Our Tutors and Guardians, and upon Ourself as their King, not as their Pupill, or Ward. For whatsoever of Regality were by the Modesty of Interpretation left in Us in the first part of the second Demand, as to the Parliament, is taken from Us in the second part of the same, and placed in this new fangled kinde of Councellors, whose power is such, and so expressed by it, that in all publike Acts concerning the Affairs of this Kingdom, which are proper for Our Privy Councell (for whose Advice all publike Acts are sometimes proper, though never necessary) they are desired to be admitted joint Patentees with Us in the Regalitie, and it is not plainly expressed whether they mean Us so much as a single Vote in these Affairs. But it is plain they mean Us no more at most than a single Vote in them, and no more power than every one of the rest of Our Fellow Councellors; only leave to Us, out of their respect and duty, (and that only is left of all Our ancient Power) a Choice, whether these that are thus to be joined with (or rather set over) Us, shall be fifteen; or twenty five; and great care is taken that the Oath which these Men shall take, shall be such, in the framing the form of which (though sure We are not wholly unconcerned in it) We may be wholly excluded, and that wholly reserved to be agreed upon by both Houses of Parliament.
And to shew that no more Care is taken of Our safetie, than of Our Power, after so great indignities offered to Us, and countenanced by those who were most obliged to resent them: After Our Town and Fort13 kept from Us (from which, if it were no otherwise Ours than the whole Kingdom is, We can no more legally be kept out, than out of Our whole Kingdom, which sure yourselves will not deny to be Treason). Our Arms, Our Goods sent away, and Our Money stopt from Us, Our Guards (in which We have no other Intention than to hinder the end of these things from being proportionable to their beginnings) are not only desired to be dismissed before satisfaction for the Injurie, punishments of the Injurers, and care taken for Our future Securitie from the like. But it is likewise desired (and for this Law is pretended, and might as well have been for the rest, which yet with some ingenuitie are it seems acknowledged to be but Desires of Grace) that We shall not for the future raise any Guards or extraordinarie Forces, but in case of actuall Rebellion or Invasion, which if it had been Law, and so observed in the time of Our famous Predecessors, few of those Victories which have made this Nation famous in other parts, could have been legally atchieved, nor could Our blessed Predecessor Queen Elizabeth have so defended Herself in 88. And if no Forces must be levied till Rebellions and Invasions (which will not stay for the calling of Parliaments, and their consent for raising Forces) be actuall, they must undoubtedly (at least most probably) be effectuall and prevalent.
And as neither care is taken for Our Rights, Honour, nor safetie as a Prince, so Our Rights as a private Person are endeavoured to be had from Us, it being asked, that it may be unlawfull and unpunishable, not only to conclude, but even to treat of any Marriage with any Person for Our own Children, or to place Governours about them, without consent of Parliament, and in the intermission of those, without the consent of Our good Lords of the Councell, that We may not only be in a more despicable state than any of Our Predecessors, but in a meaner and viler condition than the lowest of Our Subjects, who value no libertie they have more, than that of the free Education and Marriage of their Children, from which We are asked to debar Ourself, and have the more reason to take it ill, that We are so, because for Our choice of a Governour for Our Son, and of a Husband for Our Daughter (in which the Protestant Religion was Our principall Consideration) We conceived We had reason to expect your present thanks, and the increase of your future trusts.
We suppose these Demands by this time to appear such as the Demanders cannot be supposed to have any such reall fear of Us as hath been long pretended, they are too much in the style, not only of equals, but of Conquerors, and as little to be intended for removing of Jealousies (for which end they are said to be asked, and that is not as Merchants ask at first much more than they will take, but as most necessary to effect it, which (if they be) God help this poor Kingdom, and those who are in the hands of such Persons, whose Jealousies nothing else will remove) which indeed is such a way, as if there being differences and suits between two persons, whereof one would have from the other serverall parcells of his ancient Land, he should propose to him by way of Accommodation, that he would quit to him all those in question, with the rest of his Estate, as the most necessary and effectuall means to remove all those suits and differences. But we call God to witnesse, that as for Our Subjects’ sake these Rights are vested in Us, so for their sakes, as well as for Our own, We are resolved not to quit them, nor to subvert (though in a Parliamentary way) the ancient, equall, happy, well-poised, and never-enough commended Constitution of the Government of this Kingdom, nor to make Ourself of a King of England a Duke of Venice, and this of a Kingdom a Republique.
There being three kindes of Government amongst men, Absolute Monarchy, Aristocracy and Democracy, and all these having their particular conveniencies and inconveniencies. The experience and wisdom of your Ancestors hath so moulded this out of a mixture of these, as to give to this Kingdom (as far as human prudence can provide) the conveniencies of all three, without the inconveniencies of any one, as long as the Balance hangs even between the three Estates, and they run jointly on in their proper Chanell (begetting Verdure and Fertilitie in the Meadows on both sides) and the overflowing of either on either side raise no deluge or Inundation. The ill of absolute Monarchy is Tyrannie, the ill of Aristocracy is Faction and Division, the ills of Democracy are Tumults, Violence and Licentiousnesse. The good of Monarchy is the uniting a Nation under one Head to resist Invasion from abroad, and Insurrection at home. The good of Aristocracie is the Conjuncion of Counsell in the ablest Persons of a State for the publike benefit. The good of Democracy is Liberty, and the Courage and Industrie which Libertie begets.
In this Kingdom the Laws are jointly made by a King, by a House of Peers, and by a House of Commons chosen by the People, all having free Votes and particular Priviledges. The Government according to these Laws is trusted to the King, Power of Treaties of War and Peace, of making Peers, of chusing Officers and Councellors for State, Judges for Law, Commanders for Forts and Castles, giving Commissions for raising men to make War abroad, or to prevent or provide against Invasions or Insurrections at home, benefit of Confiscations, power of pardoning, and some more of the like kinde are placed in the King. And this kinde of regulated Monarchie having this power to preserve that Authoritie, without which it would be disabled to preserve the Laws in their Force, and the Subjects in their Liberties and Proprieties, is intended to draw to him such a Respect and Relation from the great Ones, as may hinder the ills of Division and Faction, and such a Fear and Reverence from the people, as may hinder Tumults, Violence, and Licenciousnesse. Again, that the Prince may not make use of this high and perpetuall power to the hurt of those for whose good he hath it, and make use of the name of Publike Necessitie for the gain of his private Favourites and Followers, to the detriment of his People, the House of Commons (an excellent Conserver of Libertie, but never intended for any share in Government, or the chusing of them that should govern) is solely intrusted with the first Propositions concerning the Levies of Moneys (which is the sinews as well of Peace, as War) and the Impeaching of those, who for their own ends, though countenanced by any surreptitiously gotten Command of the King, have violated that Law, which he is bound (when he knows it) to protect, and to the protection of which they were bound to advise him, at least not to serve him in the Contrary. And the Lords being trusted with a Judicatory power, are an excellent Screen and Bank between the Prince and People, to assist each against any Incroachments of the other, and by just Judgements to preserve that Law, which ought to be the Rule of every one of the three. For the better enabling them in this, beyond the Examples of any of Our Ancestors, We were willingly contented to Oblige Ourself, both to call a Parliament every three yeers, and not to dissolve it in fiftie dayes, and for the present exigent, the better to raise Money, and avoid the pressure (no lesse grievous to Us than them) Our people must have suffered by a longer continuance of so vast a charge as two great Armies, and for their greater certaintie of having sufficient time to remedie the inconveniencies arisen during so long an absence of Parliaments, and for the punishment of the Causers and Ministers of them, We yeelded up Our Right of dissolving this Parliament, expecting an extraordinarie moderation from it in gratitude for so unexampled a Grace, and little looking that any Malignant Partie should have been encouraged or enabled to have perswaded them, first to countenance the Injustices and Indignities We have endured, and then by a new way of satisfaction for what was taken from Us, to demand of Us at once to Confirm what was so taken, and to give up almost all the rest.
Since therefore the Power Legally placed in both Houses is more than sufficient to prevent and restrain the power of Tyrannie, and without the power which is now asked from Us, we shall not be able to discharge that Trust which is the end of Monarchie, since this would be a totall Subversion of the Fundamentall Laws, and that excellent Constitution of this Kingdom, which hath made this Nation so many yeers both famous and happie to a great degree of Envie; since to the power of punishing (which is alreadie in your hands according to Law) if the power of Preferring be added, We shall have nothing left for Us, but to look on; since the incroaching of one of these Estates upon the power of the other, is unhappie in the effects both to them and all the rest; since this power of at most a joint Government in Us with Our Councellors (or rather Our Guardians) will return Us to the worst kinde of Minoritie, and make Us despicable both at home and abroad, and beget eternall Factions and Dissentions (as destructive to publike Happinesse as War) both in the chosen, and the Houses that chuse them, and the people who chuse the Chusers; since so new a power will undoubtedly intoxicate persons who were not born to it, & beget not only Divisions among them as equals, but in them contempt of Us as become an equall to them, and Insolence and Injustice towards Our people, as now so much their inferiors, which will be the more grievous unto them, as suffering from those who were so lately of a neerer degree to themselves, and being to have redresse only from those that placed them, and fearing they may be inclined to preserve what they have made, both out of kindnesse and policie; since all great changes are extreamly inconvenient, and almost infallibly beget yet greater changes, which beget yet greater Inconveniencies.
Since as great an one in the Church must follow this of the Kingdom; Since the second Estate would in all probabilitie follow the Fate of the first, and by some of the same turbulent spirits Jealousies would be soon raised against them, and the like Propositions for reconciliation of Differences would be then sent to them, as they now have joined to send to Us, till (all power being vested in the House of Commons, and their number making them incapable of transacting Affairs of State with the necessary Secrecie and Expedition; those being retrusted to some close Committee) at last the Common people (who in the meantime must be flattered, and to whom Licence must be given in all their wilde humours, how contrary soever to established Law, or their own reall Good) discover this Arcanum Imperii, That all this was done by them, but not for them, grow weary of Journey-work, and set up for themselves, call Parity and Independence, Liberty; devour that Estate which had devoured the rest; Destroy all Rights and Proprieties, all distinctions of Families and Merit; And by this meanes this splendid and excellently distinguished form of Government, end in a dark equall Chaos of Confusion, and the long Line of Our many noble Ancestors in a Jack Cade, or a Wat Tyler.14
For all these Reasons to all these Demands Our Answer is, Nolumus Leges Angliae mutari.15 But this We promise, that We will be as carefull of preserving the Laws in what is supposed to concern wholly Our Subjects, as in what most concerns Ourself. For indeed We professe to beleeve, that the preservation of every Law concerns Us, those of Obedience being not secure, when those of Protection are violated. And We being most of any injured in the least violation of that, by which We enjoy the highest Rights and greatest Benefits, and are therefore obliged to defend no lesse by Our Interest, than by Our Duty, and hope that no Jealousies to the contrary shall be any longer nourished in any of Our good people, by the subtill insinuations, and secret practices of men, who for private ends are disaffected to Our Honour and Safety, and the Peace and Prosperity of Our People. And to shew you, that no just indignation at so reproachfull offers shall make Us refuse to grant what is probable to conduce to the good of Our good People, because of the ill company it comes in, We will search carefully in this heap of unreasonable Demands, for so much as We may (complying with Our Conscience, and the duty of Our Trust) assent unto, and shall accordingly agree to it.
In pursuance of which Search, in the fourth Proposition, under a Demand which would take from Us that trust which God, Nature, and the Laws of the Land have placed in Us, and of which none of you could endure to be deprived, We find something to which We give this Answer, That We have committed the principall places about Our Children to persons of Qualitie, Integritie and Pietie, with speciall regard that their tender yeers might be so seasoned with the Principles of the true Protestant Religion, as (by the blessing of God upon this Our care) this whole Kingdom may in due time reap the fruit thereof. And as We have been likewise very carefull in the choice of Servants about them, that none of them may be such, as by ill Principles, or by ill Examples to crosse Our endeavours for their Pious and Vertuous Education, so if there shall be found (for all Our care to prevent it) any person about Our Children (or about Us, which is more than you ask) against whom both Houses shall make appear to Us any just exception, We shall not only remove them, but thank you for the Information. Only We shall expect, that you shall be likewise carefull that there be no underhand dealing by any to seek faults, to make room for others to succeed in their places.
For the fifth Demand, as We will not suffer any to share with Us in Our power of Treaties, which are most improper for Parliaments, and least in those Treaties in which We are neerliest concerned, not only as a King but as a Father, yet We do (such is Our desire to give all reasonable satisfaction) assure you by the word of a King, that We shall never propose or entertain any Treaty whatsoever for the marriage of any of Our Children, without due regard to the true Protestant Profession, the good of Our Kingdoms, and the Honour of Our Family.
For the sixth Demand, concerning the Laws in force against Jesuites, Priests, and Popish Recusants, We have by many of Our Messages to you, by Our voluntarie promise to you so solemnly made never to pardon any Popish Priest, by Our strict Proclamations lately published in this point, and by the publike Examples which We have made in that case since Our Residence at York, and before at London, sufficiently expressed Our Zeal herein. Why do you then ask that in which Our own Inclination hath prevented you? And if you can yet finde any more effectuall Course to disable them from Disturbing the State or eluding the Law by trusts or otherwise, We shall willingly give Our Consent to it.
For the seventh, concerning the Votes of Popish Lords, We understand that they in discretion have withdrawn themselves from the Service of the House of Peers, (and had done so when use was publikely made of their names to asperse the Votes of that House, which was then counted as Malignant as those (who are called Our Unknown and Unsworn Councellors) are now) neither do We conceive that such a positive Law against the Votes of any whose blood give them that right, is so proper in regard of the Priviledge of Parliament, but are content, that so long as they shall not be conformable to the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England, they shall not be admitted to sit in the House of Peers, but only to give their Proxies to such Protestant Lords as they shall chuse, who are to dispose of them as they themselves shall think fit, without any Reference at all to the Giver.
As to the desires for a Bill for the Education of the Children of Papists by Protestants in the Protestant Profession, many about Us can witnesse with Us, That We have often delivered Our Opinion, That such a Course (with God’s blessing upon it) would be the most effectuall for the rooting out of Popery out of this Kingdom. We shall therefore thank you for it, and encourage you in it, and, when it comes unto Us, do Our Dutie; and We heartily wish, for the publike good, that the time you have spent in making Ordinances without Us, had been imployed in preparing this and other good Bills for Us.
For the eighth, touching The Reformation to be made of the Church-Government and Liturgie, We had hoped, that what We had formerly declared concerning the same, had been so sufficiently understood by you and all good Subjects, that We should not need to have expressed Ourself further in it. We told you in Our Answers to your Petition presented to Us at Hampton-Court the first of December, That for any illegall Innovations which may have crept in, We should willingly concur in the removall of them. That if Our Parliament should advise Us to call a Nationall Synode, which may duely examine such Ceremonies as give just cause of Offence to any, We should take it into Consideration, and apply Ourself to give due satisfaction therein. That We were perswaded in our Conscience, That no Church could be found upon the Earth, that professeth the true Religion with more puritie of Doctrine, than the Church of England doth, nor where the Government and Discipline are jointly more beautified, and free from Superstition, than as they are here established by Law; which (by the grace of God) We will with Constancie maintain (while We live) in their Puritie and Glorie, not only against all Invasions of Poperie, but also from the Irreverence of those many Schismaticks and Separatists, wherewith of late this Kingdom and Our City of London abounds, to the great dishonour and hazard both of Church and State; For the suppression of whom We required your timely and active assistance. We told you in Our first Declaration,16 printed by the advice of Our Privie Councell, That for differences amongst ourselves for matters indifferent in their own nature concerning Religion, We should in tendernesse to any number of our loving Subjects very willingly comply with the advice of our Parliament, that some Law might be made for the exemption of tender Consciences from punishment, or Prosecution for such Ceremonies, and in such Cases, which by the judgement of most men are held to be matters indifferent, and of some to be absolutely unlawfull; Provided, that this case should be attempted and pursued with that modestie, temper, and submission, that in the meantime the peace and quiet of the Kingdom be not disturbed, the Decencie and Comelinesse of God’s Service discountenanced, nor the Pious, Sober, Devout actions of those Reverend Persons who were the first Labourers in the blessed Reformation, or of that time, be scandalled and defamed. And We heartily wish, that others, whom it concerned, had been as ready (as their duty bound them, though they had not received it from Us) to have pursued this Caution, as We were, and still are willing and ready to make good every particular of that Promise. Nor did We only appear willing to join in so good a Work, when it should be brought Us, but prest and urged you to it by Our Message of the fourteenth of February, in these words, And because His Majestie observes great and different troubles to arise in the hearts of His People, concerning the Government and Liturgie of the Church, His Majestie is willing to declare, That He will refer the whole consideration to the wisdom of his Parliament, which He desires them to enter into speedily, that the present distractions about the same may be composed: but desires not to be pressed to any single Act on His part, till the whole be so digested and setled by both Houses, that His Majesty may cleerly see what is fit to be left, as well as what is fit to be taken away. Of which We the more hoped of a good sucesse to the generall satisfaction of Our people, because you seem in this Proposition to desire but a Reformation, and not (as is daily preached for as necessary in those many Conventicles which have within these nineteene months begun to swarm; and which, though their Leaders differ from you in this opinion, yet appear to many as countenanced by you, by not being punished by you, (few else, by reason of the Order of the House of Commons of the ninth of September, daring to do it) a destruction of the present Discipline and Liturgie. And We shall most cheerfully give Our best assistance for raising a sufficient maintenance for preaching Ministers, in such course as shall be most for the encouragement and advancement of Pietie and Learning.
For the Bills you mention, and the Consultation you intimate, knowing nothing of the particular matters of the one (though We like the Titles well) nor of the manner of the other, but from an Informer (to whom We give little credit, and We wish no man did more) common Fame, We can say nothing till We see them.
For the eleventh, We would not have the Oath of all Privie Councellors and Judges straitened to particular Statutes of one or two particular Parliaments, but extend to all Statutes of all Parliaments, and the whole Law of the Land, and shall willingly consent that an enquirie of all the breaches and violations of the Law may be given in charge by the Justices of the King’s Bench every Terme, and by the Judges of Assize in their Circuits, and Justices of Peace at the Sessions to be presented and punished according to Law.
For the seventeenth, we shall ever be most ready, (and we are sorry it should be thought needfull to move us to it) not only to joine with any (particularly with the States of the united Provinces, of which We have given a late proofe in the Match of Our Daughter) for the defence and maintenance of Protestant Religion, against all designes and attempts of the Pope and his Adherents, but singly (if need were) to oppose with Our life and fortune all such Designes in all other Nations, were they joined: And that for Considerations of Conscience, far more than any temporall end of obtaining accesse of strength & reputation, or any naturall end of restoring our Royall Sister and her Princely Issue to their dignities and Dominions though these be likewise much considered by us.
For the eighteenth, It was not Our fault, that an Act was not passed to cleere the Lord Kimbolton, and the five Members of the House of Commons, but yours, who inserted such Clauses into both the Preamble and Act (perhaps perswaded to it by some who wish not that you should in anything receive satisfaction from Us) as by passing the Preamble we must have wounded Our Honour against Our Conscience, and by another Clause have admitted a Consequence, from which We could never have been secured, by declaring, That no Member of either House, upon any Accusation of Treason, could have his Person seized without the Consent of that House, of which he is a Member, though the known Law be, That Priviledge of Parliament extends not to Treason, and if it did, any Member (the House being for a short time adjourned, and so their Consent not being so had) how treasonable soever his Intentions were, how cleerly soever known, and how suddenly soever to be executed, must have fair leave given him to go on and pursue them, no way, how legall soever, after the passing such a Clause, being left to prevent it.
To conclude, We conjure you and all men to rest satisfied with the truth of Our Professions, and the Realitie of Our Intentions, not to ask such things as deny themselves; That you declare against Tumults, and punish the Authors; That you allow Us Our Propriety in Our Towns, Arms and Goods, and Our share in the Legislative Power, which would be counted in Us, not only breach of Priviledge, but Tyrannie and Subversion of Parliaments to deny to you. And when you shall have given Us satisfaction upon those persons who have taken away the One, and recalled those Declarations (particularly that of the six and twentieth of May) and those in the point of the Militia, (Our just Rights, wherein We will no more part with than with Our Crown, lest We inable others by them to take that from Us) which would take away the other, and declined the beginnings of a War against Us, under pretence of Our Intention of making One against you. As We have never opposed the first part of the thirteenth Demand, so We shall be ready to concur with you in the latter.
And being then confident that the Credit of those Men, who desire a generall Combustion, will be so weakened with you, that they will not be able to do this Kingdom any more harm, We shall be willing to grant Our generall Pardon, with such Exceptions as shall be thought fit, and shall receive much more joy in the hope of a full and constant Happinesse of Our People in the True Religion, and under the Protection of the Law, by a blessed Union betwen Us and Our Parliament (so much desired by Us) than in any such increase of Our Own Revenue (how much soever beyond former Grants) as (when Our Subjects were wealthiest) Our Parliament could have setled upon Us.
Unable to obtain Charles’s agreement to transfer the command of the kingdom’s militia to Parliament, on 5 March 1642, that body passed the Militia Ordinance assuming such authority without the king’s consent.
It is unclear which members were put out of “any Place and Office,” but the Grand Remonstrance, clause 38, charges that “judges have been put out of their places for refusing to go against their oaths and consciences.”
During good behavior.
Charles carefully avoided referring to his growing military force as soldiers, and preferred to call them guards.
Charles’s sister Elizabeth had married the Protestant, Frederick V, the Elector Palatine. Frederick’s election as King of Bohemia upon the deposition of the Catholic Ferdinand immersed them both in the bitter Thirty Years’ War. Frederick became known as the winter king from the brevity of his reign. Elizabeth’s sons, princes Rupert and Maurice, were both to fight on Charles’s behalf during the civil war.
Lord Kimbolton here referred to was Edward Montagu, Earl of Manchester, one of those accused of treason by the king on 3 January 1642. The others were John Pym, John Hampden, William Strode, Denzil Holles, and Sir Arthur Haslerigg.
On 23 April 1642, the new parliamentary governor of Hull, Sir John Hotham, arrived just in time to refuse the king entry to the town that housed the major arsenal in the northern part of the kingdom.
“His Majesties Message to both Houses of Parliament, January 20” (London, 1642), Wing C2450.
For information on the incident involving Sir John Hotham and Hull, see note 7, above.
State messengers with power to execute warrants.
Despite his original objections to it, on 16 February 1641 Charles I had consented to the Triennial Bill mandating the summoning of a parliament at least every three years.
A meeting in Southwark in December 1641 for the purpose of drawing up a petition against the bishops became violent when a constable was attacked and beaten. Complaint was made and the sheriff ordered to impanel a jury to examine witnesses. The House of Commons intervened and ordered the undersheriff of Surrey to stop the proceedings.
The King is referring here to Hull.
Jack Cade led the Kentish rebellion of 1450, and Wat Tyler led the Great Peasant Rebellion of 1381. Both men were commoners.
We do not wish the Laws of England to be changed.
“His Majesties Message to both Houses of Parliament: February 14, 1641” (London, 14 February 1641/2), Wing C2451.
T.15 (1.6.) Henry Parker, Observations upon some of his Majesties late Answers and Expresses (2 July 1642).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.15 [1642.07.02] (1.6) Henry Parker, Observations upon some of his Majesties late Answers and Expresses (2 July 1642).
Full titleHenry Parker, Observations upon some of his Majesties late Answers and Expresses.
The second Edition corrected from some grosse errors in the Presse.
2 July 1642.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 130; Thomason E. 153. (62.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
IN this contestation betweene Regall and Paliamentary power, for methods sake it is requisite to consider first of Regall, then of Parliamentary Power, and in both to consider the efficient, and finall causes, and the meanes by which they are supported. The King attributeth the originall of his royalty to God, and the Law, making no mention of the graunt, consent, or trust of man therein, but the truth is, God is no more the author of Regall, then of Aristocraticall power, nor of supreame, then of subordinate command; nay, that dominion which is usurped, and not just, yet whilst it remaines dominion, and till it be legally againe devested, referres to God, as to its Author and donor, as much as that which is hereditary. And that Law which the King mentioneth, is not to be understood to be any speciall ordinance sent from heaven by the ministery of Angels or Prophets (as amongst the Jewes it sometimes was) It can be nothing else amongst Christians but the Pactions and agreements of such and such politique corporations. Power is originally inherent in the people, and it is nothing else but that might and vigour which such or such a societie of men containes in it selfe, and when by such or such a Law of common consent and agreement it is derived into such and such hands, God confirmes that Law: and so man is the free and voluntary Author, the Law is the Instrument, and God is the establisher of both. And we see, not that Prince which is the most potent over his subjects, but that Prince which is most Potent in his subjects, is indeed most truely potent, for a King of one small City, if he be intrusted with a large Prerogative, may bee sayd to be more Potent over his subjects, then a King of many great Regions, whose prerogative is more limited: and yet in true realtitie of power, that King is most great and glorious, which hath the most and strongest subjects, and not he which tramples upon the most contemptible vassells. This is therefore a great and fond errour in some Princes to strive more to be great over their people, then in their people, and to ecclipse themselves by impoverishing, rather then to magnifie themselves by infranchising their Subjects. This we see in France at this day, for were the Peasants there more free, they would be more rich and magnanimous, and were they so, their King were more puissant; but now by affecting an adulterate power over his Subjects, the King there looses a true power in his Subjects, imbracing a cloud instead of Juno. but thus we see that power is but secondary and derivative in Princes, the fountaine and efficient cause is the people, and from hence the inference is just, the King, though he be singulis Major, yet he is universis minor, for if the people be the true efficient cause of power, it is a rule in nature quic quid efficit tale, est magis tale. And hence it appeares that at the founding of authorities, when the consent of societies convayes rule into such and such hands, it may ordaine what conditions, and prefix what bounds it pleases, and that no dissolution ought to be thereof, but by the same power by which it had its constitution.
As for the finall cause of Regall Authoritie, I doe not finde any thing in the Kings papers denying, that the same people is the finall, which is the efficient cause of it, and indeed it were strange if the people in subjecting it selfe to command, should ayme at any thing but its owne good in the first and last place. Tis true according to Machavills politicks, Princes ought to ayme at greatnes, not in, but over their Subjects, and for the atchieving of the same, they ought to propose to themselves, no greater good then the spoyling and breaking the spirits of their Subjects, nor no greater mischiefe, then common freedome, neither ought they to promote and cherish any servants but such as are most fit for rapine and oppression, nor depresse and prosecute any as enemies, but such as are gracious with the populacy for noble and gallant Acts.
To be deliciæ humani generis is growne sordid with Princes, to be publike torments and carnificines, and to plot against those Subjects whom by nature they ought to protect, is held Cæsar-like, and therefore bloody Borgias by meere crueltie & treachery hath gotten roome in the Calender of witty, and of spirited Heroes. And our English Court of late yeares hath drunke too much of this State poyson, for eyther wee have seene favorites raysed to poll the people, and razed againe to pacifie the people; or else (which is worse for King and people too) we have seene engines of mischiefe preserved against the people, and upheld against Law, meerely that mischeese might not want incouragement. But our King here, doth acknowledge it the great businesse of his coronation oath to protect us: And I hope under this word protect, he intends not onely to shield us from all kind of evill, but to promote us also to all kind of Politicall happinesse according to his utmost devoyre, and I hope hee holds himselfe bound thereunto, not onely by his oath, but also by his very Office, and by the end of his soveraigne dignitie. And though all single persons ought to looke upon the late Bills passed by the King as matters of Grace with all thankefulnesse and humility, yet the King himselfe looking upon the whole State, ought to acknowledge that hee cannot merit of it, and that whatsoever he hath granted, if it be for the prosperity of his people (but much more for thier ease) it hath proceeded but from his meere dutie. If Ship money, if the Starre Chamber, if the High Commission; if the Votes of Bishops and Popish Lords in the upper House, be inconsistent with the welfare of the Kingdome, not onely honour but justice it selfe challenges that they be abolisht; the King ought not to account that a profit or strength to him, which is a losse and wasting to the people, nor ought he to thinke that perisht to him which is gained to the people: The word grace founds better in the peoples mouthes then in his, his dignitie was erected to preserve the Commonaltie, the Commonaltie was not created for his service: and that which is the end is farre more honorable and valuable in nature and policy, then that which is the meanes. This directs us then to the transcendent ἀχμὴ of all Politiques, to the Paramount Law that shall give Law to all humane Lawes whatsoever, and that is Salus Populi: The Law of Prerogative it selfe, it is subservient to this Law, and were it not conducing thereunto, it were not necessary nor expedient. Neither can the right of conquest be pleaded to acquit Princes of that which is due to the people as the Authors, or ends of all power, for meere force cannot alter the course of nature, or frustrate the tenour of Law, and if it could, there were more reason, why the people might justifie force to regaine due libertie, then the Prince might to subvert the same. And tis a shamefull stupidity in any man to thinke that our Ancestors did not fight more nobly for their free customes and Lawes, of which the conqueror and his successors had in part disinherited them by violence and perjury, then they which put them to such conflicts, for it seemes unnatural to me that any nation should be bound to contribute its owne inherent puissance, meerely to abet Tiranny, and support slavery: and to make that which is more excellent, a prey to that which is of lesse worth. And questionlesse a native Prince, if meere Force be right, may disfranchise his Subjects as well as a stranger, if he can frame a sufficient party, and yet we see this was the foolish sinne of Rehoboam, who having deserted and rejected out of an intollerable insolence, the strength of ten tribes, ridiculously sought to reduce them againe with the strength of two. I come now from the cause, which conveyes Royalty, and that for which it is conveyed, to the nature of the conveyance. The word Trust is frequent in the Kings Papers, and therefore I conceive the King does admit that his interest in the Crowne is not absolute, or by a meere donation of the people, but in part conditionate and fiduciary. And indeed all good Princes without any expresse contract betwixt them and their Subjects, have acknowledged that there did lie a great and high trust upon them; nay Heathen Princes that have beene absolute, have acknowledged themselves servants to the publike, and borne for that service, and professed that they would manage the publike weale, as being well satisfied populi Rem esse, non suam. And we cannot imagine in the fury of warre, (when lawes have the least vigour) that any Generalissimo can be so uncircumscribed in power, but that if he should turne his Canons upon his owne Souldiers, they vvere ipso facto absolved of all obedience, and of all oathes and ties of allegiance vvhatsoever for that time, and bound by higher dutie, to seeke their owne preservation by resistance and defence: vvherefore if there bee such tacite trusts and reservations in all publike commands, though of the most absolute nature, that can be supposed, vve cannot but admit, that in all well formed monarchies, vvhere kingly Prerogative has any limits set, this must needs be one necessary condition, that the subject shall live both safe and free. The Charter of nature intitles all Sùbjects of all Countries vvhatsoever to safetie by its supreame Law. But freedome indeed has divers degrees of latitude, and all Countries therein doe not participate alike, but positive Lawes must every vvhere assigne those degrees.
The great Charter of England is not strait in Priviledges to us, neither is the Kings oath of small strength to that Charter, for that though it bee more precise in the care of Canonicall Priviledges, and of Bishops and Clergy men (as having beene penned by Popish Bishops) then of the Commonalty, yet it confirmes all Lawes and rightfull customes, amongst vvhich vve most highly esteeme Parliamentary Priviledges; and as for the word Eligerit, whether it be future, or past, it skills not much; for if by this oath, Law, Justice and descretion be executed amongst us in all judgements (as vve well in, as out of Parliament) and if peace and godly agreement be intirely kept amongst us all, and if the King defend and uphold all our lawes and customes, vve need not feare but the King is bound to confent to new Lawes if they be necessary, as vvell as defend old: for both being of the same necessity, the publique trust must needs equally extend to both; and vve conceive it one Parliamentary right and custome, that nothing necessary ought to be denyed. And the vvord Eligerit, if it be in the perfect tense, yet shewes that the peoples election had beene the ground of ancient Lawes and customes, and vvhy the peoples election in Parliament should not be now of as great moment as ever, I cannot discover.
That vvhich results then from hence, is, if our Kings receive all royalty from the people and for the behoofe of the people, and that by a speciall trust of safety and libertie expressely by the people limited, and by their owne grants and oathes ratified, then our Kings cannot be sayd to have so unconditionate and high a proprietie in all our lives, liberties and possessions, or in any thing else to the Crowne appertayning, as vve have in their dignity, or in our selves, and indeed if they had, they vvere not borne for the people, but merely for themselves, neither were it lawfull or naturall for them to expose their lives and fortunes for their Country, as they have beene hitherto bound to doe, according to that of our Saviour, Bonus Pastor ponit vitam pro ovibus. But now of Parliaments: Parliaments have the same efficient cause as monarchies, if not higher, for in the truth, the vvhole Kingdome is not so properly the Author as the essence it selfe of Parliaments, and by the former rule tis magic tale, because vve see ipsum quid quod efficit tale. And it is I thinke beyond all controversie, that God and the Law operate as the same causes, both in Kings and Parliaments, for God favours both, and the Law establishes both, and the act of men still concurres in the sustentation of both. And not to stay longer upon this, Parliaments have also the same finall cause as Monarchies, if not greater, for indeed publike safety and liberty could not be so effectually provided for by Monarchs till Parliaments were constituted, for the supplying of all defects in that Government.
Two things especially are aymed at in Parliaments, not to be attayned to by other meanes. First that the interest of the people might be satisfied; secondly that Kings might be the better counsailed. In the summons of Edw. the first (Claus. 7. 111. 3. Dors.) we see the first end of Parliaments expressed: for he inserts in the writ that whatsoever affayre is of publike concernment, ought to receive publike approbation, quod omnes tangit ab omnibus approbari debet, or tructari. And in the same writ he saith, this is lex notissima & provida circumspectione stabilita, there is not a word here, but it is observeable, publique approbation, consent, or treatie is necessary in all publike expedients, and this is not a meere usage in England, but a Law, and this Law is not subject to any doubt or dispute, there is nothing more knowne, neither is this knowne Law extorted from Kings, by the violence and injustice of the people, it is duely and formally establisht, and that upon a great deale of reason, not without the providence and circumspection of all the states. Were there no further Antiquity, but the raigne of Edward the first to recommend this to us, certainly so, there ought no reverence to be withheld from it, for this Prince was wise, fortunate, just, and valiant beyond all his Predecessors, if not successors also, and therefore it is the more glory to our freedomes, that as weake and peevish Princes had most opposed them, so that he first repaired the breaches which the conquest had made upon them. And yet it is very probable that this Law was farre ancienter then his raigne, and the words lex stabilita & notissima seemes to intimate, that the conquest it selfe, had never wholly buried this in the publike ruine and confusion of the State. It should seeme at this time Llewellins troubles in Wales were not quite suppressed, and the French King was upon a designe to invade some peeces of ours in France, and therefore he sends out this summons ad tractandum ordinandum, & faciendum cum Prelatis Proceris & aliis incolis Regni, for the prevention of these dangers: These words tractandum, ordinandum, faciendum, doe fully prove that the people in those dayes were summoned ad consensum, as well as ad concilium, and this Law, quod omnes tangit, &c. shewes the reason and ground upon which that consent and approbation is founded. It is true we finde in the raigne of Edward the third, that the Commons did desire that they might forbeare counselling in things de queux ils nount pas cognizance; the matters in debate were concerning some intestine commotions, the guarding of the Marches of Scotland and the Seas; and therein they renounce not their right of consent, they onely excuse themselves in point of counsell, referring it rather to the King and his Counsell. How this shall derogate from Parliaments either in point of consent or counsell I do not know, for at last they did give both, and the King vvould not be satisfied vvithout them, and the passage evinces no more but this, that that King was very wise and Warlike, and had a very wise counsell of vvarre, so that in those particulars the Commons thought them most fit to be consulted, as perhaps the more knowing men.
Now upon a due comparing of these passages with some of the Kings late Papers, let the vvorld judge whether Parliaments have not beene of late much lessened and injured. The King in one of his late Answers, Alleadges that his Writs may teach the Lords and Commons the extent of their Commission and trust, which is to be Counsellors, not commanders, and that not in all things, but in quibusdam arduiis, and the case of Wentworth is cited, who was by Queene Elizabeth committed (sitting the Parliament) for proposing that they might advise the Queene in some things, which she thought beyond their cognizance, although Wentworth was then of the House of Commons.
And in other places the King denies the assembly of the Lords and Commons when he withdrawes himselfe, to be rightly named a Parliament, or to have any power of any Court, and consequently to be any thing, but a meere convention of so many private men.
Many things are here asserted utterly destructive to the honour, right, & being of Parliaments. For first, because the Law had trusted the King with a Prerogative to discontinue Parliaments: therefore if he did discontinue Parliaments to the danger or prejudice of the Kingdome, this was no breach of that trust, because in formalitie of Law the people might not assemble in Parliament but by the Kings writ, therefore in right and equity they were concluded also, so that if the King would not graunt his Writ, when it was expedient, he did not proove unfaithfull, or doe any wrong to the people; for where no remedy is, there is no right. This doctrine was mischievous to us when the King had a Prerogative to disuse Parliaments, and if it be not now exploded and protested against, may yet bee mischievous in the future dissolution of Parliaments, for that power still remaines in the Kings trust; and if to goe against the intent of trust be no wrong, because perhaps it is remedilesse, our Trienniall Parliaments may prove but of little service to us; Secondly when Parliaments are assembled they have no Commission to Counsell but in such points as the King pleases to propose, if they make any transition in other matters, they are liable to imprisonment at the Kings pleasure, witnesse Wentworths Case. A meere example (though of Queene Elizabeth) is no Law, for some of her actions were retracted, and yet without question Queene Elizabeth might do that which a Prince lesse beloved could never have done: There is a way by goodnesse and clemency for Princes to make themselves almost unlimitable, and this way Queene Elizabeth went, and without doubt had her goodnesse and Grace beene fained, shee might have usurped an uncontroleable arbitrary lawlesse Empire over us. The Sunne sooner makes the travailour desert his Cloake, then the wind; And the gracious acts of soft Princes (such as Tiberius did at first personate) if they be perfectly dissembled may more easily invade the subiects liberty then the furious proceedings of such as Caligula was, but we must not be presidented in apparent violations of Law by Queene Elizabeth; for as generall reverence gave her power to doe more then ordinary, so her perfect undissembled goodnesse, upon which her reverence was firmely planted, made the same more then ordinary fact in her, lesse dangerous then it would have beene in another Prince. In this point then leaving the meere fact of Queene Elizabeth; wee will retire backe to the ancient Law and reason of Edward the first, and wee thereby shall maintaine that in all cases wheresoever the generality is touched, the generality must bee consulted.
Thirdly, if the Lords and Commons bee admitted to some Cognizance of all things wherein they are concerned, yet they must meerely Counsell, they must not command, and the King Reasons thus, that it is impossible the same trust should bee irrevocably committed to Us, and our Heires for ever, and yet a power above that trust (for so the Parliament pretends) bee committed to others, and the Parliament being a body and dissolvable at pleasure, it is strange if they should bee guardians and controlers in the manage of that trust which is granted to the King for ever. It is true, two supreames cannot bee in the same sence and respect, but nothing is more knowne or assented to then this, that the King is singulis major, and yet universis minor, this wee see in all conditionall Princes, such as the Prince of Orange, &c.
And though all Monarchies are not subiect to the same conditions, yet there scarse is any Monarchy but is subiect to some conditions, and I thinke to the most absolute Empire in the world this condition is most naturall and necessary, That the safetie of the people is to bee valued above any right of his, as much as the end is to bee preferred before the meanes; it is not just nor possible for any nation so to inslave it selfe, and to resigne its owne interest to the will of one Lord, as that that Lord may destroy it without injury, and yet to have no right to preserve it selfe: For since all naturall power is in those which obay, they which contract to obay to their owne ruine, or having so contracted, they which esteeme such a contract before their owne preservation are felonious to themselves, and rebellious to nature.
The people then having intrusted their protection into the Kings hands irrevocably, yet have not left that trust without all manner of limits, some things they have reserved to themselves out of Parliament, and some thing in Parliament, and this reservation is not at all inconsistent with the Princes trust, though hee desire to violate the same; but on the contrary, it is very ayding and strengthning to that trust, so farre as the Prince seekes to performe it, for the peoples good; but it is objected, that a temporary power ought not to bee greater then that which is lasting and unalterable, if this were so, the Romans had done unpolitikely, in creating Dictators, when any great extremitie assailed them, and yet wee know it was verie prosperous to them, sometimes to change the forme of government; neither alwayes living under circumscribed Consuls, nor yet under uncircumscribed Dictators: but it is further objected, that if wee allow the Lords and Commons to be more than Councellors, we make them Commanders and Controllers, and this is not sutable to Royaltie. We say here, that to consent is more than to counsell, and yet not alwayes so much as to command and controll; for in inferiour Courts, the Judges are so Councellors for the King, as that the King may not countermand their judgements, and yet it were an harsh thing to say, that they are therefore Guardians and Controllers of the King: and in Parliament, where the Lords and Commons represent the whole Kingdome, (to whom so great a Majestie is due) and sit in a far higher capacitie than inferiour Judges doe, being vested with a right both to counsell and consent, the case is far stronger; and as wee ought not to conceive, that they will either counsell or consent to any thing, but what is publikely advantagious; so by such Councell and consent, wee cannot imagine the King limited or lessened: for if it was by so knowne a Law, and so wisely established in Edward the firsts dayes, the right of the people, to be summoned at tractandum, ordinandum, faciendum, approbandum, in all things appertaining to the people, and this as then was not prejudiciall to the King, why should the Kings Writ now abbreviate or annull the same? If the King himself be disable for many high matters, till consent in Parliament adde vigour to him, it cannot be supposed that hee comes thither meerly to heare Councell, or that when he is more than councelled, that it is any derogation, but rather a supply of vertue to him. A fourth thing alleaged to the derogation of Parliaments is, That whatsoever the right of Parliaments is to assemble or treat in all cases of a publique nature, yet without the Kings concurrence and consent, they are livelesse conventions without all vertue and power, the verie name of Parliament is not due to them. This allegation at one blow confounds all Parliaments, and subjects us to as unbounded a regiment of the Kings meere will, as any Nation under Heaven ever suffered under. For by the same reason, that Parliaments are thus vertulesse and void Courts, upon the Kings desertion of them, other Courts must needs be the like, & then what remains, but that all our lawes, rights, & liberties, be either no where at all determinable, or else onely in the Kings breast? We contend not meerly about the name Parliament, for the same thing was before that name, and therfore the intent is, that the great Assembly of the Lords and Commons doe not represent and appeare in the right of the whole Kingdome, or else that there is no honour, nor power, nor judicature, residing in that great and Majesticall Body, then which, scarce any thing can be more unnaturall. But these divisions betweene the King and Parliament, and betwixt the Parliament and Kingdome, seeming more uncouth, ’tis attempted to divide further betweene part and part in Parliament, so making the major part not fully concluding, and in the major part, between a faction misleading, and a party mislead. Such excellent Masters of devision has Machiavils rule (divide & impera) made since the 3 of November 1640. ’Tis a wonderfull thing, that the Kings Papers being frayted scarce with any thing else but such doctrines of division, tending all to the subversion of our ancient fundamentall constitutions which support all our ancient liberties, and to the erection of arbitrary rule, should finde such applause in the world: but we say further, that there is manifest difference between deserting, and being deserted: if the wife leave her husbands bed, and become an adulteresse, ’tis good reason that shee loose her dowry, and the reputation of a wife; but if the husband will causelesly reject her, ’tis great injustice that she should suffer any detriment thereby, or be dismissed of any priviledge whatsoever. So if the King have parted from His Parliament, meerely because they fought His oppression, and he had no other meanes to withstand their tyranny, let this proclaime them a voyd Assembly: but if ill Counsaile have withdrawne him, for this wicked end meerely, that they might defeat this Parliament, and derogate from the fundamentall rights of all Parliaments (as His Papers seeme to expresse) under colour of charging some few factious persons in this Parliament, (God forbid) that this should disable them from saving themselves and the whole state, or from seeking justice against their enemies. So much of the Subjects right in Parliament.
Now of that right which the Parliament may doe the King by Councell; if the King could bee more wisely or faithfully advised by any other Court, or if His single judgement were to be preferred before all advise whatsoever, ’twere not onely vaine, but extreamely inconvenient, that the whole Kingdome should be troubled to make Elections, and that the parties elected should attend the publique businesse; but little need to bee said, I thinke every mans heart tels him, that in publique Consultations, the many eyes of so many choyce Gentlemen out of all parts, see more then fewer, and the great interest the Parliament has in common justice and tranquility, and the few private ends they can have to deprave them, must needs render their Counsell more faithfull, impartiall, and religious, then any other. That dislike which the Court has ever conceived against Parliaments, without all dispute is a most pregnant proofe of the integrity, and salubrity of that publique advise, and is no disparagement thereof; for we have ever found enmity and antipathy betwixt the Court and the countrey, but never any till now betwixt the Representatives, and the Body, of the Kingdome represented. And were we not now, those dregges of humane race upon whom the unhappy ends of the world are fallen, Calumny and Envie herselfe would never have attempted, to obtrude upon us such impossible charges of Treason and Rebellion against our most sacred Councell, from the mouthes of Popish, Prelaticall, and Military Courtiers.
The King sayes; ’Tis improbable and impossible that His Cabinet Counsellours, or his Bishops or souldiers, who must have so great a share in the misery, should take such paines in the procuring thereof, and spend so much time, and run so many hazards to make themselves slaves, and to ruine the freedome of this Nation: how strange is this? wee have had almost 40 yeeres experience, that the Court way of preferment has beene by doing publike ill Offices, and we can nominate what Dukes, what Earles, what Lords, what Knights, have been made great and rich by base disservices to the State: and except Master Hollis his rich Widow, I never heard that promotion came to any man by serving in Parliament: but I have heard of trouble and imprisonment. But now see the traverse of fortune; The Court is now turned honest, my Lord of Straffords death has wrought a sudden conversion amongst them, and there is no other feare now, but that a few Hypocrites in Parliament will beguile the major part there, and To usurpe over King, Kingdome, and Parliament for ever, sure this is next to a prodigy, if it be not one: but let us consider the Lords and Commons as meere Counsellors without any power or right of Counselling or consenting, yet wee shall see if they be not lesse knowing and faithfull than other men, they ought not to be deserted, unlesse we will allow that the King may chuse whither he will admit of any counsell at all or no, in the disposing of our lives, lands, and liberties. But the King sayes, that he is not bound to renounce his owne understanding, or to contradict his owne conscience for any Counsellors sake whatsoever. ’Tis granted in things visible and certaine, that judge which is a sole judge and has competent power to see his owne judgement executed, ought not to determine against the light of nature, or evidence of fact.
The sinne of Pilate was; that when he might have saved our Saviour from an unjust death, yet upon accusations contradictory in themselves, contrary to strange Revelations from Heaven, he would suffer Innocence to fall, and passe sentence of death, meerly to satisfie a bloud-thirsty multitude. But otherwise it was in my Lord of Straffords case, for there the King was not sole Judge, nay, he was uncapeable of sitting as judge at all, and the delinquent was legally condemned, and such heynous matters had beene proved against him, that his greatest friends were ashamed to justifie them, and all impartiall men of three whole Kingdomes conceived them mortall; and therefore the King might therin, with a clear conscience have signed a warrant for his death, though he had dissented from the judgement. So if one judge on the same bench, dissent from three, or one juror at the barre from a eleven, they may submit to the major number, though perhaps lesse skilfull then themselves without imputation of guilt: and if it be thus in matters of Law, à fortiori, ’tis so in matters of State, where the very satisfying of a multitude sometimes in things not otherwise expedient, may proove not onely expedient, but necessary for the setling of peace, and ceasing of strife. For example: It was the request of the whole Kingdome in the Parliament to the King, to intrust the Militia, and the Magazine of Hull, &c. into such hands as were in the peoples good esteeme. Conscience and understanding could plead nothing against this, and if it could have beene averred (as it could not, for the contrary was true) that this would have bred disturbance, and have beene the occasion of greater danger, yet Where the people by publique authority will seeke any inconvenience to themselves, and the King is not so much intressed in it as themselves, ’tis more inconvenience and injustice to deny then grant it: what blame is it then in Princes when they will pretend reluctance of conscience and reason in things behoofull for the people? and will use their fiduciarie power in denying just things, as if they might lawfully do whatsoever they have power to do, when the contrary is the truth, and they have no power to do but what is lawfull and fit to be done. So much for the ends of Parliamentary power. I come now to the true nature of it, publike consent: we see consent as well as counsell is requisite and due in Parliament and that being the proper foundation of all power (for omnis Potestas fundata est in voluntate) we cannot imagine that publique consent should be any where more vigorous or more orderly than it is in Parliament. Man being depraved by the fall of Adam grew so untame and uncivill a creature, that the Law of God written in his brest was not sufficient to restrayne him from mischiefe, or to make him sociable, and therefore without some magistracy to provide new orders, and to judge of old, and to execute according to justice, no society could be upheld. Without society men could not live, and without lawes men could not be sociable, and without authority somewhere invested, to judge according to Law, and execute according to judgement, Law was a vaine and void thing. It was soon therefore provided that lawes agreeable to the dictates of reason should be ratified by common consent, and that the execution and interpretation of those Lawes should be intrusted to some magistrate, for the preventing of common injuries betwixt Subject and Subject, but when it after appeared that man was yet subject to unnaturall destruction, by the Tyranny of intrusted magistrates, a mischiefe almost as fatall as to be without all magistracie, how to provide a wholsome remedy therefore, was not so easie to be invented. ’T was not difficult to invent Lawes, for the limitting of supreme governors, but to invent how those Lawes should be executed or by whom interpreted, was almost impossible, nam quis custodiat ipsos custodes; To place a superiour above a supreme, was held unnaturall, yet what a livelesse fond thing would Law be, without any judge to determine it, or power to enforce it; and how could humaine consociation be preserved, without some such Law? besides, if it be agreed upon, that limits should be prefixed to Princes, and judges appointed to decree according to those limits, yet an other great inconvenience will presently affront us; for we cannot restraine Princes too far, but we shall disable them from some good, as well as inhibit them from some evill, and to be disabled from doing good in some things, may be as mischievous, as to be inabled for all evils at meere discretion. Long it was ere the world could extricate it selfe out of all these extremities, or finde out an orderly meanes whereby to avoid the danger of unbounded prerogative on this hand, and too excessive liberty on the other: and scarce has long experience yet fully satisfied the mindes of all men in it. In the infancy of the world, when man was not so actificiall and obdurate in cruelty and oppression as now, and when policy was more rude, most Nations did chuse rather to submit themselves to the meer discretion of their Lords, then to rely upon any limits: and to be ruled by Arbitrary edicts, then written Statutes. But since, Tyranny being growne more exquifite, and policy more perfect, (especially in Countreys where Learning and Religion flourish) few Nations will indure that thraldome which uses to accompany unbounded & unconditionate royalty, yet long it was ere the bounds and conditions of supreme Lords were so wisely determined or quietly conserved as now they are, for at first when Ephori, Tribuni, Curatores &c. were erected to poyze against the scale of Soveraignty, much bloud was shed about them, and, states were put into new broyles by them, and in some places the remedy proved worse then the disease. In all great distresses the body of the people was ever constrained to rise, and by the force of a Major party to put an end to all intestine strifes, and make a redresse of all publique grievances, but many times calamities grew to a strange height, before so combersome a body could be raised; and when it was raised, the motions of it were so distracted and irregular, that after much spoile and effution of bloud, sometimes onely one Tyranny was exchanged for another: till some way was invented to regulate the motions of the peoples moliminous body, I think arbitrary rule was most safe for the world, but now since most Countries have found out an Art and peaceable Order for Publique Assemblies, whereby the people may assume its owne power to do itselfe right without disturbance to it selfe, or injury to Princes, he is very unjust that will oppose this Art and order. That Princes may not be now beyond all limits and Lawes, nor yet left to be tryed upon those limits and Lawes by any private parties, the whole community in its underived Majesty shall convene to do justice, and that this convention may not be without intelligence, certaine-times and places and formes shall be appointed for its regliment, and that the vastnesse of its owne bulke may not breed confusion: by vertue of election and representation, a few shall act for many, the wise shall consent for the simple, the vertue of all shall redound to some, and the prudence of some shall redound to all. And sure, as this admirably composed Court which is now called a Parliament, is more regularly and orderly formed, then when it was called the mickle Synod, or Witenagenot, or when this reall body of the people did throng together at it: so it is not yet perhaps without some defects, which by art and policy might receive further amendment, some divisions have beene sprung of late betweene both Houses, and some betweene the King and both Houses, by reason of the uncertainety of jurisdiction; and some Lawyers doubt how far the Parliament is able to create new formes and presidents; and has a jurisdiction over it selfe. All these doubts would be solemnly solved. But in the first place, the true Priviledges of Parliaments, not onely belonging to the being and efficacy of it, but to the honour also & complement of it, would be clearly declared: for the very nameing of Priviledges of Parliament, as if they were Chimera’s to the ignoranter sort, & utterly unknown to the learned, hath beene entertained with scorne since the beginning of this Parliament. The vertue of representation hath beene denyed to the Commons, and a severance has beene made betwixt the parties chosen and the parties choosing, and so that great Priviledge of all Priviledges, that unmoveable Basis of all honour and power, whereby the House of Commons claimes the entire rite of all the Gentry and Commonalty of England, has beene attempted to be shaken and disturbed. Most of our late distempers and obstructions in Parliament have proceeded from this: that the people upon causelesse defamation and unproved accusations have beene so prone to withdraw themselves from their representatives, and yet there can be nothing under Heaven, next to renouncing God, which can be more perfidious and more pernitious in the people than this.
Having now premised these things, I come to the maine difficulties lying at this time in dispute before us it is left unquestioned that the legislative power of this Kingdome is partly in the King, and partly in the Kingdome, and that in ordinary cases, when it concernes not the saving of the people from some great danger or inconvenience, neither the King can make a generall binding Law or Ordinance without the Parliament, or the Parliament without the King, and this is by a knowne Maxime, Non recurrendum est ad extraordinaria &c.
It ought to be also as unquestioned, that where this ordinary course cannot be taken for the preventing of publike mischiefes, any extraordinary course that is for that purpose the most effectuall, may justly be taken and executed by the most transcendent over-ruling Primum Mobile of all humane Lawes, if the King will not joyne with the people, the people may without disloyalty save themselves, and if the people should be so unnaturall as to oppose their owne preservation, the King might use all possible means for their safetie. Yet this seemes to be denyed by the King, for he sets forth Proclamations and cites Statutes in them to prove, that the power of levying armes and forces is solely in him, and he presses them indefinitely, not leaving to the Subject any right at all of rising in arme, though for their owne necessary defence, except he joynes his consent and Authority: In the same manner also, he so assumes to himselfe a share in the legislative power, as without his concurrence the Lords and Commons have no right at all to make any temporary orders for putting the Kingdome into a posture of defence, in what publique distresse soever: And therefore in Sir Iohn Hothams case, he doth not onely charge him of Treason, for observing the Parliaments instructions and Commissions in a pretended danger, but he pronounceth the meere act Treason, let the circumstances be what they will. Let the world judge whether this be not contrary to the clearest beames of humaine reason, and the strongest inclinations of nature, for every private man may defend himselfe by force, if assaulted, though by the force of a Magistrate or his owne father, and though he be not without all confidence by flight &c. yet here whole nations being exposed to enmity and hazard, being utterly uncapable of flight, must yeeld their throats and submit to Assassinates, if their King will not allow, them defence.
See if this be not contrary to the originall, end, and trust of all power and Lawe, and whether it doe not open a gap to as vast and arbitrary a prerogative as the Grand Seignior has, and whither this be not the maine ground of all those bitter invectives almost which are iterated and inforced with so much eloquence in all the Kings late papers. See if wee are not left as a prey to the same bloudy hands as have done such diabolicall exployts in Ireland, or to any others which can perswade the King that the Parliament is not well affected to him, if we may not take up armes for our owne safety, or if it be possible for us to take up armes, without some Votes or ordinances to regulate the Militia or to make our defence manly, and not beastiall and void of all Counsell, the name of a King is great I confesse, and worthy of great honour, but is not the name of people greater? let not meere tearms deceave us, let us weigh names and things together, admit that God sheds here some rayes of Majesty upon his vicegerents on earth, yet except we thinke he doth this out of particular love to Princes themselves, and not to communties of men, wee must not hence invert the course of nature, and make nations subordinate in end to Princes. My Lord of Strafford, sayes that the Law of Prerogative is like that of the first table, but the Law of Common safety and utility like that of the second, and hence concludes, that precedence is to be given to that which is more sacred, (that is) Regall Prerogative. Upon this ground all Parasites build when they seeke to hood-winke Princes for their owne advantages, and when they assay to draw that esteeme to themselves, which they withdraw from the people: and this doctrin is common, because ’tis so acceptable: for as nothing is more pleasant to Princes then to be so deified, so nothing is more gainefull to Courtiers then so to please. But to look into termes a little more narrower, and dispell umbrages; Princes are called Gods, Fathers, Husbands, Lords, Heads, &c. and this implyes them to be of more worth and more unsubordinate in end, then their Subjects are, who by the same relation must stand as Creatures, Children, Wives, Servants, Members, &c. I answer, these termes do illustrate some excellency in Princes by way of similitude, but must not in all things be applyed, and they are most truly applyed to Subjects, taken divisim, but not conjunction: Kings are Gods to particular men, secundum quid, and are sanctified with some of Gods royaltie; but it is not for themselves, it is for an extrinsecall end, and that is the prosperitie of Gods people, and that end is more sacred than the meanes, as to themselves they are most unlike God; for God cannot bee obliged by any thing extrinsecall, no created thing whatsoever can be of sufficient value or excellencie to impose any dutie or tye upon God, as Subjects upon Princes: therefore granting Prerogative to be but mediate, and the Weale Publike to be finall, wee must rank the Lawes of libertie in the first Table, and Prerogative in the second, as Nature doth require; and not after a kind of blasphemy ascribe that unsubordination to Princes, which is only due to God; so the King is a Father to his People, taken singly, but not universally; for the father is more worthy than the son in nature, and the son is wholly a debtor to the father, and can by no merit transcend his dutie, nor chalenge any thing as due from his father; for the father doth all his offices meritoriously, freely, and unexactedly. Yet this holds not in the relation betwixt King & Subject, for its more due in policie, and more strictly to be chalenged, that the King should make happy the People, than the People make glorious the King. This same reason is also in relation of Husband, Lord, &c. for the wife is inferiour in nature, and was created for the assistance of man, and servants are hired for their Lords meere attendance; but it is otherwise in the State betwixt man and man, for that civill difference which is for civill ends, and those ends are, that wrong and violence may be repressed by one for the good of all, not that servilitie and drudgerie may be imposed upon all, for the pomp of one. So the head naturally doth not more depend upon the body, than that does upon the head, both head and members must live and dye together; but it is otherwise with the Head Politicall, for that receives more subsistence from the body than it gives, and being subservient to that, it has no being when that is dissolved, and that may be preserved after its dissolution.
And hence it appeares, that the verie order of Princes binds them not to be insolent, but lowly; and not to aime at their owne good but secondarily, contrarie to the Florentines wretched Politiques. And it followes, that such Princes, as contrarie to the end of government, effect evill in stead of good, insulting in common servilitie, rather than promoting common securitie, and placing their chiefest pomp in the sufferance of their Subjects, commit such sins as God will never countenance; nay, such as the unnaturall father, the tyrannous husband, the mercilesse master is not capable of committing; nay, we must conceive that Treason in Subjects against their Prince, so far only as it concernes the Prince, is not so horrid in nature, as oppression in the Prince exercised violently upon Subjects. God commands Princes to study his Law day and night, and not to amasse great treasures, or to encrease their Cavaliers, or to lift up their hearts above their brethren, nor to wast their owne demeanes, lest necessitie should tempt them to rapine. But on the contrarie, Machiavels Instructions puffe up Princes, That they may treat Subjects not as brethren, but as beasts, as the basest beasts of drudgerie, teaching them by subtiltie, and by the strength of their Militia, to uphold their owne will, and to make meere sponges of the publike coffers: And sure if that cursed Heretike in policie could have invented any thing more repugnant to Gods commands, and Natures intention, he had been held a deeper Statesman than hee is; but I conceive it is now sufficiently cleared, that all rule is but fiduciarie, and that this and that Prince is more or lesse absolute, as he is more or lesse trusted, and that all trusts differ not in nature or intent, but in degree only and extent: and therefore since it is unnaturall for any Nation to give away its owne proprietie in it selfe absolutely, and to subject it selfe to a condition of servilitie below men, because this is contrarie to the supreme of all Lawes, wee must not think that it can stand with the intent of any trust, that necessarie defence should be barred, and naturall preservation denyed to any people; no man will deny, but that the People may use meanes of defence, where Princes are more conditionate, and have a soveraigntie more limited, and yet these being only lesse trusted than absolute Monarchs, and no trust being without an intent of preservation, it is no more intended that the Pople shall be remedilesly oppressed in a Monarchy, than in a Republique. But tracing this no further, I will now rest upon this, that whatsoever the King has alleaged against raising of Armes, and publishing of Orders indefinitely, is of no force to make Sir Iohn Hotham, or those by whose authoritie hee acted, Traytours, unlesse it fall out that there was no ground nor necessitie of such defence. So much of danger certaine.
I will now suppose the danger of the Commonwealth uncertaine, the King sayes; the Parliament denyes; the King commands, the Parliament forbids: The King sayes the Parliament is seduced by a traiterous faction; the Parliament sayes the King is seduced by a Malignant Party: the King sayes the Parliament tramples upon his Crowne; the Parliament sayes the King intends Warre upon them: to whether now is the Subject bound to adhere? I will not insist much upon generall presumptions, though they are of moment in this case: for without all question ’tis more likely, that Princes may erre and have sinister ends, then such generall conventions of the Nobility, Gentry, and Commonalty so instituted, and regulated as ours are in England. The King does highly admire the ancient, equall, happy, well poyzed and never enough commended constitution of this Government, which hath made this Kingdome, so many years both famous and happy, to a great degree of envie, and amongst the rest, our Courts of Parliament: and therein more especially, that power which is legally placed in both Houses, more then sufficient (as he sayes) to prevent and restraine the power of Tyranny; But how can this be? if the King may at His pleasure take away the being of Parliament meerely by dissent, if they can doe nothing but what pleases Him, or some Clandestine Councellours, and if upon any attempt to doe any thing else, they shall be called Traitors, and without further arraignment, or legall proceeding, be deserted by the Kingdome whose representations they are, what is there remaining to Parliaments? are they not more servile then other inferiour Courts; nay, are they not in a worse condition then the meanest Subject out of Parliament? and how shall they restraine tyranny, when they have no subsistance at all themselves; nay, nor no benefit of Justice, but arbitrary. Surely if these principles hold, they will be made the very Engines and Scaffolds whereby to erect a government more tyrannicall then ever was knowne in any other Kingdome, wee have long groaned for them, but we are likely now to groane under them: but you will say, the King hath a power of dissent, he may use it at his pleasure, if hee have none, then he is a meere Cypher, and the Parliament may tyrannize at pleasure: either the one or the other must bee predominant, or else by a mutuall opposition all must perish; and why not the King predominant rather then the Parliament? We had a maxime, and it was grounded upon Nature, and never till this Parliament withstood, that a community can have no private ends to mislead it, and make it injurious to it selfe, and no age will furnish us with one story of any Parliament freely elected, and held, that ever did injure a whole Kingdome, or exercise any tyranny, nor is there any possibility how it should. The King may safely leave his highest rights to Parliaments, for none knowes better, or affects more the sweetnesse of this so well-ballanced a Monarchy then they do, and it hath been often in their power under great provocations to load that rule with greater fetters & clogs, but they would not. Let us marke but the nature, the right, the power, the wisedome, the justice, of Parliaments, and we shall finde no cause to suspect them, of such unmatchable treasons and conspiracies as are this day, and never was before charged upon them; for our Chronicles makes it apparent, that there is scarce any other Nation wherein Monarchy has been more abused by rash inconsiderate Princes, then in this, nor none at all wherein it hath been more inviolably adored, and loyally preserved from all diminution, I wish it were not some incitement to those execrable Instruments, which steale the Kings heart from us, that they thinke the Religion of Protestants too tame, and the Nation of of the English too incensible of injuries; but I hope God will the more tenderly resent these things. The composition of Parliaments, I say, takes away all jealousies, for it is so equally, and geometrically proportionable, and all the States doe so orderly contribute their due parts therein, that no one can be of any extreame predominance, the multitude loves Monarchy better then Aristocracy, and the Nobility and Gentry, prefer it as much beyond Democracy, and we see the multitude hath onely a representative influence, so that they are not likely to sway, and yet some influence they have, and that enough to preserve themselves from being overswaid. We also in England have not a Nobility and Gentry so independent and potent as in France, Germany, Denmarke, &c. Nor as they were here immediately after the Conquest, by reason of their great Feoffes, whereby to give Lawes either to the Crowne, or the people; but they stand at such faire and comely distances between the King and people, and also betweene themselves, that they serve for an excellent Skreene and banke (as the Kings words are) to assist both King and people against the encroachments of each other. And as the middle Region of the aire treats loving offices betwixt heaven and earth, restraining the fumes and exhalations of Sea and Land, that they ascend not too high, and at the same instant, allaying that restlesse Planets scorching flames, which else might prove insufferable to the lower Elements: So doth Houses of Parliament, as peaceably and sweetly arbitrate betwixt the Prince and his poorest Vastals, and declining Tyranny on the one side, and Ochlocracy on the other, preserving intire to the King the honour of His Scepter, and to the people the patrimony of freedome. Let us not then seeke to corrupt this purity of composition, or conceive that both Gentry, and Nobility can combine against the King, when they have no power but derivative, the one more depending upon the King, and the other upon the people, but both most excellently to affect the good of the whole, and to prevent the exorbitance of any one part. Next, the right of all the Lords and Commons in this State is so great, that no change of goverement can be advantage to them in that temporary capacity, except they could each one obtaine an hereditary Crowne, which is a thing utterly impossible. Next, their power is meerely derivative, so that except we will conceive that both King and people will be consenting to the usurpation, nothing can be done; and if wee conceive that they may by fraud gaine their consent, nothing can withstand them. Lastly, their wisedome hath beene ever held unquestionable, and their justice inviolable, no Prince that ever cast himselfe thereupon was defrauded, no Prince that ever declined the same, proved prosperous. In sum, Parliamentary government being used as Physicke, not dyet by the intermission of due spaces of time, has in it all that is excellent in all formes of Government whatsoever. If the King be an affector of true liberty, he has in Parliament a power as extensive as ever the Romane Dictators was, for the preventing of all publike distresses. If the King be apt to intrude upon the common liberties, the people have hereby many Democraticall advantages to preserve themselves. If Warre bee, here is the Unitive vertue of Monarchy to encounter it, here is the admirable Councell of Aristocracy to manage it. If Peace be, here is the industry and courage of democracy to improve it. Let us now see how Kings usually, governe without Parliaments, especially such as are ruled by Councell averse from Parliaments. I need not speake of France, and other Countries, where together with these generall Assemblies, all liberty is falne to the ground; I need not travell further then our stories, nay, I need not passe beyond our owne Times, my discourse will be endlesse if I doe.
The wisest of our Kings following their owne private advise, or being conducted by their owne wills, have mistaken their best Subiects, for their greatest enemies, and their greatest enemies for their best Subiects, and upon such mistakes our iustest Kings, have often done things very dangerous. And without upbraiding I may say, that this King by the fraud of such as have incensed him against Parliaments; and his most loyall people, hath so far been possest with a confidence in the zeale of Traytors, that he hath scarse ever yet enioyed that grandour and splendor which his Ancestors did enioy. He hath met in the field with two contrary Armies of his own Subiects, and yet that Army which he went to destroy, and advanced their colours against him, was more loyall than that which himselfe commanded, and yet both were more loyall than those fatall whisperers which ingaged them so one against the other, if the whole Kingdome of Scotland had been more hearkened to, rather than some few malignants of the Popish, and Prelaticall faction, the King had sooner found out the fidelity of that whole Kingdome, and the infidelity of that wicked faction. But as things then stood, the King was as much incensed against them, as he is against us now, and he that did then perswade him that the Scots were no Rebels, seemed as great an enemy as he doth now that shall defend the innocency of Sir John Hotham; there was no difference at all betwixt that case of the Scots, and this of ours, the King attributed then as much to his own conscience and understanding, as he doth now, and he attributed as little then to the publike Votes of that Kingdome, as he doth now to this, only in this, our condition is the more unhappy, because that so fresh and memorable experiment doth not at all profit us, but still by a strange kinde of relapse, the King seemes now the more firmly to relie upon his own private reason, and counsell, the more cause he hath to confide in publike advertisements, and the more he professes to doe contrary: the maine question now is, whether the Court, or the Parliament gives the King the better Councell; the King sayes, he cannot without renouncing his own conscience and reason, prefer the Parliaments Councell before the Courts, and that which the King here calls Conscience and reason, can be nothing else but meere private opinion; for if the Councell of the Parliament were directly opposite to common understanding, and good conscience, and the Councell of the Court were evidently consonant thereunto, there needed no such contestation: For example, the Parliament conceives that such and such ill offices have been done to frame parties, and unite forces against the Parliament & the State, and therfore they desire that such Townes, and Forts, and the publick Militia may be intrusted to the custody and command of such Noblemen and Gentlemen as they confide in; the Kings secret Court-Councell suggests against this, that this request incloseth at reasonable intention in it, and that the ayme is to wrest all power out of the Kings hand, that he may be forced to depose himselfe; the effect of this is no more but to let the King know, that they are more wise and faithfull than the Parliament, and that hee may doe royally to hearken to them in condemning the Lords and Commons of most inexpiable, unnaturall, impossible Treason, for they must needs love him better then the Parliament, but he cannot hearken to the Lords and Commons without offering violence to his owne reason and conscience; here we see the misery of all, if Princes may not be led by their owne opinions, though infused by obscure whisperers, when they scandall the loyalty of whole kingdomes without cause, rather then by the sacred and awfull councels of whole Nations, they are denyed liberty of conscience, and ravisht out of their owne understandings. And yet if Princes may be admitted to prefer such weak opinions before Parliamentary motives and petitions, in those things which concerne the Lives, Estates, and Liberties of thousands, what vain things are Parliaments, what unlimitable things are Princes, what miserable things are Subiects? I will enlarge my selfe no longer upon this endlesse Theame: Let us look upon the Venetians, and such other free Nations, why are they so extreamly iealous over their Princes, is it for feare lest they should attaine to an absolute power? It is meerely for feare of this bondage, that their Princes will dote upon their owne wills, and despise publike Councels and Laws, in respect of their owne private opinions; were not this the sting of Monarchy, of all formes it were the most exquisite, and to all Nations it would be the most desirable: Happy are those Monarchs which qualifie this sting, and happy are those people which are governed by such Monarchs.
I come now to the particularities of our own present case, for it may be said, that though publik advise be commonly better than private, yet in this case it may be otherwise; some men have advised the King, that the Parliament hath trayterous designes both against his Person & Crown, and not to be prevented but by absenting himselfe, denying his influence and concurrence, frustrasting and protesting against their proceedings as invalid and seditious, and laying heavy charges of Rebellion upon them, to this advise the King hearkens, so the Parliament requests, and advises the contrary, and now in the midst of all our calamities, of gasping Ireland, and bleeding England, the Parliament seeing that either they must make use of their legislative power and make ordinance to secure some Forts and settle the Militia of the Kingdome in sure hands, and to prevent the seducers of the King or else two Kingdomes should probably bee lost, they doe accordingly. The King proclaymes to the contrary notwithstanding. The question then as I conceive is this onely, whether or no the King hath any just cause to suspect the Parliament of Treason (and can make appeare to the world as some of his Papers mention) wherein they have attempted or plotted any thing against his person and Crowne, which was the onely motive why hee sought to absent himselfe from London, and to possesse himselfe of Hull, and to frame such an impeachment against some of both Houses, if this can be affirmed and proved, the Parliament shall be held guilty in all their Votes, Ordinances and Commissions concerning Sir John Hotham and the Militia, &c. Although it be the first time that any free Parliament was ever so criminous, but if this cannot bee prooved, it must be granted that according to the Votes of Parliaments, the Kings departure did by frustrating Parliamentary proceedings, in a time of such calamitie and distresse greatly indanger two Kingdomes, and whosoever advised the King to that departure, and to the charging of Treason, since layd upon the Parliament (and all such as have obeyed them, in seeking to prevent publicke mischeefes) are as pernicious enemies to this State, as ever received their being from it. The businesse of Hull is most instanced in, let that be first survayd, Sir John Hotham is to be lookt upon but as the Actor, the Parliament as the Author in holding Hull, and therefore it is much wondered at, that the King seemes more violent against the Actor then the Author, but since through the Actor the Author must needs be pearced, if the Act be found Treason, let us consider of circumstances, the same act may be treasonable or not, if such and such circumstances vary, for example, to possesse a Towne and shut the gates against a King is Treason, if there be not something in the act or in the intention, or in the Anthoritie of him that shuts the gates to qualifie and correct the nature of Treason in that act.
The first thing then to be lookt on is, that the King was meerely denyed entrance for that time, his generall right was not denyed, and no defying language was given, no act of violence was used, though the King for divers houres together did stand within Musket shot, and did use termes of defiance, and this makes the act meerely defensive, or rather passive. And therfore how this should administer to the King any ground to leavy guards at Yorke, many men wonder, or that it should seeme the same thing to the King, as if hee had beene pursued to the gates of Yorke. Did the King without any feare treate Sir John Hotham as a Traytor in the face of his Artillery, and after to enter Hull with twentie Horse onely unarmed, and continue such a harsh Parley, so many houres, and yet when hee was in Yorke, in a County of so great assurance, could nothing but so many bands of Horse and Foot secure him from the same Sir John Hotham? The next thing considerable is the Parliaments intention: if the Parliament have here upon turned any of the Townesmen out of their estates, or claymed any interest in it to themselves, or have disseized the King, utterly denying his right for the future, or have made any other use of their possession, but meerely to prevent civill warre, and to disfurnish the Kings seducers of Armes and Ammunition: let the State bee branded with Treason, but if none of these things bee by any credit, though their enemies should bee judges, the most essentiall propertie of Treason must neeeds here bee absent in this act.
The next thing considerable is the Parliaments Authoritie, if the Parliament bee not vertually the whole kingdome it selfe, if it bee not the supreame judicature, as well in matters of State as matters of Law, if it be not the great Councell of the Kingdome, as well as of the King, to whom it belongeth by the consent of all nations to provide in all extraordinary cases, Ne quid detrimenti capiat Respub: let the brand of Treason sticke upon it, nay if the Parliament would have used this forcible meanes unlesse petitioning would not have prevayled, or if their grounds of jealousie were merely vaine, or if the jealousie of a whole kingdome can bee counted vaine, or if they claime any such right of judging of danger, and preventing them without the Kings consent as ordinary and perpetuall, and without any relation to publike danger, let the reward of Treason be their guerdon.
But if their authoritie be so sacred, their intention so loyall, their act free from offensive violence, and if the King might have prevented the same repulse by sending a messenger before hand, or by coming without such considerable Forces in so unexpected a manner, let not treason be here misplaced. Had Faux falne by a private mans Sword in the very instant, when he would have given fire to his trayne, that act had not bin punishable; and the Scots in England tooke Newcastle but by private authoritie, yet there were other qualifications in that act sufficient to purge it of Treason, and he is not comprehensive of the value of a whole State, nor of the vigour of our nationall union which does not so interpret it; how much more unjust then is it that the whole State of England shall be condemned of Treason for doing such an act as this, when its owne safetie, wherein none can have so much interest as it selfe, was so highly touched? Let not all resistance to Princes be under one notion confounded, let the principles and ingredients of it be justly examined, and sometimes it will be held as pious and loyall to Princes themselves, as at other times it is distructive and impious. Let us by the same test try the actions, intentions, and authoritie of the Papists now in Ireland: and compare them with this businesse at Hull, and we shall see a diametricall contrarietie betweene them. Their actions are all blood, rapine, and torture, all ages, all sexes, all conditions of men have tasted of their infernall crueltie. Their intentions are to extirpate that Religion which hath indeavored so long to bring them from Idolatry and Atheisme, and to massacre that nation which hath indeavoured so gently to reduce them from poverty and beastiall barbarisme. Their chiefe leaders in this horrid tragedy, are Jesuites and meere Bandettoes, and the Authority of King, Parliament, and Magistracy is the principall thing which they strike at, and seeke to overwhelme in this deplorable deluge of blood, such a direct contrariety then being betwixt the true Rebells in Ireland, and the misnamed Rebells here in England, the same men which condemne the one, if they would be true to themselves, they ought to commend the other, for we have had experience often in England, and other nations have had the like, that Kings have marched forth amongst their enemies to encounter with their friends, so easily are they to be flattered into errour, and out of errour to seeke the ruine of those which ayme at nothing but predition. And yet questionlesse when Richard the second was invironed with the Forces of Spencer, and his confederates, vowing to sacrifice their blood in his quarrell, and in defiance of the adverse trayterous Peeres, he which would have told him, that those Swords drawne for him, were in truth drawne against him and his best friends, and those Swords on the other side drawne against him, or rather against his seducers were indeed drawne for him, should have found but poore acceptance, for without doubt the King would have thought such a suggestion an abuse to his sences, to his reason, to his conscience, and an impudent imposture, worthy of nothing but scorne and indignation. And if it had beene further pressed that the voyce and councell of the Peeres was the voyce and councell of the major and better part of the Kingdome, whereas Spencers party was but of inconsiderable fortunes, and his Councell was but private, and might tend to private ends, it is likely the King at the last resort; would have referred all to his owne will and discretion; but I have now done with the businesse of Hull, and therein I thinke with all objections against the Loyaltie of the Parliament, for the same reason will extend to all their Votes and actions concerning the Militia, &c. and in summe all ends in this; if Kings bee so inclineable to follow private advise rather then publique, and to preferre that which closes with their naturall impotent ambition, before that which crosses the same, are without all limits, then they may destroy their best subjects at pleasure, and all Charters and Lawes of publike safetie and freedome are voyd, and God hath not left humane nature any meanes of sufficient preservation. But on the contrary, if there bee any benefit in Lawes to limit Princes when they are seduced by Privadoes, and will not hearken to the Great Councell of the Land, doubtlesse there must be some Court to judge of that seducement, and some authoritie to inforce that iudgement, and that Court and Authoritie must bee the Parliament, or some higher Tribunall, there can be no more certaine Crisis of seducement, then of preferring private advise before publike. But the King declines this point, and saith, that hee doth not undervalue the whole Parliament, or lay charge of Treason upon all, he doth confesse that divers have dissented, and divers beene absent, &c. hee deserts onely, and accuses the faction and conspiracy of some few in Parliament. Wee are now at last fallen upon an issue fit to put an end to all other invectives, let us sticke close to it. The King promises very shortly a full and satisfactory narration of those few persons in Parliament: whose designe is, and alwayes was to alter the whole frame of government both in Church and State, and to subject both King and people to their owne lawlesse Arbitrary power and government; a little of this Logicke is better then a great deale of Rhetoricke, as the case now stands. If the King will please now to publish the particular crimes of such, as hee hath formerly impeached of Treason, and the particular names of such as now hee sets forth in those Characters, and will therein referre himselfe to the strength of his proofes, and evidence of his matter, it is impossible that any jealousie can cloud his integretie, or checke his power any longer; Then it will appeare to all, that he hath not lest us, out of any disaffection to Parliaments, or out of any good opinion of Papists, Delinquents, and other Incendiaries, but that hee was necessitated to depart from us, that hee might be the better able to preserve to us our Religion, Lawes and liberties, and that none of his solemne oathes of cordiall love to us hath wanted integretie and faith. This will satisfie all lovers of Justice, that he gives not light credit to weake whisperers or malitious informers (whose ayme may bee to bring this Parliament to some ignoble tryall, or to confound it without any tryall at all by generall aspertions and meere calumnious surmises) this will proclaime his cander and sinceritie, and set a brighter luster upon his Justice, then any oratory whatsoever. By the performance of this promise he shall not doe onely right to himselfe, but also to the whole kingdome, for the distracted multitude, being at last by this meanes undeceived, shall not onely prostrate themselves, and all their power presently at his feet, but for ever after remaine the more assured of his good, whether to publike liberties and Parliamentary Priviledges. Howsoever nothing but the awfull promise of a King could make us thinke so dishonorably of Parliaments, or suspend our judgements so long of them; for an Aristocracy in Parliament cannot bee erected without meanes, and what this meanes shall be, is yet to us altogether inscrutible, for the power of Parliaments is but derivative and depending upon publike consent, and how publike consent should be gained for the erection of a new unlawfull odious tiranny amongst us, is not discernable, the whole kingdome is not to bee mastered against consent, by the Traine Band, nor the Traine Bands by the Lords or debutie Lievtenants, nor they by the maior part in Parliament, nor the maior part in Parliament by I know not what septem-virat, there is some mistery in this which seemes yet above, if not contrary to nature, but since the King hath promised to open it, we will suspend our opinion and expect it as the finall issue of all our disputes.
The maine body of the difference being thus stated, I come now to the observations of some other severall obiections against this Parliament, and exceptions taken against arbitrary power in all Parliaments, and I shall observe no order, but consider them as I finde them, either dispersed or recollected in the Kings late Expresses.
The Parliament being complayned against for undutifull usage to the King above all former Parliaments, hath said, that if they should make the highest presidents of other Parliaments their patterne, there would be no cause to complaine of want of modesty and dutie.
The King, because some Parliaments formerly have deposed Kings, applyes these words to those Presidents, but it may iustly be denyed that free Parliaments did ever truely consent to the dethroaning of any King of England, for that Act whereby Richard the second was deposed, was rather the Act of Hen. the fourth, and his victorious Army, then of the whole Kingdome.
The Parliament is taxed of reproaching this Kings government, to render him odious to his subiects, whereas indeed all the miscariages and grievous oppressions of former times are solely imputed to the ill Ministers and Councellors of the King, And all the misfortunes of these times since November, 1640. are imputed to the blame of the Parliament: the Kings words to the Parliament are, That the condition of his Subjects when it was at worst under his government was by many degrees more pleasant and happy then this to which the Parliaments furious pretences of reformation hath brought them to. In this case the Parliament being accused of so haynous crimes, did uniustly betray themselves, if they should not lay the blame upon the Kings evill Councellors, the onely enemies and interrupters of Parliaments. Neverthalesse the King takes this as a way of the Parliament to let them into their franke expressions of him and his actions, and takes all things spoken against his ministers, as spoken against himselfe, how miserable here is the condition of the Parliament, eyther they must sinke under uniust charges, or be censured for the reproachers of their king, nay they are undutifull, if they tell not the King himselfe, that he ought not to onerate himselfe with the blame of his Councellors.
The Parliament, because it could not obtaine no equall Justice from the Court-Caveleers, who are conceived to be the first moovers of those stirres and tumults which happened at Westminster, did reserve the hearing of some of the contrary side it selfe, upon this it is objected, that the Parliament incited those seditious; and protected the actors in it, whereas they desire Justice yet, and that both sides may be brought fairely to an equall hearing, and before such hearing they desire that no parties may be condemned.
And whereas the Parliament, upon those rude commotions, are condemned as unheard, and of that which is unproved, and never can be proved, That they leavyed Warre upon the King, and drove him away, yet they desire that that meer imputation may not draw any further opposition to their proceedings, and the necessities of the State; for if the King could not stay at London with safety, yet being now at York in safety, he may concurre with the advice of his Parliament; the distance of the place needs not cause any distance of affection, since the King conceives He hath so few enemies, and assures himself of so many friends in Parliament.
The Parliament sayes, That none of its Members may be apprehended in case of suspicion, where no information or witnesses appear, to make good the Prosecution, without acquainting the Parliament, if leave may be conveniently obtained. In opposition to this a case is put, Of a Parliament-man that rides from York to London, and takes a purse by the way, the Parliament doth not priviledge Robberies so done; for though no such hing be likely ever to be done, yet if it be, in that case the evidence of the fact in that instant, allowes not onely the apprehending, but the casuall killing of such a Robber: Who sees not many differences betwixt such a case, and that of the five Members of the lower House, where neither Witnesses, nor Informers, nor Relaters, nor any particularity of crime could be produced? and yet by the same act the whole House might have been surprized: And all the world knows, That the impeached Members still suffer by that Charge, and yet can obtain no right against any Informers, though it be now converted to their disadvantage.
The Parliament does not deny the King a true reall Interest in any thing held by him, either in jure Coronæ or in juræ Personæ, yet meerly because it affirms, That in the same thing the State hath an Interest Paramont in cases of publique extremity; by vertue of which it may justly seize, and use the same for its own necessary preservation. Hereupon, the King replies, That this utterly abolishes His Interest in all things, so that by this device, He is made uncapable, either of suffering wrong, or receiving right: a strange violented wrested conclusion; and yet the Kings Interest in Hull, and in the lives of his subjects, is not such an Interest as in other moveables, neither is the Kings Interest taken away from him; the same things are still reserved for him, in better hands then he would have put them. The Parliament maintains its own Councell to be of honour and power above all other, and when it is unjustly rejected, by a King seduced, and abused by private flatterers, to the danger of the Commonwealth, it assumes a right to judge of that danger, and to prevent it: the King sayes, That this gives them an arbitrary unlimitable power to unsettle the security of all mens estates, and that they are seduceable, and may abuse this power, nay they have abused it; and he cites the Anabaptists in Germany, and the 30 Tyrants at Athens. That there is an Arbitrary power in every State somewhere tis true, tis necessary, and no inconvenience follows upon it; every man has an absolute power over himself; but because no man can hate himself, this power is not dangerous, nor need to be restrayned: So every State has an Arbitrary power over it self, and there is no danger in it for the same reason. If the State intrusts this to one man, or few, there may be danger in it; but the Parliament is neither one nor few, it is indeed the State it self; it is no good consequence, though the King makes so much use of it, That the Parliament doth abuse power, because it may: The King would think it hard that we should conclude so against him, and yet the King challenges a greater power then Parliaments: and indeed if the Parliament may not save the Kingdome without the King, the King may destroy the Kingdom in despight of the Parliament; and whether then challenges that which is most Arbitrary, and of most danger? but the King sayes, This Parliament has abused their power. (I wish Kings had never abused theirs more) And the Parliament answers, That this is but his rude avirment, and in controversies that ought not to condemn private men; much lesse ought Parliaments to fall under it. And as for Mr Hooker, he does not say, That the Anabaptists in Germany did deceive Parliaments with their hypocrisie, and therefore inferre that Parliaments ought no further to be trusted: the stirres of the Anabaptists in Germany conclude no more against Parliaments, then the impostures of Mahomet in Arabia do. And as for the 30 Tyrants of Athens, we know they were not so chosen by the people, as our Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses are, nor created or called by any Kings Writ, as our Peers are; nor did they so meerly depend upon their own good abearing, and the good liking both of King and State, as our Lords and Commons now do; neither had they so many equalls and Rivalls as both our Houses contain: we know their power was not founded upon the consent of the Citizens, but the strength of their Souldiers; neither were their Souldiers such as our Train Bands, but meer mercinaries of desperate, or perhaps no Fortunes, whose Revenue was rapine, whose Trade was murther: I fear they were more like our Cavaliers at Yorke, then the Militia at London: Were our new Militia any other then our old Trayn Bands, or our new Lievtenants, and Deputies, any other then the same Lords and Gentlemen, with very little variation, which before were very well reputed of, both by King and Commons, and not yet by either excepted against, or did the whole fate of the kingdom depend meerly upon the new Militia, this new device of an Aristocrasie might seem the more plausible; but as things now stand, this new Aristocraticall Fabrick cannot seem to any impartiall man, but as empty a shadow, and ayrie a dream as ever mans fancie abused it self withall.
The Parliament sayes, That the Kings power is fiduciary, and not to be used against the Kingdom, but for it only: The King hereupon demands, May any thing be taken from a man, because he is trusted with it? Or may the person himself take away the thing he trusts when he will, and how he will? Our case of Hull is not so generall, The things there remaining in the Kings trust for the use of the Kingdom were Arms, and by consequence of more danger, then other kinde of Chattels. And if I intrust my cloak to an others custody, I may not take it away again by force; But if it be my sword, and there is strong presumption, that it may be drawn upon me, I may use any means to secure it.
The Parliament claims a right of declaring, and interpreting Law. The King makes this question thereupon? Is the Law it self subject to your Votes, that whatsoever you say, or do, shall be lawfull, because you declare it so? Am I supream, and yet you above me? Must my power be governed by your discretion? This is the Popes Arrogance, That all must submit their understanding, and Scripture it self, to His declaring power: and a case is put of the Irish Rebels, making themselves a major part in Parliament, and so voting against the true Religion, &c. In perspicuous, uncontroverted things, the Law is it own interpreter, and there no Judge is requisite, and the Parliament cannot be taxed to have declared Law by the rule of their Actions; They have squared their Actions according to Law, They may be censured, but they cannot be convinced of any injustice. Tis true, In meer matters of State, the Parliament is not bound to strict presidents at all times, but in matters of right, and justice they have not deviated, either to the right hand, or to the left: Howsoever, In matters of Law and State both, where ambiguity is, some determination must be supream, and therein, either the Kings power and trust must be guided by the discretion of the Parliament; or else the Parliament, and all other Courts must be overruled by the Kings meer discretion; and there can be nothing said against the Arbitrary supremacy of Parliaments, &c. But farre more upon better grounds, may be said against the Arbitrary supremacy of the King. As for the Popes Arrogance, who undertakes to interpret Scripture where it wants no interpreter, And in matters of meer opinion to usurpe over all mens consciences; As if he had an infallibility in his sole breast He is not an instance so fitly to be alleaged against Parliaments, as Princes, For tis very probable, That if the Church had not submitted it self to so slavish a condition under one Man, but had been governed by some generall Junto of Divines fairly elected, it had never swerved into such foul idolatry, and superstition, as it has don.
As for the case of Ireland, I conceive, tis improperly urged; For England and Ireland are one and the same Dominion, There is as true and intimate an Union betwixt them, as betwixt England and Wales; And though by reason of remote situation, they do not meet in one, and the same Parliament; yet their Parliaments, as to some purposes, are not to be held severall Parliaments. And therefore, if the papists in Ireland were stronger, and had more Votes in Parliament then the Protestants, yet they would want authority to overrule any thing voted, and established before in England. For the reason, why the minor part in all suffrages subscribes to the major is, That bloud may not be shed. For in probability, The major part will prevail, and else strife, and bloudshed would be endlesse: Wherefore the major part in Ireland, by the same reason ought to sit down and acquiesce, because Ireland is not a severall monarchy from England; nor is that a major part of Ireland, and England too; for if it were, it would give Law to us, as we now give Law there; and their Statutes would be of as much vertue here, as ours are there.
The Parliament In case of extream danger, challenges an Authority of setting the Militia in sure hands, and removing doubtfull persons; if the King will not be entreated to do it of himself? The Kings sayes, This is to put His intrusted power out of Himself into others, and so to devest and disable Himself for the protection of His people. This is a strange mistake. The Parliament desires no removeall of that power which was in the King, But that which was in such or such a Substitute? And how does this devest and disable the King? And if the King sayes, That He his a better opinion of such a Substitute, then of an other, Though the Parliament conceive otherwise, Then what does He but prefer His own private opinion before the most Honourable of all Councells, before the voyce of the whole Kingdom? What higher Law then have we remaining then the Kings will? And as for his account to God, will it be easier for him to pleade, That he used such an instrument of His own meer discretion against publike advice if things prove unhappy, then that He followed the most noble Councell, and such whose lifes, fortunes, and interests, were most deeply concerned in it? And as for those absurde unreasonable, incredible suppositions of the injustice, and treasons of Parliaments, as if they were lesse carefull of the publike good, then single Rulers, Though it be spoken in derision, wise men perhaps may be not so apt to laugh in applause, as in contempt of it. For how has the Parliament removed the rub of all Law out of its way, because it assumes to it self to be higher then any other Court, and to be in declaring Law, as farre beyond the Kings single countermands in Parliament, as other inferiour Courts are out of Parliaments? Or how, has it erected a new upstart Authority to affront the King, and maintain an Aristocraticall usurpations, when the main body of the Militia is still the same as it was, and such as the King professes no suspition of, and no alteration is of the heads thereof, except only in some few popishly inclined, or not publikely so honoured, and consided in as they ought? And when the same Allegiance is performed, The same Supremacy of power confessed to be now in the King over the Militia, as has ever been? Nay, What ground can there be for this imaginary usurpation, when the King professes, He fixes not that traiterous designe upon both, or either House of Parliament, being most confident of the Loyalty, Good Affections, and Integrity of that great Body? Is the main body of the Kingdom loyall? Is the main body of the Parliament loyall? Is the King true to Himself? And is all His great partie of Clergymen, Courtiers, Souldiers. &c. constant? And yet is there a machination in hand, to introduce Aristocraticall usurpation odious to all men; which neither Kingdom, Parliament, King, nor all the Royallists can oppose? What a strange unfathomable machination, and work of darknesse is this? But this is said to be done by cunning, force, absence, or accident. If it be by cunning, Then we must suppose that the Kings party in Parliament has lost all their Law, policy, and subtilty, And that all the Parliament, except some few are luld-a-sleep by Mercuries Minstrelsie; or that some diabolicall charme has closed up all their various eyes. If it be by force, Then we must suppose that our Aristocraticall heads carry about them great store of that Serpents teeth which yeilded heretofore so sudden and plentifull a harvest of armed men, being but cast into the furrows of the earth, Though their armies have been hitherto invisible, yet we must suppose, That they are in a readinesse to rise upon the first Alarum beaten. If it be by absence, then we must suppose, That this Aristocraticall machination is easily yet to be prevented, for tis not a hard matter to draw a full apparence together, and that we see has been done lately by the order of the House it self. Nay, we see tis not the House, but the opposite part that desires to scatter, and divide, and draw away, and as much as in them lyes to hinder a full assembly: And therefore, This is not the way. If it be by accident, Then we must be contented to expect, and have a little patience; Fortune is not alwayes constant to one certain posture, nor do the Celestiall bodies confine themselves to one unaltered motion.
The Parliament requests of the King, That all great Officers of State, by whom publike affaires shall be transacted, may be chosen by approbation, or nomination of the great Councell. The King takes this as a thing maliciously plotted against him, as a proposition made in mockery of him, as a request which He cannot yeeld to, without shewing Himself unworthy of that trust, which Law reposes in Him, and of His descent from so many great and famous Ancestors: He conceives, He cannot perform the Oath of protecting His people if He abandon this power, and assume others into it. He conceives it such a Flowre of the Crown, as is worth all the rest of the Garland, not to be parted with all upon any extremity of conquest or imprisonment; nor for any low sordid considerations of wealth, and gain whatsoever. He conceives, That if He should passe this, He should retain nothing but the Ceremonious Ensignes of Royalty, or the meer sight of a Crown and Scepter; (nay the Stock being dead, the Twigs would not long flourish;) but as to true, and reall power, He should remain, but the outside, the picture, the signe of a King. Could this be, If all Parliaments were not taken as deadly enemies to Royalty? the substance of the request seems to be no more but this, That it would please the King to be advised by Parliaments, rather then His own meer understanding, or any inferiour Councellors in those things which concern the liberties, and lifes of the whole people. And how could this request seem equall to a demanding of the Crown, to a dethroning of the King, and to a leaving of the Kingdom destitute of protection, if Parliaments were not supposed mortall enemies to Princes, and Princes not supposed, but openly declared enemies to Parliaments; if the King choose such a man Treasurer or Keeper out of his own good liking only, or upon recommendation of such a Courtier, here he is devested of no power; but if it be upon the recommendation of the whole Kingdoms in Parliament, who in all probability can judge better, and are more concerned, this is an emptying himself of Majesty, and devesting himself of Power. Ordinary reason cannot suggest otherwise hereupon, but either Parliaments affect not Kings, nor their own good, nor would make good elections, or else Kings affect not Parliaments, nor the Kingdoms good, and therefore they oppose such elections, meerly because they are good: but let us observe the Kings reasons against Parliamentary elections; For first, He conceives them prejudiciall for the people: Secondly, Dishonourable to himself.
Man is by nature of restlesse ambition; as the meanest vassall thinks himself worthy of some greatnesse, so the most absolute Monarch aspires to something above his greatnesse. Power being over obtained by haughty mindes, quickly discovers that it was not first aimed at meerly to effect Noble actions, but in part to insult over others; and ambitious men thirst after that power which may do harm, as well as good; nay, though they are not resolved to do harm, yet they would be masters of it;—Qui nolunt occidere quenquam—Posse volunt. And yet let this power be added, the minde still remains unfilled, still some further Terrestriall omnipotence, a sharing with God, and surmounting above mortall condition is affected. Our Law has a wholesome Maxime, That the King may onely do that which is just; but Courtiers invert the sense of it, and tell him, That all is just which he may do, or which he is not restrained from doing by Law. Such and such things Princes ought not to do, though no Law limited them from doing thereof; but now those things which by nature they abhorre to do, yet they abhorre as much to be limited from. That disposition which makes us averse from cruelty and injury, we account a noble and vertuous disposition; but that Law which shall restrain us from the same is stomacked at, and resisted, as a harsh bit to put into our mouths or bonds upon our arms. Antoninus Pius is greatly renowned for communicating all weighty affairs, and following publike advice and approbation in all great expedients of high concernment; and he was not more honourable then prosperous therein. Had he been a meer servant to the State, he could not have condescended further; and yet if he had done necessarily, what he did voluntarily, the same thing had been in the same manner effectuall; for tis not the meer putting or not putting of Law, that does after the nature of good or evill. Power then to do such an evill, or not to do such a good, is in truth no reall power, nor desired out of any nobleness, but rather windy arrogance; and as it is uselesse to men truely noble, so to men that love evill for evill ends, tis very dangerous. What will Nero more despise then to condescend as Antoninus did? yet ’twere more necessary that Nero were limited then Antoninus; for excessive power added to Nero’s cruelty serves but as Oil poured upon flame. When Princes are as potent as vicious, we know what Ministers swarm about them; and the end is, That as vast power corrupts and inclines them to ill Councells so they perish at last by Councellors worst of all. Tis pretended that Princes cannot be limitted from evill, but they may be disabled from doing good thereby, which is not alwayes true; and yet if it were, the people had better want some right, then have too much wrong done them: for what is more plain then this; That the Venetians live more happily under their conditionate Duke, then the Turks do under their most absolute Emperours. Neverthelesse, if we consider the noble Trophees of Rome which it gained under Consuls, and condition are Commanders, we may suppose that no defect at all could be in their popular and mixt government. And our neighbours in the Netherlands are a good instance; for they being to cope with the most puissant and free Prince of Christendom, being but the torn relique of a small Nation, yet for their defence, would not put themselves under a Dictatorian power, but they prepared themselves for that so terrible encounter, under the Conduct of a Generall much limitted. Neither have those straitned Commissions yeelded any thing but victories to the States, and solid honour to the Princes of Orange; and what more, the mightiest Monarchs of our age have archieved or enjoy’d, besides the filling of a phantasticall humour with imaginary grandour. I speak not this in favour of any alteration in England, I am as zealously addicted to Monarchy, as any man can, without dotage: but I know there are severall degrees of Prerogatives, Royall, some whereof have greater power of protection, and lesse of oppression; and such I desire to be most studious of: In some things I know tis dangerous to circumscribe Princes, but in others there may be great danger in leaving them to their pleasure, and scarce any hope at all of benefit; and amongst other things, the choice of publike Officers, if the State have (at least) some share therein with the King, what considerable inconvenience can happen thereby to the State or King, is not in me to foresee: but if it have no share, experience sufficient teacheth us what great disasters may happen. And so for the disusing and dissolving of Parliaments; if the Parliament divide some part of that power with the King, I see great good, but no harm at all that can ensue, either to weaken the Crown, or disturb the subject thereby. But it will be said in the next place, If this disables not the King from protecting the Subject, yet it diminishes his own Right, and leaves him but the shadow of Royalty. This is grounded upon a great mistake; for some men think it a glorious thing to be able to kill, as well as to save, and to have a kinde of a Creators power over Subjects: but the truth is, such power procures much danger to ill Princes, and little good to any; for it begets not so much love as fear in the subject, though it be not abused; and the fear of the subject does not give so perfect a Dominion as love. Were Hannibal, Scipio, &c. the lesse honoured or beloved because they were not independent? surely no, they were the lesse feared, and for the same cause the more honoured and beloved. Or were Alexander, Pyrrus, &c. the more honoured or beloved, because they were independant? I believe the contrary, and that they had lived more gloriously, and died lesse violently, if a more moderate power had rendered them lesse insolent in their own thoughts, and lesse feared in other mens. Was Cæsar the private man lesse successefull in his Warres, or lesse dear in all his souldiers eyes, or lesse powerfull in his Countrey-mens affections, then Cæsar the perpetuall Dictator? No, if the Imperiall Throne of the World added any thing to Cæsar, ’twas not excellence, not true glory, ’twas but the externall complements of pomp and ostentation, and that might perhaps blow up his minde with vanity, aud fill the people with jealousie, it could not make Cæsar a nobler, gallanter, greater Cæsar then he was. I expect no lesse then to be laught at at Court, and to be held the author of a strange paradox, by those men which stick not to say, That our King is now no more King of Scotland, then he is King of France, because his meer pleasure there, is not so predominant in all cases of good and evill whatsoever: but I regard not those fond things which cannot see in humane nature what is depraved in it, and what not, and what proceeds from vain, and what from true glory; and wherein the naturall perfection of power and honour, differs from the painted rayes of spurious Majesty and Magnificence. To me the Policy of Scotland seems more exquisite in poynt of prerogative, then any other in Europe, except ours: And if the splendor, and puissance of a Prince consist in commanding religious, wise, magnanimous, warlike subjects, I think the King of Scotland is more to be admired then the King of France; and that he is so, to the meer ingenuity of Government, I ascribe it. But some will allow, That to follow the pattern of Antoninus freely, and voluntarily, as be did, is not dishoneurable in a Prince; but to be under any Obligation or Law to do so, is ignoble. And this is as much as to say, That Law, though good, yet quatenius Law is burthenous to mans nature; and though it be so but to corrupted nature, in asmuch as it restrains from nothing, but that which nature in its purity would it self restrain from; yet corrupted nature it self is to be soothed and observed. I have done with this point: ’twas spoken in honour of Hen. 7. That he governed his subjects by his Laws, his Laws, by his Lawyers, and (it might have been added) his subjects, Laws and Lawyers by advice of Parliament, by the regulation of that Court which gave life and birth to all Laws. In this Policy is comprized the whole art of Soveraignty; for where the people are subject to the Law of the Land and not to the will of the Prince, and where the Law is left to the interpretation of sworn upright Judges, and not violated by power; and where Parliaments superintend all, and in all extraordinary cases, especially betwixt the King and Kingdom, do the faithfull Offices of Umpirage, all things remain in such a harmony, as I shall recommend to all good Princes.
The Parliament conceives that the King cannot apprehend any just fear from Sir John Hotham, or interpret the meer shutting of Hull gates, and the sending away of Arms and Ammunition in obedience to both Houses, to be any preparation for Warre and Invasion against him at York, and therefore they resolve to raise Forces against those Forces which the King raises to secure himself from Sir John Hotham. The King hereupon charges the Parliament of levying Warre against Him, under pretence of His levying Warre against them. This is matter of fact and the World must judge whether the Kings preparations in the North be onely sutable to the danger of Sir John Hotham or no; and whether the Parliament be in danger of the Kings strength there or no: Or whether is more probable at this time, that the King is incensed against the Paliament, or the Parliament against the King: or that the King is more intentive to assayl the Parliament, or the Parliament the King. ’Tis true, the King abjures any intention of making Warre against his Parliament; but what he intends against the malignant party in or out of Parliament, is not exprest: and the King abjures invasive Warre against them; but whether he think not himself first invaded already, is not exprest; and the specifying of a faction in Parliament of some few malignants, secures none; for none can plead force, and none ought to plead folly in Treasons of this nature, and the major part of the Houses can neither plead absence or dissent; and those which can, must not be their own purgators. Besides, the act of Sir John Hotham is disputable; the King adjudges it Treason, the Parliament adjudge it no Treason; and the King has not declared whether he will refer this to the tryall of the sword only, or to some other tryalls and if so, To what kinde of tryall the judgement of a Parliament shall be submitted: If we call another Parliament to judge of this, so we may appeal in infinitum; and why another should be cleerer then this, we cannot imagine: If we could constitute a higher Court for this appeal, so we might do in infinitum also; but we know no higher can be imagined; and if we appeal to a lower, that were to invert the course of nature: and to confound all Parliaments for ever; if we call all the Kingdom to judge of this, we do the same thing as to proclaim Civill Warre, and to blow the Trumpet of generall confusion: And if we allow the King to be the sole, supream competent Judge in this case, we resigne all into his hands, we give lifes, liberties, Laws, Parliaments, all to be held at meer discretion? For there is in the interpretation of Law upon the last appeal, the same supremacy of power requisite, as is in making it; And therefore grant the King supream interpreter, and tis all one, as if we granted him to be supream maker of Law; and grant him this, and we grant him to be above all limits, all conditions, all humane bonds whatsoever. In this Intricacy therefore, where the King and Parliament disagree, and judgement must be supream, either in the one or other, we must retire to ordinary justice, And there we see, if the King consent not with the ordinary Judge, the Law thinks it fit, that the King subscribe, rather then the Judge.
And if this satisfie not, We must retire to the principles of Nature, and there search, whether the King or Kingdom be to be lookt upon as the efficient, and finall cause, and as the proper Subject of all power. Neither is the oath of supremacy indangered hereby; for he that ascribes more to the whole universality, then to King; yet ascribes to the King a true supremacy of power, and honour above all particulars: Nor is our allegiance temerated, For when the Judge on the Bench delivers Law contrary to the Kings command; This is not the same thing, as to proceed against the Kings person, upon any judgement given against him. The King as to His own person, is not to be forcibly repelled in any ill doing, nor is He accountable for ill done, law has only a directive, but no coactive force upon his person; but in all irregular acts where no personall force is, Kings may be disobeyed, their unjust commands may be neglected, not only by communities, but also by single men sometimes. Those men therefore that maintain, That all Kings are in all things and commands (as well where personall resistance accompanies, as not) to be obeyed, as being like Gods, unlimitable, and as well in evill, as in good unquestionable, are sordid flatterers. And those which allow no limits but directive only, And those no other but divine and naturall; And so make all Princes as vast in power as the Turk, (for He is subject to the directive force of God, and natures Laws;) and so allow subjects a dry right without all remedy, are almost as stupid as the former. And those lastly, That allow humane Laws to obleage Kings more then directively, in all cases where personall violence is absence, and yet allow no Judges of those Laws, but the King Himself, run into absurdities as grosse as the former.
I come now to those seven doctrines, and positions, which the King by way of recapitulation layes open as so offensive—And they run thus:
1. THat the Parliament has an absolute indisputable power of declaring Law, So that all the right of the King and people, depends upon their pleasure. It has been answered, That this power must rest in them, or in the King, or in some inferiour Court, or else all suites must be endlesse, and it can no where rest more safely then in Parliament.
2. That Parliaments are bound to no precedents. Statutes are not binding to them, Why then should precedents? Yet there is no obligation stronger then the Justice and Honor of a Parliament.
3. That they are Parliaments, and may judge of publike necessity without the King, and dispose of anything. They may not desert the King, but being deserted by the King, when the Kingdom is in distresse, They may judge of that distresse, and relieve it, and are to be accounted by the vertue of representation, as the whole body of the State.
4. That no Member of Parliament ought to be troubled for treason, &c. without leave. This is intended of suspicions only, And when leave may be seasonably had, and when competent accusers appear not in the impeachment.
5. That the Soveraign power resides in both Houses of Parliament, the King having no negative voyce. This power is not claimed as ordinary; nor to any purpose, But to save the Kingdom from ruine, and in case where the King is so seduced, as that He preferres dangerous men, and prosecutes His loyall Subjects.
6. That levying forces against the personall commands of the King, (though accompanied with his presence) is not levying warre against the King: But warre against His authority, though not person, is warre against the King? If this were not so, The Parliament seeing a seduced King, ruining Himself, and the Kingdom could not save both, but must stand and look on.
7. That according to some Parliaments, they may depose the King? Tis denyed, That any King was deposed by a free Parliament fairly elected.
To stand in comparison with these, I shall recite some such positions as the Kings papers offer to us; And they follow thus.
1. THat regall power is so derived from God and the Law, as that it has no dependence upon the trust, and consent of man; and the King is accountable therefore to God and His other Kingdoms, not to this; And it is above the determination of Parliaments, and by consequence boundlesse.
2. That the King is supream indefinitely, viz. As well universis, as singulis.
3. That the King has such a propriety in His Subjects, Towns, Forts, &c. As is above the propriety of the State, and not to be seized by the Parliament, though for the publike safety.
4. That so farre as the King is trusted, He is not accountable how He performs, So that in all cases the Subject is remedilesse.
5. That the being of Parliaments is meerly of grace, So that the King might justly have discontinued them, and being summoned, they are limited by the writ, and that ad consilium Only, and that but in quibusdam arduis, And if they passe the limits of the Writ, they may be imprisoned. That if the King desert them, they are a voyde assembly, and no honour due to them, nor power to save the Kingdom, That Parliamentary priviledges are no where to be read of, And so their representation of this whole Kingdom is no priviledge, nor addes no Majesty, nor authority to them. That the major part in Parliament is not considerable, when so many are absent, or dissent. That the major part is no major part, Because the fraud, and force of some few over-rules them. That Parliaments may do dishonourable things, nay treasonable: Nay, That this hath been so blinded by some few malignants, That they have abetted treason in Sir John Hotham, Trampled upon all Law, and the Kings prerogative, And sought to inslave the whole Kingdom under the Tyranny of some few, And sought the betraying of Church, and State, And to effect the Same erected an upstart Authority in the new Militia, and levyed warre upon the King, under pretence that He levies warre upon them. That Parliaments cannot declare Law, but in such and such particular cases legally brought before them. That Parliaments are questionable, and tryable elsewhere.
These things, we all see, tend not only to the desolation of this Parliament, but to the confusion of all other, And to the advancing of the King to a higher power over Parliaments, then ever He had before over inferiour Courts. Parliaments have hitherto been Sanctuaries to the people, and banks against Arbitrary tyranny; But now the meer breath of the King, blasts them in an instant; and how shall they hereafter secure us, when they cannot now secure themselves? Or how can we expect justice, when the meer imputation of treason, without hearing, tryall, or judgement, shall sweep away a whole Parliament; nay all Parliaments for ever? And yet this is not yet the depth of our misery, For that private Councell which the King now adheres to, and preferres before Parliaments, will still inforce upon our understandings, That all these doctrines, and positions tend to the perfection of Parliaments; And all the Kings forces in the North, to the protection of Law and liberty. I finde my Reason already captivated, I cannot further—
T.285 [1642.08??] Henry Ferne, The Resolving of Conscience upon this Question (Autumn 1642)↩
Editing History
- No Illegibles - rechecked Malcolm: HTML (13.11.2017)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date

Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.285 [1642.08??] Henry Ferne, The Resolving of Conscience upon this Question (Autumn 1642).
Full titleHenry Ferne, 1602-1662
the
RESOLVING
of
CONSCIENCE,
Upon this Question.
Whether upon such a Supposition or Case, as is now usually made (The King will not discharge his trust but is bent or seduced to subvert Religion, Laws, and Liberties) Subjects may take Arms and resist? and whether that case be now?
RESOLVED,
I. That no Conscience upon such a Supposition or Case can finde a safe and cleare ground for such resistance.
II. That no man in Conscience can be truly perswaded, that the resistance now made is such, as they themselves pretend to, that plead for it in such a case.
III. That no man in Conscience can be truly perswaded that such a case is now, that is, that the King will not discharge his trust but is bent to subvert, &c.
Whence it followeth,
That the resistance now made against the higher Power is unwarrantable, and according to the Apostle Damnable, Rom. 13.
Also that the shedding of bloud in the pursuit of this resistance is Murder.
By H. Fern D.D. &c
Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evill, that put darknesse for light, and light for darknesse, Isa. 5. 20.
O my soule come not thou into their secret. Gen. 49. 6.
Printed at Cambridge, and re-printed at
LONDON, 1642.
Autumn 1642
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationNot in TT Catalogue. PDF has 4 page section not in Malcolm: "To all Miss-led People in this Land."
Malcolm/Editor’s Introduction
Henry Ferne, an Anglican divine, was born in York and educated at Cambridge University. He first came to Charles’s attention when he preached before the king at Leicester in July 1642. Charles was so pleased with Ferne he made him his chaplain extraordinary, no ordinary chaplaincy then being vacant. That autumn Ferne’s first pamphlet, “The Resolving of Conscience upon This Question,” one of the first tracts openly on the king’s side, was published. In it Ferne wrestled with the no longer theoretical dilemma of whether there was a right for a subject to resist a king and “whether that case be now?” The tract was published at Cambridge, York, and London in four further printings. It so incensed members of the Commons that Ferne was cited that Christmas Eve to answer for it. Instead he abandoned his living in Medbourne and took refuge with the royal party at Oxford where a “second edition” of the offending tract was published in 1643.
“The Resolving of Conscience” provoked a number of impressive replies. One by Charles Herle is reprinted below. Ferne attempted to address these, and in particular Herle’s, on 18 April 1643, with a rebuttal, “Conscience Satisfied,” far longer than his original essay. Other works followed earning for their author a reputation as the leading royalist writer of the period. In 1644 Ferne was one of five clergymen sent to defend Anglican church government in a debate with parliamentary clergy. After the surrender of the king in 1646 Ferne retired to Yorkshire. There he remained until summoned to the Isle of Wight in 1648 by Charles, where, on 28 November, he preached the last sermon the king would hear before his trial.
Ferne lived quietly in Yorkshire writing religious treatises until the Restoration when he was rewarded with the mastership of Trinity College, Cambridge. During the eighteen months he held this post he twice served as vice-chancellor of the university. He was created bishop of Chester in 1662 but died five weeks later.
Text of Pamphlet
The Resolving of Conscience, Touching the Unlawfulnesse of the Warre 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 deare 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 implicite faith to beleeve, that whatsoever is said or done in the name of a Parliament, and in the pretended defence of Religion, Liberties, Lawes, to be infallibly true, and altogether just.
But he that will consider, men are men, and would seeke a surer rule for his conscience than the Traditions or Ordinances of men taken hand over head, shall upon reasonable examination find upon what plausible but groundlesse principles, upon what faire but deceiving pretences, upon what grievous but causelesse imputations laid upon Majestie itself, a 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 plainly 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 applies 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; therefore now they doe 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 clearely appeare, we will premise,
First, that in the Proposition or Principle by the word Resistance is meant, not a denying of obedience to the Prince’s 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 Kingdom & upon all those that appear for the King in this cause, that they endeavoured 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 & 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 implied, and as we see at this day to our astonishment, first the power of arms taken from the Prince by setting up the Militia,1 then that power used against him by an army in the field.
Secondly, we must consider that they which plead 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 of the representative body of the whole Kingdom. Also they yeeld it must be only Legitima defensio, 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 pretended to. And although the question is, and must be so put now, as that it seems to streighten the Case, and make it depend upon the supposall of the people; yet it so much the more enlarges the falshood of the Principle, for it plainly speaks thus; If subjects beleeve 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 enjoined 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 sin: and, In doubtfull things the safer way is to be chosen. Conscience it will find cause to forbeare and to suffer, rather than 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 worke.
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 owne grants that plead for it and therefore Conscience cannot admit such a resistance as is made now adayes.
III. If Conscience could be perswaded, that it is lawfull in such a case to resist, and that this rising in arms is such a resistance as they say may in such a case be pretended to, yet can it never (if it be willing to know anything) be truly perswaded that such a case is now come, that is, That the King refuses to discharge his trust, is bent to overthrow Religion, &c. and therefore Conscience cannot but resolve, this Opposition and Resistance to be unlawfull, unwarrantable, and (according to the Apostle) damnable; and that people running into arms without sufficient warrant, commit murder if they shed bloud in the pursuit of this Resistance, and perish in their own sinne, if die in the cause.
Sect. II.
First then, that the Principle is untrue upon which they go that resist, and that Conscience cannot find clear ground to rest upon for making resistance: for it heares the Apostle expressely say, Whosoever resists shall receive to themselves damnation: and it cannot find any limitation in Scripture that will excuse the Resistance of these dayes.
The exception or limitation that is made, is taken from the Persons resisting, and the Causes of resistance, thus, They that are private persons and doe resist upon any cause receive damnation, but the States or representative body of the whole people may resist upon such or such causes. But how will this satisfie Conscience, when every distinction or limitation made upon any place of Scripture, must have its ground in Scripture; this has only some examples in Scripture that come not home to the cause and some appearances of Reason; which are easily refuted by clearer Scripture and Reason.
The examples alleged, are, I. The people’s rescuing of Jonathan out of the hands of Saul. Answ. Here the people drew not into arms of themselves, but being there at Saul’s command, did by a loving violence and importunitie hinder the execution of a particular and passionate unlawfull command.
II. David’s resisting of Saul. Answ. 1. David’s guard that hee had about him was only to secure his person against the cut-throats of Saul, if sent to take away his life. 2. It was a meer defence without all violence offered to Saul; therefore he still gave place as Saul pursued, and did no act of hostility to him or any of his Army when they were in his power, I Sam. 26. But thirdly, because they gather out of the I Sam. 23.12 that David would have defended Keilah against Saul, if the Inhabitants would have been faithfull to him. Wee say that’s only an uncertaine supposition not fit to ground Conscience in this great point of resistance; also to this and all other David’s demeanours, in his standing out against Saul, we say his example was extraordinary; for he was anointed and designed by the Lord to succeed Saul, and therefore he might use an extraordinary way of safeguarding his person.
These are the chiefe examples. They make use also of the high Priests resisting the King in the temple, and Elisha’s shutting the doore against the King’s Messenger that came to take away his head; and the like; which speake not so much as the two former, having no appearance of such resistance as is implied in the question. But wee answer, 1. That of the high Priest is more pertinently applied to the Pope’s power of excommunicating and deposing Kings, than to this power of resisting now used; but truly to neither. For he did no more than what every Minister may and ought to doe if a King should attempt the administration of the Sacrament; that is, to reprove him, to keep the Elements from him. Ambrose Bishop of Milain withstood the Emperour at the entrance of God’s house, not by Excommunication, much lesse by force of arms, but by letting him understand hee was not fit for that place, there to be made partaker of the holy things, till he had repented of that outrage and bloodshed at Thessalonica. Upon which the Emperour withdrew.
The Priests here are said to thrust him out of the Temple; but we must note God’s hand was first upon him smiting him with leprosie, and by that discharging him of the Kingdome also. It is added in the text, yea himself also hasted to goe out. But enough of this.
2. Elisha’s example speaks very little. But let us thence take occasion to say, That Personall defence is lawfull against the sudden and illegall assaults of such Messengers; yea, of the Prince himself thus far, to ward his blowes, to hold his hands, and the like: not to endanger his person, not to return blows, no; for though it be naturall to defend a man’s self, yet the whole Common-wealth is concerned in his person, as we see in the Common-wealth of the creatures, one particular nature will defend itself against another, but yeeld to the universall.
If this be drawn from personal defence to the publick resistance now used, as usually they make the Argument thus; If the body naturall, then the body politick may defend itself, if a private person much more the whole State may; and they doe but shut the way up against the King that comes to destroy his Parliament, and take away their heads.
We answer: As the naturall body defends itself against an outward force, but strives not by a schisme or contention within itself; so may the body politick against an outward power, but not as now by one part of it set against the Head and another part of the same body; for that tends to the dissolution of the whole. Again; Personall defence may be without all offence, and does not strike at the order and power that is over us, as generall resistance by Armes doth, which cannot be without many unjust violences, and does immediately strike at that order which is the life of a Commonwealth. And this makes a large difference betwixt Elisha’s shutting the doore against this messenger, and their shutting up the way against the King by armed men; nor can they conclude upon such an intention in the King’s heart without the Spirit of Elisha. He professeth hee intends no violence to his Parliament, nor has he taken away the head of any of theirs that have fallen into his power, nor does desire any other punishment inflicted upon any that do oppose him, than what a Legall tryall shall adjudge them to, which no good Subject ought to decline.
Now let us see how Scripture excludes this and all other exceptions, giving no allowance to resistance, in regard of Persons or Causes, or other pretences, and this not only by examples, but by precept, conclusions, Resolutions, which are more safe.
First, we have the two hundred and fifty Princes of the Congregation, gathering the people against Moses and Aaron, Numb. 16.3 and perishing in this sin. If it be replied, the persons indeed were publick, but there was no cause for it; Moses and Aaron did not deserve it. I answer, but the other supposed they did, and that is now enough, it seems, to make people not only say to their Prince, You take too much upon you, but therefore to rise in armes also, which I hope will appeare to be without cause too in the end of this Treatise.
Secondly, see for the cause of Resistance, I. Sam. 8.1. there the people are let to understand how they should be oppressed under Kings, yet all that violence and injustice that should be done unto them is no just cause of resistance, for they have no remedy left them but crying to the Lord, vers. 18.
Thirdly, we have not only example, but resolution and conclusion out of Scripture. The people might not be gathered together either for Civill assemblies, or for warre, but by his command that had the power of the Trumpet, that is, the supreme as Moses was, Numb. 10.
Also when David had Saul and his army in his power, he resolves the matter thus, Who can stretch out his hand against the Lord’s annointed and be guiltlesse, I Sam. 26.9. If replied, now they intend not hurt to the King’s person; yet might not they as well have hurt his person in the day of battell, as any of them that were swept away from about him by the furie of the Ordnance, which puts no difference betwixt King and common souldiers?
This also I must observe concerning this point of resistance, out of the Old Testament (for from thence have they all their seeming instances). That it is a marvellous thing, that among so many Prophets reprehending the Kings of Israel and Judah for idolatry, cruelty, oppression, none should call upon the Elders of the people for this duty of Resistance.
But lastly, that place of the Apostle, Rom. 13 at first mentioned does above all give us a clear resolution upon the point, which now I shall free from all exceptions.
First, I may suppose, that the King is the Supreme, as S. Peter calls him; or the higher power, as S. Paul here, though it be by some now put to the question, as one absurdity commonly begets another to defend it; but I prove it, S. Peter’s distinction comprehends all that are in authority, The King as supreme, and those that are sent by him, 1 Pet. 2.12 in which latter rank are the two Houses of Parliament, being sent by him, or sent for by him, and by his Writ sitting there. Also by the Oath of Supremacy it is acknowledged, that there is no power above him without or within this Realm; and that he is in all Causes and over all persons supreme. Also acknowledged by the Petitions of the two houses addressed unto his Majesty, wherein they style themselves His loyall Subjects. But enough of this.
Secondly, in the text of the Apostle, all persons under the higher power are expressely forbidden to resist. For whosoever, in the second verse, must be as large as the every soul in the first, and the resistance forbidden here concerns all upon whom the subject is injoined there, or else we could not make these universalls good against the Papists, exempting the Pope and Clergy from the subjection.
Thirdly, in those dayes there was a standing and continuall great Senate, which not long before had the supreme power in the Romane State, and might challenge more by the Fundamentalls of that State, than our great Councell (I think) will, or can. But now the Emperour being Supreme, S. Peter calls him; or the higher power, as S. Paul here, there is no power of resistance left to any that are under him, by the Apostle. This for the Persons that should resist, all are forbidden. Now considering the Cause.
Fourthly, was there ever more cause of resistance than in those dayes? Were not the Kings then not only conceived to be enclined so and so, but even actually were enemies to Religion, had overthrown Lawes and Liberties? And therefore if any should from the Apostle’s reasons that he gives against resistance in the 3, 4, 5, verses, (For Rulers are not a terrour to good works but evill, and he is the minister of God to thee for good) reply, That Rulers so long as they are not a terrour to the good, but minister for our good, are not to be resisted. The consideration of those times leaves no place for such exception, because the Powers then (which the Apostle forbids to resist) were nothing so, but subverters of that which was good and just.
If it be replied, That prohibition was temporary and fit for those times, as it is said by some, I answer, 1. This is a new exception never heard of (I think) but in these times. 2. It is groundlesse, and against the Text, for the reasons of the prohibition in the 3, 4, 5, 6, verses, are perpetuall, from that order, that good, for which the powers are ordained of God, which will be of force as long as there is government, and will alwayes be reasons against resistance; because resistance (though it be made against abused powers as then they were) doth tend to the dissolution of that order, for which the power itself is set up of God. By which also that other distinction of theirs is made void, when as they reply, as they think, acutely, That they resist not the power, but the abuse of the power.
It is also answered by some, that the Emperors then were absolute Monarchs, and therefore not to be resisted. I answer: They did indeed rule absolutely and arbitrarily, which should have, according to the principles of these dayes, been a stronger motive to resist. But how did they make themselves of Subjects such absolute Monarchs, was it not by force and change of the government, and was not the right of the people & Senate (according to the Principles of these days) good against them with as much or more reason, than the right of the people of this Land is against the succession of this Crown descending by three Conquests?2 And this I speak not to win an Arbitrary power or such as Conquerours use, unto this Crown, but only to shew that Resistance can be no more made against the Kings of England, than it could against those Emperours. Nay, with lesse reason against them, than these.
Lastly, it is replied, That Christian Religion was then enacted against by Law; but the Religion contended for is established by Law. I answer: But is the Religion established denied to any that now fight for it? Shall the Apostle’s prohibition be good against Christians in the behalfe of actuall Tyrants persecuting that Religion, and not against Subjects freely enjoying the Religion established? Or may Protestants upon a jealousie resist a Protestant King professing the same Religion, and promising to conserve it entire to them?
2. The prohibition does not only concern Christians, but all the people under those Emperours, and not only Religion was persecuted, but liberties also lost, the people and Senate were enslaved by Edicts and Lawes then inforced upon them, & they (according to the principles of these dayes) might resist, notwithstanding the Apostles’ prohibition, & the Laws then forced upon them; or else the State, as they usually say, had not means to provide for its safety. Thus one fancy of theirs thwarts another, because both are groundless. But more anon of those means of safty they suppose to be in every State, by the power of Resistance.
Hitherto of Scripture, which is most powerful against Resistance, in the prohibition & the reasons of it, by which Conscience will clearly see, it can have no warrant from Scripture for Resistance. Now let us try what Reason can enforce.
Sect. III.
For proving this Power of resistance, there is much speech used about the Fundamentals of this government, which because they lie low and unseen by vulgar eyes, being not written Lawes, the people are easily made to believe they are such as they (that have power to build new Laws upon them) say they are. And indeed none so fit to judge of them as they. Yet this we know, and every one that can use his reason knows, that the Fundamentalls must needs be such as will bear the settled government of this Land, such as are not contradictory to the written established Laws: but both the government we see used in this Land, and the written Laws which we reade, must have a correspondency and analogie of reason to these, Fundamentalls, and they to these.
Well then, they that plead for power of resistance in the people, lay the first ground work of their Fundamentals thus: Power is originally in and from the people and if when by election they have intrusted a Prince with the power, he will not discharge his trust, then it falls to the people; or, as in this Kingdom, to the two houses of Parliament (the representative body of the people) to see to it; they may reassume the power.
This is the bottom of their Fundamentals as they are now discovered to the people. But here we may take notice by the way, that however the Fundamentals of this Government are much talked of, this is according to them the Fundamentall in all Kingdomes and Governments; for they say power was everywhere from the people at first, and so this will serve no more for the power of resistance in England, than in France or Turkey. But if this must be a Fundamentall, it is such a one as upon it this Government cannot be built, but Confusion and Anarchy may readily be raised; as shall appear by the clearing of these two particulars, Whether the power be so originally and chiefly from the people as they would have it; then, Whether they may upon such causes reassume that power.
First, of the originall of power, which they will have so from the people, that it shall be from God only by a kind of permissive approbation, as we may see by the Observator, and all other that plead for this power of resistance. Wee must here distinguish what the writers of the other side seeme to confound, to wit, the Power itselfe, (which is a sufficiency of authority for command and coercion in the governing of a people) from the designing of the Person to beare that power, and the qualification of that power according to the divers wayes of executing it in severall forms of government; and then we grant that the designing of the person is sometimes from the people by choice, and that the power of the Prince receiving qualification by joint consent of himselfe and the people, is limited by the laws made with such consent; but the power itself is of God originally and chiefly, which we prove by Scripture and Reason.
First, by such places of Scripture as plainly shew an ordaining and appointing, rather than a permission or approbation:
1. The Apostle speaks it expresly, The powers are of God, Rom. 13.1 and the ordinance of God, v. 2. S. Peter indeed saith, every ordinance of man, I Epist. 2. but of man there, and of God here is much differing; there it is ἀνθρωπίνῃ, of man, subjective, that is, every ordinance or power set up amongst men; but here it is ἀπὸ θεοῦ, of God, causaliter,3 that is, from him, his ordinance; and if in that ἀνθρωπίνῃ there be implied any creation or causality, or invention of man, it respects the qualification of the power according to the forms of severall governments and offices in them, which are from the invention of man; it does not make the power itselfe the creation of man, which is the constitution and ordinance of God. And men are not only naturally bent to society, but also are bound, as they are reasonable creatures, to set up and live under government, as under an order of that providence by which the world is governed.
2. He is called the minister of God, v. 4. but if so from the people and no otherwise from god than they would have him, he should be minister populi rather; he is indeed their minister for their good, which makes the people to be the end of this governing power, not the fountain and originall of it. Therefore the necessity of subjection urged in v. 5. has a double ground the ordinance of God, whose ministers Rulers are, there’s the fountain and originall of power to govern; then the people’s good, upon which Rulers ought to attend, that is an end of the governing power.
3. To the same purpose speake those other places, by me Kings reign: and, I have said, ye are Gods, Psa. 82. in relation to which our Saviour saith, Joh. 10. they are called Gods to whom the word of God came, that dixi, that word is the command, the issuing out as it were the commission for the setting up of a governing power among the people.
These places cannot be satisfied with that poor part, they on the other side leave to God in the setting up of power for the governing of men, that is, to approve it when the people have created or invented it. Indeed if we consider the qualification of this governing power, and the manner of executing it according to the severall formes of government, we granted it before to be the invention of man, and when such a qualification or forme is orderly agreed upon, we say it hath God’s permissive approbation.
And therefore the imputation is causeless which the Pleaders on the other side doe heedlessely and ignorantly lay upon us Divines, as if wee cried up Monarchy, and that only government to be jure divino. For although Monarchy has this excellency, that the Government God set up over his people in the person of Moses, the Judges, and the Kings, was Monarchicall; yet we confesse that neither that, nor Aristocracy, or any other forme is jure divino, but we say the power itself, or that sufficiency of Authority to govern, which is in Monarchy or Aristocracie, abstractly considered from the qualifications of either form, is an efflux or constitution subordinate to that providence, an ordinance of that Dixi, that silent Word by which the world was at first made, and is still governed under God.
Secondly, as this appeares by the former places of Scripture, so is it 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 has 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 be ὑπὸ θεοῦ τεταγμέναι, Rom. 13.1. not only ἀπὸ θεοῦ 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 himself, 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 itselfe of government is of God, however the person be designed, or that power qualified according to the severall formes or government by those Lawes that are established, or those grants that are procured for the people’s security. Thus much of the originall of Power.
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 to 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 itself. 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 plaine 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 there 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 Lord’s hand also and his oile is upon the person elected to the Crown, & then he is the Lord’s anointed, & the minister of God, whose 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 dare 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 kingdom, when as the Crown not only descends by inheritance, but also has so often been setled by Conquest in the lines of Saxons, Danes, and Normans? In answering to this they look 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, & supposed good against all other titles, or else this power of resistance falls to the ground. It is probable indeed that Kings at first were by choice here as elswhere; but can Conscience rest upon such remote probabilities for resistance, or think that first election will give it power against Princes that do not claim by it. We tell them the Roman 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 than by force and arms? The way that the Saxons, Danes, and Normans made themselves masters of this people, & was not the right of the people as good against them for the power of resistance by virtue 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, than it could against the Roman Monarchs, especially according to their argument, that hold all power originally from the people, & 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 equity. What Grants also, Lawes, Priviledges have since those conquests beene procured or restored to the people, unto all those the King is bound. But yet not bound under forfeiture of this power to the people, which now comes to be examined in that capitulation or convenant 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 Prince’s part were a forfeiture of his power. But we answer, the words capitulation or covenant are now much used to make men believe the King’s admittance to the Crown is altogether conditionall, as in the meerly elective kingdoms of Polonia, Swedeland, &c. whereas our King is King before he comes to the Coronation, which is sooner or later at his pleasure, but always 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 armes to resist, and provide for the safety thereof, it were something.
If it be said, that so much is implied 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, & still downwards the people have gained upon them. For at first when people chose their Rulers, they did as Justine in the beginning of his history observes, resign themselves to be governed by such, of whose prudence and moderation they had experience, and then, arbitria Principum pro legibus erant, the will and discretion of the Prince was law unto the people; but men were men though in God’s place, and therefore for the restraint of that power, with consent of the Prince, such Lawes have beene still procured by the people, as might make for their security.
Now from a promise the king makes for doing justice (the duty of every Prince) for the continuing those priviledges, immunities, that have been granted or restored to the people, and for the observing of those laws that have been established with the Prince’s consent, & from that oath (by which for the greater security of the people he binds himself to the performance of the premises) to infer a great obligation lieth upon him, is right, but to gather thence a forfeiture of his power upon the not performance, is a plain but dangerous inconsequent argument.
And though such argument may seem to have some force in States meerly elective and pactionall, yet can it never be made to appear to any indifferent understanding, that the like must obtain in this kingdom. And to this purpose Phil. Pareus excuseth what his father had written more harshly upon Rom. 13. in the point of resistance, that it was to be understood of elective and pactionall government, not to the prejudice of England, or such Monarchies. For where the King, as it is said, never dies, where he is King before oath or coronation, where he is not admitted upon any such capitulation as gives any power to the people, or their representative body, as is pretended to; Nay, where that body cannot meet but by the will of the Prince, and is dissoluble at his pleasure; that there in such a State, such a power should bee pretended to, and used against the Prince, as at this day; and that according to the Fundamentalls of such a State, can never appeare reasonable to any indifferent judgement, much lesse satisfie Conscience in the resistance that is now made by such a pretended power.
What then shall we say? Is the King not bound to perform? Yes, by all means. Or has he not a limited power according to the Laws? Yes, What then if he will take to himself more power, or not perform what he is bound to? Suppose that (though thanks be to God we are not come to that) then may the Subjects use all fair means as are fit to use, cryes to God, Petitions to the Prince, denialls of obedience to his unlawfull commands, denialls of subsidy, aid, &c. But are they left without all means to compell by force and resistance? This however it may at first sight seem unreasonable to the people, and very impolitick to the Statesman, yet has Scripture forbidden it, as before was plainly shewed, and so doth Reason too, as will appear in the examination of their last proof they make for reassuming this power and resisting, from that necessity of means of safety, which every State is to have within itself: Of which now.
Sect. V.
In the last place it is thus reasoned, Were it not so that the two Houses might take and use this power, the State should not have means to provide for its own safety, when the King shall please to desert his Parliament, deny his consent to their bills, abuse His power, &c. So they.
When right and just will not defend a thing then Necessity is usually pleaded; as if, because Salus populi in a good sense is Suprema lex, everything must be honest which is Sparta Utile, imagined to conduce to the proposed end. We answer therefore.
1. They have many weapons sharpened for this resistance at the Philistines’ forge, arguments borrowed from the Roman Schools, among them this is one, the very reason that is made for the Pope’s power of curbing or deposing Kings in case of Heresie. For if there be not that power in the Church, say they, then in case the Civill Magistrate will not discharge his trust, the Church has not means for the maintenance of the Catholike faith and its own safety. Well, as we reply to them, the Church has means of preserving the faith, such as God has appointed, though not that of one visible head, which though at first seems plausible for preserving the Unity of faith, yet has experience shown it, to be indeed the means to bring much mischief upon the Church. So to the other we say, The State has means of preservation such as the Law has prescribed, though not such as are here pretended to in this power of resistance; which though seemingly plausible, yet true reason will conclude them dangerous, and at this day, God knows, we see it. Of this in the 4. answer more particularly.
2. If every State has such means to provide for its safety, what means of safety had the Christian Religion under the Roman Emperours in and after the Apostles’ times? Or the people then enslaved, what means had they for their Liberties? Had they this of resistance? Tertullian in his Apology sayes, the Christians had number and force sufficient to withstand, but they had no warrant; and the Apostle expressely forbids them, and all other under the higher power, to resist.
If it be replied, as it was above touched, That things being so enacted by Law, it was not lawfull for them to resist. I answer, But it is known that not only those Edicts which concerned Christian Religion, but also all other that proceeded from those Emperours and enslaved the people, were meerly arbitrary and enforced upon the Senate, and that the Senate did not discharge their trust in consenting to them, and therefore according to the former position the people might resist, notwithstanding the Apostle’s prohibition, or else no means of safety left in that State.
So would it be in this State, if at any time a King that would rule arbitrarily, as those Emperours did, should by some means or other work out of two Houses the better affected, and by the Consent of the Major part of them that remain, compasse his desires; might the people then resist? The Apostle forbids it to them as well as to the Romans in such a case: if so, where are these means of safety by this Power of resistance? Or are these means of safety extinct in the Consent of the Senate, or the two Houses? No, the people will tell them they discharge not their trust, they chose them not to betray them, enslave them; but according to the principles now taught them, they might lay hold upon this power of resistance, for their representative body claims it by them.
Thirdly we answer, We cannot expect absolute means of safety and security in a State, but such as are reasonable; and such are provided, especially in the fundamentalls of this Government, by that excellent temper of the three Estates in Parliament, there being a power of denying in each of them, and no power of enacting in one or two of them without the third; which as it is for the security 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 evils 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 only, and not be trusted? Must not he also have his security 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 State’s safety. But now not only the name of Parliament, which implies 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 replied, as it is, for the reasonablenesse of these means of safety, through that Power of resistance, and the finall trust reposed in the representative body of the people, That many see more than one, and more safety in the judgement of many than of one. Answ. True. But 1. Conscience might here demand for its satisfaction, Why should an hundred in the House of Commons see more than three hundred; or twenty in the Lords House, more than sixty that are of different 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 not 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 yield, and experience has taught it, That Monarchy is a better government than Aristocracy, because the Tyranny and Miscarriage of one, sometime happening in a Monarch, is nothing so dangerous as Oligarchy, Faction, and Division usually incident to Aristocracy or the Government by many equals. 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 willfull 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 appear upon his not having it, as has been insinuated, and now do follow.
Fourthly therefore and lastly we answer. Such power of resistance would be no fit means of safety to a State, but prove a remedy worse than the disease. This is very plain by the drift of the Apostle’s reasons which he gave against resistance, in the 3, 4, 5, 6, Vers. of the 13. to the Romans, 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 only 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 administered for the executing of wrath upon them that do evill.
I enter this discourse, not to cast the least blemish upon Parliaments (which are an only remedy for distempers of the Kingdom) 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 Apostle’s reasons what dangers and evils may ensue upon this power of resistance.
For first of all, This power of resistance, 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, thoroughly I examine not, but this I am sure they can say, That their Prince, succeeding in the right of the Duke of Burgundy was admitted upon other conditions than 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 Prince’s promise and Protestation for it.
Secondly, This power of resistance when used, and pursued, is accompanied with the evils of Civill 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 Peers, 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 resistance, the Law silenced, the Property and Liberty 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 resistance, The King will not discharge His trust, and therefore it falls 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,4 boast themselves Reformers of the Commonwealth, overthrow King 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 fancy, but such as reason tells us may follow, and experience hath often, and this day doth shew us, do arise upon this Power of resistance, 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, ’tis 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 10,000 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 resistance on the Subject’s part, and this is according to the drift of the Apostle’s reasons against resistance, 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 Allegeance, also the late Protestation,5 and consider what duty lies upon every Subject by the former to defend the King’s 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 preserved to him intire, unlesse he hath the power of Deniall, and the chiefe 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 re-assume 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 judgment and scourge of God upon the people, and will use not Arms to resist the Ordinance under pretence of resisting the abuse, but cries and prayers to God, petitions to the Prince, denials of obedience to his unjust commands, denialls of Subsidies, aids, and all fair means that are fit for Subjects to use, and when done all, if not succeed, will rather suffer than 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 resistance, 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 people’s 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, only 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 policy, 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 resistance laid down by Scripture and Reason, even the Apostle’s reasons so powerfull against resistance.
The summe of all is this, Conscience hears the Apostle expressely forbid all under the higher power to resist, findes no other clear Scripture to limit it, findes 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 itselfe) were as strong in the Romane State as any, nay, are supposed by those that urge them, to be the fundamentalls of every State: and so resistance is forbidden as well here, as there in the Romane State, which is also cleared by the Apostle’s reasons, shewing the power of resistance cannot be the means of safety, but strikes at Order and power itselfe, though made against tyrannicall and abused powers, as before often insinuated. Therefore Conscience will not dare to go against the Apostle’s 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 Parliament, as the Papists are with the name of the Church, and thinking Religion may be defended any way, and that upon supposall that their Prince is minded to change it, (which is another humor of Popery) will not be perswaded that the resistance made upon the present supposall is unlawfull, against God’s 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 run 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 resistance now made be such as is pretended to by them in such a case as they supposed, and then whether Conscience can be truly 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 judgment of sense, and are cleared by what we hear and see: which judgment 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 principle good on which they rest, yet) this resistance which they make, 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 Resistance 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 resistance should be omnibus ordinibus regni conscientibus, agreed upon and undertaken by the generall and unanimous consent of the whole State, and that it should be only Legitima defensio, a mere resistance, and these laid down, not that I admit resistance however conditioned (for all that I have said before, doth altogether condemne it) but according to their own grants that plead for it. To this purpose it is that they say the King is Universis minor, lesse than the whole State, and every body naturally defends itself. Therefore if a contention be between the Head and the Body, it must in all reason be the whole Body that is set against it, and if there be such an appearing against the supreme Power, as tends to resistance, the consent and judgment of the whole Kingdom just be against him, or else every prevailing faction might indanger the State, by causing such changes and evils as now it’s threatened with. This is the reason of this unreasonable power of resistance in the people.
Well then, how shall Conscience be perswaded that this resistance was agreed upon by an unanimous and free consent of the States assembled in the two Houses, such as in this case may be called the judgment of the whole Kingdom.
He that knows how the Militia (in which this resistance chiefly began) was brought in,6 with what opposition, especially in the Lords House, and by what number there at length was voted; also how the like proceedings of resistance, that have been voted since, are declared against, by a greater number of each House than do remain in either, such as have been cast out, or withdrawn themselves upon dislike of these proceedings: can he, I say, that knows this (and who knows it not, that hath eyes and ears?) be in Conscience perswaded, that this is such an unanimous, free and generall consent, the judgment of the whole kingdom?
For though a Vote passed by a few upon the place has the power and condition of a Vote for the formality of Law, yet, if the question be, Was this passed in full assemblies? Did they all unanimously as one man consent unto it? Conscience cannot be convinced there is such efficacie in the place, as to make a few, the whole, or their agreement to be that judgment of the whole Kingdom, that unanimous consent, which must be in the case of resistance, by their acknowledgment that plead for it. For were it in this case to be held for the judgement of the whole, which is passed by a few, then would the State be unreasonably exposed to that danger (above mentioned) which every prevailing faction might bring upon it under the pretence of the judgment of the whole Kingdome.
Again, as Conscience cannot be truley perswaded that this resistance is agreed upon with such a generall and unanimous consent, as they themselves pretend to, which plead for this resistance, so can it not truly be perswaded that this resistance is such for the mere defensive way of it, as it ought to be according to their grants and pretences that appear for it.
Conscience here will see how to resolve upon the triall of these two particulars, whether the King or they be upon the defensive part? Then, whether the managing of this war, or resistance on their parts, be so void of hostile acts, as the defensive way, which they pretend to, ought to be?
Conscience will discern whether part is upon the defensive, by inquiring, First, Who were first in Arms? He that can number the succession of weeks, and months in his Almanack may decide this. He shall find that armed men were thrust into Hull, the King’s Arms seized against his will, the Militia set up, and by that, the King’s Subjects drawn into Arms, before the King had anything to oppose but Proclamations. That subscriptions for Plate, Money, Horse, That listing of Souldiers for the field, and appointing of Officers of the Armie were begun upon their part, before His MAJESTIE did the like. Now resistance doth in the word itselfe and in their pretence, presuppose a power and force first made against them, whereas it is plain, they were still upon the preventing and forehand with the King, still shewed him example for what he has done since in the way of War: yet must the people believe he raises the War, and they are upon defence; but conscience will not be so forced.
Secondly, by enquiring what is the cause of these Arms? What do they contend for? And though it be clear, That if Subjects be first in Arms, they cannot be upon the defensive, yet the consideration of the cause will more apparently convince it, when Conscience shall see it is not for what is pretended, but for something the King has right to deny, that this resistance is made. The preservation of Religion and Liberties is pretended, but can it be for either? The King denies them not. Their Religion they freely enjoy; and was it ever known that Subjects should rise in Arms against their Prince for a Religion which he promises to maintain? Or does Religion stand in need of a defence, which itself condemns, a defence which would be a perpetuall scandall to it? If therefore Religion be the pretence, but no cause of War than is the War raised on their part, the King is upon the defensive. Or can it be for ancient Rights and undoubted Priviledges that they contend? The King denies them not, promiseth all security, so he may enjoy his own; and God forbid that either he or they should suffer in their just Rights. But would any man ever have defended the revolt of the ten Tribes, if Rehoboam had promised to conserve their Liberties? What shall we then think of this generall revolt from Allegiance that has possessed well-neer ten Tribes of twelve? They suppose he will not make good his promises, and therefore they will make all sure, seize his Arms and Forts, strip him of all, and if he begin to stir for his own Right and Dignity, then the people must be made to believe he makes War against his Parliament, intends to destroy their Liberties. But can any man in Conscience think his Majesty since the beginning of this breach was ever in such a condition of strength as might threaten the Liberty of the Subject, or destroy Parliaments, when as it was long ere he could with much ado attain to any reasonable means of subsistence, or to such a strength whereby he might seem to be able to defend himself.
To speak truth, Religion and Liberties can be no other than the pretences of this Warre, the King has fortified them so with many Acts of Grace passed this Parliament, that they cannot be in that danger which is pretended for the raising of this Warre. It must be something that his Majesty does indeed deny for which the contention is raised. That we shall finde to be his power of Arms and ordering the Militia of the Kingdom, his power of denying in Parliament, his disposing of the Offices of State, and such like; Also the Government of the Church, and the Revenue of it. In the three former he challenges his Right, as his Predecessors had: the other he is bound by Oath to maintain as by Law they are established. Well, if these be attempted, and His MAJESTIE will not be forced from them, cannot yeeld them up, but it comes to Arms, then will Conscience easily be convinced the King is upon the defensive, for the maintaining of what he justly holds his right, or is bound by Oath to defend.
And if we hearken to the people’s voice, for that commonly speaks the mind of their leaders, we shall hear them usually call this Warre, as they did that with the Scots, the Bishops’ Warre. His Majesty has indeed alwayes declared against the altering of the Government of the Church by Bishops, being such as it alwayes had since the first receiving of the Christian faith in this land, and of all other Governments simply the best, if reformed from abuses and corruptions that have grown upon it, to the purging out of which his Majesty is alwayes ready to agree. But be it the Bishops’ Warre (though the abolishing of that Government be but one of the many inconveniences which this power of resistance doth threaten this Land with, and which the King has reason by power of Arms to divert) whether is it so just in Subjects by Arms to force a change of Government which was alwayes in the Church, and by Law established, as it is in the King to defend the same as he is bound by Oath? It is clear which of the two are upon the defensive.
The second particular by which the defensive way of this resistance is to be examined, was the managing of this Warre on their parts, whether in void of acts of Hostility as that defensive way should be which they pretend to. David’s resistance made against Saul is frequently alledged by them, which example, though it will not countenance their cause (as was shewed before) yet might it tell them their demeanour should be answerable. He offered no act of violence to Saul, but still gave place and withdrew from him. The Spear indeed and the Cruse David took away from the King’s head, but it was only to shew Abner’s neglect who had the Command of Saul’s Militia, and to testifie his own integriety, therefore he restored them before they were demanded, I. Sam. 26.
But now the King’s Spear and his Cruse, his Ammunition and his necessary Provisions are taken away, intercepted, not restored though often demanded, used against him with all advantage; nay he is stript of the very power and command of Arms, his Officers and Ministers thrust out, and other substituted, and by them his people drawn into Arms against him.
Also by these that are in resistance against the King, his Loyale and peaceable Subjects are assauled, despoiled of their Arms, Goods, Estates; their persons imprisoned, because they would according to their Allegeance assist him in this extemity, or would not, contrary to their Conscience, join with them against him. What Conscience that will not follow this way with a stupid implicit faith can be perswaded that this warre is the defence of the Subject’s Liberties, and not rather an oppugnation of them? Or that it is a mere resistance or withstanding of a force first made against them, and not rather a violent illation or bringing in of force upon those that were disposed to peace. Therefore no conscience that has a sense of Religion, or of that which is just and right between man and man, can bear a part in this resistance, for fear of that sentence of damnation which the Apostle has laid upon it.
Sect. VII.
But in the last place, if Conscience could be perswaded, that it is lawfull upon such a case as they make, to take Arms and resist, and that this rising in Arms is such a defensive resistance, as in such a case they seem to pretend to, yet how will it be perswaded that the Case is now, that is, That the King is such as the people must be made to believe he is, unlesse it will as desperately offend against the rule of Charitie, in so concluding upon the King, as it does against the rule of Faith and perswasion, in admitting so ungrounded a principle as is now rested on for resistance. So that such a Conscience shall have in its perswasion neither certainty of Rule; for the principle it goes on is false, nor certainty of the Case, for it knows not the heart of the King, to conclude for resistance upon supposals of his intentions, and in its judgement it will be altogether void of Charitie.
Indeed it concerns all such as will resist upon the principles now taught to render their Prince odious to his people under the hatefull notions of Tyrant, Subverter of Religion, and Laws, a Person not to be trusted, or at least as one seduced to such evill designes, by wicked Counsell. But what? Hath this King forbid the exercise of the Religion established, or left off to professe it himself? hath he disclaimed his trust, or not upon all occasions promised Justice and libertie to his Subjects?
Yea! But they have cause to fear Popery will prevail, and that he will not stand to his promises. It seems they are men that would be loath to suffer for their Religion, they are so ready to fly to Arms to secure themselves. But shall subjects rise in Arms against their Prince upon such remote fears and jealousies as these will appear to be? When can such be wanting in turbulent minds? When shall the Prince be assured of safety? This was the way that David himself was shaken out of his throne, and driven from Jerusalem by Absalom. This cunning Rebell steales away their hearts by rising jealousies in them and an evill opinion of David’s government, 2. Sam. 15.3. Some ground, it seems, he had for his treacherous plea, through the negligence of those that were under David, but it was his villanie to make use of it to the alienating of the people from their King. Accordingly let us now consider what slender grounds our people have for their fears and jealousies, then what securitie they have and might have against them, that it may appear how causelesse those jealousies are in themselves; how unjust causes of this resistance.
If we examine the fears and jealousies that have possessed the people we shall find them to be raised upon these or the like grounds, Reports of foreign Power to be brought in, The Queen’s Religion, The resort of Papists to his Majesty, His intercepting of means sent for the relief of Ireland, from whence the people by their good teachers are made to believe, that he means to enslave this people, reestablish Popery, and does comply with the Rebells.
I answer to all which I needed not to say more than what Michael Archangel to the devill that arch-accuser, The Lord rebuke thee, Jude 9. but in particular; For such reports of invasions from abroad, as were, before the setting up of the Militia, given out to keep the people amused, the easier to draw them into a posture of defence as was pretended, all such are discovered by time to have been vain; if there be now any foreign aids towards the King (as all Christian Kings cannot but think themselves concerned in the cause) it will be as just for him to use them against subjects now in Arms, as it was unjust in the Barons to call in the French against their naturall King.
For the Queen’s Majestie; Her Religion is no new cause, if it be a sufficient cause of Jealousie to them, they have had it from her first entrance; I would to God it were otherwise with her, that it would please the Lord to open her eyes that she may see the truth and light of the Protestant Religion: only this I must say, this is not the way to draw her to it, if she look at it in the doctrines and practices of these times she is not like to fall in love with it.
For the resort of Papists, and the King’s entertaining them; He hath often declared what caution he desired to use therein, till necessitie hath driven him to admit of some few into his Army, which also he answered lately. Let me adde this concerning the justnesse of it, If he hath entertained any into this service, he may justly make use of them. We see what manner of men were gathered to David in his distresse, I. Sam. 22.2. and how false Ziba bringing provision to the King when he fled from Absalom, was entertained and rewarded, insomuch that the King (when afterward he knew how Ziba had abused him to gain his own ends) would not reverse the sentence pronounced in his favour. If therefore in this distresse after much forberrance our King hath admitted the help of some Recusants, it cannot be alledged as a cause of the resistance was a cause of it; and if the Papist will shew himselfe a good Subject, it is just and reasonable that the King when he is put to it, may admitt of his help, and the more shame it is for them that professe the Protestant Religion to force him to it; a scandall that would not easily be wiped off from our Religion, were it to stand or fall, by the doctrines of this giddie Age.
Lastly, His Majestie hath written enough for the clearing himselfe from those false and odious imputations laid upon him in relation to the Irish businesse. I have only thus much to say, concerning anything intended for the relief of Ireland; It was great pitie they should want it there, but it is more pitiefull, the King should be forced to make use of it here.
It is not long since our neighbour Nation brought an Army into the Northern parts of this kingdome to the great detriment of the inhabitants there, and it was excused by invincible necessitie, which drove them hither. The necessitie his Majesty was driven to is sufficiently known, and might excuse him, in taking his own where he meets with it, and drawing it from his service abroad to that which more nearly concerned him at home. And when his Arms, Moneys, and Provisions are seized on wherever they be found intended for him, and imployed against him in Warre, the Lord knows how unnecessary, shall it not be lawfull for to take some part of them where he finds it for his necessary defence?
Indeed the distresse of Ireland by the help of wicked Pamphlets hath been used as a great engine to weaken the King’s reputation with his people; but upon whose account the heavie rekoning of that neglected Cause will be laid, together with the disturbance of this kingdome, any man in conscience may easily discern, that sees what sufficient and reasonable means might have been had for the security of Religion and Liberties, and for the redresse of all just grievances before this time. Which is the next thing considerable: What his Majesty hath done and profered to exempt these scrupules of fears and jealousies out of this people’s minds.
For Religion, if it be a new frame they contend for, I must acknowledge hee declares against all such; but if they desire the continuance of that true Protestant Religion, which hath been professed without interruption from the beginning of the Queen’s dayes, and established by the Lawes of this land, that he undertakes to maintaine, that he hath protested in the head of his Army to defend. For matter of Church-government and discipline he hath offered any just reformation, even with a respect to tender consciences in point of ceremony, hath often called His two Houses to the worke in drawing up the grievances to some head. For priviledges of Parliaments and Liberty of Subjects hee hath given them the like promises with the deepest Protestations, and by an excellent moderation, amidst the presurres and necessities of Warre, hath showen what respect he hath to the property and liberty of the Subject. Lastly, For his choise of Officers of State, he hath promised to admit any just exception, and thereupon to relinquish the person and as an assurance of all this, hath so far condescended as to take away Star-Chamber, High Commission, Bishops’ votes, &c. and the Continuance of this parliament, & the constant returne of a Trieniall. And now after all these promises and protestations and so many expressions of grace, can any man in conscience think there was yet place left for Propositions of such necessary concernment, that except they be granted this kingdome must be imbroiled in a Civill War, & the reliefe of Ireland neglected? I speake not this to cast any blemish upon the wisdome of the great Councell, or upon their desires and endeavours to gaine a great security to the publicke: but I would to God, the King were once thought worthy to bee trusted a little, and that the Consciences of his Subjects were more respected, which cannot so easily be commanded into a resistance, being very tender in the points of damnation, and taught out of God’s Word, Not to raise so much as an evill thought against the King, Eccl. 10. much lesse to lift up an armed hand.
Every man’s Conscience now is solicited to adhere either to the King in this great cause, or to joine with Subjects in making resistance. To draw it from Allegiance, tongues are set on fire of hell, which blast His Majestie’s Actions and Declarations, and books written by hellish spirits, enemies to peace and quietnesse, are suffered to issue forth into every corner of the Land to possesse the people, that his promises are but words, his Acts of grace were forced, he will not stand to them. It seemes then he must by force of Armes be compelled to be willing. But let us see whether a conscience that desires to be safe can be so perswaded in judging the actions and intentions of him (to whom it owes the highest duty under God) as first to conclude he intends not as he promises, and thereupon to resolve for resistance? No, it will direct itselfe by the rule of Charity, which is, not rashly to conclude upon the heart which it knoweth not, or to think any evill; and if the difference be betwixt two, as in cause, it will hold the rule of indifferency, impartially to consider the actions of both. Conscience therefore that it may be informed of his Majestie’s intentions, will it look upon him at such a distance as London and read him only in those horrid relations that issue thence, and conceive of him as they report him to the people? Or will it consider some failings that necessity has inforced, or other accidentall occurrences have occasioned, and from these conclude intentions to him, contrary to all his promises and Protestations? This would be too partiall, too uncharitable. Conscience ought alwayes to be tender in judging upon other men’s intentions, especially those of the Prince, and those to be concluded as evill, and to be made a ground for resistance, which runs the hazard of Damnation. In the 2 Chr. c. 21.10. Libuah is said to revolt from the King of Judah because hee had forsaken the Lord; a Text that is objected to us, and should have been answered in the first part: but it is impertinent as all the rest are, for it neither proves the principle, That it is lawfull for the people to revolt when the King forsakes Religion, but shewes that such revolt is a punishment from God upon such a King, though a sinne in the people. Nor doth it come home to the Case; for there the King had forsaken; here is only supposall that he will, and that groundlesse and unconscionable too. For as there was enough in David to clear these Jealousies upon which that rebellion of the people following Absalom was grounded, so is there on the King’s part, to direct conscience against this desperate uncharitable judgment, if it look at those many Acts of grace as new additions to that security, by which this State has so long stood, and from them conclude, He would not in a faire way deny anything reasonable. If it consider those many promises strengthened with the deepest protestations, enforced with desires of successe from God according to his just intentions, and all these, as proceeding from a King, under such affliction, in such danger, after such successe and experience of God’s protection, approving thereby the reality and sincerity of his heart. What conscience can here conclude contrary intentions in him, and not think it blasphemeth God and the King?
Furthermore, as conscience will not be uncharitable when it judgeth upon the intentions of another man’s heart, so neither will it be partiall when it judgeth between two, unto which of them it should incline: and therefore he that is abused to believe amisse of his King and solicited to enter this way of resistance, is highly concerned first to consider, whether they also that are the main directours of it, and to whom he would adhere, doe discharge their trust they are called to, I say such an one, unlesse he will resigne up his faith to men, and receive their dictates as the immediate rule of his conscience, must consider whether all be just and honest that is done in that way? Whether to divest the King of the power of Armes and to use them against him, be to defend his person, Rights, and dignity? Whether the forcing of the Subjects’ property, to the advancing of this resistance, and the imprisoning of their persons for deniall, be the maintaining of the right and liberty of the Subject? Whether the suffering of so many Sects to vent their doctrines with such liberty, and to commit unsufferable outrages upon the worship of God, with such licentiousness, be a defending of Religion and the established worship of this Church? All these duties every Subject respectively is bound to discharge, and the neglect of them His Majesty has chiefly charged upon those that he conceives the chiefe directours and Actours in this resistance made against him, and every man in conscience ought seriously to consider it.
The necessity of the Common-wealth is pretended to defend the not defending of the premises; when as no necessity may excuse any failings on the King’s part, as if his promises, by which he stands obliged to his Subjects, did not suppose they for their parts also should performe. I know not how some particular men may be engaged and contract a necessity of resisting, or seeking safety by Armes; but I am perswaded, no man in Conscience can thinke it a necessity of the Common-wealth to have all confounded, or of a Christian to run the hazard of damnation by resisting. My conscience tells me, and will theirs one day tell them, how much they have to answer for not improving that grace and willingnesse, they had experience of in His Majestie and might still have found in him, to the speedy and happy Reformation of this Church and State. I pray God to give them Consciences truely inlightned, and bowels truly compassionate, that they may speedily and feelingly be sensible of the miseries this Land grones under, and faithfully examine how far they are answerable for them by rejecting such reasonable meanes of security, as they might have had for the safety of this State. Amen.
And now if there be any one that will run the hazard of this resistance, I desire he would first set his Conscience before the Tribunall of God, where it must appeare, and consider whether it will excuse him there, when he has shed the bloud of others, and expended his owne, to say, I verily supposed and believed my Prince would change Religion, overthrow our Liberties. I must tell him it will not be safe for him to present such a Conscience at that barre, a Conscience that wanted the rule of Faith to warrant and perswade the lawfulnesse of resistance on such a supposall, a Conscience that wanted the certainty of perswasion that the Prince’s heart (which God only knowes) was so inclined, a Conscience that wanted the judgement of charity, in concluding such intentions in the King notwithstanding all his promises and deepest protestations made in the time of his trouble, without which Charity all is nothing though he layes downe (as he thinkes) his life for Religion. Such a Conscience I must needs conclude sinfull, and liable to that which the Apostle threatens unto Resistance, Damnation.
Ferne is referring to the Militia Ordinance passed by the two houses of Parliament on 5 March 1642.
This statement is a reference to the theory that a conquered people have only those rights the conqueror chooses to bestow upon them. The English, according to Ferne’s reckoning, having been conquered no less than three times, would have no claim to inherent ancient rights.
Causally.
For information on Cade and Tyler, see note 14, above.
The “late Protestation” is probably that drawn up by the Commons in May 1641, which read: “I, A. B. in the presence of Almighty God, promise, vow, and protest to maintain and defend, as far as lawfully I may, with my life, power, and estate, the true Reformed Protestant Religion, expressed in the doctrine of the Church of England, against all Popery and Popish innovations within this realm contrary to the same doctrine, and according to the duty of my allegiance, his Majesty’s Royal person, honour, and estate, as also the power and privileges of Parliament, the lawful rights and liberties of the subjects. . . .” The Protestation went on to include a vow to oppose and bring to punishment all who plot or do anything contrary to it.
This is a reference to the months of wrangling between Charles and Parliament over control of the militia of the kingdom, with the two Houses eventually passing the Militia Ordinance without royal approval.
T.16 (8.7.) John Marsh, The Great Question concerning the Militia (30 September, 1642).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (15 Nov. 2017)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (15 Nov. 2017)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.16 [1642.09.30] (8.7) John Marsh, The Great Question concerning the Militia (30 September, 1642).
Full titleJohn Marsh, AN ARGUMENT OR, DEBATE IN LAW: OF THE GREAT QVESTION CONCERNING THE MILITIA; As it is now settled by ORDINANCE of both the HOUSES of PARLIAMENT. By which, it is endeavoured, to prove the Legalitie of it, and to make it warrantable by the fundamentall Laws of the Land. In which, Answer is also given to all Objections that do arise, either directly, or collaterally concerning the same. All which is referred to the judicious Reader. By J. Marsh C. L.
LONDON: Printed by Tho. Paine, and M. Simmons, for Tho. Underhill, at the Bible in Wood-street, 1642.
30 September, 1642.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 175; Thomason E. 119 (13.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
TO THE READER.
Courteous Reader,
THat which I framed for my own private satisfaction onely, in these distracted times, in which every man (that resolves not to stand Neuter) ought to have his conscience poysed by good grounds and principles, lest that it suffer shipwrack in the conclusion; I do here (though unwillingly) present to the publique view; in which weak and poore indeavour, I have borrowed some of the Parliaments grounds to exspatiate my self upon, that I might the better convince thy iudgement, and mine own: but the greater part are mine; which I hope will not blast the rest, nor make it unfruitfull to thee; but rather more fully inform, satisfie and convince thee of the truth of the Parliaments assertions: and to this end I have not used any affected style, but have (to the utmost of my endeavour) invested the Law with its own plainnesse and integrity: for I have alwayes raised this conclusion to my self, that where I look for words, there I expect least Law, which is confirmed unto thee, as a truth, in these dayes. Now Reader, shortly to conclude this, (for the Work doth not deserve a Preface or Epistle) if happily there may be any thing in it, that may merit thy more serious consideration, and make thee a true Subiect to the King, by being faithfull to the Parliament; I shall expect no greater a reward of my labour, then that, confidently beleeving that the issue of it will be, thine, and my happinesse, Farewell.
Thine to love and serve thee,
J. Marsh.
AN ARGVMENT IN MAINTENANCE OF THE MILITIA, Setled by Ordinance of Parliament.
THe generall Question is but shortly this; Whether the Militia, as it is now setled by both the Houses of Parliament, be warrantable by Law, or not?
The Case, with the Circumstances, upon which this generall Question is stated, depends upon these two Quæres.
1. Whether the King by his Prerogative hath the sole and onely power of ordering and disposing of the Militia of his Kingdome or not? Admitting that he hath: then the next and maine scruple is:
2. Whether both the Houses of Parliament, in time of imminent danger, (the King refusing to settle the Militia for the defence and securitie of his people) may by an Ordinance of Parliament, without his Majesties consent, settle the Militia, and put the Kingdome into a posture of defence or not?
1. For the first point, I conceive very clearly, that the King by his Prerogative, warrantable by the Lawes of the Land, performing the trust reposed in him, hath the onely power of disposing of the Militia of this Kingdome; and therefore I shall not debate this, so much out of scruple or doubt, as to give satisfaction to the unlearned; and I shall prove it in reason thus: The King is Caput Reipublicæ, & pater patriæ, that is, the head of the Common-wealth, and Father of his Countrey; and hath this great trust committed to him by God, and his people, of governing of them in peace and happinesse, by maintaining and defending of their Religion, Lawes, and Liberties; which, that he may be the more obliged to doe, he taketh a solemne Oath at his Coronation, that he will doe and performe this, according to the trust reposed in him; the due execution whereof, being of so high consequence to this Kingdome, and of so great difficultie to himselfe, and therefore not to be executed without great care, circumspection, and trouble; the Lawes and Constitutions of this Realme, hath in favour and ayde of his Majestie (who is intended alwayes to be imployed and negotiated Circa ardua regni, about the high things of the Kingdome) allowed unto him, many prerogatives, priviledges, and exemptions, above all his Subjects. Among which, I take this in our Case to be one; for as our Religion, Lawes, and Liberties, are committed in trust to the King, so are our lives also: which he is bound to defend aswell by the materall sword, if occasion be, as by the sword of Justice, and therefore as it is well knowne, all prosecutions by way of Indictment against any man, for the taking away of the life of another, are at the suite of the King, and the King onely can pardon the offence, and no other. For he alone hath the charge of the lives of his Subjects committed to him, and this is such an inseperable trust, that the King cannot grant this over to another, as it is resolved in 20.20. H. 7. fo. 8. a. H. 7. where it is said, That a grant of power to pardon Felons, by the King to another, is not good, for that it is a prerogative annexed to the Crowne, and cannot be severed: But here it is not to be understood that no prerogative of the King can be severed from the Crowne, for some may, as I shall afterwards shew, and that by grant of the King too: but that this among others, is such a prerogative as cannot be severed, and the reason of this, is, as I conceive, for that the life of a man is of so high and puissant nature, that none lesse then God, or the King, ought to have interest and power in; and though the Common-wealth loose a member, it is the King onely who looseth a Subject, and therefore the killing of a man, is said in the Indictment to be against his Crowne and dignitie, and not against the Common-wealth; for though mediately it be an offence against the Common-wealth too: yet it is a more neare and immediate offence against the King: for that he is intrusted with the lives of his Subjects.
Now as the King is bound to defend his Subjects by the Law, so in like manner he is bound to defend and protect them by the Sword, if occasion be, as I have said before, from all danger, both of forraigne and domesticke enemies. And therefore, as there is a Leigeance, that is, a faithfull and true obedience of the Subject due to his Soveraigne, as it is interpreted in the 7.Rep. Calvins Rep. Calvines case: So there is a protection due from the Soveraigne to the Subject; for he ought not onely regere, to rule, but also Protegere subditos suos, to protect his Subjects.20. H. 7. 8. So as betweene the Soveraigne and Subject, there is Duplex & reciprocum ligamen, that is, a double and reciprocall bond; Quia sicut subditus regi tenetur, ad obedientiam,10. R. 2. ca. [Editor: illegible word] ita Rex subdito tenetur ad protectionem, for as the Subject is bound to obey the King, so the King is bound to protect his Subject; and therefore in 20. H. 7. it is holden, that there is a Liege or Leigeance betweene the King and the Subject:11. R. 2. ca. [Editor: illegible word] and Fortescue cap. 13. saith, Rex ad tutelam legis, corporum & bonorum erectus est, that is, he is erected King, to defend the Law, the bodies, and goods of his Subjects: and in the Acts of Parliament of 10. R. 2. 11. R. 2. and 14. H. 8. &c. Subjects are called Leige people. And in the Acts of Parliament of 34. H. 8. and 35. H. 8. &c. the King is called the Liege Lord of his Subjects;14. H. 8. ca. [Editor: illegible word] and with this agreeth Master Skene in his Booke de expositione verborum, that Leigeance is the mutuall bond & obligation betwixt the King and his Subjects, by which Subjects are called his leige Subjects,34. H. 8. ca. [Editor: illegible word] for that they are bound to obey and serve him: and he is called their Leige Lord, for that he ought to maintaine and defend them: Wherefore it is truely said, that Protectio trahit subjectionem, & subjectio protectionem,35. H. 8. ca. [Editor: illegible word] Protection draweth subjection, and subjection protection.
By all which it is manifest, as also by the Oath of the King, taken at his Coronation, lately published by the Parliament, that the King is bound to protect the lives & liberties of his Subjects, so long as the Subject is obedient to the King; for protection and leigeance are relatives, and have a necessary and reciprocall dependance the one upon the other: and this is the reason that we say that a man outlawed, is out of the protection of the King; so that heretofore a man outlawed was said to have Caput Lupinum, that is, a Wolfes head: so that any man might then have killed him, as Fleta saith, and other old Books:Fleta. lib. [Editor: illegible word] cap. 27. because that by his disobedience to the King, he had deprived himselfe of the benefit of the regall and legall protection. I doe not say, that if the King withdraw his regall protection from his Subjects, that his Subjects may withhold their obedience from their Soveraigne: yet I am certaine, that the Books before cited imply as much. Besides, reason will arme every man thus farre, as to conclude, that the cause and ground of his obedience, is his Soveraignes protection, and therefore if his Soveraigne withdraw the one, he may deny the other. Againe, denying to protect his Subjects, is a plaine refusall to be ruled by Law, and this, as Bracton saith, makes him a Tyrant no King, and my obedience is due to him, as a King, not as a Tyrant. But I passe this over, as a matter of so great consequence at this time, considering the bad principles of many men, that I had rather offend in withholding of my judgement, then in publishing of it.
But yet more fully, that the King is bound to protect his Subjects, F. N. B. is expresse.F. N. B. fo. 232. Nota, saith the Booke, that the King is bound of right by the Lawes, to defend his Subjects, and their goods and chattels, lands and tenements, and therefore by the Law, every lawfull Subject is taken to be within the protection of the King, and if he be put out of protection for his offence, then every man may doe with him as with an enemy of the King: Here note, that the Subject cannot loose his protection due to him by his Soveraigne, but by his owne default.
F. N. B. fo. 113. a.And in F. N. B. fol. 113. a. it is there said, that the King ought of right to save and defend his Realme, as well against the Sea, as against enemies, that it be not surrounded or wasted: and to provide remedy for it; and also to provide that his Subjects have their passage throughout the Realme by all high wayes in safeguard. And this is warranted by the Commission of Sewers, which is directed by the King to Commissioners, to inquire of, &c. and to heare and determine all faults and breaches of Walls, Ditches, &c. Sea-bankes, &c. in the beginning of which Commission, the fractions of the Walls, or Sea-bankes, is cited, and in the body of it, the King saith, Nos pro eo quod ratione dignitatis nostræ regiæ ad providendum salvationi regni nostri circumquaque sumus astrcti, volentes in haec parte congruum & festinum remedium adhiberi, assignavimiu vos, &c. Here the King himselfe saith expressely, in this Commission, that he is every way bound, by reason of his royall function, and Kingly office, Providere salvationi regni sui, that is, to provide safety for his Kingdome. And is the Law thus, that the King is bound to protect and defend his Subjects, Per mare, per terras? By the Sea, from all Pyrates and Robbers, as also from the invasions of forraigne enemies: and by the Land, from any domesticke dangers, either by inbred rebellions, or civill Commotions? Why then the Conclusion that I raise upon these premisses, is but this; That it is consonant and agreeable to all reason, that the King executing of the trust reposed in him, should not be denied the means by which he may respond that great confidence placed in him, by his owne care and fidelitie: and God forbid, that we should require the due execution of this great function, of his Majesties part, and yet that we should withdraw from him the meanes, by which he should performe it; for if so, to be a King, would be farre worse, then an Ægyptian servitude.
Wherefore I conceive that it stands with all the justice and equity in the world, that the King (who hath so great a charge upon him, that greater cannot be, by which, he, as Vicarius Dei, that is, Gods Vicar, as Bracton speaketh, is obliged to defend the persons and property of his Subjects) should have all the Castles, Forts and strong holds, and all the Ports and Havens at his rule and disposition, and that generally he should have the ordering of the Militia throughout the Realm: so that by this means he may be inabled to discharge that great trust that is committed to him (without which he cannot be) and at the last to render a just account to God, of his Stewardship.
And this certainly Bracton li. 2. de acquirendo rerum dominio,Bract. l. 2. c. 2. [Editor: illegible word] intends, when he saith, that the King, Habes ea quæ sunt pacis, ut populus sibi traditus, in pace sileat & quiescat, &c. that is, he hath those things, which belong to peace, that he may govern his people committed to his charge in peace and quietnesse. For as the King hath ordinariam jurisdictionem, that is, ordinary jurisdiction, as Bracton saith before, and this to govern his Subjects according to Law and right: so, Habet ea quæ pacis sunt; that is, not onely the Law to maintain peace among his Subjects: but also, Ea quæ belli sunt, all those things, which conduce to the protecting and defending of his Subjects from any forrein invasion, or domesticke danger, or otherwise he could not possibly maintain peace according to the saying of Bracton, and as by his Oath he is bound.
The King by the Law hath this Prerogative allowed unto him, that he onely may proclaime warre, and he onely can establish peace among his people, as the 7. Rep. is: why then I argue thus,7. Rep. fo. 25. [Editor: illegible word] It is a greater prerogative to have power to proclaim warre: then it is, to have the onely means to maintain it: and therefore it is not to be conceived, that the Law, that would allow the King the greater power, would deny him the lesse. For, Qui majora concedit, minor a non denegabit: He that granteth the greater, will not deny the lesse. Again, to allow the King power to proclaime warre, and to deny him the means to maintain warre, were absurd, and the Law will not admit of any absurditie. Wherefore I conceive, for these reasons also, that the King by the Law, hath likewise this prerogative of the sole ordering and disposing of the Militia of the Kingdom.
Now to conclude this point, I shall paralell this case, to one case onely in the Law,4. Rep. fo. 3. [Editor: illegible word] Mittons [Editor: illegible word] and that is to Mittons case in the 4. Rep. where the case is thus: Queen Elizabeth by her Letters Patents under the great Seal, granted the Office of the Clerk of the County Court of the County of Somerset, to Mitton, with all Fees, &c. for terme of his life: and after the Queen constituted Arthur Hopton Esquire Sheriffe of the same County, who interrupted Mitton, claiming this Office, as incident to his Office of Sheriffe, and upon this he appointed a Clerk himself of the County Court; and here the sole question was, whether this grant by the Queen, were good, or not? And it was adjudged upon solemne debate, that it was not, and the principall reason given wherefore the grant was nought, was, because that great inconveniences might follow to Sheriffes, who are great and ancient Officers and Ministers of Justice, if such grants should be of validity, for that there is great trust reposed in them, for which they are responsible, as it is there said: whereupon it is concluded, that Law, and reason requires, that Sheriffes who are publick Officers and Ministers of justice, and who have an office of so great eminencie, confidence, perill and charge, that they ought to have all rights appertaining to their office. And in this case there is cited another case, to this purpose, Mich. 39. & 40. of the Queen resolved by all the Judges of England, as my Lord Coke saith, that the grants of the custodies of Goales, of the Counties, either by King H. 8. or afterwards, were utterly void: and the like reason is given in this case, at in Mittons case: for that custodies of Goales belong to the office of Sheriffe, who being immediate Officer to the Courts of the King, must answer for escapes, and shall be subject to amerciaments, if he hath not the body in Court upon processe to him directed, &c. and therefore it is reason, that he should put in such keepers of the said Goals; for whom he should answer,Act 14. E. 3. c. 10. according to the purvieu of the Act of 14. E. 3. For otherwise against the rule of reason and equitie, Alius offendes, alius plectitur: that is, one man should offend, another should be punished. Now if the Law be thus, in these cases, that you shall not take away these offices from the Sheriffe, who is an Officer of trust, and onely chargeable for any misdemeanor, in the executing of the same; for that by this means, you should disable him to execute his Office, according to the confidence reposed in him, and yet should punish him for the not doing of his duty; which should be against all reason: à fortiori, I say in this case, you shall not deny the King, who hath the greatest Office of trust, and charge, that can be, the means and way to perform this trust, and to undergo this charge, which cannot be otherwise done, then by allowing of the King this prerogative (so long as he doth perform the trust that runs along with it) of having the sole disposing and ordering of the Militia of his Kingdom.
And without question Bracton when he saith, that the King hath Gladium materiale, that is, the materiall sword, can intend nothing else by this, but Gladium belli, which is the Militia, and gladium by a Synecdoche, may well comprehend and be set pro omnibus rebus milititaribus, that is, for all things military; And it is usuall in holy Writ, when God threatens the heavy judgement of warre upon any Nation, to do it under the notion and expression of a sword, by this intending, Bellum, that is, warre, with all its sad effects. Wherefore I conclude this point, that the King hath this prerogative allowed unto him by the Law: for these preceding reasons. 1. For that it were inconvenient for the King, who by the Law is bound to protect and defend his subjects, if he should not have this power. 2. For that the Law hath given unto him a greater prerogatiue, and therefore will not deny him the lesse: and thirdly and lastly, for that it would be absurd, that the King should have power to proclaime warre, but not to maintain it.
For the second question, which is, as I conceive, much more difficult,Second part. then the former, and which is the great doubt and dilemma of the time, which is but thus: whether the two Houses of Parliament, the Kingdom being in imminent danger, and the King refusing to put it into a posture of defence, may by their Ordinance, without the consent of the King, settle the Militia, and put the Kingdom into a posture of defence, or not?
And I do conceive, under favour, in some clearnesse, that they may, and that in so doing, they have done no more then what is warrantable by the Law. And this I ground in the first place upon the imminent danger, and extreame necessity, that the kingdom is in: and therefore though it should be admitted, that they could not do it, at another time, yet I conceive that by reason of the necessity, it is warranted by the Law for them to do it at this time.
It is a rule in our Law, first cited in Bracton,Bract. fo. 247. a. 10. Rep. fo. 61. a. and remembred in the 10. Rep. that illud quod alias licitum non est, necessitas facit licitum, & necessitas inducit privilegium, quod jure privatur. In time of necessitie, illegall acts, are made legall: and things utterly against Law, justifiable; Upon this rule I might multiply cases, but because I do not affect, via trita obambulare, to go in the common road, therefore I shall onely put some of the most materiall cases, which I find to this purpose, and the others I shall omit.
In Pl. Com. it is said, that when Laws or Statutes are made,Pl. Com. fo. 13. b. yet there are some things, which are excepted, and forseprised out of the provision of them, by the Law of reason, though that they are not expressed by words. As breaking of a prison is Felony in a prisoner himself by the Statute De frangentibus prisonam: yet if the prison be burnt, and they which are in, break the prison for salvation of their lives, this shall be excused by the Law of reason, and yet the words of the Statute are against it.
And 14. H. 7. Jurors who were sworn upon the issue,14. H. 7. fo. 29. and by the Law ought not to depart, untill they are agreed of their Verdict, for fear of a great tempest departed, and severed themselves: and it was there held that they should not be amerced, and that their verdict afterwards was good. And this was thus holden (saith the book) for the necessity of the chance; but otherwise they should have been grievously punished. So by the Law, for the salvation of my own life, I may kill another. And as the Law makes that lawfull, in case of necessity, which otherwise would not be lawfull, when it concerns any mans private: so à fortiori,29. H. 8 Dyer. [Editor: illegible word] 36. b. 8. E [Editor: illegible word] 23. Br [Editor: illegible word] 45. when it concerneth the Common-weal, and therefore as the book is in 29. H. 8. Dyer, a man may justifie the making of Bulwarks, in another mans soyl, without licence; and the razing of a house which burns, for safeguard of the houses of the neighbours. So it is if the Sheriffe pursue a Felon to a house, and for to have the Felon, he breaketh the doore of the house, this is justifiable. So in 13. H. 8. the inhabitants of a Citie in time of warre, if they conceive that the Suburbs may endanger the taking thereof, may lawfully burn or destroy the suburbs,13. H. 8. 16. [Editor: illegible word] E. 4. 35 b. for the Towns or Cities preservation, and the common safetie. And in these cases, necessity, and the good of the republick, maketh that lawfull, which otherwise would not be lawfull.
It is a certain rule, that all Laws ought to receive an equitable and favourable construction, according as opportunitie and the necessity of the case, administers occasion: for, Summum jus, est summa injuria: that is, over strict observance of the Law, may sometimes be unlawfull. And à fortiori, they shall receive such a construction, where it concerns the Common-wealth: and accordingly the Judges in all ages, as they ought, so they have alwayes made such interpretation and declaration of the Laws, that the Common-wealth should not be prejudiced. And this is the reason of these cases, which have been often adjudged, that if a man bind himself, that he will not exercise his trade, or that he will not manure his land, or that he will not marry, that the Obligation in these cases is void, for that it is against the weal publike.
And this is the reason also, that hath made the Judges alwayes to adjudge all the Grants of the King, of Monopolies, or Impositions upon the Subject, without Act of Parliament, to be against the Law, for that they were against the good of the Common-wealth,[Editor: illegible word] H. 3. ca. 29. and libertie of the Subject. And this is grounded upon Magna Charta, which saith, Quod nullus libor. homo, &c. that no free-man shall be taken and imprisoned, or be disseised of his Free-hold or liberties, but by lawfull judgement of his Peers, or by the Law of the land.
And if the Law be such, that the King by such grants, which are against Law, and the weal publick, cannot take away my free-hold or livelihood from me, but that such grants shall rather be adjudged to be void, (against the opinion of Bracton who saith, De chartis Regiis & factis regum, non debent,Bract. fo. 34. [Editor: illegible word] b. 2. nec possunt justiciarii, nec privatæ personæ disturbare: that is, of the Kings Charters, and his deeds, neither Justices, not private persons, may, or ought to dispute: which clearly is against the known and established Law at this day) why then certainly, it will follow, that if the King, either by action, or omission, go about to endanger the weal publick, and endeavour the destruction of it, which ex consequenti, must of necessity bring ruine to every individuall person of it: that in such case, those who are intrusted with the common good, (as the Parliament at this time is) may by all meanes possible, indeavour the preservation of it: but I doe not here intend by violent opposing or deposing of his sacred Majestie, of which I shall speake a word afterwards, but by setling of the Kingdome, into such a state and condition, as our sage Parliament hath now done, that it may be able to defend his sacred Person, and it selfe, against any forraigne or domesticke surprise or invasion.
It is a true Rule, that Interest Reipublicæ, ne suare, quis malè utabur, a man (contrary to the opinion of the vulgar) may not doe with his propertie as he pleaseth; for that the Common-wealth hath an interest peramount the propertie of any private man, and there is no Subject, but that, either more or lesse, according to his Talent, or place, that God hath put him in, either in Church, or State, is intrusted with the common good: and therefore if he doth contrary to his trust, use his Talent or place, against that end for which it was given unto him, he is punishable by the Law for it.
And therefore if a man will destroy his woods, cast his money into the Sea, burne his Corn upon the Land, or in his Barnes, or the like, cleerely by the Law he is punishable for it: and agreeing with this Trin. 4° Jac. many were indicted of a Riot in the Starre-chamber, for putting in of their Beasts into Corne, claiming their Common there, and in this case, the Lord Chancellor said, that though they had good title to the Common, yet that they should be here punished, for that they had destroyed the Corne, which is against the weale publique.
And without question, the rigour of all Lawes, ought to receive such qualification, and equitable construction, that the Common-wealth doe not suffer or be indamaged. The Law was made to support the common good, and therefore that Law is against Law, that is against the common good. Nemo sibi nascitur, no man was borne for himselfe; all men both Rulers and people, were borne to this end, to contribute, and conferre some good to the Republique: and therefore Qui sibi solum vivit, he that lives to himselfe onely, doth not live to that end, for which he was created, much lesse he, which makes construction of the Law against that end, for that were to destroy both Law, and government, which every man was borne to defend.
It is a Rule in the Law, that Judges ought alwayes to make such construction of the Deeds of men, and of their Grants, Ut res magis valeat, quàm pereat, that is, that they should rather take effect, then perish: so I say, it may well be taken for a Rule, that the Judges should not so construe the Law, that the Law should destroy it selfe, which will necessarily follow in the destruction of the Common-wealth; but that they should so interpret it, Ut respublica magis valeat & floreat, quàm preat & destruatur, that the Common-wealth should rather flourish, then perish, and be destroyed.
I agree, that in the case in question, by the strict Rule and Law of Prerogative, the governing and disposing of the Militia of the Kingdome is onely in the King, and that he onely may proclaime warre, and he alone establish peace amongst his people: yet we ought not so to construe this Law, that it is so in the King, that it cannot be severed from him, and that no other can intermeddle with it, without the consent of the King though that it be for the Weale publique, and for the securing of the Kingdome, being in imminent danger, the King refusing to settle it, as in right he ought, upon the prayer of his people, represented in the desires of the Parliament. For to make such a construction were utterly to confound, and destroy, both Law, & Common wealth, as I have said before, and therefore ought not to be admitted.
The King hath this Prerogative allowed him by the Law, that he shall not be bound by any Statute, except that he be expressely named in the Statute,5. Rep. fo. 14. b. yet it is resolved in the 5. Rep. that all Statutes, which are made to suppresse wrong, to take away fraud, or to prevent the decay of Religion, shall binde the King, though he be not named in them; for, saith the Booke, Religion, Justice, and Truth, are the sure Supporters of the Crownes and Diadems of Kings. So I say in this case, the King by his Prerogative (as I have said before) ought to have the sole disposing of the Militia: But if in imminent danger, he refuse to settle this for the safetie of himselfe, and his Kingdome, according to the trust reposed in him, his Prerogative ought then to give way for the securing of his Crowne, that those who are intrusted with the Weale publique, as the Parliament is, may settle this for the defence of the King, and Kingdome, according, as in truth, they are bound, as I shall afterwards shew.
It is a Rule in our Law, That the King can doe no wrong; and with this accords Bracton,Bracton fo. 107. Nihil aliud potest Rex in terris, cum sit Dei minister & vicarius, nisi id solum quod de jure potest, nec quod principi placet, legis habet vigorem, the King can doe nothing upon earth, seeing that he is Gods minister and Vicar, but that onely which of right he ought to doe, neither ought the Kings will, to have the force and vigour of a Law. Here note, that the will of the King, ought to subscribe to the Law; and not the Law to the will of the King.
Pl. Com. fo. 246.And in Pl. Com. 1. Rep. & 5. Rep. it is said, That the King cannot doe a wrong, neither will his Prerogative be any Warrant to him to doe injurie to another: and if the King cannot injure one single person, without question, he cannot injure all the Common-wealth,5. Rep. fo. 44. b. which he should doe in this case, if both the Houses of Parliament, in this time of imminent danger, the King refusing to joyn with them, should not have this power of setling the Militia, in defence of the Kingdome, without his consent.Rep. fo. 55. b.
I agree with Bracton, that the King, Parem non habet in regno, nec superiorem, He hath no equall, nor superiour in his Kingdome; but that is to be understood, that there is no man above or equall with his Majestie; for he saith afterwards; Rex non debet esse sub homine sed sub Deo, & sub lege,Bracton fo. 34a. that the King ought not to be under man, but under God, and under the Law: and after fo. 34. a, he saith, Rex habet superiorem, Deum, scilicet, item legem, per quam factus est Rex, item Curiam suam, viz. Comites Barones, &c.Bracton fo. [Editor: illegible word] the King hath a superiour, to wit, God, in like manner, the Law, which made him King, and also his Court, to wit, the Earles, Barons, &c. which cannot be understood of any other, then the high Court of Parliament. And in the places before cited, he saith, Quod non est Rex, ubi dominatur voluntas, non Lex, He is not King, when his will rules, not the Law. Then if it be thus, as Bracton saith, that the Law, and the two Houses of Parliament, are above the King: and that the King is as no King, when he doth not submit to the Law, (which will of necessitie follow, for that the same Law, which made him King, injoynes and obliges him also to defend his people committed to his charge; and without doubt, the one as just as the other, and if he refuse to protect his people, which is a dispising, and a depressing of that Law which gave him this Soveraigntie: certainly, the Law will not defend him in this his tyranny) I conceive, that in this case, the Law will in its own defence, and in default of the King, who ought to have maintained the Law, inable the two Houses of Parliament, to put the Kingdome into a posture of warre, in defence of the King, his Lawes and Subjects.
But now the great Question is, What, and where is the ground of our feares, and jealousies, and where is the imminent danger; for, many say, that they cannot see it, and then it not being visible, and obvious to every eye: a Question as great in shew as the former, arises upon this, Who is, or may be the proper Judge of this imminent danger. To the first, I answer, that our feare, and the imminent danger pretended, is no Phantasme or Chimerâ, as some would have it, but it is a reall and visible cause of feare,Instit. fo. 253. Et talis metus qui cadere potest in virum constantem, such a feare, as may befall a constant man, as my Lord Cooke describeth a feare, that may possesse a generous and settled spirit. And that it is thus, I appeale to the conscience of any wise & indifferent man, whether that the Commune incendium, the common fire, or calamitie in our neighbour Nation of Ireland, clothed with these three circumstances, as I shall set it forth, will not cause, and justly too, a wise man to feare, and doubt, what the event will be.
As first, that they are our Neighbours, and when my Neighbours house is on fire: will any man adjudge this to be a phantasme or an effeminate feare in me, to provide for the securing of my person and estate, from perishing in the common ruine?
Secondly, It is Religion, that these cruell, barbarous, and unheard of Tyrants, make for a ground of their horrid Rebellion: and what stronger ingagement can there be, then this, for to incourage and spurre men forward, in any desperate designe? Especially, those of the Popish faction, who may have a pardon before-hand, for the act they shall commit, be it never so desperate: And doe we not thinke, that this will be a strong incitement to men, who conceive themselves tyed in conscience to undertake that which they doe, to wade through any misery, for the accomplishment of their desired end, knowing before hand, that they have a pardon for the most horrid act or attempt that they can doe, conducing to the perfecting of the same? And then as this obligeth all Nations besides, of the Popish partie, ought not we to thinke, and beleeve, that such an opportunitie, must of necessitie, stimulate them forward, to be ayding and assisting to such a designe, which will infallibly at the last, merit either Heaven or Hell? I am confident (and it stands with all reason that it should be so, for that they have not for a long time, praysed be God, had the like opportunitie) that the Pope, with all his adherents, are now plotting, and contriving, with their holy Father the Devill, to operate the ruine of the Protestant Religion: and shall this ingage them to fight against God, under a pretence of being on his side? And shall it not invite us, who fight for God, and his truth, which we have so long time, happily & peaceably through Gods goodnesse enjoyed, to prepare our selves, and all that we have, for the defence of the same? To conclude this, we who have the greatest part of the world our enemies, may justly feare, that they are now plotting and contriving that for England, that is already acted in Ireland. And let us not say, that they are at enmitie one with another, and therefore, are not at leisure, to harme us: for we may be sure, that they will shake hands, to doe us a mischiefe:Luke 23. 12. according to that in holy Writ, of Pilate and Herod, who though they were utter enemies one to another, yet they were made friends, to combine against Christ.
Thirdly, and lastly, who is able to say, that either he, or his children, shall live to see an end of that bloudy persecution and rebellion, and what the successe of it will be? True it is, that God hath hitherto gone forth with our Armies, and hath in an exceeding measure, and above all expectation, blessed their endeavours, and crowned their actions with a happie successe, God be praised for it, but yet who knoweth, whether they shall ever be able to root out this rebellious Tribe? I speak not this out of any diffidence of Gods continued favour and goodnesse towards us, or to make others mistrust; but onely to demonstrate, that there is a just cause of feare; for who can divine what the event of warre will be: Exitus belli incertus, that is, the issue of warre is uncertain. Besides (and which brings me to my second ground of our just and dreadfull feares) if the distractions of this Kingdome continue, which God defend, what ayde can they expect from us, who are like to be surrounded with the like misery: so that their necessitie, may cutt them short of their hopes, and by this much adde to our feares.
Secondly, having shewed our just cause of fear, which riseth ab extra, from our deplorable brethren, and neighbours; now I shall shew, our cause of fear, that ariseth ab intra: from the unhappy distractions, which are risen amongst our selves. Who is it, that doth not see, the sad divisions and generall sidings throughout the Realm? which hath grown upon this unhappy division of the King and Parliament; which when it will be reconciled, God knoweth. And if this (which adds much to our miserie) had not happened, we could not before have been secure, without a just cause of fear: for what divellish plots, and fearfull designes, have been discovered through Gods mercy, and the vigilant eye of the Parliament; tending to the destruction of our best birth-right and inheritance, the priviledges and freedome of Parliaments? Without the continuance of which, that which is nearest and dearest unto thee, whether it be thy Religion, life, or liberty: what ever it be, that thou most blessest thy self withall, will then depend upon the Arbitrary will of thy Soveraign; so that thou mayest not then, stile ought that God hath given thee, thy own: which heavy judgement I beseech God to divert from this sinfull Land and Nation; for we may truly acknowledge, that it were just upon us, that we who have so much abused Gods blessings, should now be deprived of them: and that we, who have so much abused the freedome of conscience, of our laws, lives, liberties, and estates, should now be subjected to a perpetuall slavery. Now to conclude this likewise, divide the Kingdom into foure parts, and I am confident, that the Papist. Newter, and Cavalier (I might adde likewise the domineering proud Clergy, who would fain reduce all things to their late condition) who lie perdue, and wait for an opportunitie, for to bring a speedie destruction upon this Common-wealth, will make two parts, I think I might, without any imputation, or prejudice to judgement, say three parts of the foure, and now put all these things together, and I beleeve, that no indifferent understanding man, but will be forced to confesse, that there was, and still is, a just cause of fear, and of putting of the Kingdom, into a posture of warre. And then the imminent danger being pregnant, and demonstrable to all the world: the last question is taken away.
But admitting that it were not prospicuous, and visible to all, then the question is, who is the proper Judge of this imminent danger, and I conceive plainly, under favour, that the Parliament ought to be,[Editor: illegible word] Rep. 106. b. [Editor: illegible word] 2. and no other: and my first reason is grounded upon the rule of Law, viz. that the Parliament can do no wrong, which is warranted by the 9. Rep. the 6. Rep. and many other books. And in Pl. Com. it is said, that the Parliament is a Court of thrice great honour and justice, of which none ought to imagine a dishonourable thing.[Editor: illegible word] Rep. 27. b. [Editor: illegible word] 2. And this I conceive to be grounded upon the Writ of Summons to Parliament, which wils, that the elections should be De gravioribus & discretioribus viris, &c. of the most grave and discreet men. And Fortescue speaking of the Parliament, saith, We ought necessarily to think, that the Statutes of this Realm are made with great wisdom and prudence,Pl. Com. fo. 398 [Editor: illegible word] ca. 18. Dum non unins aut centum solum consultorum virorum, sed plus quam trecentorum electorum hominum, quali numero olim Senatus Romanorum regebatur, ipsa sunt edita. For that they are not made by one, or an hundred onely of sage judicious men, but by more then three hundred of chosen men: by such a number, as in times past, the Senate of Rome was used to be ruled.
Object.But here it will be objected, that this Ordinance is not setled by Parliament, for that the King and many of his Nobles, were not there, nor never consented to it; and therefore that we ought not to esteeme, or account, some few Scismaticall and factious persons (who seek their own ends, and not the common good) to be the Parliament: and therefore you mistake in giving of them the Style of the Parliament.
Answ,A strange, unheard of, and illegall objection, a pretty trick and wilde to mask illegall slanders, under illegall objections. It is a wonder to hear such strange, and as unparalelld, as unwarrantable, invectives, against the Parliament, which are published in the Kings name, and under his protection, and patronage: while in the mean time, the King (whose distance of place, or affection, cannot divide from his Parliament, as I shall afterwards shew) suffers in those very obloquies, and dishonourable detractions, which are coyned for his honorable Assembly of Parliament.
For, as all our books agree, the Parliament is as one body: and the chief or head of this body, is the King: and with this agreeth, Dyer, fo. 60. 2. who saith,Dyer, fo. 60. 2. that the Estate of Parliament consists of three parts: viz. of the King, as the chief Head; and of the Lords, the chief and principall Members of the Body; and of the Commons, Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses, the inferiour Members: and these make the body of the Parliament. Now if it be thus, that the King, Lords and Commons make but one body, and that the King is the Head of this body, as in truth the Law is: then it will thus in reason follow, that no more then you can divide the head from the naturall body, and yet preserve the body alive, can you divide the King from the Parliament, and yet have the Parliament continue, as in truth it doth: and I hope that there is none so void of reason, as to think, that the Kings dividing of himself from his Parliament, (for the case is utterly mistaken, to say that the Parliament, severs the King from them) shall destroy his Parliament, though I suppose, that many, who dare not bring their actions to the teste, would have it so.
Now if it be so, that, notwithstanding this unhappy division, the Parliament doth vertually, and actually continue, (which, God defend it should be otherwise, for then Parliament, and no Parliament would be all one) then, of necessity, it must follow, that the King, who is the head of this great body, is not divided in Law, though he be in distance, for if so it must needs be, that the body would be destroyed, for that a Body (as I have said before) cannot subsist without a Head. And it must likewise follow, that they usurp no honour or power to themselves, more then by the Law is due, to stile themselves the Parliament. And therefore whatsoever imputations, or dishonourable invectives (things too common in the mouthes of many, who have not common reason, much lesse Law, to discover a truth) are imposed and cast upon the two Houses of Parliament, reflect upon the honour of the King, and are a great stain and blemish to it.
Then if it be thus, that the Parliament, in judgement of Law, can do no wrong, and that no dishonorable thing ought to be imagined of them; certainly, they are the most proper Judges of this imminent danger. But to this it will be objected that the King likewise, in judgement of Law, can do no wrong, and therefore he notwithstanding this reason, may be as proper a Judge of the imminent danger, as any one, and upon this ground his judgement ought rather to be received then the judgement of any, yea of the Parliament it self; & he tels us, that there is no imminent danger, what then meanes this great contention about the Militia? To this I answer, that it is true, the rule of Law likewise is, That the King can doe no wrong; but the reason of this is, for that it is presumed, that what the King doth, he doth upon the advice, & reducement of evill Counsellors, who with a spetious shew, pretend nothing more then the good of the Common-wealth; whereas in truth, they intend nothing lesse. And hath it not been frequent, for Kings, seduced by wicked and malignant Counsellors, to do those things which have been a dishonour to themselves, and a great gravamen and prejudice to the publique: and if so, my conclusion is, that I would as willing a man should doe me injury, upon his owne principles, as by the advice of others; for though happily the wrong may not be so great, as to himselfe, yet the damage is all one to me. But now on the other side, who can tell, or what Story is able to relate, that ever a Parliament did doe that thing, that was prejudiciall to the Common-wealth? Why then if this position hold true, That Kings seduced, may injure the Common-wealth, but that Parliaments cannot: I conclude, notwithstanding this objection, that the Parliament, for this reason, are the most proper Judges of this imminent danger.
Againe, they are the most proper Judges of an imminent danger, who in probabilitie may have the best cognisance, and information of it: but the Parliament (which is the representative body of the whole Realme, and the eyes of all the Kingdome) must of necessitie have the best cognisance and information of any imminent and approaching danger: Ergo, they are the best and most competent Judges of it.
Last of all, the Parliament are the most proper Judges of an imminent danger; for that they are those, whom the Common-wealth hath intrusted with its future happinesse, they are our Judges, those whose judgement we have bound our selves by our owne free Election, to stand to, and therefore we cannot now recede from it, or see with other eyes then they see; if they say, that they see an imminent and approaching danger, we ought not to say, that there is no such matter; and if they say, that the Militia is well and legally settled, we cannot, nor ought not to say, that it is against the Law; for that our judgement is bound up in, and superseded by theirs. But to this it will be said, that this were a kinde of implicite faith, or if I may so speake, a kinde of Heresie in Law; for a man to be tide to subscribe to other mens judgements, and to beleeve that whatsoever they doe, is lawfull: To this I answer shortly, that there is a great difference, between a subscription of compulsion, and a subscription of consent; for volenti non fit injuria, that is, he that cõsents to the doing of a thing, is not injured by the thing done. Againe, the Parliament would not have us to pinne our faith upon their judgements, to beleeve without reason; for, as it is well knowne, they have published the justice and integritie of their cause, to the whole world, and have left their proceedings to the judgement and determination of every private conscience; so that cleerely this objection holds not.
Then if the judgement of Parliament, be our judgement; what else doe they then oppose their own judgement, who dare oppose the judgement of Parliament, which is folly? and what else doe they but preferre their proper and private judgement, before the judgement of the whole Parliament? which is an extreame insolency; for that they represent the whole Kingdome: and are the most worthy part of it, and for that, we have, as I have said before, bound our selves by our owne consent and election, to stand to their judgement and determination. Wherefore, for all these preceding reasons, I conclude this point, that admitting the imminent danger were not perspicuous and manifest to every eye, that the Parliament as they are the most proper Judges, so they ought to be the onely Judges of it, and no other person whatsoever.
Now for the Objection, that many of the Lords and Commons, did never consent to the Ordinance of Parliament, for that they were with his Majestie, and that therefore this should make their determination invalid, and ineffectuall: This is a more strange objection then the other, for that it is against the rule of Law, that any man should take advantage of his owne wrong; and it is cleare, that after the Parliament is once begunne, their personall attendance is so necessary, and of such importance to the Parliament, that they ought not by the Law, for any businesse whatsoever, to be absent, and so is Dyer.Dyer. fo. Stat. 6. H. 8. ca. 3. E. 2. Fitz. Corone 61 [Editor: illegible word] Crompt. [Editor: illegible word] Courts. fo. [Editor: illegible word] And by the Stat. of 6. H. 8. it is enacted, that no Knight, Citizen, or Burges, absent himselfe, without licence of the Speakes and Commons, under the paine of the losse of their wages. And in 3. E. 2. Fitz: Corone 61. cited in Crompton Jur. the Bishop of Winton was arraigned in the Kings Bench, for that he came to the Parliament, and departed without licence. Why then is it so, that their withdrawing of themselves, is a crime in them? Shall they then take advantage of this offence and neglect of theirs, of the Weale publique; for the good of which, they were called and assembled together, to avise? certainly not. Besides, if this objection might hold, who is it that doth not see, what the inconvenience might be, Et argumentum ab inconvenienti est bonum in lege, an argument drawne from inconvenience, is good in Law. For by this invention, the conclusions and determinations of those who are present, intending the Weale publique, (as in dutie they are bound) should be all frustrated, and annihilated, by the absence of those, who voluntarily and against Law, withdraw themselves; which would be destructive to all Parliaments.
For posito that all the Lords or all the Commons, should voluntarily and out of an indisposednesse to the common good, withdraw themselves, and utterly refuse to performe that trust, which is reposed in them, of counselling and consenting to such Lawes, which might establish peace, and a settled condition in Church and State: will any man thinke, that if in this time of dissertion of the Lords or Commons, there be an apparent & imminent danger, threatning ruine to the Common-wealth, if it be not in an opportune and seasonable time prevented, that in this case, it lies not in the power of the King and Lords, or of the King & Commons onely, as the case is, by way of Ordinance, to settle the Kingdom in such a state and temper, as may prevent any approaching misery? Without question it doth, or otherwise this conclusion (as I have said before) would be destructive to all Parliaments.
I agree, that an Act of Parliament cannot be made, by which a new Law should be enacted,H. 7. 18. that should be obligatory to the Subject for ever, (I meane untill it were repealed by another Act) but by the consent of the King, Lords, and Commons; and with this accords the Books, 4. H. 7 there an Act was made by the King and Lords, but nothing was spoken of the Commons; and by all the Judges, this is no act of Parliament.H. 7. 14. 7 H. 7. No Statute except that the Lords and Commons assent to it. And 18. H. 7. it is no act of Parliament, except it be made by the King Lords, and Commons. By this it is manifest, that all the three Estates ought to joyne in the making of an act of Parliament: and this is so cleare, that I need not cite any other authoritie in proofe of it, for our Books are plentifull in this point.H. 7. 27. Onely I shall remember one remarkable case, which I finde in our Law, to prove that the Books which say, That an Act of Parliament cannot be made, without the consent of the Lords, that this ought to be intended of the Lords Temporall onely, and not of the Lords Spirituall: and therefore it is resolved by the Judges in 7. H. 8. Keilway.H. 8. Keilway. fo. 184. b. that the King may well hold his Parliament, by him, his Temporall Lords & Commons, without the Spirituall Lords: so that by this it was manifest, that they were not essentially necessary to a Parliament; for that the King might have holden a Parliament without them: and therefore it is not now so much to be wondred at, that they are totally excluded by Act of Parliament.
But now on the other side, I conceive as clearely, under favour, that if the King do utterly forsake them, and decline their advice and counsell, to which he ought to adhere during Parliament, that in such case they may (as I have said before) make such Ordinances, without him, for the securing of the Kingdome, in case of exigency and extremitie, as shall be obligatory to all the Realme, pending Parliament: for otherwise, they should have the name of a Parliament onely, & not the power and vertue of it.
But now it may be objected, that the King by his Prerogative, may call a Parliament when he pleaseth, and also adjourne and dissolve it when he pleaseth: and that the power given by the Writ of Summons, of the Lords to Parliament, is onely ad tractandum & consulendum, &c. and therefore it will be concluded, that by the same power the King may command his Counsellors whither he pleaseth. To this I answer, and agree, that the King may call or dissolve a Parliament when he pleaseth, and so totally toll their power; but yet under favour, pending Parliament, unadjourned, the King can neither retarde their proceedings, nor take away their persons: and that I shall prove thus: the King, as sons Justitiæ, the fountaine of Justice, from whom all Judiciary power is derived, may likewise make, whom he pleaseth, to be a Judge, to dispence the Lawes in justice and equitie unto his people; but will it therefore follow, that when he hath made such and such to be his Judges, that he may either retarde their proceedings, or countermand their judgements, under favour, nothing lesse. Againe, as I have shewed before, they are punishable by the Law, for withdrawing of themselves: and it were hard, that the King should have power to command me that act, which being done, subjects me to a severe punishment. Now for that part of the objection, that they are but his Counsellors, and not his Judges: to that I shall give, as I hope, a full and satisfactory answer afterwards.
And now I shall conclude this first ground or reason, with another answer to the objection, against the imminent danger, and this I ground upon the words in the Kings Writ, by which he summons the Lords to Parliament; in the body of which Writ he saith, Mandamus quod consideratis dictorum negotiorum ardultate & periculis imminentibus, cessante excusatione quacunque, dictis die & loco personalitèr intersitis nobiscum, &c. that is, we command you, that considering the greatnesse of the businesse, and the imminent dangers, laying aside all excuse, you be personally with us, the said day and place, &c. Here the King by his Writ saith expressely, that at the time of the calling of this Parliament, there was an imminent danger; and as now it should be dishonourable for the King to contradict himselfe, so I doe not conceive, that he shall be received to deny that extrajudicially, which he hath confessed by his Writ judicially.
But to this it will be said, that the Writ, Est breve formatum, that is, it is a formed Writ, or a Writ of course, and that there is no other, and that from this there is no varying; so that be the occasion of calling of the Parliament, what it will, the same form ought to be pursued, and no other; and therefore it is no concluding reason, that there is an imminent danger, because the Writ saith so. To this I answer, that we ought not to presume, that the King will speak any thing in a judiciall way, as here he doth, which should be vain and superfluous; besides, if you consider the time in which this Parliament was called, when that the Scottish Army was in England, and at which time such distractions, and rumours of warres, did I say rumours of warres? I might have said Warre it self; was amongst us: when that the extreme insolencie and pride of the Clergie; together with the darknesse of superstition and Popery, had almost overwhelmed this Nation with imminent destruction and misery: the fear of which doth yet cloud the face of the poore Commonalty, I say, these things considered, we may justly conclude, that the King, at that time, spake as he intended, and therefore certainly now, he shall not be received to contradict it. Wherefore I conclude this first reason, that by reason of the imminent danger which threatens the Common-wealth, the King refusing to settle the Militia, the Parliament may well do it.
2.Secondly, I hold that the Parliament may do it; for that the King by his refusall hath made a breach of that trust that is committed to him, by God, and his people, that there is a trust committed to him, and that the greatest also, that any one under God can have. I have in part demonstrated it before; for I have shewn how that he is bound by the Law to defend and protect his people, their lives, liberties, and estates, from any forrein or domestick danger; and saith Fortescue, ca. 13. cited before,Fort. ca. 13. Rex ad tutelem legis, corporum, & honorum, erectus est: he is erected King, for this purpose, and intent, to defend the Law, the bodies and goods of his Subjects. And he saith himself (as I have likewise shewed before) in the Commission directed to Commissioners of Sewers, that by reason of his royall dignity, Astrictus est ad providendum salvationi regni sui; He is bound to secure his kingdom. And this he is bound to do by the Law, and Justice: for he ought to rule according to Law, and for this purpose he is intrusted with the Law also: and therefore in 8. H. 7. it is said,8.H. 7. fo. 1. a. that the King is conservator of the Law, the which is the Common-weal. As if it had been said, the Common-weal, depends upon the Kings well keeping, and observing, of the Law. And in many places of Bracton, amongst which, this is one: fo. 55. b. he saith, Sciendum quod ipse Dominus Rex, ordinariam habet jurisdictionem, & dignitatem, & potestatem, super omnes, qui in regno suo sunt, habet enim omnia jura in manu sua quæ ad Coronam, & laicam pertinent potestatem, & materialem gladium, qui pertinet ad regni gubernaculum, habet etiam iustitiam & iudicium, quæ sunt iurisdictiones, us ex iurisdictione sua, sicut Dei Minister, tribuat unicuique quod suum fuerit: that is,Bract. fo. 55. b. we must know, that the King hath ordinary jurisdiction, and dignitie, and power, above all which are in his kingdom; for he hath all the Laws in his hand, which do pertain to the Crown, and lay power; and the materiall sword, which belongeth to the government of his kingdom; he hath also justice, and judgement, which are jurisdictions, that by his jurisdiction, as Gods Minister, he may give to every one, that which is his own. Here you may see, that the King is intrusted, with the Laws, and Justice, as also with the materiall Sword, to this end, that he may defend his people committed to his charge, as well by force, if occasion be, as by righteous judgement. And to this also he is bound by his Oath, as I have said before, which I find in Bracton,Bract. fo. 107. a. ca. 9. fo. 107. by which he sweareth that In omnibus iudiciis aquitatem præcipiet, &c. ut per justitiam suam firma gaudent pace universi: that is, that he will use equitie in all his judgements, that all men may injoy a firm peace, by his justice. And there he further saith, that ad hoc creatus est & electus, ut iustitiam faciat universis, &c. & quod iustè iudicaverit, sustineat, & defendet, &c. He is created, and elected King, for this purpose, and intent, to do justice to all men, and that he should judge justly, sustain and defend them. And with this accords 6. H. 7. where it is said,6. H. 7. 16. that the King is bound for to do right to parties. And as he ought to rule according to Law, so he himself, ought to be governed by the Law, as I have shewed before.Bract. fo. 5. b. And as Bracton saith, fol. 5. b. Ipse autem Rex, non debet esse sub homine, sed sub Deo, & sub Lege, quia Lexfacit Legem: The King ought not to be under man, but under God, and the Law. Now I conceive that it is manifest, that the King is intrusted with the Laws, lives, liberties, and estates of his Subjects, all which he of right ought to defend in peace and tranquillity, as he also by his Oath is bound; and therefore Bracton saith, Est Corona Regis facere iustitiam, & iudicium, & tenere pacem,Bract. fo. 55. [Editor: illegible word] sine quibus corona consistere non potest nec tenere: It is the Crown of the King to do justice, and judgement, and to maintain peace; without which, his Crown cannot stand and continue: as if he had said, it is so essentiall to the King to do justice and judgement; and to maintain peace, that you destroy the Crown, if you take away these.
Now I shall prove, that the King hath made a breach of this great trust committed to him, foure wayes. First, by denying of his Protection to his people. Secondly, by not supporting of the Laws, and the Priviledges of Parliament. Thirdly, by not endeavouring to maintain peace amongst his people. And fourthly and lastly, by denying of Justice; and in all these particulars I shall prove, that the King hath broken the trust committed to him.
And first, he hath broken the trust committed to him by denying of his protection, and this he hath done three wayes.1. 1. By denying of his legall protection, that is, in not protecting of his people according to Law: and this he hath done, by denying to settle the Militia, by the advise of his great Counsell, according to Law: by whom onely, during Parliament, he ought to be advised, for during the continuance of this great Counsell, all inferiour Counsels ought to cease: and therfore the Counsell of others neither can, nor ought to countermand theirs: but of this I shall speak more fully afterwards. 2. The King hath denied his Royall protection to his people, in taking up of Arms against his Parliament, who is the representative Body of the whole Kingdom: and this is the most strong refusall of his protection, of all others, for by this he doth not refuse onely to protect them, but he goes about to destroy them, whom, by the Law, and his Oath, he is bound to preserve and defend. And thirdly and lastly, he hath denied his royall protection to his people in this, that in time of imminent danger to the Kingdom, he hath denied to settle the Militia; and he that denies the means, denies the end. For it is a rule with us in our Law, that Qui tollit medium, tollit quoque finem: He that takes away the means, takes away the end. And it is all one in effect, to deny a thing, as to deny the means per quod pervenitur ad illud: by which you may come to the thing. Now it is clear, that the sole means, under God, to defend this kingdom, in time of imminent danger, from its enemies, either forrain or domestick, is, by settling of the Militia, and by putting of the Forts, and Magazine of the kingdom, into faithfull and true hands, such as may be confided in, being a matter of so great consequence, and of so high importance to the whole Common-weal. Now the King refusing to do this, doth he not in effect, deny his protection to his people? for denying of the means, it is all one as if he had denied the end: so that I conceive, for these reasons, the King hath denied to protect his people, as by the Law he is bound, and therefore hath made a breach of the trust that is reposed in him.
2.Secondly, I conceive, that the King hath broken this great trust, in not supporting of the Laws, and the priviledges of Parliament; that he hath not maintained the Law appeareth plainly, by that, that I have said before, for that he hath refused to be ruled by it, as he ought: for though that he is not sub homine, under man; yet he is sub Lege, under the Law, as I have shewed before, and therefore ought to be governed by it. And what is this but a refusing to be ruled by Law, when he refuseth upon the prayer of his Parliament to settle the Militia for the defence of his Kingdom, and people, according to Law? And that the King hath broken the Priviledges of Parliament, what more plain? I might instance in many things, but I shall instance in onely one or two: And here I appeal to all the world, whether his withdrawing of himself from his Parliament; and not onely so, but his endeavouring, by his many detractions and imputations laid upon his Parliament, to withdraw all the hearts of his people from them likewise: and, which is yet worse, his supporting and maintaining of such men, and keeping of them from justice and their condigne punishment, who are Delinquents in a high nature, against his Parliament: I say, that I appeal to all the world, whether these be not great breaches of the Priviledges of Parliament? and what greater breach of the priviledges of Parliament can there be? then to protect and defend them, without any colour of Law, or justice, who indeavour nothing, but the ruine of Parliament, and in this, of our Laws, lives, and liberties: so I conceive, that this also is a breach of that great trust which is reposed in his Majestie, by God, his people, and the Laws of the Land.
Thirdly, I conceive that the King hath infringed this great trust,3. by not indeavouring to maintaine peace: and this two wayes, by his commission, and omission; by his commission, in taking up of Armes against his people, as I have said before, and then by his omission, and not onely so, but by an absolute refusall, in this time of imminent danger, to settle the Kingdome in a posture of defence, the sole meanes, under God, as I have said, to maintaine peace and tranquillitie amongst us: and this is against his Oath also, which the King himselfe was pleased of late to publish to his people: which I finde likewise expressely in Bracton,Bract. fo. 107. [Editor: illegible word] that the King first sweareth, Se esse pracepturum, & pro viribus opem impensurum ut Ecelesiæ Dei & omni populo Christiano, vera pax, omni suo tempore, observetur, that is, that he will indeavour to the utmost of his power, that true peace may be kept & observed, to the Church of God, and to all Christian people, all his dayes.
Fourthly, and lastly, I conceive that the King hath broken his trust,4. by denying of justice: and this he hath done two wayes; first, by denying to surrender up Delinquents to the Justice of the Law: and secondly, by denying to settle the Militia, by and according to the advise of his great Counsell the Parliament. Now that the King is obliged to doe Justice, it is without question, for his very Oath (as I have shewed before) ties him expressely to it, and so is 6. H. 7. cited before,Bracton fo. 107 and Bracton, fo. 107. a. where he saith, that Ad hoe creatus est & electus ut justicians faciat universis, &c. He is created and elected King, for this purpose and intent, that he may doe justice to all men. And what greater act of Justice can there be, then for the King to defend his people in peace? or what greater act of Justice can there be, then for the King, at the request of his people, represented by the body of Parliament, to enact such Lawes, which conduce to the maintaining of peace? Certainly none. And this Bracton seemeth to intimate,Bracton. fo. [Editor: illegible word] Sinon esset qui justitiam faceret, pax de facili potest exterminari, &c. If there were not one who would doe Justice, peace might easily be extirminated. Here note, that he doth not say, that our lives, Lawes, Liberties, or Estates, for want of Justice might easily be extirminated; but our peace, by this, as it were, concentering all Justice in this act of maintaining peace: and without question, all our happinesse, under God, consists in the supporting and maintaining of peace: for, take that away, and all things fall to utter ruine and destruction. And certainly, if it be thus, that the greatest act of Justice in the King that can be, consists in maintaining of peace, and in granting of such Lawes, which conduce unto this end, without question the denying of this by the King, must needs be the greatest act of injustice in the King that can be, and by consequence, a breach of that trust, that is reposed in his Majestie. And therefore I doe conceive, that at the least in this, the King can have no negative voyce: and I doe not conceive, that the King can have any negative voyce in Parliament, in other things; for if the King, by his Oath, and the Law of the Land, be obliged to doe Justice, (as in truth he is) and if it be as great an act of Justice in the King, as can be, not onely justly to dispence the Lawes in esse, in being, to his people; but also to grant such new Lawes unto them as conduce to the well governing of them, in peace and happinesse. Why then certainly it must of necessitie follow, that the King can have no negative voyce; but is bound under this heavie sinne, of the breach of his Oath, and the Lawes of the Land, to grant such Lawes as are requested of him by his people.
But here it may be objected, that the King had this Prerogative by the Law, that he might have called a Parliament when he pleased, and there was no positive Law to the contrary, before this Parliament, in which the King hath devested himselfe of this power; and if before at the request of his people, he had not been pleased to grant them a Parliament, why, this in effect, was a denier of Justice, for that the King denied the meanes by which it might be obtained, and yet this was lawfull for him to doe; therefore it will be concluded, that by the same reason he may have a negative voyce in Parliament.Cro. Iur. fo. 7. b. And Cromp. Jur. of Courts saith expressely, that when the King doth assent to a Bill, then he writes upon the Bill, L’Roy veult, that is, the King will have it so; and if he doth not assent, then it is indorsed L’Roy advisera, that the King will advise; here it doth appeare how the King hath a negative voyce allowed him by the Law. To this I answer, and agree, these Prerogatives de facto to be in the King, but whether in truth, they be such as are compatible, and may stand with the Oath and Justice of the King: this may be questionable, and under favour, I conceive that they cannot; for that, as I have shewed, his Oath and the Lawes of the Land, ties his Majestie to doe Justice to his people, and the granting of new Laws unto them, upon their request, is an Act of Justice, and therefore he cannot denie them without breach of his Oath, and the Lawes of the Land; and by consequence, these prerogatives are not compatible, with the Oath and Justice of the King; and though peradventure the Law may dispence with it selfe, yet it cannot with the Oath of the King. Wherefore I conceive, notwithstanding this objection, that the King can have no negative voyce: but of this onely by the way.
And is it thus, that the King hath made a breach of that trust reposed in him, by God and his people? as in truth, I have cleered it unto you: then none so proper to supply this defect, in his Majestie, by the disposing of the Militia, for the defence and protection of the King & Kingdome, as the Parliament, who are at this time entrusted, under God, not onely with our esse, with our being, but with our bene esse, with our well-being also.
But here it may be objected, that the King derives his Crowne and regall power from God, and that therefore he is responsible to God alone for his actions, and not to man: To this I answer, that it is a most strange Episcopall and illegall objection; for what is this but the attributing of a power to the King above Law? and the giving of him such a prerogative that should not be subject to those Constitutions, which his predecessors before him had been, and though it should be admitted, that as all power is derived originally from God, so especially this; yet it doth not follow, that it was therefore conferred by an extraordinary and immediate hand of God, as it was upon Saul and David,1 Sam. 9. & 14. yet they likewise were confirmed and approved by the people, as you may reade in holy Writ. Besides, Saul and David, lived not under any Municipall or positive Constitutions of men, which they were bound to maintaine and observe, as the King of England doth, and therefore it must needs be, that their power must be more absolute, which was not circumscribed within the bounds and limits of any humane Lawes. But now the Kings of England having subjected themselves to the Law of the Land, and received their Crownes with that trust and tacite condition, of defending of the Lawes, lives, and liberties of their Subjects: the Law were idle and vaine, if there should be none that should have this power, for the breach of this trust by his Majestie, to interpose for the securing of him, his Lawes, and people. And if this divine prerogative, which the Bishops doe so buzze into the Kings eares, should be admitted, I would faine know what difference would be made, betwixt an absolute Monarke, and the King of England: and cleerely this was never reputed for other, nor can be (the Crowne being subject to the Law as well as the people) then a mixt Monarchy: but I shall conclude this, that they who so much defend and exalt this divine prerogative, would in the conclusion (if they might have their way) upon the same ground, advance the Miter above the Crowne. God open the Kings eyes, that he may see and acknowledge himselfe subject to the Lawes, and may rule his people accordingly: and grant that he may detest such advice, as dangerous to the State, and the suggesters of it, as Pests and Traytors to the same.
But it may be againe objected, that this was a conquered Nation, & therefore by the Law of Conquest, the Conquerour might have made what alterations in the Law, or State, he pleased; but he retaining the Law, and subjecting himselfe to it (who might have advanced himselfe above it) will it therefore follow, that in so doing, he hath subjected himselfe to his people likewise? if he transgresse it, Deum habet ulterem, God will revenge it, but it was never his intent to give his people that power.
To this I answer, that retaining of the Law, and subjecting of himselfe unto it, he is bound by it, and all his Successours after him; and it were in vaine (as I have touched it before) to establish a Law, and to give none power to put it in execution: Wherefore I conceive, that that Law that bindes the King, will for the breach of the same, authorise his Parliament, though not to inflict any penalty upon his sacred person, God forbid, yet to provide for the securing of him and his Kingdome; for otherwise (as the sad consequence of it would make it good) it would be, in effect, but as a dead Letter.
But now further it may be objected; Shall they have such an arbitrary way of power, as this is, to doe any thing by way of Ordinance, without the King? If this may be suffered, they may Metamorphise and change the Law, into what shape they please, or which best agrees with their humours: so that if they order, that land shall from henceforth discend to the youngest sonne, contrary to the course of common Law, (as I thinke the case was put) if this ordinance should binde the Subject, he should here at once be deprived of a double birth-right and inheritance, viz. of his land as heire, and of the Law as a Subject; which would be very hard and unreasonable.
For that part of the objection, of their arbitrary way of proceeding, I shall in part here answer it; but more fully afterwards: for the objection, that they cannot doe it by way of Ordinance, without the King: To this I answer, that in case of imminent danger (as now) the Kingdome must needs perish, if they should not have this power, for they have no other way to ayde the Kingdome in time of imminent danger, by setling the Militia of it, but by way of Act, or Ordinance, and if the King refuse, by their advice, to settle it, by way of act (as in truth he doth now) then we must of necessitie, allow a power in the Parliament, Ne percat regnum. least that the Kingdome perish, by way of Ordinance to settle the Militia, for the defence of the same; for otherwise, the King should have power, when he pleaseth, to destroy his Kingdome, and the people should be left naked of any abilitie, to preserve and defend themselves; which were very unreasonable, and unnaturall; for nature it selfe, hath not onely established it as a Law, that all creatures may defend themselves from unnaturall violence, but hath armed them accordingly.
And now I shall prove, that as the Parliament are the most proper and onely power, to provide for the securing of the Kingdom: and as they have no other way to do it: so they are obliged to take this way: and this they are tied to by their Oaths of Allegiance, Supremacy, and their late Protestation; for by these they have all sworn, vowed, and protested, to defend the King, his royall person, and estate, and to be true and faithfull to him; now it is impossible for them to defend the King, and to be true and faithfull to him, if they, in time of imminent danger, do not indeavour, as much as in them lieth, to defend his kingdom; for there is such a reciprocall and dependent relation, betwixt the King and his Kingdom, that the one cannot subsist without the others for if they permit the kingdom to be destroyed, the King must of necessitie be ruined also. If the Master die, the relation of a servant must needs cease: for that relatives cannot subsist, the one, without the other. And if the kingdom fail, the King and Scepter must needs fall to the ground. And this is, in part, the reason of that pollicy of Law, in the 7. Rep. Calvins case, that the King is a body politick,7. Rep. 12. Calvins C. lest there should be an interregnum; for that a body politique never dieth.
Why then is it so, that they are bound by their Oaths to defend the kingdom, as well as the King? as in truth they are, for that the King cannot subsist without the kingdom; then the consequence must of necessity be, that the Parliament, in this time of imminent danger, hath well done in settling of the Militia, for the defence and welfare of the King and kingdom: and that in so doing, they have not onely not done more then what they might do, but they have done no more then what they were bound to do, and this under the heavie sinne of perjurie.
But here it may be objected, that this is a corrupting and dividing of the Text; for that the Oath of Supremacy doth not onely bind us to be true, and faithfull to the King, but also to defend, all Jurisdictions, Priviledges, preheminences, and authorities, granted, or belonging to his Highnesse, &c. And the having of the sole disposing of the Militia is one of the priviledges of the Crown, and appertaining to his Highnesse: and therefore we are bound likewise, by this Oath, to defend this priviledge of the Kings, against any who shall endeavour the taking it away from his Majestie.
To this I answer, and agree, that the King (as I have shewed before) hath this priviledge and prerogative given unto him, and with him intrusted by the Law for the good of the Common-wealth: but I never heard that he had it allowed him, for the destruction of the same. Again, I agree that the Oath of Supremacy obligeth every man to defend the priviledges and preheminences of the King: but I do not conceive, or beleeve, that this ought to be so construed, that any man by the Oath of Supremacy, is bound to defend the priviledges of the King, against the weal publick: for if the weal publick, and priviledges of the King, stand in competition, without question the publick interest and welfare ought to be preferred. And therefore if the King do not imploy and use his priviledges according to the trust reposed in him, but rather contrary to it: certainly this doth disoblige every man from that tie and ingagement in this particular, with which he was bound by the Oath of Supremacy. For so to construe the Oath, that I should defend the priviledges of the King, though it be in destruction of the common-wealth: were to make the Oath the most hard and unreasonable tye in the world: whereas, every Oath, amongst other qualifications, ought especially to have these two: viz. that it be explicite, I mean, without implications, or etcetera’s: and reasonable; and it would be very unreasonable for a man to swear to such a thing as would be his own destruction: but à fortiori, where it would be the destruction of the Common-wealth. And as it is said, Pereat unus, ne pereant omnes; let one perish, that all may not perish: So I say, Pereant privilegis Regis ne pereat Regnum: it were much better, that the priviledges of the King should totally cease, or at the least, be suspended for a time, then that the kingdom should be indangered.
But now I shall demand of any man an answer to this question: whether doth most stand for and defend the priviledges of the King: either he that endeavoureth to the utmost of his power to defend and support the Common-weal, in imminent danger: or he that indeavoureth the destruction and ruine of the same: this is the very difference, between the Parliament and the Malignant party: the Parliament use all means possible to defend the King and kingdom from ruine; and the malignant party use all their skill to make both for ever miserable; This question is in it self pregnant of an answer: and the very putting of the case, is a solution of the question: For, no doubt, every wise and ingenious man must needs conclude within himself, that they most defend the priviledges of the King, who most indeavour the safetie of the King and kingdom, and that is the Parliament: so that this Objection fails in the very foundation of it.
And now having answered that part of the Objection, that we ought not to defend the priviledges of the King against the Common-weal: and having likewise shewed, that he most indeavours the defence of the priviledges of the King, who seeks most the good and prosperitie of the Common-weal. I shall now answer the latter part of the Objection, that there is none that goeth about the taking away of the priviledges of the King: but onely to imploy them in defect of the King, according to the trust reposed in his Majestie. For as I have shewed before the King is tied to protect his Subjects from any forrain invasion, or domestick danger: and now the King refusing to do this, by putting of the kingdom into a posture of defence; the Parliament, according to the trust reposed in them, have, in defect of the King, and in his right, assumed to themselves this great charge, of settling of the Militia, for the securitie of the King, and people. And here I shall bid malice it self speak, whether it hath been imployed to any other end or purpose, then that for which it hath been alwayes pretended: viz. for the defence of the King and kingdom? or whether the Magazine (which is pretended to be taken from the King) wheras in truth it is imployed by the King, and for the safetie of him, and his kingdom (as I shall afterwards shew) hath been converted to any private property:4. Rep. 73. 2. or otherwise disposed of, then for the common good? and if so, certainly here is no devesting of the pretended property of the King: but that it still remaineth in statu quo prius:7. Rep. 25. b. in the same state that it was at the first. But if it should be admitted, that this priviledge of the King is at this time taken from him: I conceive that it may be so, as this case is: For, as I have said before,14. H. 4. 9. it were better that the King should loose his priviledge, then that the kingdom should perish. I agree the rule of Law, that the King, regularly, cannot grant over his Prerogative; and with this accords 4. Rep. 7. Rep. 14. H. 4. 2. H. 7. 20. H. 7.2. H. 7. fo. 13. and many other books: except in some speciall cases, as in the 2. Rep. and the 5. Rep. and the difference upon the books may be this, where the Prerogative is meerly personall, and where not: where it is meerly personall, there it is not grantable;20. H. 7. fo. 8. but where it is not meerly personall, there it is: Now in our case I do conceive, and shall agree, that the ordering of the Militia of the kingdom, is a prerogative, so meerly personall in the King, that it cannot be granted over to another.2. Rep. fo. 44. 2. But it doth not therefore follow, that it can by no means be severed; especially, as in this case, when it so much concerneth the good of the Common-weal. Wherefore, I conceive clearly, that the King cannot grant this prerogative over to another,5. Rep. fo. 56. b. for that he onely is intrusted with it for the weal publick: and as we well know, parties intrusted, cannot grant their trust over: for that a trust is meerly personall, and therefore not severable. And the King can no more grant over his prerogative of protection, or power of ordering of the Militia, to another, then he can dispose of his Crown, or royall dignitie, to another: and that he cannot do,Rot. Parl. An. 40. E. 3. Nu. 8. for King John surrendred his Crown to the Pope, and this was adjudged to be void, for that it was given to him by God, and the Law, in trust, for the well governing of his people. And therefore by his own act, or grant, cannot be severed from him: For an office of trust, by the Law, is not grantable over. But on the other side, we see, how that Crowns of Kings have been taken from them, by the people, as in case of R. 2. and others: I do not speak this in justification of the deposing of Princes, God forbid that I should, their persons are sacred: for that they are Gods anointed, and his Vicegerents, or Vicarii Dei, that is, Gods Vicars, as Bracton stiles them: against whom, God hath laid an inhibition, that we use not any violence, Touch not mine anointed: and therefore for my part, I conceive, that that damned opinion of the Spencers,Bract. F. 2. called exelium Hugonis de Spencer. 1. E. 2 ca. 1. in the reign of E. 2. that if the King did not demean himself, by reason in the right of his Crown, that his Lieges were bound by oath to remove the King: and that if the King could not be reformed by suit of Law, that it ought to be done per aspertee, I say that, I conceive that this was justly damned, as in truth it was afterwards by two Acts of Parliament; the one in the Reign of E. 2. called Exilium Hugonis de Spencer: and the other in 1. E. 3. ca. 1.
But now, though that the King cannot grant this Prerogative over, as I have said before yet, under favour, I conceive cleerly, that it lieth in power of the Parliament, for the preservation of the Kingdom, in case of imminent danger, as now, to settle the Militia in hands to be confided in; for, as I have said before, the prerogative of the King must give way to the weal publique, and not the weal publique to the Prerogative of the King. For if the Prerogative of the King ought not to be advanced to the prejudice and wrong of the interest of any private man, as I have shewed before, much lesse, to the wrong and injurie of the re-publique. And with this difference ought Bracton to be understood, who saith,Bract. fo. 55. b. that, Ea quæ jurisdictionis sunt, & pacis, & ea que sunt justitiæ & paci annexa, ad nullum pertinent, nisi ad Coronam & dignitatem Regiam, nec à Corona seperari poterunt, cum faciunt ipsam Coronam. Those things that belong to jurisdiction and peace, or are annexed to them, appertain to none, but the Crown, and Royall Dignity, neither can they be severed from it, for that they make the Crown it self. Now as I have shewed before, these words of Bracton, Ea quæ pacis sunt, &c. those things that belong to peace, must necessarily intend Ea quæ belli sunt, those things that belong to warre also, for that it is impossible for the King, Absque rebus Militaribus, that is, without the Militia, to defend his people in peace and safety; And for that, that he saith, that this cannot be severed from the Crown: this ought to be understood, by his own act onely: and not that it cannot be severed from him, though in his own default, by his Parliament. For to make such a construction, were to make a Law, destructive to that, for which it was principally, and in the first place, made to preserve; and that is the Common-wealth. And the like construction and explanation of his words, Bracton maketh afterwards, for he saith, Ad personas, vel tenenmeta transferri non poterant, nec à privata persona possidori: they cannot be transferred to persons, or Tenements, nor be possessed of a private person; which cannot be otherwise intended, then of the grant of the King, for transferre, that is, to transferre, is no other then concedere, that is, to grant. And I agree with Bracton in this, that the King cannot grant over this prerogative: but this position, doth no way conclude against the power of the Parliament, as our case is.
But here Mittons case in the fourth Rep. cited before to another purpose, may be objected against me,4. Rep. Mittons case. where it is resolved, that the Queene could not take away the grant of the Office of the Clerke of the Countie Court from the Sheriffe: in which case, there is another case also cited to be adjudged by all the Judges of England, viz. that the grants of the custodies of Goals of the Counties, by the King are voyde; and the reason that is given for both these Cases, is, that the Sheriffe having these Offices appendent to his Office (as in truth they are) is by the Law responsible for all misdemeanours done in those Offices, and therefore it is against all reason, that the grant of them should be taken from him; but that he should have power, to put in such into those Offices, for whom he should answer. Now the force of the objection stands thus; if these Offices cannot be severed from the Sheriffe, because that by this he should be disabled to performe the trust reposed in him, and yet should be responsible for all misdemeanours done in those offices, which would be very unreasonable: à fortiori, you shall not take a way this priviledge from the King, for by this he should be disabled, either to protect and defend his people, as by Law he is bound, or faithfully to discharge this great trust reposed in him, as God requireth. To which I answer, that there is a great and wide difference betwixt the cases; for first, in the case of the Sheriffe, the depriving him of the grant of these Offices, concernes onely his private interest, & not the Common-weale; I meane, the Common-weale stands not in competition with the Sheriffes right, as in our case; and therefore in this, the difference is great. But, which makes the cases much more to differ: in the case of the Sheriffe, there was no act or default in him, for which to deprive him of this benefit; and it is a rule in our Law, that Quod nostrum est, sine facto, sive defectu nostro, amitti seu ad alium transferri, non potest; a man shall never be devested of his propertie, without his owne act, or default. But otherwise it is here in the case of the King, for, if there be no act, yet I am certaine, that there is a defect or default in the King, in refusing, in this time of imminent danger, to put the Kingdome, according to the advice of his great Counsell, in a posture of defence.
And it is no new thing, for a man to loose his interest in his own default: Upon this I might multiplie cases; but I will put onely one or two familiar and ordinary cases in our Books. If I make an estate for life, or yeares, to another, without condition expressed, yet the Lessee hath not the estate so absolute in him, but that by a tacite condition in Law, running with every such particular estate, he may, by his own default, loose his estate; and therefore if he commit wast, he subjects his estate to be evicted by the Lessor; or if he assumeth to himselfe, to grant a greater estate to another, then he himselfe hath, by this he forfeiteth his estate. But you will peradventure say, that this case doth not agree with the case in question, for that the King hath an estate of inheritance in his Crowne, which goeth in succession to his posteritie, as well as the private interest of any Subject: This I agree, but under favour, he hath this committed to him in trust; this tacite condition runneth along with it, that he use his regall power and authoritie, for the good of the publique; or if he doth not, that then his great Counsell for breach of this trust, and non-performance of this tacite condition (though that they cannot meddle with his sacred person, by dethroning of him, or devesting of him of the regall Scepter) may provide for the securing of him and his Kingdome.
Againe, it is cleare by the Law, that misuser or non-user of any Franchises, Priviledges,5. E. 4. 5. or Offices, is a forfeiture of them; but especially of any publique Offices, which concerne the administration of Justice, or the Common-wealth: and with this agreeth 5. E. 4. 8. H. 4. 20. E. 4. and my Lord Cooke in his Comment upon Littleton:8. H. 4. 18. and many other Books. Now it is as cleare, that to be a King, is an Office, though it be the greatest Office that any one, under God, can have:20. E. 4. 6. and what Office so much concerneth the administration of Justice, and the good of the Common-wealth, as this doth? and therefore, though this great office, be no more forfeitable, then it is grantable by the King:Iustit. 233. 2. for I conceive that to be regularly true in the Law, that that which is not grantable, is not forfeitable: yet, God forbid, that his great Counsell, for his misuser, or non-user of his Kingly function, should not have power, for the breach of this tacite condition, to apply themselves, by all lawfull meanes, for the securing of him and his Kingdome.
I shall compare this case, to one case onely, lately adjudged, viz. Hill. 17. Car. in the Kings Bench,Hill. 17. Car. in Banco Regli Langhams case Langhams case, where the case was thus; Langham a Citizen and free-man of London, was elected Alderman of the Citie, and being called to take his Oath, refused, for which he was committed to prison by the Court of Aldermen: upon which he prayed his Habeas corpus in the Kings Bench, and it was granted unto him: and upon the returne of the Writ, they did alledge, that they had this custome, that if any man were elected Alderman of the Citie, and refused to take the Oath, that the Court of Aldermen had used, time out of minde, to imprison the party so refusing: and then they set forth, de facto, how that Langham being a Citizen and free-man of London, was duely elected Alderman, of such a Ward; and that he being called to take the Oath, refused, and that therefore he was committed by the Court of Aldermen: and the question here was, whether the custome to imprison the body of a free-man, were a good custome, or not? and it was resolved upon solemne debate, by all the Judges of the Kings Bench, that the custome, as this case is, is a good custome: and this is the difference that was taken by them, that a custome generally for a Court of Record to imprison the body of a freeman, is no good custom, for that it is against the libertie of the Subject, and Magna Charta,9. H. 3. [Editor: illegible word] by which it is enacted, Quod nullus liber homo capiatur, aut imprisonetur, &c. that is, that no free-man be taken or imprisoned; but Per legem terra, &c. by the Law of the Land. But a custome, as in this case, for to imprison the body of a freeman, for refusing to take an office upon him, which is for the support of government, and without which government cannot subsist, which by consequence, strikes at the very esse, and foundation of the Common-wealth; for that it cannot stand without government: such a custome was resolved to be a good custome. Now I shall compare this case, with the case in question: it is here resolved, that a custome for to imprison the body of a freeman, for refusing to do such a thing, which by consequence reflects upon the Common wealth, and may indanger it, that this is a good custome: now thus stands the paralell: and as the rule of Law is, Vbi eadem ratio, ibi idem jus, where there is the same reason, there ought to be the same Law. Now the same Law, that defends the Kings prerogative from violation, or separation from the Crown, doth as strongly, Et eadem jure, by the same right, defend the liberty and freedome of every private mans person from imprisonment; for, though the interest and priviledge of the King, doe farre transcend any singular and private persons, being compared with them, yet they stand in equipage, In equali jure, that is, in equall right, being compared with the Common-weale; and therefore aswell the interest of the King, as of his Subject, Debent cedere Republicæ, ought to give way to the Common-wealth: And yet we see, that as a mans person, for the good of the Common-wealth, shall be set at large, and free from imprisonment, as it is resolved in 36. & 37. H. 8. Dyer.36. & 37. Dyer. fo Trewynni Case. Where a man was elected a Burges of Parliament, and being in execution was let at large, by a Writ of priviledge, and adjudged that his inlargement was lawfull, and that the Sheriffe was by this excused: So on the other side, a freemans person, by a private custome, contrary to Magna Charta, may for the good of the Common wealth be imprisoned: and without question, the Subject may as justly demand of the Law, the freedome of his person from imprisonment, as the King, of his prerogative, from violation, or separation; and yet no priviledge, no, not of the person it selfe, of a common person, ought to be preferred before the common good: and by the same reason, not any priviledge of the King; for, though the King be much greater, and much to be preferred, before many thousands, of individuall or particular persons; yet, without question, the universe or Common-wealth, is to be preferred before the King, or any interest or priviledge whatsoever of his: so that, for all these reasons, I conceive, that the prerogative of the King, may, as this case is, be severed from him: and therefore, that the Parliament (admitting that they have taken it from his Majesty) have done no more then what is warrantable by the Law.
But now, if all that I have as yet said, will not sufficiently justifie the Parliament in their proceedings, concerning the Militia: I shall adde a third reason to prove,3. that what they have done, is lawfull: and that is this; what they declare to be Law, bindes the King, by an inclusive judgement, & then their judgemennt, being the judgement of the King, and their Votes and Declarations of the Law, including the royall assent and declaration: the King cannot afterwards by a subsequent Declaration countermand his own judgement, tacitly included in theirs: and by consequence, the prerogative of the King suffers no violence; for Volenti non fit injuria, that is, a man that consents to the doing of a thing, is not injured by the thing being done. Now that their Declarations of the Law, includes the King, and shall binde him, I shall presently prove it: First, it is cleare, that the Parliament consisting of the three estates: viz. of the King,9. Rep. Epist Lords, and Commons, are a Court; and it is as cleare, that they are the greatest and highest Court in England; in which, Justice is administred by the King, in those Worthies, unto his people, in the most high and transcendent way that can be: for the King doth not appeare with that splendour and brightnesse of Justice and integritie; neither is he so true and clearely represented to his people, in those glorious rayes of his,Pl. Com. fo. 388. Bract. fo. 34. a. [Editor: illegible word] 2. ca. 2. [Editor: illegible word][Editor: illegible word] fo. 1. 2. in any Court of Justice whatsoever, as he is, in his thrice great and honourable Court of Parliament. Now that it is a Court, and that the greatest Court in England, in the 9. Rep. Epist. ibidem, my Lord Cooke saith, that among other appellations, it is called by the name Magnæ Curiæ, &c. of the great Court, and in Pl. Com. fo. 388. the Parliament is a Court of thrice great honour and justice, &c. and Bracton 34. a. Rex habes &c. Curiamsuam, viz. Comites Barones, &c. the King hath his Court, to wit, Earles, Barons, &c. and Fleta lib. 2. ca. 2. Habes etiam Rex Curiamsuam, in Consilio suo, in Parliamentis suis, &c. the King hath his Court, in his Counsell, in his Parliaments, &c. and Crompton in his Jurisdiction of Courts, begins with the description of the high Court of Parliament, giving it the precedency in act, as well as in words: where he saith, that the said Court, is, L’treshaulte Court d’ Engliterre, that is, the thrice high Court of England: in which, saith he, the Prince himselfe sits in person, &c. And I shall conclude this with Dyer, who saith, that this Court of Parliament, is the highest Court, and hath more priviledges then any other Court of the Realme, &c. And all this is made cleare, without further saying, by this, that no appeale lyeth from this Court;Dyer fo. no reversall of their judgement, but by the judgement of a subsequent Parliament.
Then this being admitted, that the Parliament is the greatest Court in England, I shall argue thus: is the King by intendment of Law, present in all his other inferiour Courts? as in truth he is, as 21.21. H. 7. and 2. & 3. Eliz. Dyer fo. 1. H. 7. and 2 & 3. Eliz. Dyer. and many other books are: which certainly is the reason of the heavy judgement of these cases, of killing of a Judge upon the Bench; that that is Treason: Or of drawing of a sword to strike a Justice sitting in judgement: or of striking of a Juror in the presence of Justice, that these incurre the heavy judgement, of cutting off the right hand, perpetuall imprisonment, and the losse of lands, and goods,22. E. 3. and Fitz. Judg. 174. as the books are, of 22. E. 3. and F. Judgement, 174. or of killing of a Messenger of the King, that goeth to execute his commandment, that this likewise is Treason, as the book is, in 22. Ass. I say, I conceive, that the reason of these cases is, for that he that offers violence to his Minister, when he is doing the service of his great Master the King: offers violence to the King himself, whose person he represents, and who by intendment of Law, is there present giving judgement: and he that strikes another in the presence of Justice, doth it as in the presence of the King himself:22. Ass. [Editor: illegible word] for that what the Judge, or Minister of the King doth, in pursuance of the lawfull commands of the King, or in executing Justice, is the act or judgement of the King himself, according to that rule of Law, Qui per alium facit, per scipsum facere videtur: the act of a mans minister or servant, is the act of the Master himself.Bract. fo. [Editor: illegible word] And this Bracton himself saith, treating of jurisdiction, delegated by the King, to inferiour Judges, and withall shewing and directing of those Judges Delegates, to execute righteous judgement, saith he, Tale judicium diligit honor Regis, cujus personam in judicio & judicando representant. Such a judgement the honour of the King delights in, whose person, in judgement, they represent. Why then, I say, is it thus, that the King by intendment of Law, is present in all his other Courts; and that what they do, or judge, is the act or judgement of the King himself? then certainly it must of necessity follow, (as indeed the Law is) that their judgement cannot be countermanded by the King: for this were to put Cæsar against Cæsar, the King against himself, which cannot be; for that when a Judge hath once given his judgement, he cannot afterwards countermand this judgement.
Again, is the King (as I have said) by intendment of Law present in his inferiour Courts; and is their judgement his judgement, so that by this his Majestie is estopped and concluded by his own inclusive judgement, to countermand theirs. Then, I say, à fortiori, the King, though he disunite himself from his Parliament, yet by intendment of Law, and virtually he is present in his high Court of Parliament: and therefore their judgement is his judgement: and what they declare to be Law, the King by an inclusive judgement declareth to be Law also. And if so, the conclusion must of necessity be, that the King can no more countermand their judgement, then he can the judgement of his Judges: for when Transit in rem judicatam, that is, when a thing is once adjudged, it can never after be repealed by the same judgement (as I have said) for that were a way to make judgement upon judgement, and so ad infinitum, & infinitum in iure reprobatur: the Law detests infinites. And as the King himself, cannot repeal this judgement pronounced by his Parliament: so neither can he do it, by any other advise or judgement, power, or jurisdiction whatsoever, no not by the advise, though of all the Judges of England, for that there is no power or judgement whatsoever, but is inferiour to the judgement of the high Court of Parliament; which is plain, by that, that no appeal lieth from them: and then the rule of Law binds up and supersedeth all inferiour judgements: In presentia maioris, cessat potestas minoris. In the presence of the great, the power of the lesse ceaseth. And therefore according to this rule, it is resolved in 21.Ass. Pl. 2. Ass. that because that the Kings Bench is Eier, and more then Eier: if a Commission of Eier sit in a County, and the Kings Bench cometh thither; the Eier ceaseth. And this is the reason, that when it was enacted by the Statute of 28 E. 1.[Editor: illegible word] 1. ca. 5. that the Kings Bench should follow the King, that the power of the Steward of the Kings Houshold, to determine Pleas of the Crown, did cease: and that in Terme time, when the Kings Bench sits, in the same County, all Commissions cease,Rep. fo. 73. [Editor: illegible word] Rep. fo. [Editor: illegible word] b. as it is resolved in the 10. Rep. and in the 9. Rep. And this is the reason likewise, that when the Pope exercised jurisdiction here in England, whatsoever the Ordinary of any Diocesse might do, that the Pope, who challenged to himself supreme jurisdiction, over all Ordinaries, used to do within this Realm, as supreme Ordinary: and so he used to make Visitations, corrections, dispensations, and tolerations, within every Diocesse of this Realm, as the Ordinaries used: so he used to make Appropriations, without the Bishop: and this was held good, and was never contradicted by the Bishop, who was accounted but the inferiour Ordinary. Upon this ground, as it is said by Manwood Justice in Pl. Com.Com. fo. [Editor: illegible word] In presentia maioris, cessat potestas minoris.
So I say, in the case in question, for that the high Court of Parliament, are the most supreme jurisdiction in England; what they declare to be Law, cannot be countermanded, by the judgement of any power or Counsell whatsoever: because that in the presence of the most supreme jurisdiction, the inferiour ceaseth. I do not hereby intend, that the power of the Judges, in their severall Courts, for the dispensation and execution of justice, should cease in the Terme, for that the Parliament is sitting at the same time, And the reason is obvious, for that these Courts have their proper and distinct jurisdictions, from the Parliament; and therefore cannot be superseded by it. I intend by this onely that what the Parliament hath declared to be Law, cannot, as I have said before, be countermanded by any other inferiour judgement whatsoever: for that where the powers exercise the same jurisdiction, they cannot both stand together, but the greater will cashere and suspend the lesse: so I say in our case.
But here it may be objected,Bract. fo. 55. b. that the King is fons Justitiæ, that is, the fountain of Justice; and that he onely, as Bracton saith, Ordinariam habet iurisdictionem, & dignitatem & potestatem super omnes qui in regno suo sunt, habet enim omnia iurain manu sua, &c. And a little after he saith, Ea quæ iurisdictionis sunt, &c. & ea quæ sunt Justitie, &c. annexa, ad nullum pertiaent, nisi ad Coronam & dignitatem Regiam: that is, those things which appertain to jurisdiction, and justice, belong to no body, but the Crown, and royall dignity. And as all justice and jurisdiction is primarily and originally in the King, so they cannot be exercised by any other, except that they be first delegated to them by the King; And so saith Bracton a little after, Jurisdictiones, &c. non possunt à privata persona possideri, nec usus, nec executio iuris, nisi hoc datum fuorit ei desuper: that is, no jurisdiction, nor execution of the Law, can be exercised by any private person, except that this power be first given unto him from the King. So Bracton treating of jurisdiction, saith; Videndum,Bract. fo. 107. [Editor: illegible word] &c. quis primo & principaliter possit & debet indicare: that is, let us see, who first, and principally, may, and ought to judge. And then he answereth, Sciendum, quod ipse Rex. & non alius, si solus ad hoc sussicere possit; cum ad hoc virtute sacramenti teneatur astrictus that is, we must know, that the King onely, and no other, if he alone may suffice: For that he is bound to do it, by vertue of his Oath. And after in the next Chapter speaking of jurisdiction delegated, he saith,Bract. fo. 108. a. Si ipse Dominus Rex ad singulas causas terminandas, non sussicias, ut levior sit illi labor, &c. he may, saith he, Constituere Justiciarios, &c. quibus referantur tam quæstiones super dubiis, quam quærimoniæ super iniuriis, &c. that is, if the King alone cannot suffise to determine all causes, that his labour may be the more easie, he may constitute Justices, to whom, as well doubts in Law may be referred, as complaints, upon injuries. And in pursuance of this, the King, not possibly sufficing to exercise all jurisdiction himself, hath in all ages, delegated power and jurisdiction to a certain number of men; and hath constituted them Judges, and dispensers of the Law under his Majestie, and in his right and [Editor: illegible word]` to his people.
Now all this being admitted, as in truth it cannot be denied, the force of the objection stands thus: is it so that no jurisdiction can be exercised by any, except that it be first delegated to them by the King, and that the King hath constituted certain persons, to be his Judges of the Law? why then it lieth not in the power of the two Houses of Parliament, to declare what is Law, and what not. First, because that they are not the proper Judges of it. And secondly, because that they have no such power given unto them by the King: for what power they have it is derived by their Writ, by which the King calleth them to Parliament: and this onely requireth their presence, Super dictis negotiis tractaturis: and tractare is onely to treat of or debate the Law, not to declare, or give judgement what the Law is; Besides, this word tractare is contained onely in the Writ by which the Lords are summoned to Parliament, and not in the Writ of the Commons, for by that they are called onely (as I remember the Writ is) ad faciendum & consentiendum, to do, and agree; why then they have no such power to intermeddle with the debating of the Law, much lesse to declare what the Law is.
To which I answer: That the two Houses of Parliament conjoyned (for I speak not of the power of the House of Commons distinct, and by it self) may not onely declare what the Law is, but are the best and most proper Judges of it. Are not they the ne plus ultra; that the Subject hath for redresse in matter of Law? are not they (as common experience teacheth us) the supreme Seat of Judicature? and do not they exercise a superintendent jurisdiction over all other Courts? and have not they power by a Writ of Error, brought before them, to reverse Judgements erroniously given in other Courts? Without doubt they have; witnesse that case of the Ship-money: which Judgement could not possibly have been reversed, but by the Parliament; who upon debate, declared that Judgement to be against the Law; and how miserable this Common-wealth had been: if they had not had this power, the lamentable successe, of devesting of the Subjects property, without his consent, by that damnable judgement, contrary to all Law, would have in short time, been manifested to the whole world. But to this it may be said, that in these cases, the Judges advise, who sit as assistants in Parliament, is demanded: and that in such case, the King, by his Judges, doth declare what the Law is. To this I answer, that because the Parliament may demand the advise of the Judges, who sit there to that intent, will it therefore follow that they are tied to it? or having demanded their advise: must the consequence be, that they are bound to follow it? without question nothing lesse: for this were to tie my judgement to another mans principles, which ought not to be. And it were absurd for to think, that the Parliament, who are the supreme seat of Judicature, should be tied to subscribe to the judgement of any inferiour power whatsoever. And now I shall put you one case: posite, that all the Judges of England, assembled together in the Chequer Chamber to give judgement in a point of Law, should all concurre in their judgements, and should give judgement accordingly; and after in a Writ of Error brought in Parliament, this judgement should be reversed; doe not the Parliament onely, in this case, declare what the Law is? Without question they doe; for, I suppose, that there is none so stupid, as to thinke, that the Judges advice or judgement ought or can be received in this case; for this were, upon the matter, to appeale à Cæsare, ad Cæsarem, and to reverse that Judgement (though not by the same power) yet by the same advise that gave it: which, as I conceive, by the Law ought not to be.
But here peradventure it will be againe objected,2. H. 9. 19: b. that no Writ of error can be brought in Parliament, but that the King first signes to it: and this is a consent by the King, & a giving of them power to proceed and declare what the Law is: but in our case there is no such thing, for here is nothing judicially before them, by which to authorise them to give any such judgement, and therefore they have no such power to declare what the Law is, in this case; and if they doe, their proceeding is extrajudiciall and arbitrary.
To this I answer, that true it is, that they cannot, nor ought not to take notice of any thing which concerneth any private persons, or their interest; neither can they, in any such case, give Judgement, or declare what the Law is, except they have something judicially pending before them, upon which to ground their judgement; but otherwise it is where it concerneth the Common-wealth, for there, I conceive, under favour, (especially, as in this case, in time of imminent danger) they are not tied to any legall way of proceeding, but they may, and are bound, as well by their Oaths of Alleageance, Supremacy, and their late Protostetion, as by their Writ, by which they are called to Parliament, to take notice of all things, which may be obnoxious and prejudicall to the Common-wealth: and to debate, determine, and declare the Law concerning them, though that they have nothing judicially before them; for if they should, in this case, expect a complainant, the Common-wealth might perish, before that they could yeeld any ayde or assistance, for the securing of it. Now by their Oaths, they are bound to defend the King and Kingdome (as I have before said) and by their Writ they have power and authoritie given them, De imminentibus periculis tractare: and tractare, doth not onely signifie to handle, treate of, or debate; but likewise it signifieth, as the learned observe, to order, to governe, to write of, or to describe; and, without question, these words have weight, sence, and power enough in them, not onely to inable them to debate what the Law is, but also to declare what it is, after that it is debated: so that I conceive, by this it is cleare, that the Parliament doe not exercise, practise, or endeavour any arbitrary way of proceeding. And the difference (as I conceive) upon the whole matter, will be this; that the two Houses of Parliament cannot (as I have shewed before) make a new Law, or alter the old Law, without the consent of the King, and this by Act of Parliament; but they may declare what the Common Law is, and this shall be obliging to his Majestie; for otherwise, this great Court, which so farre transcends all others, in other things, should be lesse in power, in this particular, then any other; Which ought not to be conceived, or imagined.
Now this being Law, which I have delivered, as I conceive it is; from hence these Conclusions may necessarily, and by consequence, be deduced; First, that the declaration of the Law,49. Ass. Pl. 8. 37. H. 8. to be otherwise by the Proclamation, or other Declaration of the King, doth not change the Law; for that it is a Rule in the Law, that the King can neither create a Law, nor alter the Law, by his Patent or Proclamation: And with this agreeth 49.Br. Pat. 100. Ass. 37. H. 8. Br. Patents 100. 11. H. 4. 10. H. 7. 5. Rep. and many other Books. Secondly, Hence a good argument may be deduced, to prove the Commission of Array, at this time illegall; for that the King,11. H. 4. 37. with the advice of his great Counsell the Parliament, hath by a tacite and inclusive consent (as I have made it good before) established the Militia; why then clearely it lieth not in his Majesties power, without their consent, to countermand this by any other Commission; for the Rule of Law is, that Eodens modo, quo, quid constatuitur, dissolvitur, that is, every thing ought to be dissolved by a matter of as high nature, as it was created: and that is the reason,10. H. 7. 23. that an Act of Parliament, cannot be repealed but by an Act of Parliament; for that no power or jurisdiction whatsoever, is so great as it selfe: and it is without question, that the Kings power or authoritie, by it selfe, is not of so high and excellent a nature, as it is joyned with his Parliament:5. Rep. fo. 55. Wherefore I doe conceive, for this reason, that the Commission of Array is absolutely unlawfull, and therefore ought not to be submitted unto. Thirdly, and lastly, Hence may be concluded, that the Kings declaration of the Law, to be contrary to what the Parliament have declared the Law to be, is Coram non Judice; that is, by one that hath not jurisdiction of the cause. First, Because (as I have said) that the King himselfe cannot declare the Law to be contrary to their judgement, for that his Majesties judgement is superseded, and bound up in theirs: and secondly, For that he cannot contradict their judgement, by any other advice or judgement, for that, that advice or judgement is inferiour to the Court of Parliament; and therefore in their presence, as to this purpose, ought to cease. And I shall compare this case, to one case onely, which is in the 10.10. Rep. fo. in the case of Marshallsea. Rep. in the case of the Marshallsea, where the case is thus; The Sheriffe who is prescribed by the Law to hold his Tourne within the Moneth after Mich. &c. held his Tourne after the Moneth, and tooke an indictment of Robbery at the same Tourne, and the Indictment being removed by a Cerciorari into the Kings Bench, by the advice of all the Justices, the partie so indicted, was discharged, for that the Indictment was utterly voyde, and Coram non Judice, because at this time the Sheriffe had no authoritie to hold his Court: so I say, in this case, the Declaration or Proclamation of the King, is Coram non Judice, for that though the King properly, and onely, ought to declare the Law, by the advice of his Judges, at another time, yet at this time he cannot, for that their judgement is estopped and superseded, by the superintendency of the high Court of Parliament: Then the Law being thus, this justifieth the proceedings of Parliament, in punishing of such, who dare adventure, against Law, to execute the Commission of Array, or to proclaime, or declare any thing in his Majesties name, against his owne judgement, and the judgement of his Parliament; for the Rule of Law is; Extra territorium jus dicenti, non paretur, impunè; he that obeys the command of any power, out of its jurisdiction, shall be punished for it: So I conclude this point also, and conceive, that for this reason likewise, the Parliament hath done no more then what is warranted by the Lawes of the Land.
4.Fourthly, and lastly, I hold that the Parliament have done no more then what is warrantable by Law, upon this ground (which ought to be the Basis and end of all Law) viz. the common good and safetie: but of this onely a word, for that I have touched it before. That Law which is above all Law, & to which all Law ought to subscribe, is Salus Populi, the safetie of the people. True it is, that the Law was made to defend every mans private interest, as well as the Republique, but primarily and principally the Republique: it is the Rule of Law (as I have shewed before) Quod bonum publicum, private anteferri debet; that the publique good ought to be preferred before the private. And againe, we have another Rule, Quod magis dignum, trahit ad se quod est minus dignum, that the more worthy doth draw to it the lesse worthy: and without controversie, the magis dignum, the more worthy, is the Common-wealth; why than the minus dignum, the lesse worthy, which is every mans private concernment, must subscribe to that.
And the reason, wherefore the good and safetie of the Republique ought principally and in the first place to be maintained, and therefore is styled Suprema Lex, that is, the most supreame Law, or, if you will, a Law above all Lawes, is, for that as in the naturall body, if the body be in health the members must needs be well also, and if the body the sicke, the members must needs sympathise with it: so it is in the body politique, if the body be well, the members fare all the better for it, if the body be in distemper, the members own not but be distempered also; so the happinesse, or misery, of every individuall person, hangeth upon the good or ill successe of the Common-wealth and therefore the good of the Common-wealth ought to have the first and chiefe endeavour, of every true and faithfull member of it.
18. E. 2. 27. 10. Rep. 139. b. C.In 18. E. 2. which you shall find cited in the 10. Rep. Keighleyes C. a man brought an Action upon the case, against another, and the ground of the Action was, for suffering of a Wall of the Sea, that the Defendant was bound by prescription to repair, when need should be; unrepaired, so that for default of reparation; the water entred, and surrounded the lands of the Plaintiffe; The Defendant traversed the prescription, upon which they were at issue, and so was found for the Plaintiffe; and that there was a default in the wall, for not repairing, for which the Plaintiffe recovered his Damages, and a Writ was awarded to the Sheriffe, to distrain the Defendant to repair the wall, where need was hand default: Upon which my Lord Cook: maketh a speciall observation; Not a Reader, saith he, this judgement, and the reason of it, is, pro bone publico, for the common good. For, saith he, Salus populi, est suprema Lex: the safetie of the people is the most supreme Law: and therefore it is part of the judgement, in this Action, that the Defendant should be restrained to repair the wall. As if he had said, this Action is brought by the Plaintiffe, for his speciall damnification onely, and this he hath restored to him by the judgement: But yet note, for that it concerneth the weal-publiqué, the Judges considering themselves to be tied both in Law and conscience, to provide for the securing of the same, made this part of their judgement likewise, that the Defendant be compelled to repair the same; lest in defect of this the Common-wealth should suffer also. Here you may see, the care that the Judges then had of the common good: It went well that this were pondered on in those dayes, in which I doubt, men are too ready and prone to prefer their own private concernment in their endeavours I mean their honour, before the publique safetie.
Da. Rep. fo. 32. b.In Davis Reports it is [Editor: illegible word][Editor: illegible word][Editor: illegible word][Editor: illegible word][Editor: illegible word] to the interest of one particular person, & yet reasonable, where it is for the benefit of the Common-wealth in generall; as a custome to make Balwarks upon the land of another for the defence of the Realm,36. H. 8. 36. H. 8. Dyer, and to raze houses in publico incendio, in a common fire, 29. H. 8. Dyer, (these cases I have remembred before) so to turn the plough up in the head-land of another, in favour of husbandry, 21. E. 4. and to drie Nets upon the land of another, in favour of fishing, and navigation, 8. E. 4.Dyer fo. 60. 29. H. 8. But saith the book, a custome which is contrary to the publique good, which is the scope and generall end of all Laws (for salus populi. suprema lex) or injurious and prejudiciall to the multitude, and beneficiall onely to some particular person, such a custome is repugnant to the Law of reason, which is above all positive Laws, &c.Dyer fo. 36. 21. E. 4. 28. 8. E. 4. 28. Here note, that it is said, that the Law of reason is above all positive Laws: and no doubt but it is, for that Law, which is against reason, is rather a mystery of iniquitie, then Law: and in truth, it is no Law, which is not grounded upon the Law of reason. For as some will have it, the word (Lex) is derived, à ligando, quonian ad observandas leges, homines ligat: and no question a Law, which is unreasonable, doth not oblige men to obedience: so that it is no Law, if it be not warranted by the Law of reason. Now to apply this to the case in question; the King, by his Prerogative, ought to have the sole disposing of the Militia: the kingdom being in imminent danger, the King refuseth to settle it, by the advise of his great Counsell, for the securing of himself and his people; Now the doubt is, whether the Parliament may without the consent of the King, assume this power to themselves, for the securing of his Majestie, and his kingdom? or whether they ought to subscribe to the Prerogative of the King, though it be to the apparent destruction of the Common-weal; which of these two is the reasonable Law, is the question? Why no doubt, Salus populi, the safetie of the people: for these reasons. First, for that the Law was made for the people, and not the people for the Law. And secondly, for that the whole ought to be preferred before any part: wherefore I conclude that it is Suprema Lex; the most supreme Law, and therefore the Prerogative of the King ought to give way to this; and not this, to the Prerogative of the King: for if you preserve and maintain the common good, you preserve and maintain the Kings Majestie, his Prerogative, your Laws, and your selves; and if you do otherwise, you destroy all. And therefore I conclude all with this, Non solum conveniens est, sed necesse est, ut salus populi, sit suprema Lex: That it is not onely convenient, but necessary, that the safety of the people, should be the most supreme Law: And therefore the Parliament have done that which is agreeable both to Law and reason, in preferring of the publique safetie.
FINIS.
T.17 (8.8.) Richard Ward, The Vindication of the Parliament (15 October, 1642).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.17 [1642.10.15] (8.8) Richard Ward, The Vindication of the Parliament (15 October, 1642).
Full titleRichard Ward, The Vindication of the Parliament And their Proceedings. OR, Their Military Designe prov’d Loyall and Legall. A Treatise, wherein these things are ingeniously and sincerely handled; to wit,
1. That the MILITIA as setled by the PARLIAMENT is lawfull.
2. That it is lawfull for us to obey it, so setled by Them.
3. That the PARLIAMENT is not by us to be deserted.
4. That in aiding the PARLIAMENT the KING is not opposed.
5. That the PARLIAMENT (as the case stands) may not confide in the King.
6. That this necessary Defensive WARRE of Theirs is indubitably justifiable.
Pulchrum pro Patria mori,
LONDON, Printed in the Yeare. MDCXLII.
15 October, 1642.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 181; Thomason E. 122 (19.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
The Vindication of the PARLIAMENT and their PROCEEDINGS.
THe maine thing now looked upon,What is now principally enquired after. and pried into by all eyes, is the nature of this present Martiall and Military Designe undertaken by the Parliament. Now although much hath beene writien by many upon this Subject, yet divers well disposed and well affected persons, are very unsetled and unresolved, what to thinke thereof; and the Reasons hereof I conceive to bee these; to wit.
1. That compendious kind of writing which some use in laying downe onely the particular Head, by way of assertion,5. Reasons why the vulgar sort are unsatisfied in the present expedition. without either amplification, application or proofe; whence he who is not informed or thorowly insighted into the truth, and nature of that which is affirmed, is ready to conclude it a fallacie, Petitio quæsiti, & dare not beleeve it upon the Authors bare word.
2. That abstruse, sublime and high stile which others use in their writings, thinking all apprehensions as quick, and judgements as profound, and understandings as cleare as ther owne; and thus not stooping to the capacity of vulgar Readers, leave them as perplexed and as much unsatisfied as they found them.
3. That confused kind of writing which some have; for as Method doth much helpe both the memory and understanding; so immethodicall discourses doe confound both understanding and judgement.
4. That sleight and superficiall kind of writing which others have, who never searching themselves into the depth, life and bottome of the point in hand, leave their Reader just so wise as they found him.
5. That timerous and halfe handling of the case in controversie, which some are guilty of; for some have taken the point in hand, but fearing Veritas odium parit, that Truth will come home with a scracht face, dare not say what they can, may should or ought of the point, for the full satisfaction of their Reader; having him by this means altogether without light in the most materiall things which he undertakes to instruct him in.
And therefore because I will never refuse to sacrifice my life, much lesse spare any paines for the welfare, safety and preservation of my Countrey, the preventing of these Civill wars threatening and composing of our present distractions, and the satisfaction of tender consciences, to the utmost of my ability, I have with what brevity, sincerity, plainnesse and clearnesse possibly I could, declared unto all, who desire to be satisfied what they may conceive and imagine of the true nature of the present Designe of the State and condition where in we are, and what seemes to be intended and aimed at by both sides.
I will not trouble my selfe to search Record, nor presume to expound, and interpret Lawes, (being no Lawyer) but only show the lawfulnesse of this Designe, as farre as the law of Nature, the light of humane Reason, and experience, and my small knowledge in Religion, will dictate unto me.
Exceptions taken against the Parliament.Against the Parliament two things are excepted; viz. their Act, and the Effect of that Act: or, their Action and Intention.
1. Their Action is the putting of the Kingdome into a posture of defence, by settling of the Militia without the assent of the King.
2. Their Intention herein is supposed or surmised to be the strengthening of themselves against the King, and the raising of Forces against his power. Now, of both these severally.
Concerning the Militia two quare’s are ordinarily made; to wit,
The setling of the Militia lawfull.1. Whether it be lawfull for the Parliament to settle it without the Royall assent.
2. Whether it be lawfull for us to obey it, so setled by Them?
Quest. 1.First, it may be demanded, Whether was it lawfull for the Parliament to settle the Militia [which is made the cause of all our present distractions and dangers] or not, without the Kings Royall assent.
Answ. 1.First, they did it not without asking his permission and leave; for considering the necessity of putting the Kingdome into a Posture of defence, both in regard of Forreigne and Domestick Forces and Foes: they addressed themselves to his Majesty, desiring him so to order and dispose of the Militia of the Kingdome, as it was agreed upon by the wisedome of his great and grand Councell, whose counsell above all others, Kings in Parliament time, have, and ought to embrace and follow. And therefore we may imagine that to be lawfull which our best Lawyers, yea Law-makers did so earnestly sue and sollicite for.
Secondly the Parliament continuing their humble supplications unto the King,Answ. 2. his Majestie was once graciously pleased by Message sent unto them, to promise, that the Militia should be put into such hands as they should approve of, or recommend unto Him, provided that they declared [together with the Names of the Persons] the extent of their power, and the time of their continuance, both which they did, which shewes evidently; That there was nothing unlawfull in the substance of the thing desired, [His Majesty himselfe not excepting against that] but at the most, that somthing desired by them did not square with some circumstances observed in former times.
Thirdly,Answ. 3. the Parliament seeing a necessity of settling the Militia, thought that in conscience and humane reason it was much better, safer, and more agreeable to that trust which was reposed in them by the Kingdome, That the strength of the Kingdome should rather be ordered according to the direction and advice of the Great Counsell of the Land equally intrusted by the King and Kingdome, for the managing of the great affaires thereof, then that the safety of the King, Parliament, and Kingdome, should be left at the devotion of a few unknowne Counsellours, many of them having not beene at all formerly intrusted by his Majesty in any publike office or service, nor confided in by the Common-Wealth. And therefore we may conjecture the legality of the Militia settled by the Parliament.
Fourthly,Answ. 4. the Parliament desire not to remove the Militia from the King, but from his subordinate Ministers, (who by reason of their evill counsels given unto Him, and their small love, respect, and care shewed towards Them) the Parliament dare not confide in; and therefore onely place it upon other Ministers, whom they have no cause to suspect, nor against whom, (when they were nominated to his Majestie) He did except.
Fiftly, the Parliament long since saw,Answ. 5. and still sees (as themselves affirme) the Kingdome in so evident, and imminent danger, both from enemies abroad, and a popish discontented, and disaffected party at home, that there was an urgent, and inevitable necessitie of putting the Kingdome into a posture of defence, for the safeguard both of his Majestie and people: and in all probability, and likelyhood, if the Militia at Land, and the Navy at Sea, had not been setled in sure hands when they were, we had ere this been exposed to the practises of those, who thirst after the ruine of this Kingdome, and endeavour to kindle that combustion in England, which they have in so great a measure effected already in Ireland. Now the safety of the people being the supreame Law, it must needs be lawfull for the Parliament to settle the Militia, in case of such necessitie.
Answ. 6.Sixtly, the power given to those, in whose hands the Militia is placed by the Parliament, is onely, to suppresse Rebellion, Insurrection, and forraigne Invasion. Now that this power should be put into some hands is necessary, especially in dangerous, and distracted times; and into whose hands better, and with more safety, than such as the Parliament dare confide in, and against whose persons no exception hath beene taken by his Majestie: and therefore we need not much question the Legality of the Militia.
Answ. 7.Seventhly, this is granted on all sides, to wit, That the Common-wealth intrusts the Parliament to provide for their weale, not for their woe; and that this Parliament thus intrusted by the People, did by a Law intrust the King with the Militia, to wit, for the weale of the Common-wealth, not for the woe thereof: and that this is implyed (in that Act, or Grant) though not exprest, no Royalist, I perswade my selfe, will question, or deny. And therefore
1. If the Kings desire, and royall intention be (as we hope it is) to settle the Militia for the preservation, not perdition, for the defence, not destruction, for the strength, and safety, and not enslaving, or envassalling of his Subiects, and people; and that this likewise is the intent, and purpose of His Grand Councell, the Parliament, then the difference who shall establish the Militia, is but a kinde of λογμαχία, or contention about words, or a ceremony, or a quarrell who shall have their will, when both purpose and resolve one and the same thing: which is to weake a ground, and too triviall a cause to draw that ruine, desolation, and destruction upon us, which must inevitably fall upon, and ceaze us, if these Civill wars which threaten us, and hang over our heads, be not prevented. But
11. If (which God forbid) the King should intend, and endeavour by the setling of the Militia, to enslave us, to tirrannize over us, and to rule us (beeing so curbed, and kept under by a strong hand of Power) by his owne will, then the Parliament, and Law did never settle the Militia upon Him for that end,Answ. 8. or, to be so used: for the equitie of the Law, and not the Letter of the Law is the true Law.
Eightly, it evidently appeares, Aliquid latet, quod non pates, That neither the Militia setled by the Parliament, nor Hull kept for the King and Parliament, nor the Magazine of Hull removed by the Parliament, are the true grounds of the Warre so violently threatned against the Parliament, by the malicious, mischeivous, and malignant partie of Papists, Cavalliers, and other ill-affected persons. For
1. There were attempts made to be possessed of Hull, and the Magazine, by Captaine Leg, and the Earle of Newcastle, before ever Sir Iohn Hotham was seized of it, (much more, before he denied His Majestie entrance thereinto) and this attempt, desire, and purpose, seemes to some, (and that not improbably) to take its rise from the Lord Digbyes letter to the Queene, wherein he desires, That the King would repaire unto some place of strength, where he may safely protect his servants, that is, such as will doe him service against his Parliament, amongst whom (most disloyally he saith) Traitors beare sway.
2. The Lord Digbie promiseth in his Letter unto his Majestie before the Militia was setled to doe him service abroad, that is, (as he expresseth himself) to procure for them supplies against the Kingdome, and Parliament, with which hee said himselfe would returne (as hee did indeed in the Ship called the Providence, with store of Armes) although he had been published, and voted a Traitour.
3. Before this, the same Lord Digby endeavoured to raise forces, under the pretence of a Guard for the Kings person in winter.
4. Before the Militia was setled, there were endeavours, to incense the two Nations England, and Scotland, and to engage their Armies one against the other, that in such a confusion, as must needs have followed; the Parliament might not be able to sit, nor doe us any good. For if in this battell we had been conquered; we might have feared to have lost our selves, and all we had, to the Conquerour with whom we fought; and if we had conquered, we might have been sure to have lost our selves, and all we had, to the Malignant Party for whom we fought.
5. Before the setling of the Militia, there were endeavours to turne the English Army against the Parliament, as is abundantly proved by them.
6. By the testimony, and allegations of many, the Irish Rebellion, (which brake forth before the Militia was setled) was hatched by the popish, and disafected party in England, not to have rested there, but to have ended here.
7. Before the Militia was setled, some Members of both Houses (who were observed to be most zealous for the speedy suppression of the Irish Rebellion, which notwithstanding, was so long protracted and delayed) were unjustly charged with Treason, and after such unjust accusation, were demanded and required of the House of Commons, by His Majestie, attended with a Troope of Cavalliers, who had intended to have taken them by force, if they had not been absent. By all which it appeares, That the setling of the Militia was not the cause why warre is made upon, or against the Parliament.
And thus much may suffice for the first quare, concerning the Parliaments setling of the Militia.
Quest. 2.It may now in the next place be demanded, whether it be lawfull for us to obey this Ordinance of the Militia thus setled by Parliament.?
Answ.In case of extreame danger, and of his Majesties refusall, people are obliged, and ought to obey (by the Fundamentall Laws of this Land) the Command, and Ordinance agreed upon by both Houses, or the major part of both Houses (which is all one) for the Militia. I enlarge not this Answer, because that which followes concerning the deserting of the Parliament, may be applied hereunto.
Thus much may suffice for the first exception taken against the Parliament: viz, Their action, in putting the Kingdome into a warlike posture of defense, by setling the Militia in such hands, as they durst trust.
I proceed now unto the other Exception, (viz) the fruits, and effects of the setling of the Militia, which are affirmed to be, the opposing of the Kings precepts and proceedings.
We affirmed before, That if the Militia had not beene settled, we had beene in great danger of destruction; and now when it is setled we are neither free from feares, nor foes, enemies nor evils. Whence it may be demanded,Quest. 3. How may we be preserved from that ruine, and destruction which hangs over our heads.
Answ. 1.First, by standing upon our Guard.
Answ. 2.Secondly, by siding with and assisting of those who stand for us.
Answ. 3.Thirdly, by resisting and opposing those who withstand us.
This Question is something like Hydra’s heads, for from this little Head, foure maine ones sprout and spring up; to wit,
1. Whether the Parliament may be deserted, or ought to be assisted?
2. Whether the King may be disobeyed, or his Commands opposed?
3. Why the Parliament dare not confide in the King, seeing he promiseth as much as they can desire?
quest. 4.4. Whether this Warre undertaken by the Parliament be warrantable and lawfull? Now of all these in this order.
It may first of all (I say) be demanded, Whether we may desert the Parliament in this time of danger, or is it our duty to obey, assist, aide and stick to them.
First, whatsoever is said of this Subject, in that Treatise called,Answ. 1. Reasons why this Kingdome ought to adhere to the Parliament, I wholy omitt; as also many Reasons which might have beene drawne, from a Tractate, which by many solide arguments justifies the Scottish Subjects for their defensive Warres.
Secondly, our Saviours rule is here worthy observation,Answ. 2. Whatsoever you would, that others should do unto you, doe so unto them. Make the case ours, by supposing us in their places, and they in ours, that is, We Parliament men, and they private persons; and looke what aide, and assistance we would expect, and desire from them, if we were in such danger, as now they are, the same we should now affoord unto them.
Thirdly, I dare not say,Answ. 3. that with a blind obedience we should actively obey them in whatsoever they command: for as Councels in Divinity, so Parliaments in Policy, may erre: and therefore inquisition, disquisition, examination, and conference are not forbidden us in any Acts or Statutes.
Fourthly, the Members of the Parliament, are chosen by us,Answ. 4. and stand for us, yea, are sent thither, intrusted by us with all we have, (viz) our estates, liberties, lives, and the life of our lives, our Religion, and the safety of the Kings Person, and Honour: and therefore in equity, and conscience they ought not to be forsaken of us.
Fiftly the Parliament men are no other then our selves,Answ. 5. and therefore we cannot desert them, except we desert our selves, the safety of the Commons, and Common-wealth being wrapped up in the safety of the Parliament. As the Wolves desired the sheepe to put away the dogs, and then they would enter into a League with them, but when they had by so doing stript themselves of their best friends, and laid themselves open to their fiercest foes, they were then devoured without pity: even so may we feare it will be with us, if we should be so sottish as reject, and desert the great, grave, and grand Councell of the Land, (which consists of as wise, faithfull, meeke, moderate, sincere, just, upright, understanding, zealous, and pious Patriots, as ever any Parliament in this Land was possessed, and consisted of) and submit our selves to the protection, and care, of obscure, and unknowne, yea malignant, and malicious Counsellours, who would glory so much in nothing as in our misery, and Ruine, as appeares by their deeds wheresoever they come, if they can but prevaile.
Sixtly the Kings Majestie hath promised (in His-Message. January,Answ. 6. 12. 1641.) That He will be as carefull of his Parliament, and of the priviledges thereof, as of his Life, and Crowne, and therefore if He assure them so of His adhering unto, and care of them, then much more should we encourage them, by Promising to assist them (so long as they stand for us, and our Lawes) with our estates, and them.
Answ. 7.Seventhly, we ought to obey, and assist them in any thing which is lawfull, and we ought not to suspect, that they will enjoyne, or command us any thing as lawfull, which is unlawfull. The opposition betweene the Kings Majestie and His Parliament, seemes to be about law, He affirming that to be lawfull, which they denie, and they affirming that to be lawfull, which He proclaimes illegall. Now the King is pleased to professe, That he is no Expounder of Law, that belonging neither to His Person, nor Office; and therefore concerning the legality, and illegallity of things. He will be guided by the judgement and counsell of others: And whose, or what counsell (in all probability, and reason) can be better, sounder, sincerer, and more worthy to be followed, then that of his Grand Councell? who assure us that what they doe and enjoyne us to do is lawfull, that is, according, and agreeable to the Law, either of God, Nature, or the Land. Now it becomes us (whom they represent (thus honourably, and venerably to thinke of Them, viz. They know such and such things to be lawfull, and therefore they do them themselves, and enjoyne them to us. And not thus (as some pervert it) The Parliament hath done, or commanded such, or such things; and therefore doe affirme them to be lawfull, and just: for it is a principle in law, That no unworthy, or dishonourable thing is to be imagined, or presumed of Parliaments.
Answ. 8.Eightly, if we desert and now forsake the Parliament, we shall be found guilty before God of three great sins; to wit,
1. Perfidiousnesse; for as we have intrusted the Parliament with our estates, liberties, and lives; so we have engaged our selves, to maintain, and defend them, so long as they pursue our safety, prosperitie, preservation, and peace, according to Law. And therefore, if for our good, or for discharging of their consciences, and trust, they be endangered, we are perfidious if we leave them, and for lacke of succour let them sinke and perish.
2. Perjurie; for all who have taken the Protestation, have promised, protested, and vowed, with their lives, power, and estate, to defend, and maintaine all those who stand for the lawfull rights, and liberties of the Subject; yea, to oppose, and by all good wayes and meanes to endeavour to bring to condigne punishment, all such as shall either by force, practise, counsels, plots, or otherwise, withstand or endanger those who stand for our Lawes, and Liberties. Now who stand more, for our Religion, Lawes, Soveraigne, and Liberties, then our Parliament? and who are more opposed and endangered for their zeale, and care for us, and our Priviledges than They? And therefore we are guilty of Perjury before God, and Man, if we in this case assist them not, but desert them.
3. Treacherie; for such as forsake the Parliament, as the case now stands, are guilty of a manifold Treason: to wit, against the Church, against the State, against the Representative body of the Land, and against themselves. For by deserting of the Parliament, and suffering it to be trampled under foot, by Papists, Atheists, prodigals, Delinquents, Antiparliamentaries, and Viperous Monopolists, and Projectors; we betray
First, The Church to errour, and heresie.
Secondly, The State to ruine, and miserie.
Thirdly, The Parliament to bloud, and crueltie.
Fourthly, Our selves to poverty and slavery. And therefore I may truly and boldly say, That it is those who desert the Parliament, who are the Principall causes of all the bloud which is, hath, or shall be shed in this Warre, and of all the burning, plundering, ravishing, and theeving, where with the poore Subject hath, or shall be oppressed.
Ninthly,Answ. 9. we may not vow (when things are come to maturitie and height, and the cursed conception is come to a birth) desert and fall from our Parliament because there hath beene long great jealousies, of some greivous mischeife, to be intended against our Church and State, by those who are enemies to both. Here note, that the jealousies which men generally have had, that there was, and is still some designe a foot, for the ruine and destruction of the Parliament, and of us through their sides, and of introducing, yea establishing of Popery, and of abolishing of Protestantisme in this Land, are these and the like: to wit,
1. That Army of 8000. Irish Papists, which was raised by the Lord Straford, and ready to come over, either to further the Warre with Scotland, or (if that jarre were composed) to joyne with the English Army against the Parliament.
2. The endeavours and courses which were taken, to bring our English Army out of the North, either to destroy the Parliament, or to awe and compell it, and take away the freedome of it.
3. The two Letters sent to Mr. Bridgeman, Ian. 14. 1641. and to Mr. Anderton, which intimated some sudden, sad and sorrowfull blow to be intended against the Puritanes in and about the Citie of London; and declared many things of deepe and dangerous consequence, which (considering many passages in the State since) seeme not to be faigned or forged; but to foretell dangerous and divilish practises really intended against the City, Country, and Parliament, by the Popish Faction.
4. The accusing of the 6. worthy Members of Parliament, against whom (as yet) no proof hath been brought, nor no particular instances produced (as hath beene againe, and againe promised) of any treachery treason or high and treacherous misdemeanors, practises or plotts.
5. His Majesties going into the House of Commons, attended neither with his ordinary Gaurd, only, nor Pentioners and Servants only but with diverse Cavaliers armed who by their words and gestures showed themselves to bee men of desperate resolutions and bent them upon some damnable, and bloody designe.
6. The endeavours used to the Gentlemen of the Innes of Court.
7. The Rebellion in Ireland, which was raised for the diversion and interruption of the Parliament, for the weakning of our Land, by the maintenance of that, and for the strengthening of the Papists and Popish Faction with us. For when the English Protestants had beene plundered, pillaged, subdued and slaughtered there, (as it was reported, confessed and acknowledged by divers of the Rebels, when they were taken) they should have come hither to have assisted our Papists and Malignants, to have done as much to and with us.
8. The calling in diverse Cannoneers, and other Assistants into the Tower of London.
9. The making of Lunsford (a man of a knowne and notorious debach’d life and conversation) Lieutenant of the Tower; for he being so apt and fit a man for any desperate designe, or divellish practise, and in that place, having so much command over the City, made all generally feare, that there was more mischiefe intended against the City, then did out wardly appeare.
10. The selling of the Crowne Jewels beyond the Seas, and buying therewith Field-pieces, Pieces for Battery, Culverings, Morter-peices, Carabines, Pistols, Warre-saddles, Swords and Powder, as appeared by the note of direction which was sent over, and found among the Lord Digbies Papers. Now although these were bought in June; yet we must imagine (as appeares by the time when they were writ for) that they were bespoke, and that order was given for the providing of them long before.
2. The fortifying and guarding of Whitehall with Ammunition, in an unusuall manner, and with men of turbulent spirits; for some of them with provoking language and violence abused divers Citizens passing by; and others with their swords drawne wounded sundry other Citizens passing by (who we unarmed) in Westminster Hall.
12. The drawing away of many Members of the Parliament, by Messages and Letters from the Parliament, That the Actions of both Houses might be blemished and reported to be the Votes onely of a few, and an inconsiderable number, yea rather the Acts of a Party, then of a Parliament.
13. The force raised at Yorke, and the Ammunition provided beyond Sea, for to be sent unto Yorke that force being gathered (as was feared) to make an opposition against the Parliament, but evidently percieved to be imployed for the protection, and support of Delinquents.
14. The multiplying of Papists in this Land of late dayes their frequent meetings at certaine places in and about the City without controule, the audaciousnesse of their Preists and Jesuites with us, notwithstanding our strict and severe Statutes against them, the residence of the Popes Nunntio so long amongst us, the Colledge of Capuchins in or here unto Coven Garden, and the favouring and prefering principally such as were either Popish, or Arminion, who in some points are true Cozen Germanes.
15. Lastly his Majesties absenting of himselfe from his Parliament, withdrawing from them thereby both his presence and influence. Here note That after the King was councelled, and perswaded hereunto, this his absence followed and attended with this Doctrine, againe and againe iterated, viz. That the King absenting, dissenting, and severing of himselfe from his Parliament, it was no Parliament neither had they any Power to dispose of any of the weightie affaires of the Kingdome; which dangerous Doctrine seemes to have beene taught by Court flatterers for these ends viz.
1. To discourage, weary and quite tire out our couragious, and indesatigable Senate.
2. To divert, interupt and retard their consultations, and designes both for our owne Reformation, and the subduing of the Irish Rebels.
3. To take off peoples hearts from the Parliament, to stagger them in their obedience unto them, to coole their zeale for the preservation and defence of them, and to make them call in question all their proceedings
4. To annimate all those who stood disaffected to the Parliament, to show their disaffection, and opposion with more freedome and lesse feare.
Tenthly, and lastly to this maine question, whether the Parliament may be deserted or ought to be adhered unto, I answere that of (of necessity) some wee must adhere and stick unto, that is either to the grand and knowne Councellours of the Land, or to obscure and private Councellours, that is either to the Parliament, or to the Cavalliers, Papists, Malignants, Delinquents and dissaffected Persons of the Kingdome.
Now because Contraria juxta se posita clarius ducescunt, contraries are best commentaries, wee will looke particularly upon both and consider the nature, ends and aimes of both, and from thence coniecture whom wee may best desert, and whom with most safety follow; and first I begin with the Cavalliers, and that side.
First, in that side which consists of Cavalliers, Papists, Malignants, Delinquents, ill-affected and Popishly affected Persons, or (to terme them onely so) evill, private and obscure Councellors, wee have these two things to observe, to wit; First, their intentions and endeavours: Secondly, their nature and ends.
First, their intentions, endeavours and the fruit of their Councells; for I conioyne them altogether.
1. Their intentions and endeavours were to raise Civill Warre, and that both first in Scotland, and afterwards in Ireland, and now in England; And
2. To perswade the King to rule by his owne Will. The Lord Faulkland tels us, That the King was perswaded by his Divines that in conscience, by his Councellours that in policie, and by his Judges that by law he might doe what he list. Which doth directly labour to raze the very foundation of our well founded State, and to introduce and reare amongst us an Arbitrary Government. And
3. They endeavour to make division betweene his Majesty and his Parliament, (whom God and the Lawes of this Land have united in so neere a relation) as appeares.
First, By their endeavours and perswasions to draw the King from his Parliament, which they have effected now for a long time, and still continues his absence from them; although (I thinke) the most Shires in England have most humbly petitioned and besought Him to rejoyce and revive all the drooping, dead and sad hearts of his People, by affording his much and long desired presence, unto his Parliament. If these Persons (whatsoever they are) who thus counsell the King to estrange himselfe from the Parliament, and to oppose and disgust all their Proceedings, and designes, were but Masters of Hull, the Militia, and Navy, they would then quickly master both the Parliament and all the Kingdome; who could expect but bad quarter from such Masters, who by their counsels and endeavours to divide the King and Parliament shew that they are neither friends to the Common wealth, nor favourers of the publique safety; And
Secondly, By their feare that the King should accord with his Parliament. For the Malignants and evill Counsellours stand in great feare That his Majesty is too inclinable to an accommodation with his Parliament, which above all things they abhor fearing thereby to be undone, that is, to lose the spoile, pillage and possessions of this Land, which they have long since hoped for: whence they have solicited the Queene to disswade the King by all meanes from such accommodation, hoping to obtaine their desires (the ruine of this Land) by the Queenes interposing. See the Lord Digbies Letter to the Queene, March 10. 1641. and Mr. Eliots Letter to the Lord Digby. May 27. 1642.
4. They endeavour to cast aspersions upon the Parliament, perswading the People, That the Parliament would set up a Aristocracie, take away the Law, and introduce an arbitrary government; a report so false that no man of common sense or reason can credit it.
5. They have and doe still endeavour and combine together to effect and worke the ruine of the Parliament, or at least to force it, and by forcing thereof to cut up the freedome of Parliament by the root, and either to take all Parliaments away, or (which is worse) make them the instruments of slavery, to confirme it by Law, as the Parliament in Rich. 2nds, time did, when they found the Kings anger against them, and feared the peoples forsaking of them. See the Treatise called, The successe of former Parliaments.
6. The fruits and effects of the intentions, and indeavours of those evill Counsellours, have been nothing but contention, dissention, division, debate, decay of trading, and more &illegible; then would fill a volume, if we should consider all the distractions distresses, dangers, feares, discommodities, hinderances, and losses, which both England, Scotland, and Ireland have felt, undergone, and sustained by their counsels, designes, and plots.
And thus much for the Intentions, and indeavours, of evill counsellors, and the fruits, and effects of their evill counsels.
Secondly, we have now to consider, the nature, and ends of these evill counsellours, who desert, and oppose the Parliament.
1. They are men of lost estates, and desperate fortunes; and these aime onely at plundering, and pillaging, desiring to raise themselves by razing others, and to build up themselves upon their brethrens ruine.
2. They are Papist., and popishly affected persons. The Citizens of London (in their petition presented to the House of Commons, December 11. 1641. testifie. That information is given to divers of them, from all parts of the Kingdome, of the bold and insolent carriage, and threatning speeches of the Papists. Now those aime either at the introducing and establishing of Popery amongst us, by the change of religion, or at least, at the gaining of freedome to professe, or an open toleration of their idolatrous, and superstitions religion. Which because they can never expect, nor hope for, from the Parliament, (which labours so zelously for the reformation of our Church, and the abolition of all popery, and popish innovations) they therefore joyne, and side with the former sort, which seeke nothing but mischeife and ruine. Or
3. They are Delinquents, Malefactors, and guilty Persons, who have by some plotts, practises, monopolies, Projects, or otherwise, trespassed and transgressed highly against the Common-wealth for their owne private advantage and profit. Now these hope, that by siding with the Cavaleirs and Papists against the Parliament, they shall bee protected against it and the justice thereof. Or
4. They are the ministers of the Land, who are corrupt either in Life or Doctrine; that is, are either superstitious, ceremonious, contentious, covetous, Popish hereticall scandalous in their lives and conversations or slothfull in the discharge of the worke of their ministry. Now these hope by siding with the former, to keepe, and hold fast what they have fearing the justice of the Parliaments will (for their demerrits) deprive them of those spirituall or ecclesiasticall dignities and possessions which they hold and injoy; Or,
5. They are of that number of the Nobility or Gentry of the Land, whose lives have been very loose, & unbridled. Now these oppose the pious proceedings of the Parliament, least such restraint should be imposed upon them by that Reformation which is intended and indeavoured by Them that they may (without punnishment) live as they list, have done and desire still to doe; Or
6. They are ignorant Persons. Now there is a two fold ignorance viz.
1. Naturall; now they are naturally ignorant who for want of knowledge understanding, and teaching are neither able to discerne of the designes, and intentions, of the adverse Partie, nor to foresee the miseries which will come upon them by aiding and assisting of, and siding with them: nor to know what is their duty and how farre and in what cases they may aid and assist the Parliament against some personall or verball command of the King; And,
2. Affected: Now this mischevous, malitious, and affected ignorance is in those who will neither read, nor heare any thing which may inform them in the former particulars, viz. the nature intentions ends and fruites of evill councels, and counsellours: and what is their duty in regard of the great counsel of the land. Or,
7. They are of that number of the Nobility, and Gentry, who seeke preferment by betraying their Country, to serve, and be made subject to the Court. Or,
8. They are the allyes, friends, acquaintance, and associates of some of the former; who although in themselves they stand not much disaffected to Parliaments, yet in regard of their friends, they leave it, and cleave unto them. Or,
9. They are timerous and fearefull: who although they wish well unto the Parliament, yet they dare not shew their affection, nor affoord any aid unto them, lest thereby they incurre some malice, or detriment through the Kings displeasure, Or.
10. They are covetous, and desirous to keepe their mony, and meanes: and therefore (whatsoever their heart, and affections be unto the Parliament) they dare not shew their approbation of their proceedings, lest they should be wrought upon to supply them, and their wants, for the support of the State, their necessities, and occasions, in regard of the land, being great, urgent, and pressing. Or,
11. They are Macchiavillians, and Polititions; who desiring with the Cat to fall on their feet, and to be free from blame and danger however the world wags, will neither side, nor support, neither aid, nor assist, either King or Parliament.
Let us now seriously consider three things from what hath beene said of the nature of this Side, or Party, viz.
First. who are those evill Counsellours which we must not adhere unto, but desert? It is denyed, That there are any such about the King; but I conceive, what I shall say, will not be gainsayd, viz. If there bee any about the King, who first move him to Civill warres, and secondly, perswade him to rule his people according to his owne Will, or an arbitrary power, and thirdly, strive to divide, and estrange the King from his Parliament, and fourthly, cast (even in his eares) aspertions, and false calumnies upon his Parliament, and fiftly, labour to ruine, and destroy the Parliament, and sixthly, by their plots brings misery and confusion upon the whole land: none (I say) will deny, but these are evill and wicked Counsellours, who deserve to be disclaimed, deserted, and left free, and layd open to the penalty of the law. Now that there are some such about the King, or in high favour, power, and credit with Him, is more then evident (though I, and wiser then I, cannot particularly name them) for,
1. His Majesty professeth a detestation of warre, and yet prosecutes it, which shewes that some puts him upon it. And,
2. He protests to governe his people according to established law, and yet he hath been perswaded to an Arbitrary governement, by them about Him, by many plausible, and faire seeming arguments, as Himselfe affirmes in one of his Messages. And,
3. He solemnely professeth his love unto, and his care of, and his honourable respect to his Parliaments and their priviledges, and preservation; and yet some hath withdrawne his person from the Parliament, and to himselfe, vilified the Parliament, yea have had plots upon the Parliament, and have laboured that in them, they might be countenanced, and protected by his sacred Majesty, And,
4. The King againe and againe calleth God to witnesse, the sincerity of his heart towards all his people, and how earnestly desirous He is that they may live happily, and prosperously under him; and yet by following the counsell of some, many, great, and long evills have pressed all the three Kingdomes of England, Scotland, and Ireland. And therefore it must needes be granted, That there are malignant Counsellours about the King, who worke much misery, and mischiefe, both to Himselfe and his People; and that they cannot be unknowne unto Him, if He would please, to disclose, discover, and leave them to the just, and equall triall of the Lovers of the Land.
Secondly, let us consider from this Army of Malignants, and mischievous Counsellours, and party, what in all probability we may expect, and looke for if they prevaile against the Parliament. That is, if,
- 1. Men of desperate fortunes prevaile, what can we expect but plundering and pillaging? And,
- 2. If Papists prevaile, what religion but Popery?
- 3. If delinquents, what but oppression?
- 4. If bad Ministers, what but bad preaching, and ill practizing?
- 5. If loose Gentry, what but prophannesse?
- 6. If ambitious spirits, what but contempt, cruelty, and disdaine?
- 7. If ignorant persons, what but their owne selfe-wills?
- 8. If delinquents and malignants friends, what but such a measure as we finde from delinquents, and malignants themselves? But from an Army consisting not of one, but of all these, what can we expect, but all these evills? and from the wickednesse which will be committed by them, the heavy judgment of God to be hastened downe upon us.
Thirdly, let us consider, whether there be any the least probability of receiving any benefit, or profit, in any regard, from this Side or Party, if they should prevaile against the Parliament.
- 1. Can we expect that the propriety of our goods shall be maintained, and preserved unto us, by men of decayed, lost, and desperate fortunes? Or,
- 2. Can we expect that the true orthodoxe Protestant Religion shall be maintained, and preserved, by heterodoxe, and hereticall Papists? Or,
- 3. Can we expect to be preserved free from unjust impositions, and taxes, by oppressing Projectors, and Monopolists? Or,
- 4. Can we hope that our Parliament priviliges will be preserved by Delinquents, and contemners of Parliaments? Or,
- 5. Can we expect the propagation of the Gospel, or that the sincere, faithfull, painfull, and profitable preaching thereof, shall be promoted by lewd, lazy, and corrupt Ministers? Or,
- 6. Can we expect that Piety, and the honour of God, shall be preserved in the land, by loose and prophane Gentlemen, and Nobles? Or,
- 7. Can we expect that justice, just measure, and equity, shall be maintained by those who ayme at nothing but their owne gaine, and greatnesse? Or,
- 8. Can we expect that our Lawes shall be preserved inviolably, by those who are wholely bewitched with the love of an Arbitrary Governement? Sense, and Reason will tell us, that these things cannot be expected from those persons; neither that any good can come unto the Land from such an Army.
I might conclude this last Answer, to that maine Question, Whether the Parliament be to be obeyed or deserted? as I began it: to wit,
Argum.To our Side of necessity we must adhere and cleave, that is, either to the evill, and obscure Counsellours, or to the Parliament.
But we must not adhere and sticke to the evill and malignant ones, for those reasons specified before.
Therefore we must adhere and cleave close to the Parliament.
This argument (I say) together with what hath been spoken against the Malignant party, might be sufficient for the amplification of the last Answer: but as I have said somthing against the one party, so I will say something for the other, as I promised, for the better fastning and setting of the Truth home upon the heart, of whosoever will vouchsafe to excuse this Treatise.
Secondly, in that Side, or party, which consists of the great, and grand Councell of the Kingdome, I will (as in the other Party observe divers things, for the amplification of this truth, That the Parliament ought not to be deserted, but obeyed, and assisted: to wit.
- 1. The ends of Parliaments.
- 2. Their necessity.
- 3. Their excellency.
- 4. Their utility.
- 5. The reason why we ought to believe ours.
First, the ends of Parliaments are briesly these two: to wit.
- 1. That the interest of the people might be satisfied.
- 2. That the King might be better counselled.
Secondly, the Necessity of this Parliament shewes it selfe by the miserable and distressed condition wherein our Land was, and the multiplicity of agrievances we groaned under; as is to the life declared, in the Parliaments Remonstrance of the State of the Kingdome, set forth December 15. 1641.
Thirdly, the Excellency of Parliaments is declared by his Majestie himselfe, who doth highly extoll the constitution of this Governement of ours, and especially the nature of our Parliaments, which consist of King, Peeres, and Commons; acknowledging that the power which is legally placed in both Houses, is more then sufficient to prevent and restraine the power of tyranny. Which argues plainely, that there is much, and great power, (and that by Law) placed, and put into the hands of both Houses, or the Major part of both for the good, and preservation of Peeres, and Commons, when the Common-wealth, or Whole is in danger, and the King being seduced by wicked Connsell, doth desert, and refuse to joyne with them in their owne defence. For if they cannot do any thing (upon any occasion, necessity, extremity, or danger, though never so evident, apparent, or urgent) without the King, then the sole power of managing the affaires of the Kingdome, doth even in arduis, in high, yea in the highest cases, belonging onely unto the King; and nothing at all to either, or both Houses, except, or but what he alleages. That is, though the Land lay a bleeding, and were invaded by Hoasts, and Armies from abroad, and Papists, and Rebells at home (Ireland now is) and the King would make no provision against them, or, for the suppressing, and withstanding of them, the Parliament must sit still, and suffer all to be lost, and ruined, having neither power to raise, nor use any force without the thing.
Fourthly, the Vtility, and Benefit of Parliaments is great: and that both,
1. To Kings, and Princes; and that,
1. In regard of their reputation, same, and honour. Antonius Pius is greatly renowned for communicating all weighty affaires, and following publike advice, and approbation in all great expedients of high concernments; and He was more honourable, and prosperous therein, then was Nero, who made his owne will his Law. And thus alwaies those Princes have gained unto themselves most honour and renowne, who were most willing and ready to listen to the Counsell of the Land in important affaires. And also
2. In regard of their Crowne, state; for the Kings of England by this representative Body of their People, are alwayes assisted, and that upon all occasions: as for example.
First, If they lack money for any necessary occasion, the Parliament supplies them.
Secondly, if they be invaded by any forraigne or domestique foe, or force, the Parliament assists them.
Thirdly, if they be injured, reproched or dishonored by any potent person or Prince, the Parl. wil vindicate and avenge them. All which were seene evidently in Q. Eliz. time, between her and her Parliament, And
Fourthly, I may ad, that none of our Princes were ever yet happy without the use of Parliaments: and therefore it is plaine that they are beneficiall & utile unto Princes, and consequently not to be deserted of subjects which are loyall to Princes.
2. As Parliaments are usefull and utile to Princes, so they are also beneficiall and profitable unto People: as appears by 3. particulars, viz.
1. Without Parliaments People have no possibility of pleading their own rights, & liberties, they being too confused a body to appear in vindication of their proper interests. Whence it comes frequently to passe, that what all should look after, no man does, and what is committed to no man thinks his owne charge: and therfore some few chosen out by, and from amongst the People, to consider of their liberties, lawes and grievances, must needs be very advantagious unto them.
2. As people cannot without confusion plead for themselves, so often the subordinate Magistrates, and Iudges of the Land (through feare, flattery, or private corruptions) doe often betray the peoples rights, by unjust sentences or verdicts: and therefore such Counsellours as can have no private aymes, or ends of their owne; but are themselves involved in the same condition with the people, both in weale, and woe must needs be profitable for them. Yea,
3. By this present Parliament we have reaped already many great, and notable benefits; and therfore may conclude from our owne ezperience, with a Probatum est, That Parliaments are beneficiall to people. By this Parliament we are free from these two grievous arbitrary Courts, the high Commission (the Purgatory of the Church) and Star-chamber, (the terrour of the Common-wealth) as also from the heavy burthen of Ship-money, and the oppressions we groaned under by reason of Monopolies, and other illegall impositions, yea Bishops removed out of the House of Peeres, who having their dependance upon the King, for the most part would side with him, in any thing, though it were adjudged by the Parliament to be destructive and hurtfull to the Kingdome. This particular is so abundantly amplified, and that so truely, by the Parliament in their Remonstrance of the state of the Kingdom, set forth Dec. 15. 1641. that I will not enlarge it; but only conclude, that if the ends, necessity, excellency, and benefits of Parliaments be such as hath been shewed, then They are worth standing for, and ought not to be deserted. Now
Fiftly, we will take a short view of some particular reasons why we ought ta beleeve, & obey this our present Parl. and not relinquish it. viz.
1. Because they can have no by ends, nor base respects of their own: for if they aimed at promotion, preferment, and wealth, they might much easilier attaine those, by complying with, then by opposing the designes and personall commands of the King. It is (or at least hath been) an approved Maxim, that a community can have no private ends to mislead it, and to make it injurious to it selfe: and I never heard nor read so much as one story of any Parl. freely elected and held, that ever (for any ends of their own) did injure a whole kingdom or exercise any tyranny over the land (but divers Kings have done sundry acts of oppression) for nothing can suit or square with the common Councell, but only the common good, and therfore it is great reason that we should beleeve & obey them. And
2. Because no benefit at all can redound unto them by faigning, forging, or counterfeiting of false fires, feares, chymera’s, and dangers which are not. And therfore we may they better beleeve what they say. And
3. Because we never yet found them false unto us. It was the saying of one, If my friend deceive me once, I wil blame him, but if twice, my self? meaning, that he would never trust him the second time, who deceived him once. Now charity perswades us to hope, and believe, where we see nothing to the contrary; and give credit to them in whom we never saw any designes or indeavours, to betray us, or our liberties, but rather alwayes the contrary. And,
4. Because they know more then any one of us. Two eyes (we say) sees more then one; and the Parliament is the eies, and the eares of the re-publique, and their information, conference intelligence, experience, knowledge, &c. doth afford unto them some sight and insight into all things, passages, occasions, affaires, negotiations, &c. both at home and abroad. And therfore it is not without cause, that we should beleeve them. And
5. Because they never shewed any disloyalty unto the King, that ever yet was observed by the Commons or Commonwealth, whom they represent. We find in all their Petitions, royall expressions, humble suits, hearty intreaties unto his Ma: to comply with them for his owne honour & safety, cordiall Potestations of the sincerity of their intentions towards his Ma: and free and full promises neither to spare pains, purses, persons, nor estates, for the defence of his person, & preservation of his honor; yea unwearied & (beyond humane patience) continued supplications to his notice of personall imputations, yea reproachfull aspersions, that hath bin cast upon them; still taking (as much as possibly they can) all blam from his Majesty, and laying it upon his evill counsell. And
6. Because the King himselfe doth not accuse the Parliament, but onely some few particular persons therein; and therefore that which comes, or is commended unto us by the whole Parliament, we may believe, and obey, his Majesty promising to protect them, and their priviledges, and to except them in all his taxes, and accusations. And,
7. Lastly we may believe, obey, and adhere unto the Parliament, because the King of Kings seemes to favour their proceedings. How doe we see the Lord blowing upon all the devices of their enemies, sometimes turning them back upon themselves, and sometimes turning their wisedome into foolishnesse. Or what counsels, what letters, what plots, and practises, what words, and passages, against Kingdome and Parliament, hath strangely been discovered, prevented, and come to light, to the joy and rejoycing of Parliament and people, and the terrour and amazement of the contrivers, and authors of them. How extraordinarily hath the Lord assisted that honourable Assembly with zeale, courage, wisedome, discretion, prudence, moderation, patience, and constancy in all their consultations and desires? How hath the Lord preserved their Persons from imminent perill, and given them favour in the eyes of all Counties, not withstanding the base, and bitter aspersions cast upon them by some? When they had cause to be discouraged, by reason of the strong opposition of Delinquents, and disaffected persons, what encouragments have they even then found, from the Petitions, Promises, and resolutions, of divers Shires? Wherefore, seeing these are blessings, and such as belong unto the godly, we may perswade our selves, that the Lord seeing the sincerity of their intentions, doth in much mercy shew his gratious acceptation of their zeale, for the good of our Church, King, and Common-wealth. I conclude this particular, if the Lord seeme to say to our grave, and gratious Senators, as he said unto Joshua,Iosh. 1. 5, 6. There shall be none able to withstand you, because I will be with you, yea, I will not leave you, nor forsake you; therfore be strong, and of good courage: then let none who would be the Lords souldiers, and servants, desert the horsemen of Israel, and the Chariots thereof, yea the Lords Captains who fight his battels.
And thus by a serious consideration of these grounds, we may easily conjecture, yea abundantly satisfie our selves in this point, That the Parl. is not to be deserted, or forsaken by us. I proceed now unto the next Quære, which is,
Whether may the King be disobeyed,Quest. 5. and his commands withstood, or not? Whether He is to be opposed in his proceedings by any command of the Parl. Or whether are we now to obey King or Parliament.
Ans. 1.First, some Princes think, that they may lawfully do, whatsoever they have power to do, or can do; but the contrary seems truer (both by light of reason, religion, & of power intrusted by law in the hands of any) viz. that Princes have no power to do, but what is lawful, and fit to be done.
Ans. 2.Secondly, personall actions of superiours be disobeyed. The Gramarians say, Rex regis, à rego, the word King comes from Governing, because Kings are no other, but more high, and supreme Governours, and Magistrates. Now some hold (and I think warrantably) that if any Magistrate, or Judge, do pursue a man, not judicially, and by order of Law, but invade him by violence without any just cause against all law, that then in so doing he is to be held as a private person, and as such we may defend our selves against him. As for example, a woman may defend her selfe own body against an adulterer, though a Magistrate. A servant may hold his Masters hands, if he seek to kill wife, or children in his rage. Marriners, and Passengers may resist him who stands at helme, if they see that he would run the ship against a rock; yea they might hold the Princes hands, if being at the helme he misgoverns the ship, to their certain shipwrack, without prevention, because by his so governing thereof, He hazzards both his owne life, and theirs, and they by holding of his hands, prevent both his, and their own ruine, (which seems to be our present case) and therefore, much more may the whole Body defend it self against any such unjust and unlawfull invasion, as will indanger the safety, and welfare of all.
Ans. 3.Thirdly, the Kings personall, that is verball commands, without any stamp of his authority upon them, and against the order of both Houses of Parliament, I imagine may be disobeied. For I do conceive that no lawyer will say, that suppose the King should take the broad Seal of England from the Lord Keeper, into his own hands, that all the writs whatsoever he should issue forth signed with his own hand, and sealed therewith, ought to be obeyed: for it is not the stamp and impression of the Seale which makes a thing lawfull, but the Keeper thereof ought to be a Lawyer, and (by his place) should not for feare, or favour, signe any Writs, therewith, but such as are legall, and if he do otherwise, he is lyable to be questioned, and censured by a Parliament. And therefore doubtlesse, when Writs and Precepts are issued forth without the broad seal, or without a regall, that is, legall authority (as of all the Writs and Commissions, for executing the Commission of Array, are, as is proved both by the Parliament and others) they may be disobeyed, and withstood, especially when they are destructive to the Common-wealth.
Fourthly, Princes by Parliaments may be withstood,Answ. 4. when they desire, or endeavour those things, which tend to the envassailing of their people. Kings (we know) sometimes have loved their enemies more then their friends, and have marched forth amongst their enemies, to encounter with their friends. As for example, Richard 2. thought Spencer, and his confederates his best friends, though they were base sycophants, and bainefull foes, and conceited that his Peers (who were his loyallest Subjects) were the truest Traitors, And hence Princes being abused by the slattery of private persons (for some wicked ends of their own) have followed their private perverse counsels, before the grave, loyall and faithfull advice of their sage Senate. Now that it is lawfull for Parliaments to withstand Princes, who make unlawfull Warre upon their people, is so evidently proved, by the Author of that lately come forth, and learned and pious Treatise, called, A Soveraigne Antidote to prevent Civill Warres, Pag. 6, 7, 8, 9. &c. that at present I wholy silence it.
Fiftly, the matter with us is quite, and generally mistaken,Answ. 5. and the Question altogether wrong stated, viz. Whether we should obey the King, or Parliament? for the King and Parliament are not like two parallell lines, which can never meet, nor like two incompatible qualities which cannot be both in one subject, nor like the Atke and Dagon, whom one House will not hold, nor like God and Mammon, which one man cannot serve; for by siding with, and assisting of the Parliament, in those things which are according to Law, we side with, and serve the King.
Two things are here distinguishable, to wit,
1. In our obeying of the Parliament according to Law, we obey the King. This his Majesty grants, commands and commends, yea professeth, that he requires no obedience of us to himselfe, farther then he enjoynes that which is Law, lawfull and just, And,
2. In our obeying of the Parliament in this present Military and Martiall designe, we stand for the King, not against Him: that is, for the good of his soule, person, estate, honour and posterity; of which a word or two severally.
1. They stand for the Soule of their Soveraigne, who withstand him (having a lawfull call, and warrant thereunto) from doing those things which (if he doe) he can never justifie in the Court of Conscience, nor at the great chancery day of Judgement, but must sinke under the sentence of condemnation, for those unlawfull, and unjustifiable facts. And therefore the Parliament (and we in obedience unto Them) are friends unto the Soule of our dread Soveraigne, in not obeying, aiding and assisting of Him, to make unnaturall, unlawfull and unwarrantable Warres, upon his Parliament and people, which can never be defended, or justified, before or unto God, to whom the Mightiest, as well as the meanest, must give a strict account of all their actions at the last day. And
2. They stand for the Kings Person, who obey, joyne and side with the Parliament. His Majesties Person is now environed by those, who carry Him, (as far as the eye of humane probability can see) upon his own ruine, and the destruction of all his good people: which the Parliament seeing, they labour to free him from such false hands, by this twofold meanes, viz.
1. By perswading, beseeching and most humbly soliciting his Majesty to forsake them, and to rejoyce and make glad the hearts of his Parliament and People, by conjoyning himselfe with Them. But this request, suit and supplication will not yet be granted, though with much importunity and many loyall expressions desired. And
2. By labouring to take his evill Councellors from Him, they being confidently assured, and piously perswaded of the Kings sweet disposition and readinesse to comply with them, in any thing which might conduce to the good, either of Church or Common-wealth, if he were not overswayed and deluded by the fained flattering and crafty counsell of those about Him, who look with a sinister eye upon our State. Now this seemes to me to be all that is aimed at, in this present Military and Martiall designe: for the Parliament doe not purposely, and in their first intentions, intend by their Souldiers to cut off any (for if any be slaine by them, it is by accident) but to preserve and keep the peace of the Kingdome, to maintaine the priviledges of Parliament, the Lawes of the Land, the free course of Justice, the Protestant Religion, the Kings authority and Person in his royall dignity, and to attach, arrest and bring such as are accused, or imagined, to be the disturbers and firebrands of the Kingdome, unto a faire, just, equall and legall triall, which no man can think unlawfull in our Law-makers. And therfore both Senatours and Subjects in the prosecution of this Designe, stand for the safety of their Princes Person. And
3. They stand for his State, Wealth, Honour and reputation, for I conjoyne all these together. Kings acquire and accumilate more honour, respect, wealth and power, by their meeknesse towards, tender love of, and vigilant care for their Subjects, and their safety (as we see in Qu: Elizabeth and Tiberius, so long as he was such) then by tyrannizing over, and cruelly oppressing and handling of them, as we see in Caligula If our gracious Soveraigne, would be but pleased, to consider the honour and prosperity which his predecessors have enjoyed, by following the Advice of their Parliaments, and the dishonour our Nation hath in divers designes received abroad, and the grievous troubles, vexation and discord we have had at home, since Parliaments have bene difused, and laid asleepe, he would then certainely see, that they seeke his wealth, honour, reputation and welfare, who desire to reconcile and conjoyne him unto his Parliament, and advise him to governe his people by Parliaments, and endeavour to free him from the power, and hands of those, who being themselves, desire likewise to make him, an enemy unto Parliaments. And
4. They stand for his Posterity: For as evill gotten goods slip and wast away, and seldome continue to the third generation: so Kings cannot be sure that their Posterity shall peaceably and successively enjoy their Crowns, except themselves rule and governe according to Law, righteousnesse only establishing the Crown and Throne, both upon Princes and their Posterity. And therfore they who assist not the King, in those things, wayes and courses, which are illegall, grievous, yea destructive to the Common-wealth, are His Childrens and Posterities best Friends.
I conclude this Question, with this Argument,
Those who labour with their lives and estates,Arg. to defend and maintaine the Kings Soule, Honour, Reputation, Wealth, Person and Posterity, obey and stand for Him.
But the Parliament,Quest. 6. and all those who side with them in this present designe, labour with their lives and estates, to maintaine and defend the Kings Soule, Honour, Reputation, Wealth, Person and Posterity.
Therefore the Parliament, and all those who side with them in this present designe, in so doing, obey and stand for Him.
It should seeme by what hath bene spoken, That neither Parliament nor People, doth intend the least indignity, dishonour or disloyalty to the King: and it is most perspicuously and clearely to be seene, in all the Kings gracious Messages and Declarations, That he hath no designe upon his people or Parliament, neither intends any harme, opposition or oppression unto them, but professeth to rule them according to Law and equity: How then comes it to passe, that either the Parliament will not or dare not confide in the King?
First, it is because they see that some about the King,Answ. 1. are potent with Him, who affect not the Parliament, nor their proceedings, have that influence in his counsels, and are so predominant and prevalent with Him, that they have often varied and altered him, from his words and promises. It is a Maxime in Law; The King can doe no wrong; for if any evill act be committed in matter of State, his Counsell, if in matters of Justice, his Judges must answer for it: and therefore I will not lay any fault upon the King, but rather impute the faults which have bene of late obvious to many, unto some about him, or in great favour with him. Great discouragements (I grant) the Parliament in their proceedings have had from the King, but I dare not imagine that they came originally and primarily from Him, but from some about him, in regard of that vast difference, which is between his words spoken to his Parliament, with his own mouth, when he was with them, and the Messages sent unto, and the heavy charges laid upon them, in his Letters and Declarations, now when he is absent from Them. He said once, That in the word of a King, and as He was a Gentleman, he would redresse the grievances of his people, as well out of the Parliament, as in it. Againe, That he was resolved to put himselfe freely and clearely upon the Love and affection of his English Subjects. Againe, We doe engage unto you solemnly the word of a King, that the security of all, and every one of You from violence, it, and ever shall be as much our care, as the preservation of us and our children: And yet what actions and passages have of late fallen out, quite contrary to all these expressions? the Parliament and all who side with it, assist it, or obey it, in any of the Commissions or Orders thereof, being assaulted, opposed, yea now at last proclaimed Traitors. Againe, his Majesty doth professe the detestation of a Civill War, and abhorres (as he saith) the very apprehension of it. But this mind neither seemed to be in them, who came with his Majesty to the House of Commons, nor who accompanied him to Hampton-Court, and appeared in a warlike manner at Kingstone, nor in diverse of those who have bene with him and employed by him at Yorke, Hull, Leicester-sheire, Lancashiere, Sommerset-sheire, Northampton-sheire, and other places. And therefore we must needs conceive, that the King is put upon these courses and wayes by his evill Counsellors, and consequently, that the Parliament cannot confide in his words and promises, untill those Councellors be put from him, or forsaken by him. And
Answ. 2.Secondly, because of that trust which is reposed in them. I dare boldly say, That if the King should take, or make those Protestations, which he makes in his Messages and Declarations, unto any one of the Parliament-House, for the performance of any promise either unto them or theirs, which did simply and soly concerne themselves, they would beleeve and obey him, and without any further question confide in him, but they cannot doe this in the case, and place, wherein they are. The trust reposed by the people in the Parliament, is as well to preserve the Kingdome by making of new Lawes, when and where there shall be need, as by observing and putting the Lawes already made, in execution: And therefore in regard of this trust, they dare not hazard the safety, preservation, and sole managing of the Land to his Majesty alone, upon his bare word; because if after such confiding of theirs in the King, upon his faithfull promise unto them, he should be over-swayed, and seduced by some wicked Counsellours, to lay some illegall impositions, taxations and burdens upon his people (as he did soone after the granting of the Petition of Right unto the Subject) the Kingdome then would (and might justly) blame them as the Authours of their grievances, that had so lightly given away their liberties and freedome, by subjecting them to an arbitrary power. And indeed, if we will but consider it without passion and partiality, the case is no other but this, if the Parliament should wholy confide in the Kings words and Promises, then there were no more requisite in them, then this, to make a Declaration unto his Majesty of the grievances, burdens, annoyances and illegall proceedings in all, or such and such Courts or Persons, to the great oppression and heart-breake of the Subject, and having so done, to obtaine some serious Promise and Protestation, from the King to take-off all these pressures, and to be carefull for the future, that no such shall be imposed upon them, and then to confide in the King, and to breake-up the Parliament, and repaire every one to his own house. Now if Sense, Reason, Experience and Knowledge will tell us that this is farre from, or comes farre short of the true nature, and duty of a Parliament, then let us thinke that it is reason (as the case now stands) that the Parliament should not confide in the King. And
Thirdly,An. 3. because it were very dangerous for the time to come. Admitting our present Soveraigne were as prudent as Salomon, yea as pious as David (yea like him, a man after Gods own heart) yet it were dangerous for the Parliament so to confide in him, that they should trust the managing of all the great and weighty affairs of this Kingdome wholy and solely unto him, and consequently granting him an arbitrary power, to rule us, according to the dictates of his own conscience, or as the Lord should move and perswade his heart. This (I say) is not safe, because if they grant, give or settle this Power upon him, as King of England, then all other succeeding Kings will challenge and claime it as due; (or thinke they are not respected as their Predecessours) whence if any of them prove Tyrants or tyrannous oppressours, we shall be most miserable and wretched slaves.
Ob. Some perhaps may here object, that although Princes should not use their absolute power by doing alwayes what they list, yet they ought not to be circumscribed, limited, or restrained in their Government, by any tie or obligation of Law.
An. 1. First, it is much better (considering the corruption of our nature) to be with-held by some restraints of Law and covenant, from that which is evill, and which we cannot justifie before God in the Court of Conscience, then to be boundlesse, lawlesse and left to live as we list, and to do whatsoever seems good in our own eyes.
An. 2. Secondly, this also is better for others: for as the Crane had better to keepe his head out of the Wolves mouth, then to put it into his mouth, and then stand at his mercy, whither he will bite off his neck or not, so it is better for every wise man, rather to keepe and preserve those immunities, freedomes, prerogatives, and priviledges, which God, and nature hath given unto him, for the preservation, prosperity and peace of his posterity, person and estate, then to disenfranchize himselfe and to relinquish and resigne all into the hands of another, and to give him power either to impoverish or enrich, either to kill him, or keepe him alive.
Quest. 7. I come now unto the last Question, which is this; suppose things come unto this height and issue, that the King will have the Parliament to confide in him for all they desire of him, or otherwise he will by warres labour to have his will of them, then whether is it lawfull for them by warre to withstand him? Briefly, whether is this Martiall and Military designe, undertaken by the Parliament, against that party which is owned and aided by the King, lawfull or unlawfull, and consequently whither may, and ought we to assist them or not?
An. 1. First in generall, I answer concerning meanes, by these Propositions; to wit,
- 1. Meanes must be used for preventing, and removing of all temporall evils.
- 2. The meanes to be used for the removall of temporall maladies must be alwayes lawfull: for we must never doe evill that good may come thereof.
- 3. The meanes to be used must be alwayes conformable, answerable and sutable to the malady; as for example, a man must not take a sword to quench a fire, nor thinke to defend himselfe against an armed foe, (who comes with his Sword drawn, or musket charged, or pistoll cocked to take away his precious life) with faire words; but must consider what remedy, or meanes is most proper for the preventing of the evill feared. Now there is no meanes better against offensive warres then definsive.
An. 2. Secondly, I answer in generall again, concerning Actions, by two Propositions, to wit,
1. That which is not lawfull for a private person to doe, is lawfull for a publicke; as for example, it is not lawfull for a private person to take away the life of one, whom he knowes to have robbed, or murdered some one or other, but it is lawfull for the Judge upon the Bench, upon good proof, to do it.
2. That which is not lawfull for a private person in his own particular cause, is lawfull for him in a publick: as for example, had Faux bin ready to have given fire to his train, when the Parliament had bin full, and in the very instant had fallen by a private mans Sword, that act had not bin punishable, but praise-worthy; but it is not lawfull for a private man to take away the life of one, because he sees, or knowes that he intends some mischiefe against his neighbour or acquaintance: but is bound only to indeavour to hinder, and prevent it, or, at least not to fall upon him, except he can by no other meanes prevent the death and preserve the life of his brother; and neither is this (I think) lawfull in all cases.
3. That which is not lawfull for a private and particular man to do upon his owne head, is lawfull for him to do being commanded by authority; as for example, if it be not lawfull for Sir John Hotham to shut the gates of Hull against the King, of his owne accord, yet it is lawfull being warranted, and commanded by the Parliament. If it be not lawfull for the Earls of Essex and Bedford, to take up arms to suppresse that party which oppresseth the Kingdome, of themselves, yet it is lawfull, by the Order and Commission of Parliament; as is proved by the soveraigne Antidote to appease our civill warres.
An. 3. Thirdly, if his Majesty passed an Act, not onely of Oblivion, but of Justification, to our Brethren of Scotland, for their Warres, or for taking up weapons against his instruments; then I cannot see wherein, or how our defensive Armes should so much differ from theirs, that they in so doing should be loyall Subjects, and we disloyall Traitours.
Answ. 4.Fourthly, a Necessary War must needs be lawfull; for the power and force of Necessity is such, that it justifieth actions otherwise unwarrantable. The transcendent [Editor: illegible word] of all politicks, or the Law Paramount, which gives Law to all humane Laws whatsoever, is Salus populi, The safety of the people: and this Supreame Law of Nations, Salus populi, hath it’s immediate rize from the Law of Nature, which teacheth every worme, much more a man, and most of all a whole Nation, to provide for its safety in time of necessity. It is not alwayes lawfull for us to kill those who stand at our doores, or who would keep us from comming out of our doores: but if our houses be blocked up, and we so hindred from commerce with others, or from seeking reliefe for the sustentation of our own lives, that we and ours are in danger to famish, it is lawfull then to issue forth with the forces we can make, to fight our selves free: how much more lawfull then is it to fight for the liberty and preservation of a Church and State? It seemes evident by the clearest beames of humane reason, and the strongest inclinations of nature, That every private person may defend himselfe, if unjustly assaulted, yea even against a Magistrate, or his own Father, when he hath no way to escape by flight: much more lawfull then is it for a whole Nation to defend themselves against such Assassinates, as labour to destroy them, though the King will not allow them defence. Let us consider the miseries, and heavy burthens which we must lye under, if we undertake not this defensive War, and that will shew us the Necessity thereof. Now the evills which we are in danger of, are of that nature, that if they should fall upon us (which the Lord in mercy forbid) we would thinke, that it were better for us to have no being, then such a miserable being. The present Case seemes to many, who see throwly into things, to be threefold. viz.
2. Whether Popery or Protestanisme? and this doubt arises from the Kings Assistants and Agents, in his designes, or some who are in neere trust, and of great power with his Majesty, who (for the most part) are either of no Religion, or of any Religion, or of the Popish Religion, or popishly inclined and effected. And
2. Whether slavery or liberty? and this doubt arises from the doctrines, counsels and perswasions of those about the King, who perswade Him that it is lawfull for him to doe what he list. And
3. Whether estates or none? and this doubt arises from some speeches fallen from some in place and authority; that all we have is the Kings; that when there is necessity he may command of, or take from us, what he please; and that he alone is the sole Judge of this necessity. The Case being thus with us, it seemes unnaturall, that any Nation should be bound to contribute its own inherent puissance meerely to abet tyranny, and support slavery: that is, to fight themselves slaves, or, to affoord aide, assistance and succour, either with persons or purses to those who desire and endeavour to introduce popery and heresie into their Church, and to bring themselves into such slavery and bondage, that they may tyrannize over them at pleasure. And thus the Necessity of this Warre shewes the lawfullnesse thereof.
Fiftly, Defensive Warres are alwayes held lawfull.Answ. 5. Now the nature and quality of our Warre is defensive, and so the more justifiable. For
1. The Kings Majesty mislead by Malignants, and malevolent Persons made preparations for Warre, before any such thing was thought upon by the Parliament. And
2. We intend not the hurt of others, but our own peace and preservation; the designe being but to suppresse riots, to keep the peace, and to bring Delinquents to a faire, just and legall tryall. And
3. Our Armes will be laid down, as soone as we are assured of a firme peace, and to be ruled as becommeth a free people, who are not borne slaves.
Sixtly, we may guesse at the nature of this Defensive Warre,An. 6. by divers particulars; as namely,
First, by the Persons against whom this Designe is undertaken, which is not the King (as was proved before, and shall be further enlarged by and by) but the Malignants of the Kingdome, which we labour to suppresse, and to bring to punishment in a legall way. We goe against the Troublers of Israel, the fire-brands of Hell, the Korahs, Balaams, Doegs, Rabshakaes, Hamans, Tobiahs and Sanballats of our time. And
Secondly, by the Persons most favouring, and furthering of this Defensive warre, who are in every place, those who stand most cordially affected to the good of the Common-wealth, and most sincerely addicted to the purity of the Church, and the intire profession and practise of Religion. And
Thirdly, by the mercy and favour of God towards the Parliament, the principall Agents and Authors of this Designe. If we consider,
1. How the Lord preserved their persons, from the malicious intentions of the Cavaliers, when they went to the very doore of the House. And,
2. How He discovered the plots and practises which were intended for the bringing up of the Army out of the North against Them. And
3. How He directed them in their setling of Hull, the Militia and Navy, when things were almost come to their height. And
4. How he hath from time to time, and still doth encourage them with, or by the Love, Loyalty, Fidelity, Faith and firme Resolutions of the most part of all Counties, to stand and fall, live and dye with them. And
5. How hitherto He hath extraordinarily turned all the plots of their enemies against themselves, and produced effects quite contrary to those they intended, and frustrated all their hopes.
If (I say) we consider these things, we cannot but say of the Parliament House, and Parliament-men, Surely God is in this place, and in the midst of you, and present with you, and president amongst you; and we considently hope, that the Lord will preserve and keep you, and finish the work he hath begun by you, to your comfort, His glory and our good. And
Fourthly, we may guesse at the goodnesse of the Designe, by the time, when it was undertaken; for it was not begun untill all other Meanes failed; and therfore may be called, ultimum & unicum remedium, the last and only meanes left. The old Rule was observed by them, Non recurrendum est ad extraordinaria, inijs qua fieri possunt por ordinaria, they tried all fair and ordinary means, and never had recourse to extraordinary and extreame courses, untill no other would prevail. We and They have again and again petitioned the King, but cannot prevail; and therfore all other politique means failing us, we ought generally (seeing the misery which is threatned is generall) to joyn heads, hearts, hands and estates together to fight for our King, Country, Parliament, selves, Religion, Laws, Liberties, lives and all that is ours, because now all is at stake. And
Lastly, we may cleerly see the lawfullnesse of this Defensive warre, if we but look upon the Causes and Ends therof, which are many, as namely,
- 1. The glory of God.
- 2. The good of the Church.
- 3. The propagation of the Gospell.
- 4. The peace of the Kingdome.
- 5. The prosperity of the Common-wealth.
- 6. The maintenance of the Kings honour, authority, and person, in his Royall dignity.
- 7. The liberties and immunities of the Commons.
- 8. The preservation of the representative Body of the Realme.
- 9. The Priviledges of Parliament.
- 10. The Lawes of the Land. And
- 11. The free course of Justice.
But I will reduce all these to foure Heads: to wit, Gods Glory, the Kings honour, the Parliaments safety, and the Kingdomes preservation.
First, This Defensive warre is undertaken by the Parliament for Gods Glory, and the maintenance of true Religion. Now we may, yea ought to fight, to maintaine the purity and substance of Religion, that it may neither be changed into the Ceremonious formalities of Popery nor our consciences brought into the subjection of Romish and Antichristian slavery.
Secondly, This Defensive warre is undertaken by the Parliament for the Kings honour and safety. Now we are bound by the duty of allegiance to defend and maintaine the Kings person, honour and estates and therefore,
1. It is our duty to labour by all lawfull meanes to free his Person from those Assassinates, who violently (by their wicked councell, assistance, and perswasion) carry him upon his owne danger and the destruction of his liege and most loyall Subjects. And
2. It is our duty to labour to maintaine the Kings honour; and therfore when he is over-ruled by those, who (through their subtilty) work so upon his mild and pliant temper, that they make him appeare to his Subiects, yea forraigne Nations to be a Defender of Delinquente and evill Counsellours, against his loving Subiects and loyall Parliament, which tends infinitely to his dishonour: it is then our duty to labour to unwinde and disentangle him from their practises, or by force plucke away their Persons from about Him. And
3. It is our duty to maintain his Maiesties estate. Now as the Lord Burleigh would often say to Q. Elizabeth, Madam, get but your Subiects hearts, and you need not feare their purses; so I may say, that the love and affection of the Kings Subjects (which his Parliament labours to enrich him withall, and to possesse him of) will be more advantagious unto him for matter of estate, then all the Prerogatives and Priviledges, which his obscure Counsellours perswade and indeavour so much for, against the will and welfare of his people. And if we compare our Q. Elizabeth (who would have nothing, but by and from the Parliament, with the love and affection of her people) with the king of Spain, who by an arbitrary power tyrannizeth over his Subjects, we shall then see, as cleare as the Sun, that where Princes by joyning with Parliaments, labour to unite, the hearts, and affections of their people unto them, there riches abound more, both with Prince and people, than in those Kingdomes where all cruell courses are taken by the King, to impoverish the Commons.
Thirdly, this Defensive warre is under-taken by us, at the Parliaments command, for their safety. Now both Reason and Religion will teach us, that if our pious Parliament and sage Senate, for the maintaining of our lives, liberties and lawes, and in, or for opposing of it selfe (not against the Kings Person, honour or estate, but) against his affections mislead by evill Counsellours, shall be exposed to danger, dissolution or death: then it is our duty by defensive Warre, to withstand that power, or force which is levied against them.
Fourthly, this Military Designe is undertaken for the Kingdoms preservation. Now both the Laws of God and man (as is against all contradiction proved in the Treatise, called, A Soveraigne Antidote to prevent and appease our civill Warres) will beare us out, for taking up Defensive Armes for the safety of our Kingdome and Common-wealth. That is, if we see indeavours and designes a-foot, for the reducing of the Government of this Kingdom, to the condition of those Countries, which are not governed by Parliament and established Laws, but by the will of the Prince and his Favourites; then it is lawfull for us to assist the representative body of the Land (whom we entrust with our laws and liberties) against those who resist and oppose them, that they may the more easily prevaile against, and make good their designes upon us.
And therefore although we will never cease to sue unto the King, and humbly to supplicate the King of Kings, for peace and unity, yet if we cannot obtain it, without the dishonour of God, the losse of our Religion, Priviledges, Liberties and Laws, the endangering, yea exposing of our most faithfull Parliament, to imminent perill, and the hazard of his Majesties Person, honour and estate; we may then with the peace of God, his holy Angels, and of our own consciences take up Arms for the Defense of all these.
FINIS
T.18 (1.7.) John Goodwin, Anti-Cavalierism (21 October, 1642).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.18 [1642.10.12] (1.7) John Goodwin, Anti-Cavalierism (21 October, 1642).
Full titleJohn Goodwin, Anti-Cavalierism, or Truth Pleading As well the Necessity, as the Lawfulness of this present War, for the suppressing of that Butcherly brood of Cavaliering Incendiaries, who are now hammering England, to make an Ireland of it: Wherein All the materiall objections against the lawfulness of this undertaking, are fully cleered and answered, And All Men That Either Love God, Themselves, or Good men, exhorted to Contribute all manner of assistance hereunto. By. Jo. Goodwin.
Be not afraid of them : Remember the great Lord and fearfull, and fight for your Brethren, your Sons, and your Daughters, your Wives, and your Houses. Nehem. 4. 14.
All that take the Sword, shall perish with the Sword. Mat. 26.52.
De Rex Legi, quod Lex Regi, i. Imperium ac potestatem.
London Printed by G.B. and R.W. for Henry Overton, At his Shop in Popes-Head-Alley.
Estimated date of publication21 October, 1642.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 183; Thomason E. 123. (25.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
THAT which some in the Gospell spake in great amazement, by way of glorifying God, upon occasion of an unexpected breaking out of his goodnesse and power, in a miraculous cure, It was never seene after such a fashion (Mar. 2. 12.) may now be uttered by the Inhabitants of this Kingdome, with astonishment, to the everlasting shame and infamy of men; upon occasion of the late breaking out of that fire of rage and cruelty, which yet burneth in the midst of the bowels of it, and threatens to consume the very foundations thereof, except it be seasonably quenched by a gracious raine from on High. And as all that saw that inhumane butchering and quartering out into pieces of the Levites wife by her owne husband, cryed out, and said, There was no such thing done or seen, since the time that the Children of Israel came up out of the Land of Ægypt, untill that day, Judg. 19. 30. So doubtlesse whosoever shall consider what bloody and horrid intendments and attempts against this Nation, have passed the hearts and hands of some of her own Children, may truly say, There hath no such thing been done or seen in the Land, since God first caused men to dwell on the face of it.
What shall we think of that Legion of Devils (I had almost called them) who now possesse the Land, and after the manner of Devils indeed, seek all to rent and teare it in pieces; I meane that Colluvies, that heap, or gathering together of the scum, and drosse, and garbage of the Land, that most accursed confederacy, made up of Gebal, and Ammon, and Amaleck, Philistims with the Inhabitants of Tyre, of Jesuits and Papists, and Atheists, of stigmaticall and infamous persons in all kindes, with that bloody and butcherly Generation, commonly knowne by the name of Cavaliers? Have they not thorough some black art or other gotten the chiefe treasure of the Land, the King, into their possession, setting him still in the Front of all their desperate designes; which are these, and their fellowes: 1. To pull those Stars out of the Firmament of the Land, to dissolve and ruine that Assembly, which is by interpretation, or representation (which you will) the whole Nation. 2. When they have opened this doore of hope unto themselves, to turn the Lawes, and present frame of Government upside downe. 3. To make havock and desolation, to roote out the Generation of the Saints rush and branch, men and women, young and old fearing God, out of the Land. 4. To make rapine and spoile of all the goods and possessions, at least of all those that withstand them, and are not brethren in iniquity with them. 5. To build up the Walls of Jericho, to put Lucifer againe into heaven, I meane, to advance the tyrannicall Thrones of the Hierarchie to their former heighth, or higher, if they know how. 6. By their authority and power to excommunicate and cast out all the pure and precious Ordinances of God out of his House, and to supply this defect with Antichristian, and spurious institutions. 7. To spread that Veile, or covering of Antichristian darknesse again over the face of the Land, which God by a most gracious hand of providence had rent and taken off many yeares since; to leaven the whole lump of the Land, the second time, with the soure leaven of Romish error and superstition. 8. And lastly, as is much to be feared, when they have served their turnes with, and upon the King, and used him as an Engine to get all the stones together for their building, then to make rubbidge of him, as if they had honoured him sufficiently, to cause such sacred designes as these to passe thorough his hands, and made him instrumentall, or any wayes accessory in such Angelicall atchievements. Doe we thinke that the light of the knowledge of God shines in the hearts and consciences of these men? Have these men the minde of Christ amongst them? Doe they know who is the Lord? Or doe they not thinke rather, that Baal, or Belial is he? Have all the workers of iniquity (saith David) no knowledge, that they eat up my people as they eat bread? Psal. 14. 4. i.e. That they injure, vex, and consume them with no more remorse, regret, or touch of conscience, then they eat and drinke to preserve their naturall lives: as if such men as these, the people of God, were made for the same end and purpose to them that bread is, viz. to be eaten up and devoured by them. Have they no knowledge (saith the Prophet) that they dare attempt such a thing as this? Implying (as it should seeme) that to vex, molest, persecute, and destroy the people of God, argues the most profound ignorance, and thickest darknesse in the mindes and understandings of men, that can likely be found there; and that the weakest impressions or glimmerings of any true light of knowledge, would keep men from dashing their foot against this stone howsoever. If men had but as much knowledge of God, as Pilates wife had in a dreame, they would take heed of having any thing to doe with just men. And these things (saith our Saviour to his Disciples concerning those that should kill them, and thinke they did God service therein) these things (saith he) they shall doe unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor me, John 16. 3. If men had the least degree of the true knowledge of God in Christ, they must needs have some knowledge of his People and Children also: and if they know these, this knowledge would be as a hooke in their Nose, or a bridle in their Lips, to keep them from falling foule upon them, as the knowledge of Christ the Lord of glory, would have kept the Princes of this world from crucifying him, had it been in them.
And since we are fallen upon the mention of those men who are ready in a posture of hatred, and malice, and revenge, with other preparations answerable hereunto, to fall upon us, and our lives and liberties, both spirituall and civill, upon our estates, our Gospell and Religion, and all that is, or ought to be deare and precious unto us; and in our miseries and ruines, to render our posterities more miserable then we, and have advanced their designe this way to that maturity and heighth, which we all know and tremble to think of: Give me leave in that which remaines, to excite and stir you up, from the greatest to the least, both young and old, rich and poore, men and women, to quit your selves like men, yea, and (if it be possible) above the line of men, in this great exigency and stresse of imminent danger that hangs over your heads, and threatens you every houre. Oh let it be as abomination unto us, as they very shadow of death, to every man, woman, and child of us, not to be active, not to lie out and straine our selves to the utmost of our strength and power in every kinde, as far as the Law of God and nature will suffer us, to resist that high hand of iniquity and blood that is stretched out against us; to make our lives, and our liberties, and our Religion good against that accursed Generation that now magnifieth themselves, to make a prey and spoyle of them, to make havock and desolation of them all at once, if the Lord shall yet please to deliver us out of their hands. Let not our Lives, our Liberties, our Estates, be at all precious or deare unto us in this behalfe, to expose them; be it unto the greatest danger, to prevent the certaine and most unquestionable ruine of them otherwise: Let us resolve to put all into the hands of God, to prevent the falling of all, or any thing, into the hands of these men. There is neither man nor woman of us, neither young nor old, but hath somewhat or other, more or lesse, a Mite or two at least to cast into the Treasury of the Publike safety. Men that have strength of body for the War, and fingers that know how to fight, let them to the Battell, and not feare to look the enemy in the face. Men and women that have only Purses and Estates, let them turne them into men and swords for the Battell. Men that have heads, but want armes and hands for outward execution, let these study and contrive methods and wayes of proceedings: Head-worke is every whit as necessary in such a time and exigent, as hand-work is. They that have neither hands, nor heads, nor estates, let them finde hearts to keep the Mountain of God, to pray the enemies downe, and the Armies of the Lord up: Let them finde tongues to whet up the courage and resolutions of others. This is a service wherein women also may quit themselves like men, whose prayers commonly are as masculine, and does as great and severe execution, as the prayers of men. As for little Children that know not the right hand from the left, and so are uncapable of exhortation, or putting on this way, by their weaknesse and innocency (innocency I meane, as concerning the enemies, and giving them the least cause or colour of their bloody intendments, as likewise in respect of the crying sins, and horrid provocations of other men) they doe every whit as much towards the furtherance of the service, as men doe by their strength, by their wisdome, by their estates, or otherwise; as we see in the case of Gods sparing Niniveh.Jon. 4. 11. The sixscore thousand Children that knew not their right hand from the left, were the great intercessors, and chiefe mediators in the behalfe of the City with him. Yea, the bruit beasts themselves, the Cattell, their case and condition working upon the goodnesse and graciousnesse of God, were contributors too in their nature towards this service: As is to be seen in the last clause of the place cited from the Prophet Jonah.Jon. 4. 11. And should not I spare Niniveh, &c. —. and also much Cattell. Therefore now I beseech you that are capable of the great evils and dangers that threaten you, and are even at your doore, be not you wanting and backward in any thing that is in your hand to doe, if it be possible, and as far as in you lyeth, redeeme your lives with your lives, your estates with your estates, your Religion with your Religion, out of the hands of those men, set them all to work for their own maintenance and preservation: yea, if you know how to create more strength then you have, or to improve your selves seventy times seven fold above the proportion of any your present abilities, I beseech you doe it; at least be Willing (as the Apostle beares the Corinthians witnesse they were, in a case not altogether unlike) above that you are able, that so you may be sure to give out your selves to the utmost of your ability, the more freely.
Give me leave to set an edge upon you, to quicken and encourage you, to strengthen your hand to the worke, by the tender only of two motives, or considerations unto you.
1. Consider that the cause, wherein you are desired and exhorted to appeare, and to engage your selves to the utmost, is like unto the Law of God it selfe in those excellent qualifications of it: it is just, and holy, and good: there is nothing in it that should make you ashamed either before God, or justly-judging men, nothing that needs make you tender, or holding off in point of conscience. You are to stand up in the defence of your Lives, your Liberties, your Estates, your Houses, your Wives, your Children, your Brethren, and that not of this Nation only, but of those two other Nations likewise united under the same government with this, in the defence of those Religious and faithfull Governours, that Honourable Assembly of Parliament, whose power and priviledges you stand bound by your solemn Vow and Protestation unto God, (besides many bands of conscience otherwise) to defend and maintaine with your lives, power, and estates. Yea, in defence of his Majesties royall person, honour, and estate; all which are now in eminent danger to suffer by that accursed retinue of vile persons that are gathered about him, as Ivie about an Oake, which never suffers it to thrive or prosper, till it be torne off from it. This, men that have their eyes open, may easily see and discerne; though others make a mock and a scorn of such an assertion, as ridiculous: But so did Lots sons in Sodome, by that saying of his unto them, That the Lord would destroy the place and City Where they Were, Gen. 19. 14. which yet was a serious and solemne truth: Yea, and further, you are exhorted to stand up in defence of the true Protestant Religion, for the name and honour of your God, your Ordinances, and (which ought to be of very deare and precious consideration to you) for the safe conveyance of that great treasure of the Gospel over unto your posterities that are yet unborne. Here is nothing in all this but what the manifest Law of God, and the common light of nature, not only warranteth and alloweth in all men, but even leadeth, perswadeth, yea, urgeth and presseth them unto. Now how should not the goodnesse, equity, and righteousnesse of the cause be as precious seed, out of which a generation of sons and daughters shall be raised up unto it? Yea, and be spirit and life to the undertakers thereof? And encouragement unto them, to plead it with the highest hand of meanes and endeavours they are able to lift up? When there is a cause that hath the image and superscription of God upon it, so full and lively as this hath, is it not pitty it should want Orators to plead it, that it should suffer and fall to the ground, and none be found to take it up?
Indeede if there were any occasion to make a stand in matter of conscience, if there were any thing doubtfull in the cause recommended to you, anything to detaine your judgements and consciences in suspence, whether it were lawfull for you or no, to appeare in it, there were just cause to spare and to forbeare you, at least for a time, till you should be fully satisfied. But now the righteousnesse hereof being as cleare as the light, or as the Sunne at noone day, why tarry you? why are you not up in your might before this, to maintaine it to the uttermost?
Yea, but say the Rabbies and great Disputers that stand by your enemies and strengthen their hand that they can not depart from their wickednesse, that cover, but it is with the covering of the flesh, and of the spirit of the world, not with the covering of the Spirit of the Lord: It is not lawfull (say these men) for you to oppose them, nor to contend any wayes by force against them, because by opposing them, you resist the King the Lords anointed, whom God commands should be obeyed and submitted unto. If you conceive him to be your adversary, yet you ought to oppose him, (or rather that adverse disposition of his against you) onely with prayers and teares, and supplications unto God for him, and with petitorie and humble addresments unto himselfe, but to make no outward resistance at all.
To this I answer,
1 By way of concession, that the King is to be obeyed, and that by the expresse commandement of God. Submit your selves to every Ordinance of man for the Lords sake, whether it be unto the King, as supreme, or unto Governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evill doers, &c. 1 Pet. 2 13. Here is submission to the King required in expresse termes, and they that yeeld not the submission here required, resist the Ordinance of God (as the Apostle Paul speakes, Rom. 13.) and by such resistance shall receive to themselves (viz. without repentance) ϰϱῖμα judgement, or condemnation: God will severely judge or punish them for this resistance. And for my part, I from my soule could wish and desire that the sad distractions and contestations betweene the two opposing parties in the land, might come to a comprimise, and be issued and ended upon this point: that party that makes most conscience of keeping that commandement of God which requires submission and obedience unto Kings, to be submitted unto by the other; and that to yeeld, and sit downe, which is most defective this way, and in whom lesse conscience of such obedience appeareth. Only two things I desire may be taken notice of from this Scripture where submission to Kings is commanded: First, that a King or Kingly Government, is ἀνθρωϰίνη ϰτίσις an ordinance of man, or an humane creation (as the Originall properly signifieth) which yet we know is no lesse generally then impudently, and in the face of expresse Scripture to the contrary, denyed by the Divinity and learning of the malignant faction, who by swelling the Prerogative of Kings to a monstrous and most unnaturall proportion, as if they had a minde to make it crack before they had done, have consulted all maner of miseries and calamities to the world, as well to Kings themselves, as to their People, Submit to every Ordinance of man (saith Peter) for the Lords sake, whether it be unto the King, &c. Therefore he supposeth the King or Kingly Government to be the Ordinance, or creation, or creature of man. And it is evident that so he is; for there were Kings over the Heathen Nations, with the forme of whose government God did no wayes intermeddle by way of any command or appointment concerning it, long before there was any King over* Israel. Nor was it the order or command of God, that there should be any King over Israel, but he was highly offended with the People for desiring it. Is it not now Wheat harvest? (saith Samuel to the People) I will call upon the Lord, and he shall send thunder, and raine, that you may perceive and see, how that your wickednesse is great, which ye have done in the sight of the Lord in asking you a King. And though he condescended in a passive way, that they should have a King as they desired, yet as he tells them by the Prophet Hosea, He gave them a King in his wrath, and bid them in effect take him at their perils, if they would needs have him, he should deale but hardly by them. He would take their sons and daughters, and make them servile to him, as you have it. 1 Sam 8. 11. It is true, in this sense a King, or Kingly power and government may be said to be from God. 1. In a generall or indefinite consideration, as it is a government, not simply, or in it selfe unlawful: For it is the will and appointment of God, that there should be some government or other in every society of men, yet not any government neither, not any that is unjust, unreasonable, or tyrannicall: And in this sense all formes of government that are lawfull and just, whether they be simple, as the three commonly known by the names of Monarchy, Aristocracy, Democracy; or whether they be mixt, having somewhat of two, or all of these simples in them, are equally and indifferently from God: not any one of them determinately, or with exclusion of the rest. For suppose all Nations and Societies of men in the world, from the foundations thereof untill now, should have set up and exercised only one and the same form of government amongst them, as viz. That which we call Aristocraticall (like that in the Low-countries, by some chosen amongst them, whom they call States) so that neither the Monarchicall, or Kingly government, nor yet the Democraticall, nor any other government whatsoever had been ever practised in the world untill this day, we must not thinke that the world had herein sinned, in not using any other, no nor yet neglected any Ordinance of God. Because it is no ordinance or appointment of God that any particular Nation or society of men, should have either this or that speciall forme of government amongst them, but only that they should have some kinde of government which is just and lawfull. Therefore Kingly Government is no Ordinance of God in this sense, viz. as imposed upon any Nation or People by way of duty or precept to use and set up amongst them. But being set up in any people, it is warranted, and countenanced by God as lawfull, and obedience & subjection streightly enioyned thereunto. And therefore the Apostles expression, Rom. 13. 1 is very expresse and punctuall this way. Let every soule be subject unto the higher powers, for there is no power (.i. no iust and lawfull form of government) but is from God, the powers that are, are ordained (or rather ordered πταγμ[Editor: illegible character] αι) of God. The powers that are: Why doth he say the powers that are, are ordained, or ordered by God? Doubtlesse to shew, that there are some powers or formes of government, in actu signato, (as the School-men speak) that is, in respect of their species or kinde, which are not in actu exercito, actually exercised or taken up, nor need they be taken up by any State or People in the world. But for those that are, .i. that are de facto established, and set up by any People among themselves, (speaking only of those that are lawfull) these (saith he) are ordained, or rather ordered by God: .i. God by speciall instinct and work of providence (q) inclines the hearts of severall Nations, some to imbrace and fall upon one, and some upon another, some upon that which is Monarchicall, or Kingly, others upon that which is Aristocraticall, some upon that which is Democraticall, &c. and withall commands, that that which every Nation or People chooseth for it selfe, should be obeyed and submitted unto by those that have chosen it, and live under it, so long as it continueth: For the time is comming, when Christ will put downe all rule,1 Cor. 15. and all authority, and power. And this is another sense wherein Kings or Kingly Government may be said to be from God, or to be the Ordinance of God, viz. because where it is established and set up, he had a speciall hand in ordering and guiding the hearts of the People to choose it, before others, and withall commands it to be obeyed, as a Government that is lawfull and authorized by him, not as commanded and enioyned by him.
Thus you have the first thing made plaine to you, which was observed from the place in Peter, which was, that Kingly power or authority is directly and properly the creation or ordinance of man, though there bee that in it also, which in a sense may give it the denomination of an Ordinance of God; viz. 1. As warranted or countenanced by him. 2. As ordered and taken up by those Nations, who have subjected themselves unto it, by the speciall disposall and work of his providence.
The second thing I desire you would take notice of from the same Scripture, is this, that subordinate Authority, and inferiour Magistracy and power is as much the Ordinance of God, as Soveraignty and supreame Authority it selfe is: and that God by one and the same command, requires us to submit our selves to inferiour Magistrates or Governours, as well as hee doth to Kings themselves. Reade the passage againe. Therefore submit your selves to all manner of Ordinances of man, whether, &c. So that it is a sin of the same nature, and renders a man obnoxious to the same danger or displeasure from God, to he found in disobedience to subordinate Rulers under the King, as to the King himselfe. But this for answer to the Objection in the first place, by way of concession or grant, That the King doubtlesse is to be obeyed.
But secondly by way of exception I answer further, that though the King be to be obeyed and submitted unto, yet this obedience was never intended by God to be universall, but with limitation, viz. In such commands wherein a mans obedience to the King should not be found disobedience against God: for in these cases, That of the Apostles Peter and John to the Rulers Elders, and chiefe Priests, must take place. Acts 4. 19. Whether it be right in the sight of God to obey you, rather then God, Judge yee. The debt of obedience to God must alwayes be paid, whosoever looseth by the hand: Though the truth is, that there is no creature, King nor other, that can lose any thing due to him, by any mans obedience unto God. The Apostles were so confident of the righteousnesse of their cause in disobeying their Rulers in that, wherein they obeyed God, that they feared not to make their Adversaries themselves their Judges therein: Judge yee. If a King should command me not to pray for the generall good, or peace of the Church or State where I live, or to forbeare the doing of any thing, which I conceive I am bound in conscience unto God to doe for the publique good, I am not in this case any whit more bound to obey the Kings command, then the Apostle Peter and John were to obey the command of the Rulers and Elders who charged them to give over preaching the Gospell, or then Shadrack, Meshach, and Abednego were, to worship the Golden Image, because Nebuchadnezzar commanded it. This limitation is plainly enough expressed in that very Scripture, wherein we heard obedience unto Kings commanded. 1 Pet. 2. 13. Submit your selves (saith the Apostle) to every Ordinance of man, for the Lords sake. If we ought to submit for the Lords sake: .i. Either for that love we beare to him, or out of conscience of that obedience which we owe unto him, we ought not to submit in any thing whereby God may be dishonoured or disobeyed. It is senselesse to thinke, that any thing can, or ought to be done for the Lords sake, which cannot be done but to his dishonour, or (which is the same) with disobedience to him.
Yea, but it will still be objected, though it be true, that Kings are not to be obeyed in any of those commands that are unlawfull, in an active way, we are not alwayes to doe what they would have us doe, nor to cease or forbeare the doing, of what they would have us forbeare; yet are they even in such cases to be obeyed passively: Men are to suffer patiently any punishment they desire to inflict upon them, for refusing any such obedience; or however, they are not forcibly to resist.
To these things likewise I answer: 1. That the unlawfull command of a King, may possibly be of that nature and condition, that a Subject cannot disobey it, but by a strong hand, and taking up of Armes, though not properly or directly against the King, yet against the command of a King. In such a case, disobedience to Kings by a strong hand, and with forcible resistance, is not only lawfull, but even matter of duty and obedience unto God. For instance, A Christian hath solemnly vowed and protested before God, to defend the lives of his godly and faithfull Governours to the utmost of his power: or whether he hath made such a Vow and Protestation or no, it is not much materiall in this respect, because he stands bound in conscience otherwise, and by the Law of God, to doe it. Now suppose such a man cannot performe this Vow, or doe that which is his duty to do otherwise therein, but by a strong hand, and taking up Armes; In this case, if a King commands such a man not to take up Armes in relation to such a defence, it is evident that this unlawfull command of a King cannot be disobeyed, but by taking up Armes against it. There are many other cases of the same consideration and rule with this.
2. I answer further, That it is one thing to offer violence to the person of a King, or Ruler, or to attempt the taking away of his life; another to secure a mans own life, or the life of another, whom we know to be innocent, and much more the publike safety, by strengthening a mans selfe to withstand the violent execution of any unjust command from a King, by those that have no right or lawfull authority at all, to doe any such execution upon us. As for offering violence to the person of a King, or attempting to take away his life, we leave the proofe of the lawfulnesse of this, to those profound disputers the Jesuits, who stand ingaged by the tenour of their professed Doctrine and practise, either to make good the lawfulnesse thereof, or else to leave themselves and their Religion, an abhorring and hissing unto the world. As for us who never travelled with any desires or thoughts that way, but abhor both mother and daughter, doctrine and practise together, we conceive it to be a just Prerogative of the Persons of Kings in what case soever, to be secure from the violence of men; and their lives to be as consecrated Corne, meet to be reaped and gathered only by the hand of God himselfe. Davids conscience smote him, when he came but so neare the life of a King, as the cutting off of the lap of his garment.
But as concerning a forcible withstanding, or resistance making, against a violent execution of any unjust command from a King, attempted by those that have no rightfull or lawfull authority to do such execution either upon us or others, yea though the King himselfe be at hand to second his instruments in the execution of such commands, we have sufficient warrant for the lawfulnesse hereof in the Scriptures themselves. When Ahab sent a Cavaliere (you may call him a man of blood, to take away the Prophet Elisha’s head, as he sate in his house amongst the Elders, 2 King. 6. 32. did Elisha set open his doore for him, and sit still till he took off his head, in obedience to the King? No, he bestirred himselfe for the safeguard of his life, and called upon others to stand by him, and assist him against that outrage and violence intended against him: yea and this without any brand or blemish of any rebellion or disobedience to the King; yea though he spake somewhat roundly and freely of the King himselfe. See yee not (saith he to the Elders that were with him) how this son of a murtherer (meaning no beggars, no lesse then Ahab himself, the King) hath sent to take away mine head? Take heed when the Messenger commeth, and shut the doore, and handle him roughly * at the doore: Is not the sound of his Masters feet behinde him? Surely he that went thus far, for the safety of his life, when he was but in danger of being assaulted, would have gone further if occasion or necessity had been; and in case the Kings Butcher had got in to him before the doore had been shut, if he had been able, and had had no other meanes to have saved his owne head, but by taking away the others, there is little question to be made, but he would rather have taken, then given a head, in this case. So when Saul the King would needs have had Jonathan put to death, yea, and had bound himselfe with an oath or curse to have it so (yea and that twice over for failing) the people knowing that Jonathan had committed nothing worthy of death (though the King thought he had) but that contrarily, he had deserved well of the State, and had mightily delivered Israel, (as the words of the Text are) delivered him by a strong hand out of the hand of Saul. 1 Sam. 14. 45. Neither is there the least aspersion or imputation cast upon this People for this fact of theirs, as if they had beene any wayes injurious or disobedient to their King. Nay it appeares by the sequell of the Story, that Saul himselfe, though a man not of the best disposition, when the turbidum intervallum, the fit of passion was over, took it no wayes amisse at the hands of the people, that they had resisted him, in that unreasonable and inconsiderate designe of his against Jonathan: but went on, and raigned peaceably over them. David in like manner, being unjustly persecuted by Saul, and those gracelesse and base flatterers that assisted him in that ungracious designe, and being in danger of his life by them, did hee either sit still, to see whether God would in an extraordinary and miraculous way protect him or no? Or did he submit himselfe to Sauls mercy, and lay downe his life at his feet? No, but on the contrary, he provided himself with weapons, the best that were to be had. 1 Sam. 21. 8 9. And willingly entertained for the safeguard of life, and to make resistance against Saul and his party, all the help of men he could come by, making himselfe an head or Captaine over them. 1 Sam. 22. 2. And yet all this while David was but one single man, and that of a private and mean condition in comparison.
And this (my Brethren) is the very case that is now before you, or if there be any difference in respect of a justifiablenesse in the one above the other, all the advantage, which certainly is very much, lies on your side; your scale is much the better weight. There are sons of Belial that are risen up against you, full of a spirit of hatred and revenge gainst you, who partly in plaine words, and without Parables, partly by their insolent carriages and behaviours towards others of the same spirit and cause with you, threaten you with the utmost insolencies they can execute upon you, and (in effect) to stretch the line of miserable and wofull Ireland over you and your City, and whole Nation. These either have, or pretend to have a Warrant or Commission from the King to doe what they doe, to make prey and spoile of you, your lives, and liberties, and all that you have; just as the Messenger had from Ahab, that was sent to take away the Prophets head (as you heard) or as those had from Saul that went to lay hold of Jonathan to put him to death. Now then the question is, whether it be lawfull for you to stand upon your guard in this case, and to seeke the preservation of your lives, and of those that belong unto you, wives, and little ones, &c. and if there be no other likely meanes for your safety, to destroy the lives of those that seek to destroy yours; whether the command of the King (suppose such a thing were, which yet I much question) to wicked instruments to take away your lives, or the lives of those whom you are bound, by oath or otherwise to protect; whether (I say) such a command ought more to prevaile with you to sit still and suffer the destroyer to execute his Commission upon you, to take away your lives, or the command of God and nature which lies upon you to defend your lives, and the lives of such others, as we spake of, when they are assaulted, or in danger of assault? This fairely and unpartially is the State of the present question. The great Prophet Elisha (as we heard) and the people of Israel under Saul, and the man according to Gods own heart, resolved the question clearly enough by their practise.
It it be here objected and said, it is true, such acts as you have related were indeed done by these men: but, Quo jure, whether they did well, or lawfully in so doing, is yet in question: An act done by a good man, fearing God, is not therefore good, or lawfully done, because such a man doth it: The ancient Fathers were generally Polygamists: yet the plenty of their practise is but a defective proofe of the lawfulnesse of Polygamy. In like manner, the actions mentioned, having no testimony of approbation from the Scriptures, may very possibly be workes of darknesse, though done by children of light; yea, though there be no expresse brand of unlawfulnesse set upon them by God: for Polygamy it selfe hath this negative testimony of its innocency.
To this I answer, first in generall: That though the goodnesse and holinesse of the person be not sufficient to authorize an act for lawfull, yet whilst the unlawfulnesse of it be clearly evicted by a contrariety in it to some command of God, it is a strong presumption, that an act performed by such a person, is lawfull: To the instance of Polygamy in the Fathers: I answer, that it was apparently a breach of the seventh Commandement, and contrary to the first institution of marriage by God; the tenour whereof, according to our Saviours own extract out of the ancient Record, runs thus, Mat. 19. 5. And they twaine (not they three, or they foure, or more) shall be one flesh. And besides, it is plainly branded and condemned by the Spirit of God, as sinfull, Mal. 2. 14. 15. as the generall vote of Interpreters upon this place carryeth it. But there is not the least intimation given throughout the whole Scriptures, of any thing sinfull or displeasing unto God, in what either Elisha, or the people, or David did, in the particulars mentioned.
Those acts of Solomon, commanding Joab and Shimd to be put to death, without any tryall or due processe of Law against them, 1 King. 2. and so that of David, giving away Mephibosheths estate to Ziba, onely upon a displeasure conceived against him, with some others of other Kings of Judah, of like consideration, smelling too ranke of prerogative oyle, are much more questionable in point of lawfulnesse, and of farre more difficult reconciliation with principles of reason and equitie, and with the Law of God it selfe then those other. But,
2. To the particular I answer. First, for the fact of the Prophet Elisha, calling out to those that were with him, to lay hands upon him that came armed with the Kings authority and command, to take away his head, and to shut the doore against him; that in this he did nothing but what was pleasing unto God, appeares from the circumstance of time, and that posture of spirit, wherein the Prophet thus contended for his head against him that would needs have had it from him. He was now full of the Spirit of God, and of prophecy: and was in that very instant, wherein his head should have beene-taken from him, ready to cry out as a woman in travaile, and to bee delivered of that gracious message, which immediatly followes in the beginning of the succeeding Chapter. Now that so holy a man, and so great a Prophet, should in that very point and instant of time, wherein he was full of the Spirit of God, and ready to deliver a message from him of that high importance and unexpected grace to his people, fall into the foule sinne of rebellion against his lawfull King, is doubtlesse an incredibilitie of the first magnitude.
Secondly, the Elders or Statesmen of the Kingdome, who were present, complyed with him in his motion, and assisted him in his opposition against the Kings messenger, who came for his head; laid hands upon him, and suffered him not to enter: which appeares from hence because the Prophets head stood still upon his shoulders. And this is yet a further confirmation of the lawfulnesse of that resistance, which he made, because it is unreasonable to thinke, that persons of that qualitie, and who cannot be conceived but to have understood themselves sufficiently in a businesse of that nature, being the Peeres or chiefe officers of the Kingdome, should have involved themselves in the danger and guilt of rebellion against the King: which (doubtlesse) they had done, had that act of the Prophet, wherof they were abettors, had any streine or touch of Rebellion in it.
Thirdly, and lastly, the King himselfe (it seemes) comming very shortly after into the place where the Prophet and Elders were, finding the execution, which in hot blood he had commanded, not done, the heate of his passion being somewhat over and abated, sate downe amongst them, and never so much as reproved either Prophet or Elders, for making the resistance they did to his messenger: which it is like he would have done, and that upon high termes, had he conceived either the one or the other to have beene within the verge of a Rebellion; or any other injury or indignitie offered either to his person, or to his Crowne and dignitie.
Againe secondly for the people who delivered Jonathan out of the hand of Saul; there is no colour to conceive any thing unlawfull or unjustifiable therein. Evident it is that themselves looked upon this fact before it was done, not only as a thing lawfull for them to doe, but as matter of dutie, and that which in conscience they were bound to doe. That expression of theirs implies as much: Shall Jonathan die, who hath so mightily delivered Israel? God forbid. (1 Sam. 14. 45.) As the Lord liveth there shall not one haire of his head fall to the ground. They conceived, that it had beene a sinne of a very high nature in them, if they should not have appeared for his rescue and deliverance, whom they not onely knew to be innocent, and to have done nothing worthy of death, but also to have wrought with God for their deliverance. Nor is it easie to conceive what other ground or motive should have induced this people to runne the hazard of the Kings displeasure in Jonathans protection, then conscience onely: though its true, there is no intimation given of any complaint made, nor of any offence conceived by Saul against the people for this fact of theirs, which is another argument of the lawfulnesse thereof, yea and of the unprejudicialnesse or in-offensivenesse of it to Sauls kingly Throane and dignitie, considering how tender and jealous Saul was of these, and how impatient of the least touch (yea though but imaginary onely) in them, as appeares in the sequell of his history, especially by his violent persecution of David, upon very light and loose grounds of suspition this way.
Lastly, concerning Davids gathering a strength of men and armes to him, whereby to make resistance against Saul, or rather against that bloody association which conspired with him in a most unjust way, to take away his life; evident it is,
1. That David, all the time of this his unjust persecution by Saul and his complices, being still in eminent danger of his life, was more soft and tender conscienced then ordinary, and more afraid of sinning against God; yea and prayed both more frequently and more fervently unto God to bee preserved from sinne, then at other times; as appeares by many Psalmes composed by him, during this his triall. Now it is a thing altogether incredible, that a man otherwise according to Gods owne heart, under the best and softest frame of spirit and conscience, that ever he liv’d in, and whilst hee made it his earnest prayer unto God daily to be kept from sinne, should so fouly miscarry, as to live in the sinne of Rebellion against his lawfull King without repentance.
2. That he respected and honoured Saul very highly, and was very tender of doing him the least harme. It is said, that his heart smote him, because he had cut off but the lap or skirt of his garment, 1 Sam. 24. 5. using moreover these words to his servants, whose fingers itch’d to have made sure worke with Saul; The Lord forbid that I should doe this thing to my master the Lords annointed, to stretch forth mine hand against him, seeing he is the anoynted of the Lord, vers 6. Therefore certainly David in defending himselfe against Sauls Cavaliers with armes and men, neither offended God, nor wronged Saul himselfe in the least measure, Yea,
3. Saul himselfe overcome with this expression of Davids love and faithfulnesse unto him, acknowledged his innocencie, and the uprightness, of his heart towards him, vers. 16. Is this thy voyce, my sonne David (faith Saul) and lift up his voyce and wept. And said to David, thou art more righteous then I: for thou hast rendred me good, and I have rendered thee evill. And thou hast shewed this day that thou hast dealt well With me, &c. Saul did not onely acquit him from those high crimes, of treason, rebellion, secition &c. but from all manner of injury or iniustice at all done to him. And if Saul against whom the offence (if any) had beene committed, iustifieth him, who shall with any colour of equitie condemne him:
Lastly (for this particular) the holy Ghost himselfe gives this expresse testimony concerning David; That he did that which was right in the sight of the Lord, and turned from nothing that be commanded him all the dayes of his life, save onely in the matter of Vriah the Hittite, 1 King. 15. 5. whereas, if that fact of his, defending himselfe by force of armes, against Saul and his confederates in blood against him, had beene of any such interpretation as some would make it, (by making other cases like unto it) as either treason, rebellion, or the like; doubtlesse this had beene an higher and greater matter of exception against him, then the matter of Vriah it selfe. But yet further that their practise in the particular mentioned respectively, and so yours, being onely conformable thereunto, was and is every wayes iustifiable; and of perfect consistence with the rules of reason equity and all good conscience, and no wayes derogatory to Kingly power and authority, I remonstrate and prove by this one consideration.
Men that have no lawfull authority or power to take away the lives or goods of men, may very lawfully be resisted in any attempt they shall make, to doe either; and if their lives miscarry in such attempts, they have their meanes in their owne hands, (as we say) their blood is upon their owne heads. This I suppose is a pregnant and knowne principle both in reason and religion. If a man assaults another upon the high way, and seekes to take away his mony or life from him; if the person assaulted slayes the other se defendendo (as the Law speakes) there is neither Law nor conscience will take hold on, or reprove him for it. This proposition is manifest. I go on therefore and adde,
But men can have no lawfull authority or power, by any warrant or commission from a King to take away the lives, or goods, of those that are innocent and have not transgressed the Law, no not of those that are not in a lawfull way convicted for transgressors of the Law.
Therefore such men as these may lawfully be resisted in any attempts they shall make either upon our lives, or our goods, notwithstanding any Warrant, Commission, or command they have, or pretend to have, from a King to doe it. And take that along with you which apparently followes from hence: If such persons so assaulted may lawfully resist such assailants, then may they every whit as lawfully provide themselves before hand of such meanes, wherewith they may be able to make the resistance when time comes. As, if it be lawfull for a Traveller to kill a Thiefe upon the way in the defence of his life, or money; certainly it is lawfull for him to ride with a Sword, Pistoll, or the like, wherewith he may be able to doe it; It is ridiculous to grant the lawfulnesse of an end, and to deny a lawfulnesse of meanes necessary and sufficient to attaine that end.
But some (it may be) will deny that proposition, which affirmeth, that those men have no lawfull power or Authority to seize upon mens lives or goods who are innocent, and as yet so reputed by the Law, having the authority and command of the King to doe it. That therefore no unjust, or unrighteous command of a King, can enable any man with any lawfull power to put in execution any such command, I thus demonstrate (though indeed it be a thing evident enough in it self without any demonstration) no King can derive any power or authority to another, to any minister, officer, or the like, but only that wherewith himselfe is invested, and possessed of, either formally, or by way of eminencie and surplussage. But no King is himself invested with any authority or power to doe any thing which is uniust, or unrighteous: therefore hee can not impart or give any such power to another: and consequently those that attempt or doe any thing by vertue of any uniust command from a King, had every whit as good doe the thing upon their owne heads and authority, without any warrant or commission from the King at all: the fact as touching the lawfullnesse of it, is but of one and the same consideration in both cases. Now that a King himself hath no power or authority at all, to doe any thing that is uniust or unequall, is yet more evident then the former, thus: All power that a King hath in point of government, is derived upon him, either by God, or by men, or both: but it is a truth of the cleerest evidence that neither the one, nor the other, neither God, nor man conferreth any power upon him to doe unjustly. Concerning God, there is not the least question to be made: he gives no man Authority to sin; but layes his Authority and command upon all the world to doe righteously: and as for men, supposing they be but reasonable men that have conferred the power upon a King, it cannot be thought, or once imagined, that they should give a power out of themselves, against themselves; a power to injure, or to wrong either them or their posterity. And though they should be conceived to do a thing so inconsistent with reason and even common sence, yet such an act of theirs, were a meere nullitie: the King was never the more possest of any such power, because they that are supposed to have conferred it upon him, had it not in themselves, nor the least right or power to derive it upon any other.
Yea, but (will the malignant Doctors) still object and reply, who shall be Judge in this case, Whether the command or commission of a King, given to an Officer, or other subiect, to be put in execution, be uniust, or no? Is it not fit, that rather the King himselfe should be iudge in this case, then every private man? Is it fit to give way or allow, that every private man should scan, examine, iudge, and determine either the righteousnesse or unrighteousnesse of the Kings command? Doth not such a liberty as this tend to dissolve the bands of obedience to Superiours? To poure contempt upon Kings and Rulers, and to fill the world with confusion?
To this I answer, First, that for many things that are commanded by Kings and Superiours, there needs little or no examination or sifting, whether they be lawfull, or no. Their unlawfulnesse is written (as it were) in their foreheads, with such Capitall Letters, that he that runs may reade it. A man needs no skill either in Arithmetique or Geometrie, nor the use of any rule or square, to try either whether the bow be streight, or the string bent and crooked. Halfe an eye is sufficient provision for this decision. The command of that Idolatrous King Nebuchadnezzar with his Nobles, that men should worship his golden Image, was so notoriously wicked, that those three servants of God, Shadrack, Meshack, and Abednego, were not carefull to answer the King concerning it. Dan. 3. 16. that is, they would never take time to study or consider whether they should obey it, or no. Such was the command of the Elders and Rulers to Peter and Iohn, When they commanded them that in no wise they should speake or teach in the name of Iesus. Act. 3. 18, 19. Besides many others both upon Sacred, Ecclesiastick, and Civill Record, of like condition and importance.
2. If it be not lawfull for inferiours to examine and enquire into the commands of Kings, and other their Superiours, whether they be lawfull or no; then is there a necessity lying upon men by way of duty, to make men equall with God, and to iudge them as unerringly, as universally righteous and holy, as he; which a man of conscience will hardly forbeare to call blasphemy. The sequell is evident: Because men can rise no higher in their thoughts and apprehensions of God himselfe in this kinde, then to iudge him absolutely and unquestionably righteous, worthy to be obeyed, in whatsoever he shall command, without examination.
3. If men were either bound to, or lawfully might obey their Superiors without all examination, there would be no place left for that command of our Saviour, wherein he prohibites his friends and servants, to feare those that could only kill the body; meaning by such, either only, or principally Kings and Rulers, who are commonly said to have potestatem vitæ & necis, power of life and death. There is no reason to thinke, that either Kings or Rulers should take away the lives of those that will comply with them in all their desires and commands: and as little reason is there for any man to thinke, that men should run the hazzard of being killed, by disobeying the commands and will of Kings, if they might safely, and with the peace of a good conscience obey and comply with them.
4. It is no more disparagement or dishonour to Kings or Rulers to have their commands examined by those to whom they are directed and given, then it was for Paul and the rest of the Apostles to have their Preachings and doctrines examined by the inferiour sort of Christians that heard them. These were every whit as great (if not far greater) in Spirituall authority and dignity, as Kings themselves are in politique and civill. Now the Holy Ghost is so far from reproving those, who examined the things which they heard from Paul himselfe, that he hath left it upon Record as matter of especiall commendation to them, That they daily searched the Scriptures, whether things were so or no, as he had taught them, Act. 17. 11. Yea, the Apostles themselves were so far from looking upon it, as any matter of prejudice to them or their reputations, that what they delivered and taught, should bee brought to the touch-stone by those that heard them, that they required this at their hands by way of duty, and exhorted them unto it. See 1 Cor. 10. 14. 1 Thes. 5. 21. &c. And yet far greater reason is there, why the teaching of the Apostles should have been ἀνυπ [Editor: illegible character] ό [Editor: illegible character] α, .i. priviledged from account, then the commands of Kings: because they had a promise of such a presence of the Spirit of truth with them, that he should lead them into the way of all truth; whereas Kings, both in the framing and publishing of their Commands, are left to an arbitrary assistance from heaven, after the manner of other men.
5. The wrath of God hath been revealed from heaven, .i. hath been shewed in very remarkable and exemplary manner, upon those who have swallowed the commands of Kings, and submitted unto them in things unlawfull. Those Officers that obeyed King Nebuchadnezzars command in casting those three innocent servants of God into the fiery furnace, were suddenly consumed by the flame that came out of the furnace; whereas those that streined at the Kings command, & exchanged it (as the Scripture phrase is) meaning (I conceive) for the commandement of God, obeying this in the stead, remained untouched of the fire in the midst of the furnace, Dan. 3. 22. So the men of Israel that had obeyed the commandement of Saul in giving their assistance to him for the persecuting of David, were punished together with Saul, fleeing and falling down wounded before the Philistines, as Peter Martyr hath well observed upon 1 Sam. 31. 1. So of that great Host of Assyrians, that joyned with their King in an unlawfull war against the Church and People of God, there were 185000. slaine in one night by an Angel, 2 King. 19. 35. To passe by all other examples of the severity of God in this kinde, that is most worthy consideration, which is recorded, 2 Chron. 24. It is said, ver. 17. That after the death of Jehoiada, the Princes of Iuda came and did reverence unto the King, and that the King hearkened to them. Not long after, They conspired together against Zachariah, a faithfull Prophet of the Lord, for dealing faithfully with them, and at the Kings commandement, stoned him with stones, in the Court of the house of the Lord, ver. 21. But (saith the Story, ver. 23.) it came to passe at the end of the yeare, that the host of Syria came up against him: and they came to Iuda and Ierusalem, and destroyed all the Princes of the People from among the People, &c. The just revenging hand of God, singling out from amongst many thousands, those persons by name, who had obeyed the King in a way of unrighteousnesse, though they were the chiefest and greatest of them, and in that respect (in all likelihood) kept furthest off from the danger, and had more outward provision for their safety, then others.
6. (And lastly for this) If this liberty we speak of, of examining the commands of Kings and other Superiours, were granted unto, and used by those that are in subjection, it would not devest or bereave Kings or Rulers of any obedience at all, that were worth the having or receiving from men, or that were truly honourable or safe for them to receive. All that in reason it could be conceived to doe in this kinde, is to prevent and cut off all such obedience from Kings, which would endanger their cutting off, and their States and Kingdomes with them. If this liberty, or duty rather, of examining the Commands of Superiours, had been preached and pressed upon the consciences of men with that authority and power, which the truth and high concernment of it will beare, or rather (indeed) required, those crownes might have flourished upon the heads of Kings, which now begin to droope and languish; and those Nations enioyed abundance of peace under them, the foundations of whose safety are now shaken. Ephraim is oppressed and broken in judgement, because he willingly followed the commandement, viz. of King Jeroboam, who commanded the worshipping of the golden Calfe. Hos. 5. 11. Here is the fruit of the forwardnesse of a Nation to obey and comply with an Idolatrous King, even to be oppressed and broken in judgement, .i. Not only to be sorely afflicted, but utterly ruined and destroyed, and that in a course of iustice, and of the righteous proceedings of God against them. In this cup of trembling and astonishment which they were compelled to drink from the hand of God, there was none other ingredient, but their own wayes; and that which it seemes was predominant in the mixture, was their forwardnesse to side with their King, in that false Religion and worship which he maintained. And for the ruine and destruction of Jeroboam himselfe and his house, that is much considerable from the pen of the H. Ghost, that it is not ascribed so much to his sin & wickedness in commanding Idolatry, as to the sin & wickedness of the people in obeying And this thing (saith the history, speaking of Jeroboam’s Calfe, and command given to the people to worship them. 1 King. 12. 30) turned to sin, meaning to a provocation of a very high nature, to such a sin, which even rooted out and destroyed the house of Jeroboam from the face of the earth. Cap. 13. 34. But how, or by what meanes did Jeroboams Calves and Idolatrous commands concerning them, turne to such a sin or provocation, as was his ruine? The Holy Ghost ascribes this to the obedience of the People in this behalfe: And this thing turned to sin: for the people went to worship before the one, even unto Dan. Clearely implying, that that sin which was the ruine and rooting out of Ieroboam and his house, was not so much his wicked and Idolatrous command, considered simply and in it selfe, but as it found obedience and subiection in the people. The people in true accompt, who magnified Ieroboam in his commands, above God in his, were they that ruined both Ieroboam and his house. And generally, all that Kings and Princes gaine, by an unlawfull subiection and obedience from their People, is little else but the kindling of the fire of Gods iealousie against them. I am the Lord (saith God, Esa. 42. 8.) this is my Name: and my glory will not I give to another, .i. I will not suffer it to be given to, nor to be received by another; I will sell it deare to him that shall own it, and will recover it out of his ruine. We know Herod was smitten by an Angell from heaven, and soon cast up that morsell of divine honour which he had swallowed, by a miserable, shamefull, and loathsome death. As those that make Images of wood, stone, silver, gold, or the like, to be adored and worshipped, doe the greatest iniury that may be to those poore innocent creatures; they expose them to the fury and iealousie of God, whereby they commonly suffer a dissolution of their beeing before their time, as the brasse whereof the brazen Serpent was made, did, being broken all to pieces, when incense was once offered unto it, 2 Kin. 18. 4. and the gold whereof Aarons Calfe was made, being burnt in the fire, and stamped and ground small, even to very dust, and this also cast into the river, Deut. 9. 21. So they that will devest the great God of heaven and earth, to cloath Kings and Princes, or whomsoever, with the spoiles of his Name, as all those doe, who obey them with disobedience unto God, as in one sence they make them gods, so in another, by making them gods, they make them indeed more men then they were, more obnoxions to his displeasure, who hath the command of their life and breath. Consider that passage (to omit many others of like importance) which you shall finde, Esa, 1. 31. And the strong, .i. the Idoll, either because in the Idolaters conceit, it is strong like a god, or rather strong, in respect of the firmnesse and durablenes of the matter of it, Shall be as Tow, and the maker therof, as a Spark: they shall both burne together, and none shall quench them. Marke well: How strong and durable soever the matter is, whereof the Idoll is made, whether it bee the best heart of Oake that can be gotten, or the hardest and firmest stone, silver, gold, or the like, or if there be any thing more durable, and more resisting corruption, then these, yet being made an Idoll, it becomes as Tow, i. of a very weake and perishable nature: and the maker of it (saith he) shall be as a Sparke, viz. to set this Tow on fire; meaning that he is the cause both why that good substance, which was made into an Idoll, perisheth so suddenly, and likewise of his owne perishing by the hand and iudgement of God. In like manner, when men or women shall make Idols of Kings and Princes, and great men, and fall downe before them, and worship them with divine worship, as all they in effect doe, who yeeld obedience unto them against God, what doe they else but shake the very foundations of their lives, and present beeings in the world, and call for the fire of Gods iealousie from heaven to consume them: Whereas on the contrary, those that soberly, and out of conscience refuse to obey them upon such termes, I meane, against God, they doe them as good service, if they would please so to apprehend and interpret it, as Mordecai did to King Ahashuerosh, when he revealed the Treason of the two Eunuchs against him. He that refuseth to obey a Superiour in an unlawfull command, giveth notice to him, that his foote is in a snare of death, and that his preservation stands in his desisting and repenting.
I shall mention only one obiection more wherewith that unhappy learning of the contrary side, useth to be very importune, and to triumph much in it. The Christians in the primitive times submitted themselves with patience to those most uniust and cruell commands of the heathen Emperors, when they sent their officers to put them in execution, and to take their lives from them: they never resisted, nor stood upon their guard, but tooke even death it selfe, yea, and many times torments worse then death, patiently. And whereas this might otherwise be sufficiently answered, that they made no resistance, because they were not able, they had no considerable strength to make good any resistance; to take away this answer; They usually cite a place out of one of the Fathers, Tertullian by name, wherein he disclaimes this ground of their patience in suffering, writing unto the States, or Senators of the Empire, affirming, that they had a considerable party of Christians in their Dominions, whereby they were able to have made resistance against them.
Because this objection is matter of so much confidence and triumph to the adversary, I shall desire leave to examine it the more thoroughly, and to search the bottome and foundations of it in my answer to it, I shall first speake to the testimony propounded, and consider the validitie or likelihood of the truth thereof; and secondly, (for argument sake) the truth of it being granted or supposed, we shall indeavour to shew of how little force or concernment it is, any wayes to disable the truth of that position we have in hand, which justifieth a resistance against the violent execution of any unjust command from Kings, in those that are assaulted under pretence thereof; therefore as concerning the testimony of Tertullian, touching the sufficiencie of strength the Christians in his time should have to resist the Emperour and all his power. I answer.
*First, that this Father might easily be mistaken in taking the proportion, and making the estimate of the strength and power of Christians within the compasse of the Roman Empire, in comparison of the strength of those that were ready to oppose them. This was no point of faith, nor of Christian Religion; and therefore a devout father might easily fall under a misprision herein. The common saying indeed is, that unicuique in arte sua credendum, i.e. every man is to be beleeved in his owne art or profession, but no rule of charitie or reason bindes us to believe another in any thing which belongs to the art or profession of another, and wherein himselfe is little versed or exercised. Now to weigh the strength of a Kingdome, State, or Empire, (as it were) in a ballance, and to make an estimate of, and compare together the power of severall parties or divisions of people in it with so much exactnesse, as to determine which is the stronger, and which the weaker, belongs to the profession and imployment of a States-man, not of a Divine, or minister of the Gospell, of one that sits at the sterne of the empire, not of one whose heart, and time, and strength are taken up with the studie of the mysteries of heaven, yea for a States-man himselfe to be able upon sufficient grounds, precisely to determine such differences as we speake of, I meane betweene the strength and strength of different parties in a State, where there is any neerenesse or appearance of an equality, wil require both double diligence and treble sufficiency in him otherwise.
2. How easily might he mistake and miscarry in a matter quite besides his profession and course, who not long after miscarryed so grievously in his owne, as to turne Montanist, who called himselfe the Holy Ghost, and to approve of the dreames and furious fancies of those two vile women, Maximilla and Prisca (Montanus his wicked associates) for true prophecies. Yea stayed not here neither, but joyned himselfe with those Heretiques called Cataphryges, who condemned second marriages as adulterous and prohibited by God: besides divers other misprisions in his owne profession, which would take up too much time to insist particularly upon: a memorable example and warning (as it were) from heaven, how unsafe and dangerous it is to build upon the authority of men.
3. It is well observed by one, that there is an aptnesse and pronenesse of inclination in much devotion, in persons devoutly given, to over-value the workes and piety of other men. Now this Father out of such a principle or inclination as this is, desirous to extoll and magnifie the patience of Christians, might easily draw in such a circumstance as this for such a purpose, upon very weake and slender grounds for it.
4. It is generally observed and knowne by the writings and records of these times, that even in the pious and Orthodox Fathers themselves there were some touches and streines, some fibræ of that roote of bitternesse which afterwards grew ranke, and flourished above measure in the times of Popery, yea and brought forth fruit abundantly unto death. I meane, an inclination to credit and countenance their Religion in the sight of the heathen and the world about them, by very slender reports and relations of things, as of Miracles, Visions, strange accidents, &c. which are generally rejected, as fabulous and false, by the sounder and more considerate knowledge of these latter dayes.
5. Supose there might be considerable numbers of men of the Christian party in the Empire (though to me it is one of the things I least beleeve) to withstand the heathen party therein, yet doubtlesse these were kept under, as the Israelites were in Ægypt, when they began to multiply. It is no wayes likely, that if they were any wayes formidable for their numbers, that they should be suffered to have any proportion of armes or meanes, either of offence or defence, in case they were assaulted. It being contrary to all reason and rule of State, to suffer a party of an opposite Religion to the State, and worshipping another God then the State allowed, growing to any considerable numbers within them, to have farther any such proportion or quantity of weapons, armes, or meanes in any kinde, whereby they might endanger and become formidable to the State. Now then granting that which this Father spake concerning the numbers of Christians amongst the heathens, that they had number for number, man for man, and in this respect might seeme to ballance them, and be able enough to resist them; yet wanting armes and other meanes of defence, wherewith it cannot be conceived but that the adverse party abounded, it had been in vaine for them to have made resistance when violence was offered unto them. And thus much for the first part of my Answer, to shew the questionablenesse, or rather indeed the great unlikelihood of the truth of that testimony, which is brought to support the objection propounded, which otherwise would fall to the ground of it selfe.
I goe on to the second part of my Answer, which is to prove and to shew, that though the testimony be admitted for truth, yet the objection will not reach the question, or case in hand.
Therefore suppose we the Father that spake as we have heard, viz. That the Christians under the Heathen Emperours should be able enough to have defended themselves, yea to have opposed the Emperour himselfe with his party, spake nothing herein but the truth; yet it doth not follow, that all those of his profession, I meane all the Christians that were scattered up and downe the face of the Empire should have the same apprehensions with him herein, should thinke themselves strong enough to resist their adversaries, in case they were opposed. Those particular persons that were called out here and there, some after others, to suffer, might very probably, yea, could not lightly but conceive and thinke, that if they should have made any resistance against them that came to lay violent hands upon them, and to put them to death, they should have but enraged their malice against them the more, and so have encreased their own torments: yea, and happily have provoked the Heathen party, to rage so much the more against their Christian Brethren who yet remained amongst them. So that in those that were called to suffer, it had been both want of wisdome, in respect of themselves, and of charitie in respect of others, if they should have made the least resistance against those unjust and bloody officers, that were sent against them to take away their lives.
If it be here replyed and said; yea but the whole body and partie of Christians throughout the Empire, having sufficent strength might have agreed to have risen up at once, and have suppressed their adversaries, if they had Judged it lawfull.
To this, Answer hath in part been made already: as first, that it is no waies probable that they had any sufficiencie of strength, no not of men, to have made good such an attempt, much lesse that they had any competent provision of meanes otherwise, which had been requisite therunto.
Secondly, that though it should be granted, that they had a sufficiencie of strength both wayes, yet is it no wayes necessary that therefore they should all be of the same minde and judgement touching this sufficiencie; that they should all be perswaded that their party were strong enough to deale with their adversaries. We know that many attempts, projects, and undertakings which have been in treaty and agitation, have been deserted and laid aside, only through the different judgements and apprehensions of those that vvere concerned, and to have been engaged therein, touching the expedience or feaceablenesse of them. As that proiect of Achitophell for the immediate and close following of David,Sam. 17. was deserted by Absolon, and his party, and not put in execution, because of the different advise which Hushai the Archit gave. A late instance hereof vve had likewise amongst our selves: that dangerous designe of bringing up the Army out of the North against the Parliament, proved abortive, the execution of it never seeing the light of the Sun, through the different opinions of those that were, & were to have been in speciall maner concerned therin; some conceiving it to have been a proiect deserving the name of none such; others no wayes daring to adventure themselves, their lives, and fortunes, nor some (perhaps) their consciences, upon it. In like manner for the Christians living within the Romane Empire, to have made head and risen up against the maine body and State of the Empire to suppresse them, had been an enterprise of that dangerous and grievous consequence, in case it had miscarryed; especially the grounds of the successe of it being so uncertaine and weake as they were, that it hath not the least appearance or shew of likelihood, that ever it should be generally consented unto by the whole society of the Christians; without which there was no attempting the putting of it into execution,
To this may be added.
3. That suppose the Christians wee spake of had been generally confident of their strength and had made little question but that they might have carried it against the Emperor and his; yet having no invitation, countenance or command from any Authoritie, rule, or lawfull power in the Empire to attempt any such thing, their case was farre differing from ours who are invited, countenanced, encouraged, and some waies commanded by as great and as lawfull an Authority as this state hath any, to doe what you have been exhorted to doe in opposing the rage and violence of that malignant and blood-thirsty generation, who having stollen away the heart of the King, make use of his name to make havock and spoile of your Lawes, Liberties, Estates, Lives, Religion, yea of the Peace, Honour, and safety of the whole Kingdome. It is the expresse command and ordinance of God that inferiour Magistrates, and Rulers should be obeyed as well as Kings, as we observed formerly out of that of Peter, 2 Pet. 2. 13, 14. Therefore submit your selves unto every, or all manner of ordinance of man, for the Lords sake, whether it be unto the King as unto the Superiour, or unto Governours, as these that are sent of him, for the punishment of evill-doers, &c. So that inferiour Governours are by the expresse Commandement of God to be obeyed, as well as the Superiour. Now then put the case that the inferiour Governour requires that which is only honest, agreeable to the Laws of God and of Nature, as, viz. that we should doe our best to defend our selves against those that contrary to all Law and conscience assault us; the superiour, that which is contrary to both, viz. to sit still whilest our Lawes, Liberties, Estates, Lives, friends, godly Magistrates, and Religion it selfe, are indangered, and ready to be taken from us; the question in this case, whether we are to obey the inferiour or superiour Authority; (the command of God indifferently extending it for obedience unto either, in things that are lawfull) is easily resolved, except men will complaine and say it is darke at noone day. When it shall be substantially proved unto us, that an unlawfull command from a superiour Magistrate, dissolves and makes void that commandement of God, whereby we stand bound to obey the inferiour, in that which is lawfull; We may then have cause to make a demurre touching the goodnesse of the cause; but till then we may be bold to say, it is day, when the Sun shineth. This then is a difference very considerable, between the case of primitive Christians, and ours, in the point in hand, supposing they had power to defend themselves against the persecuting agents and instruments of the Emperour, yet had they not any countenance or command from any Authority in that State to doe it, which we have in ours.
4. Still supposing (that which yet is never to be granted, till it be better proved) that the Primitive Christians we spake of had a sufficiency of power, to have defended themselves against the persecuting Emperours, and did it not, yet there may be this reason given, why they should rather patiently suffer, than make resistance, because whilest they were yet heathen and unconverted to the Christian Faith, they consented to that power or authority in the Emperour, whereby he made those bloody Edicts for the persecuting and murthering of poore Christians. Now it had been a very unreasonable thing and justly offensive, both in the eyes of God and men, if the same persons who had established a power or authority in the hand of a Ruler, should have resisted or opposed him, or his Agents and Ministers in the execution of it. A servant of God, though he sweares or bargaines to his owne hurt, yet must he not change, as you have it, Psal. 15. 4. But wee are under no such ingagements, or bands, and therefore have a liberty which they had not: For though a mans consent to an unlawfull power, be in absolute and simple consideration a meere nullity, and such a power never the more lawfullized thereby; yet by all rules of reason and equity, such a consent ought to be a bar against him that hath given it, that he shall not, for any carnall benefit or advantage, breake out against him that exerciseth this power by vertue of such consent, meerly for such exercise sake.
5. Be it granted that the Christian party in the Romane Empire was very great (as is pretended) yet could it in no sence be called or looked upon as the whole State or body of the Empire, as the Parliamentary Assembly is amongst us. This in a representative and legall consideration, is the whole body of the Nation, and of all the persons in it, having the same power and authority by Law, and in conscience too, to do every whit as much in every respect, as the whole Nation, and all the particular persons therein could have, if they were met together. Now that may be lawfull for an entire body or society of persons to doe, which may not be lawfull for a part, or some few of the society, save only in conjunction with the whole. The Parliament (we know) being interpretatively, and in consideration of Law, the whole body of the Kingdome, hath a lawfull power, both to doe and command many things, which a far greater part or number of men in the Kingdome, have not; no, all the Kingdome besides hath no such power, as they: and many things may be done very lawfully, and with a good conscience, by vertue of their appointment and command, which could not be done upon any such termes without it, though a thousand times more men or persons then they are should command them.
6. Supposing they had such a power as we have oft supposed (but never granted positively) and that it was lawfull for them to have made resistance accordingly, yet may God by way of speciall dispensation, and for very great and considerable ends of his, hide this liberty we speake of from their eyes; that they should not see it to make use of. Wee know there were many in the Apostles time, who eat hearbs, when as yet it was as lawfull for them, in respect of any command of God to the contrary, to have eaten flesh; but yet they did better to content themselves with hearbs, when God had not revealed and cleared up this liberty unto them. And yet they did as well as they too, who seeing their liberty in this kinde by the cleare light of the Gospell, did take it, and eate flesh. Consider that passage of the Apostle, Rom. 14. 6. He that observeth a day, observeth it unto the Lord: and he that observeth not a day, observeth it not unto the Lord. He that eateth, eateth unto the Lord: for he giveth God thanks: and he that eateth not, eateth not unto the Lord, and giveth God thankes Whereby it is evident that the forbearance of some actions by some men, wherein they approve themselves unto God, doth not at all prejudice or gainesay the like acceptation of others in their doing them: yea that some men may be bound in conscience to forbeare that, which another with a good conscience may doe. And this doubtlesse is (if the testimony of Tertullian mentioned be true) the case betweene those Primitive Christians, and Christians in these dayes. They might out of tendernesse of conscience, and out of an apprehension of some unlawfulnesse in it, forbeare to vindicate themselves against those bloody bucthers, that were set on worke by the Emperours to destroy them: and yet Christians in these dayes, seeing their liberty in this kinde, may as lawfully resist those that shall come against them in the like manner, as the other forbare it.
If it be here objected and said that it is no wayes like that the Church of God should generally be ignorant of such a libertie as wee speake of and challenge, if there were any such liberty indeed; is it credible that God should hide such a point of truth as this from them all?
I answer first, It is not necessary to suppose that it should bee hid from them all without exception: it is sufficient for our purpose if it were hid from their teachers, and those that were leaders to the rest, upon whose judgement (in things of this nature) the generality of people then much depended. But secondly, if there were many ministers of the Gospell and teachers, even in the Apostles times themselves, that were ignorant of that liberty which the Gospell brought with it to the world, for the eating of flesh, the non-observation of dayes and of circumcision, &c. or at least were so farre ignorant, that they were not able to informe and satisfie the generall sort of Christians therein, it may very well be conceived, that some hundreds of yeares after, when the light began to darken and wax dim (in comparison) they might now be generally ignorant of such a point of liberty as this we now speake of, at least so farre ignorant, as not to be able to satisfie the generalitie of their people therein. Especially if we consider,
Thirdly, that from the dayes of the Apostles, untill their numbers and strength were raised and increased to the supposed pitch of a sufficiencie to resist (which was not lesse then neere 200. yeares) there was no occasion, of studying, or looking into the point: they had beene in never the better case, whether they had had that liberty we speake of or no; and therefore it is no marvaile if they neglected the searching after it. And when cases of conscience (as this was) lie unstudied and uninquired into, neither is it any marvaile if the resolution or state of the truth in them, bee not generally knowne.
Fourthly, that Spirit of courage, patience and constancy, which God poured out abundantly upon his Church & servants in those times, whereby they were so strengthned and incouraged to suffer, that martyrdome seemed a desirable thing unto them, might be a speciall reason and meanes to take them off from inquiring into, or so much as thinking what their lawfull liberty might be in the case we speake of. Men that have a full estate in faire rents, as much as they can well spend, and as their heart desireth, are not like, have no occasion to busie themselves in studying the case of usury, as whether it be lawfull to take increase for the lone of mony, or no; which he that hath his estate in mony, hath. Whilst the Israelites were fed by God in an extraordinary way by Manna from heaven, there was no necessitie or occasion for them to plough and sow. So whilst Christians were furnished with an extraordinary strength from heaven, to offer themselves up in martyrdome, their edge must needs be taken off hereby, as from seeking meanes to escape it, so from studying cases and questions about the lawfulnesse of escaping.
Fiftly, whilst there lay a confessed necessity of suffering upon Christians, i.e. till the supposed strength of resistance came to them (which as was noted before, could not be much lesse then 200. yeares) Martyrdome was so extolled and magnified by the generall acclamations of the ministers, and continuall panegyricks, and orations made in praise thereof, that it is like no man would for a long time be endured, that should teach any doctrine that might any wayes seeme to take men off from the desire thereof. As there are many doctrines and points of Religion amongst our selves that have beene a long time taught with so high an hand, and generally received with so full an applause, that it is not safe for any man to appeare so much as in a seeming opposition to them, (though with never so much modestie and tendernesse.) But,
Sixtly (and lastly for this) whether God was pleased to make use of one or both of their particulars last mentioned, or any other like unto them, as a meanes to hide that libertie of resistance wee speake of from the eyes of the primitive Christians, or no; certaine it is, that the frame and tenour of his after dispensations, did require, that such a libertie should be hid from them; or at least that they should not make use of it; as on the contrary, the nature and purport of those dispensations which God hath now in hand, requires that this libertie should be manifested and made knowne unto Christians. We know that according to the counsell and foreknowledge of God, Antichrist was then to come into the world: as now wee know that he is about to be destroyed and cast out of the world. Now this is a generall rule, looke what truthes were necessary to be shut up and concealed from the Churches of Christ, that Antichrist might passe by, and get up into his throane; the discovery and letting out of the same into the world, are necessary for his pulling downe. For certaine it is, that Antichrist could never have gotten up into that throane, whereon hee yet sits and shewes himselfe in his sacrilegious glory, had not God by speciall dispensation suffered him to make many truths his footstoole. If all truths had beene clearely taught in the Church of Christ, and accordingly received and beleeved, it had beene impossible that ever such a monster should have gotten into the temple of God, that should exalt himselfe above all that which is called God. But God causing a dead sleepe (as it were) to fall upon those truthes, which should in speciall manner have opposed him, hee had the opportunity without much contradiction or noyse to steale and convey himselfe into that Cathedram pestilentiæ, that chaire of papall state, which yet he possesseth. Now amongst many other truths that were of necessity to be laid asleepe, for the passing of this beast unto his great power and authority, and for the maintayning and safe-guarding of him in the possession hereof, this is one of speciall consideration; that Christians may lawfully in a lawfull way, stand up to defend themselves, in case they be able, against any unlawfull assaults; by what assailants, or by what pretended Authoritie soever made upon them. For had this opinion beene timeously enough, and substantially taught in the Church, it would certainly have caused an abortion in Antichrists birth, and so have disappointed the divell of his first-borne. Had not the spirits, and judgements, and consciences of men beene as it were cowed and marvellously imbased and kept under, (and so propared for Antichrists lure) by doctrines and tenents, excessively advancing the power of superiours, over inferiours, and binding Iron yokes and heavy burthens upon those that were in subjection, doubtlesse they would never have bowed downe their backes so low as to let such a beast goe over them, they would never resigned up their judgements and consciences into the hand of such a spirituall tyrant as he. So that you see, there was a speciall necessitie for the letting of Antichrist into the world, yea and for the continuance of him in his Throne, that no such opinion as this which wee speake of, whether truth or untruth should be taught and beleeved; I meane, which vindicateth and maintaineth, the just rights, and liberties, and priviledges of those that under authority, and subjection unto others.
Whereas, now on the contrary, that time of Gods preordination and purpose, for the downefall of Antichrist, drawing neere, there is a kinde of necessitie, that those truths, which have slept for many yeares, should now be awakened: and particularly that God should reveale and discover unto his faithfull ministers, and other his servants the just bounds and limits of Authoritie, and power, and consequently the just and full extent of the lawfull liberties of those that live in subiection. Evident it is, that they are the commonaltie of Christians, I meane Christians of ordinary ranke and qualitie that shall be most active, and have the principall hand in executing the judgements of God upon the Whore. Consider that place, Revel. 18. 4, 5, 6. And I heard another voyce from heaven say, goe out of her my people, that yee be not partakers in her sinnes, and that ye receive not of her plagues. For her sins are come up unto heaven, and God hath remembred her iniquities. Reward her even as she hath rewarded you, and give her double according to her workes, and in the cup that she hath filled to you, fill her the double. Now that this service shall be performed unto God by them (Christians I mean of under rank and qualitie) contrary to the will, desires, or commands of those Kings and Princes under whom they live, it appeares by that which immediately followes, verse 9. And the Kings of the earth shall bewaile her and lament for her, which have committed fornication and lived in pleasure with her, when they shall see the smoake of her burning. It is evident that the people of God spoken of before, were subiects to these Kings, that should bewayle the whore in her ruine; for they are such as come out of Babylon; which could not be, except they had lived under those Kings that were Babylonish, and had given their Kingdomes to the whore, and by whom Babylonisme had been countenanced and set up. And that these (or at least the greatest part of them) should no wayes consent to the destruction of the whore by their subiects, it is evident by this; they should waile and lament over her, when she is destroyed. As for that which is found in the former Chapter concerning the 10. Kings (Rev. 17. 17.) Into whose heart God hath put it to give their Kingdomes or power to the Beast, where it is said, that these should hate: the whore and make her desolate, and naked, and eat her flesh, and burne her with fire; I conceive this is not meant of the persons of Kings, but of their States and Kingdomes, i.e. of the generalitie of their people under them.
1. The expression, will fairely, and with full consonancie to the Scripture language elsewhere, carry this sence and interpretation; the bodies of States or Kingdomes indefinitely taken and considered, being usually signified by their heads, as Dukedomes by Dukes, Kingdomes by Kings, &c. as wee have had occasion formerly to observe more at large when we produced severall instances from the Scriptures of this kind of phrase. I shall (for the present) be your remembrancer onely of that one, Dan. 7. 17. with verse 23. where verse the 17. the foure great Beasts are said to be foure Kings that shall arise out of the earth. Yet verse 23. it is said that the fourth Beast shall be the fourth Kingdome upon earth, which shall be diverse from all Kingdomes, i.e. all the other three Kingdomes formerly expressed by three Kings. I could direct you to severall other Texts of Scripture where the same manner of speaking is found; but that I hasten. 2. If we take the word, Kings, properly, i.e. precisely for the persons that are the heads and chiefe rulers of Kingdomes, in that Scripture, and will say, that these shall hate the whore and make her desolate, &c. I apprehend no possibility (for the present) of reconciling this place, with that other mentioned, Rev. 18. 9. Where it is said, that the Kings of the earth who have committed fornication and lived deliciously with her, shall bewaile her, and lament for her, when they shall see the smoks of her burning. Certainely they that shall hate her, and helpe to make her desolate, and to burne her with fire, will not bewayle her, nor lament over her, after such a manner, as is farther expressed in that which followes in this Chapter. As for that Exposition, which by the Kings of the earth that should bewaile and lament over the Whore in her burning, understandeth Cardinalls, Arch-Bishops, Bishops, &c. who in their port and pompe are as Kings, it seemeth not probable; I rather conceive these to be the Merchants of the earth that should weepe and waile over her, because no man buyeth their wares any more, vers. 11. and who are said to have waxen rich, by that long trade and trafique they had had with the world, in those Babilonish commodities. Therefore they are the ten Kingdomes indefinitely considered. i. persons living within the ten Kingdomes, not the ten Kings personally and properly taken, that shall hate the Whore and make her desolate, and burne her flesh with fire. Now this promise and prediction of God concerning the destruction of the Whore by Christians of inferiour ranke and qualitie, can hardly be conceived however it should be fulfilled or take place, except the judgements and consciences of men should be losed and set at libertie from the bands and fetters of those enslaving Doctrines and apprehensions, wherewith they had beene formerly oppressed and made fervile above measure, to those that were in place and authority over them. Thus then we see a ground and reason fully satisfactory, both how and why the Christians in the Primitive times, whilest Antichrist was in comming, might well be ignorant of that liberty, the knowledge whereof would have kept him from his Throne; and also why that liberty should now be revealed by God and taught unto his people; the ignorance whereof would still keepe and continue him upon his Throne, when Gods Will and Pleasure is that he shall be throwne downe. And this for Answer to the Objection last propounded; and for the sixt Particular, by way of Answer to the maine Objection. But,
7. (And lastly) whatsoever the credit or authority of Tertullian may be for the strength of Christians in Primitive times, to make resistance against their enemies; & how justifiable, or commendable soever the patience & subjection of these Christians in suffering as they did, may be by some conceived to be, supposing they had such a power to have defended themselves, as is supposed; yet most certaine it is, that as well the authority of the one as the submission of the other, yea and both together, being both Apocriphall, are too light to weigh against the authority of the practice of that great Prophet Elisha, who made resistance against the Kings Messenger, that was sent against him to take away his head (as we instanced to you in the former part of this Discourse) as also against David, a man after Gods own heart, who being but a private man, strengthened himselfe as well as hee could, both with men and armes, yea and with Goliahs sword to boote, to defend himselfe against the unjust and bloody persecution of Saul; both which examples (besides others of like importance) are Canonicall. Elisha must not be censured as an evill-doer, nor David condemned for a Traytor, or Rebell, either because Tertullian saith, that there were Christians enough in the Romane Empire, to make their party good against the Emperour & his wicked instruments, nor yet because these Christians did not stand up in their owne defence, having sufficiency of strength to have done it. Thus we see there is nothing at all in the patience or submission of the primitive Christians, so much urged and insisted upon, to discountenance that cause and service, wherein your best concurrence hath been desired, of any consideration or concernment that way. To rise up in your owne defence, in the defence of your lives, your estates, your liberties, your wives, your children, your friends, your lawes, your religion, against those; who without any lawfull Authority or Warrant either of God or men, are risen up with all their might, and all their power to make havock, and spoile, and ruine of all, is no wayes offensive either in the sight of God, or reasonable men.
And (to conclude) if any man be afraid that Martyrdome should suffer by this, as either that the glory hereof should be eclipsed, or that all opportunities of expressing our selves unto God and Jesus Christ in such a service, should be cut off, and taken away by such an opinion. I answer, No: The glory and praise of Martyrdome will remaine as entire, with this Doctrine, as without it, and the opportunities of shewing our selves in our love and faithfulnesse unto Christ in such a service, will no waves be diminished hereby.
For first, the glory and praise of Martyrdome or suffering for Christ, doth not consist in lying down, and suffering proud and wicked men to ride over our heads, in sitting still whilest our estates, liberties, wives, children, friends, are ruined and destroyed before our faces, when God puts an opportunity into our hand to defend them; the name and Gospell of Jesus Christ would rather suffer losse by such a patience as this, then any wayes gaine; it were more Infidell-like, then Christian, not to make the best provision we can, for the safety of those that are so neare to us in such a case. But the grace and glory of Martyrdome lyeth in this; First, when a man is resolved to professe the name, and faith of Christ, what danger soever hee incurs, what losse soever he sustaines, or is like to sustaine by it. Secondly, When it comes to the necessity of suffering, that he baulkes not, nor faulters with Christ: that he is not any wayes ashamed of him, or any of his words, or wayes. Thirdly, When a man disdeignes deliverance upon any base termes, or by unworthy meanes, that scornes to fly away for the enjoyment of any rest, except it be with the wings of a Dove (the Scripture Embleme of innocency) which is covered with silver wings (as David speakes) and her feathers like yellow gold. It is ever honourable to fly with such wings as these.
Fourthly (and lastly) when God doth not open a doore of lawfull escape unto him, either by flight or otherwise, but hedgeth him up (as it were) with thornes into the hand of the persecutor, that he patiently and with meeknesse and composednesse of spirit, without any breakings out in one kinde or other, without any expression of discontent either against God or man, submitteth himselfe unto the stroke, in what kinde soever it falls upon him.
And secodly, for opportunities of Martyrdome, of suffering for Christ, and that in numbers more then we desire, they will not be wanting, though we shall not suffer every base Cavalier, that saith he is for the King to cut our throats, or to plunder our Cities, Townes, or Houses, to commit outrages and insolencies upon Wives, Children, Friends, &c.
1. It is a suffering for Christ (and so a degree or kinde of Martyrdome) to suffer those things which we doe, in feares, in dangers, in distractions, in runnings, or removings up and downe, in disappointments of our affaires, in the losse, expence, or forbearance of our estates, by those men of Belial, that are as thornes in our eyes, and scourges in our sides, only or chiefly because we will be that in open and constant profession, which by the grace of God we are inwardly and in the truth of our soules; because we will not prostitute our consciences to the lusts of their Father the devill, we will not give the right hand of fellowship to them, in those desperate courses of wickednesse and prophannesse wherein they are engaged, and wherein (it seemes) they meane to weary, yea and weare themselves out before they will give over.
2. We lie open to the hatred and malice, to the mockings and scoffings, to the rayling and revilings, to the slanders and lyings of the whole malignant party round about us; and that because we hold forth the Lord Jesus Christ in his holinesse and purity, in his power and authority over the world, in his truth, and faithfulnesse, in his mercy, and goodnesse, in his glory, and Majesty, in our lives, and conversations. And this is a Martyrdome too, or suffering for Christ.
3. (And lastly) we know not how soon or suddenly we may be called out by God, to suffer even a perfect and compleate Martyrdome indeed, to lay downe our lives for Christ; when God will hedge up every way of escape against us with thornes, and leave us in Peters streights, To stretch forth our hands, and have another to gird us, and to lead us whither we would not. John 21. 18. So that we shall have occasions, and opportunities enough, even as many as God himselfe ever made, for the expressing of our love and faithfulnesse unto Christ and his Gospell in wayes of suffering, though we stand up like men, and quit our selves with all our might, and all our strength, against those assacinates, and sworne Sword-men of the devill, who have conspired the death and ruine of all that feareth God in the Land.
Only for a close of all that I have to say in this point, let me adde this one thing by way of caution, that opportunities of suffering Martyrdome will not alwayes continue in the Church for the servants of God: yea, the time draweth neare, when they shall cease and be no more. The sad retinue of the first things, (as they are called Rev. 20. 4.) which hath been a long time in passing by, even for many Generations, is now almost quite passed; God is now bringing up the reere of this host of sorrowes; and when this is passed, he will turne the wheele of his providence and dispensations, between his own Church, and the Synagogue of Sathan. That side which hath been down hitherto, shall be upward, and that which hath been above, shall be below: Now the devils Saints, and the Children of the Whore, even all fearefull and unbeleeving ones, and abominable, and murtherers, and Whoremongers, and Sorcerers, and all lyars, they shall be called to their Martyrdome, and the Saints of the most high shall give them double, of their owne cup.* They that led into captivity hitherto, shall now goe into captivity themselves: and they that killed with the sword hitherto, shall now be killed with the sword themselves. And who they are that shall now lead into captivity, and slay with the sword, you may informe your selves, Rev. 18. 6, 7. Reward her, even as she hath rewarded you: you, viz. in your Brethren, that have walked in the steps of the same faith and holinesse with you: And give her double, &c. This is the honour which the Saints shall have, to execute the judgement that is written, upon the whore.
Another motive to strengthen your hand the same way, may be to consider, that as the cause recommended to you is every waies justifiable, so is it a matter of the highest & deepest concernment unto you to stand by it & advance it to the utmost you are able, yea (if it were possible) above & beyond what you are able to do. All your interests, relations, & concernments in this world are bound up in it: yea, it narrowly concernes you in relation to the world which is to come; your everlasting estate and condition is not lightly concerned in it. First, what have you in this world amongst all that which you call yours, any wayes deare or precious unto you, but that the line of this cause, whatsoever it proves, is like to be stretched upon it: the cause which is now depending and pleading between you and your adversaries, will certainly be either the rising or falling of it.
1. For your Estates, these are already designed, by your enemies, for a reward and recompence of their labour and travell in procuring your ruine. Your silver, and gold, your houses, and lands, with all your precious and pleasant things besides, must call you Masters no more, if you fall into the hands of these devourers. If they prevaile, they will be like a sweeping raine (as Solomon speakes) that will leave no food. You must looke for no other mercies from them, but those that are cruell; you heare daily from divers parts of the Land, of what spirit they are in this kinde; what spoyle and rapine they make of the precious substance of your Brethren, where they have opportunity to fall; notwithstanding they are not yet in a posture to their mindes, to follow this occupation of ruine and spoile, as they desire and hope to doe. They have a bridle of some feare in the lawes of their fury, they cannot stay by their work, they cannot gather in their harvest so cleane as they desire. But if they doe these things being but yet in the valley, what will they doe, if they should make good the mountaine? if they commit such insolencies as these in the day of their feares, what will they doe in the day of their power, if ever this Sun should arise upon them? I beseech you consider this, you that have lived at ease, and in all fulnesse hitherto, and have wanted nothing of all that your hearts could desire, to make your lives comfortable unto you; that have had food, and rayment, and lodging, and harbour, upon such termes, that your flesh it selfe, though apt enough to murmure and complaine, hath yet been ashamed to complaine of any want or scarcity in any kinde; tell me how, or what will you do in such a day, wherein your faire necks, that never had yoke upon them to this day, shall be wrung and galled, and torne with those Iron yokes, of poverty, nakednesse, hunger, cold, contempt, want of all things? Will not the dayes and yeares of your former plenty and fulnesse be seen upon you in abundance of sorrow and extremity? And is it not in vaine for you to thinke that this cup shall passe by you, that you drinke not of it, if ever it be in the power of those enemies of yours we speake of, to make you to drinke? Doubtlesse they must want of their will if you doe not drinke, yea and suck out the very dregs of it. Whereas on the contrary, if you shall only this one time make good your standings against them, and break this enterprise, as far as humane reason is able to judge, and according to the ordinary course of Gods admistration of things in the world, they are never like to rise up against you, nor to endanger the peace of your outward enjoyments the second time. If you will now be perswaded to give out your selves; like men, to advance the cause in hand, that which you doe is like to be a bulworke, and an impregnable defence for the time to come, to your possessions, and estates, against all violence and oppression of men in this kind.
2. For your liberties, this is another pretious possession of yours in the world. I speake here onely of your civill or politick libertie, which is of equall accommodation and desirablenesse (if not of superiour) with your estates: and this likewise will certainly be oppressed and seized upon, and turned into a miserable slavery and bondage, if that bloody generation shall carry the day against you, and make themselves Lords over you. That of Peter, 2 Pet. 2. 19. is like to come upon you in this case: of whomsoever a man is overcome, of the same he is brought into bondage. It may be you are not generally so apprehensive and sensible of the pretiousnesse and sweetnesse of your liberties, as of your estates; you doe not place so much of your outward comfort and contentment in the one, as in the other. The reason whereof I conceive to be partly because wee are generally borne free, and therefore take no care or paines to come by it, whereas many are borne poore, and to inherit little but what they can get by the sweat of their browes: partly because libertie is as plentifull amongst us as silver was in Solomons dayes; which was therefore little esteemed because it was as plentifull as the stones in the street, and as the wild Figtrees that grew abundantly in the plaine; there is none amongst us but is as free as another; but there is great difference in respect of estate; partly also, because we see few in any suffering or hard condition, we heare few cryes or complaints for want of liberty, whereas we both heare and see daily what hardship and things grievous to flesh and blood, are endured by many, both men, women and children, for want of meanes, and an outward estate. Haply for these and other reasons that might be given, our liberties are not so high prised with us as matter of estate is; but if we did judge righteous judgement (as our Saviour speakes) or if we had but the sensible advantages and quicknings to raise our thoughts and apprehensions concerning our liberties, which wee have in reference to our estates, and which many others in the world have, in reference to liberty it selfe; we would thinke our liberties every whit as worthy to be placed at our right hands, as our estates. I must not stand to discourse the benefit and sweetnesse of this blessing of libertie; concerning which, many great and excellent things might be spoken. I shall onely say this, that if we lived but a while in those States, where the poore subject is yoked with an Iron yoke of bondage, and bowes downe the backe, and grones under the heavy pressure of usurpation and tyrannie; as under the great Turke, or in the State of Persia; yea or in France it selfe (which is neere at hand) and did but observe the miserable and hard termes and conditions, that by reason of such slavery and bondage they live under, then a dram of that libertie which yet we enjoy, would be as pretious to us, as a drop of could water would have beene to the rich man in hell, when he was so grievously tormented in those flames. Now then this is that which I hold forth unto you in this motive to be considered of, that if ever you shall suffer the hand of the Malignant partie, which is now up in rage, and great fury against you, to find their enterprise, if the day falls to be theirs, you must looke to be dealt with all in your liberty, as in your estates; there will no partialitie be shewne by these men betweene them, they that will not spare you in your estates, neither will they favour you in your liberties: they have bands, and chaines, and fetters already prepared for your hands and feet, and Irons that will enter into your soules. You must know that they are animated and acted against you, with the spirit of that fourth beast in Daniel, which was unlike unto all the others, very fearefull, whose teeth was of Iron, and his nayles of Brasse, which devoured, brake in pieces, and stampt the rest under his feet. They are of a Lordly, insolent, domineering and tyranizing spirit, sporting themselves in their cruelties, and delighting to ride over the heads of men, that they can get under them. Therefore now consider (I beseech you) how intolerable and grievous a thing it is like to bee unto you to beare the yoke of that cruell bondage and slavery which these men have prepared for your neckes; to live by the lawes of their lusts and pleasures, to be at their arbitterments and wills in all things, to doe and to suffer, to have and to possesse as they shall appoint and thinke meet for you; how intollerable a condition (I say) this is like to prove unto you, who have beene free men and women all your dayes, and have had the disposall of your selves and of all your wayes, and of the good things that the providence of God hath cast in unto you upon your labours or otherwise. Oh you will finde the change very sharpe and terrible, beyond what I am able to expresse, or your selves for the present, able to apprehend. Whereas on the contrary, if you shall hold out this one impression and onset which they are now making upon you, and make good the ground you stand on against them; you shall breake their cords in sunder, and cast their bands from you for ever; you shall make such an intaylement of this pretious inheritance we speake of, your libertie, to your children, and childrens children, that they shall never be able to cut off. If they be but now broken, they are not like ever to make themselves whole againe: if you will be perswaded to be men of wisedome once, you may be men of comfort and peace ever after.
3. For your wives and children, these (I make account) are another part of your pretious injoyments in this world: But as for these, neither are they like to finde any better quarter in their kind from these bags of blood and basenesse, then your liberties and estates in their kind. Nay as these are capable of the impressions of more of those vile affections which rage in these men, so are they like to suffer upon termes yet more grievous, even according to the utmost of their capacities in this kind: The rage of their lusts (I meane of many of them) is as barbarous and cruell, as the rage of their crueltie it selfe. And what measure you are to expect both in the one and in the other, in lust and crueltie towards these, your wives (I meane) and children; themselves have proclaimed in your eares aloud in those patternes and examples of this kinde, which in severall places of the land, they have set for themselves to follow in their future course. I presume you have heard of divers insolencies and outrages of abomination committed by them with an high hand, such as have made both your eares to tingle in the hearing. Therefore consider and weigh it well with your selves: put your hearts upon deepe and sad, and serious apprehensions of it, how grievous and heart-breaking and soule-cutting a sight it would be unto you to see the honour and chastitie of your wives, & daughters plundred by the barbarous lusts of those brutish men, who are ready to poure out their abhominable filthinesse and uncleannesse where ever they be-come, and when they have done execution upon their honours, with the lusts of uncleannesse in the Front, to bring up the lusts of crueltie in the Reare, to doe the like execution upon their lives and blood. Assure your selves, that the divell hath the driving of them, and he will make them runne and keepe his pace, as far as ever the strength of any vilenesse and wickednesse in them will hold out. And so for your little ones that are not for their lusts: it is much to bee feared that in that respect, they will double their cruelties upon them, as you have heard (I presume) that their Brethren in Ireland, baptised into the same spirit of blood and abhomination with them, have done. Oh, how can you beare the thoughts of such a day likely to come upon you, wherein your young children shall be taken by the hand of an inhumane monster, and dashed in peeces against the stones, or torne one limbe from another, or tossed upon the point of the Pike or Speare. Assure your selves that the day of all these astonishing things, and perhaps of things more intollerable and astonishing then these, is like to come upon you, except you will bee perswaded to redeeme it, and buy it off, at the rate of your utmost endeavours, and of all you are able to doe to prevent it, if God will vouchsafe the grace and mercy to you, to let you have it at any rate.
4. That honorable Senate of both Houses of Parliament, consisting of most of the worthies of the Land: (I meane for men of their ranke and qualitie) to whose unwearied labours, and diligence, and faithfulnesse, and zeale, and expence, under God, you and your whole Nation owe your lives & liberties, both spirituall and temporall, yea estates and all your sweet enjoyments hitherto; and in whose peace and preservation all you yet injoy, as farre as reason is able to discerne and judge, is bound up; (so that I may well reckon these amongst your temporall enjoyments) these are like to perish and to be cut off by the right hand of iniquitie, if that generation of men whose bloody cruelties you both have beene heretofore, and are now againe exhorted with all your might to oppose, shall ever get the upper hand. We know it is this assembly, that have stood by you and stucke close to your liberties, and the truth and purity of that Religion you professe; that are the bulwarke and defence against the furious impressions of those wicked ones, upon you, and all that is yours; And they know as much too, and looke upon them accordingly: they are they that have robed these beares of their whelpes, that have shaken the foundation of Popery, Prelacy, and prophannesse in the Land; and that are at worke upon it night and day, to make it a land of righteousnesse, which is an element that these kinde of Creatures know not how to live in. And in this regard, these are the men of their rage and hatred above others; these are the mountaines that stand in their way; and what will they not doe, what will they not suffer to remove them, or cast them downe, and make them into a plaine? doubtlesse they are sicke, and long for their blood, as much as ever David longed for the waters of the well of Bethleem. And if they shall ever be but able to dissolve the power and proceedings of this Parliament now sitting, the way will be open and ready for them, either to stave off all Parliaments for the future, or (which is of more dangerous consequence of the two) to make them themselves: and so the Sunne of the glory and peace of this Nation is like to set upon it for ever. Therefore now consider (I beseech you) of how lamentable and unsupportable a consequence it would be, if this Spring should be troubled (as Solomons comparison is) if these righteous shall fall before these wicked ones; and Cavaliers Swords drinke Senators blood: And how would it be a blot upon you, and make your memoriall an infamy and reproach throughout all generations, if it should be said, that you sate still and did nothing, but keepe up your mony, while these men perished at your side, who had beene a guard and safety to you and to all that you had: yea that laboured and travailed with the honours and safetie of the whole Land, and were ready to cry out, and to have beene delivered, but that in the very breaking forth of the children, your covetousnesse, and your unfaithfulnesse, and remissenesse betrayed them into the hands of their enemies, who cruelly destroyed both Parents and Children at once. Not to feede your enemie When hee hungers, or when he is thirsty, not to give him drinke, is by the Holy Ghost himselfe interpreted; to be a revenging your selves on him; and withall to be a matter of high displeasure and offence unto God. I beseech you, if not to save the life of an enemy when it is in danger, nay if not to supplie such necessities of his, which yet perhaps doe not touch his life, be a sin of that provocation in the sight of God; What sin will that be, or by what name shall it be called, or what shall the measure of the provocation of it in the eyes of God be, when men shall suffer the greatest and faithfullest freinds they have, that for a long time together have laboured for them in the very fire night and day, in the very midst of their sore conflicts and strivings with men, and that cheifely for their sakes, to perish by the hand of their enemies, when it was in their hand and power to relieve them? Surely men must create a New Name, and God will create a new punishment or hell for such a sin.
5. (And lastly for matter of this worlds concernment) what doe you thinke of your lives themselves; if those men of blood shall carry the day, and ever come to set up their banners amongst you? Will they not be sold as cheap as Sparrows were among the Jewes, five for two farthings? Nay, will they not be trodden down and trampled upon like clay and mire in the Streetes, by the foot of the pride, and rage, and insolency of these men? Would not your flesh be as a feast of fat things unto them, and your blood as new Wine? Or if they did spare your lives, would it not be only out of a desire and intent to adde unto your miseries, to gaine opportunity of inflicting many deaths upon you? Perhaps they have learned a deliberate cruelty, from that bloody Emperour Nero: who when any person that was accused, and under the stroke and dint of his power, desired of him that he might be dispatched, and put to death, was wont to make answer, Non ita tecum in gratiam redii: .i. He was not yet so far friends with him, as to give him leave to die: he meant to have more satisfaction out of them, then so. So if these men give you your lives for a time, you must not looke to have them given you upon such termes, as God sometimes in common destructions gives his servants their lives: viz. For a prey, or booty: No, they will be given you only as meanes or engines wherewith to torment you. It may be they will desire to reserve and keep you aliue, to make spectators of you, of all that bloody Tragedy they meane to act upon all that belongs to you, in setting your Houses, and Cities on fire, in taking away your goods, in offering villany to your wives, and your daughters, and then mangling and massacring them when they have done. And then when they have throughly scourged you with such scorpions as these, it is like they will deliver you into the hand of death. Certaine it is, that the spirit that works in these cursed children of disobedience which are now your adversaries, lusts not onely to your temporall ruine and destruction, but to your everlasting ruine and destruction also, as farre as it knowes how to bee active in it. Our Saviour himselfe seemes to imply as much, Matth. 10. 28. where he commands us not to feare those which kill the body: but are not able to kill the soule: as farre as they are able to goe in hatred and malice against the Saints, they doe goe, they doe kill the body (saith our Saviour) Hee doth not say, feare not those that can kill the body, but, which doe, actually, frequently and from time to time, kill the body, but are not able to kill the soule; doubtlesse intimating, that if they were able, they would kill body and soule, and all. And somewhat more plainely (I conceive) Joh. 10. and I give unto them eternall life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any man plucke (or pull) them out of mine hand; cleerely implying, that the divell and his instruments, wicked men, are ready to pull and tugge hard to get even his elect themselves out of his hands, out of that hand of election and grace, which hee hath layd upon them, and whereby he holds them fast. Thus the story of the martyrs report, that when the Popish Prelates, and Priests were ready to have execution done upon that faithfull servant of God John Husse, they used these words, Now wee commit thy soule unto the Divell: And when Hierom of Prague, through long and grievous imprisonment grew very sicke, and (as himselfe thought) neere unto death, desired that hee might have a confessor (being it seemes, consciencious this way) the story saith, that very hardly, and with great importunitie it could bee obteyned: which shewes, that it was griefe and torment to his enemies, that hee should have any thing, that in their opinion might bee a meanes to save his soule, after hee was dead; besides many other like streynes of the same spirit, which that story presents unto the diligent Reader. Now then, there being a spirit of this profound, deepe, and divellish enmitie against you, working in the Bowells and inward parts of these men, to desire not onely your temporall, but eternall death also, it is none other like, but if they suspect and doubt of the strength of their arme, for the sending of you by death into Hell (as I make little question but they doe, they have no great hope of hunting your soules into the bottomlesse pit, which is reserved for their owne) they will themselves create a Hell for you, as full of torment and cruell burnings as they can make it, and cast you into it themselves before you die, and so be gotten out of their reach. So that there is nothing to bee looked for from these men but death, or that which is worse then death, a life to contribute towards the increase of the paines and sorrowes of your death: and so indeed death howsoever. Therefore I beseech you consider the weight of this branch of the present motive also. Will you thinke of keeping or saving your estates, to the losse or imminent danger of your lives? Shall you not keepe your money to make a goodly purchase, if you bring all these great evills and miseries upon you thereby? Though in many other cases you might make much gaine and advantage by making the Divell a lier, yet it will bee your wisedome, to justifie him in that his saying; skinne for skinne, (or rather skinne after skinne, or, skinne upon skinne) and all that hee hath will a man give for his life, If you have so much of men in you, as Sathan your enemy supposeth (it seemes) that you have) to value your lives at any such rate above all your possessions whatsoever, shew it this day, and make a fortification and bulwarke of all that you have for their defence and safetie; Solomon (we know) made some hundreds of Targets, and Shields of Gold: it should not be grievous to any man to sacrifice his estate, his Gold and Silver upon the service of his life. There is a time to keepe (saith Solomon) and a time to spend, or to cast away, Eccles. 3. 6. Certainely of all other, that is no time to keepe, when a mans life lies at the stake, and is in all likelihood not to bee redeemed but by casting away. Thus much for your temporall and outward injoyments, they are all involved and concerned to the utmost, in the present occasion and service, which you have beene exhorted, to promote and further with all your strength, and all your power.
But secondly, it were well (at least it were lesse to bee layd to heart, it were a matter of farre lighter moment and importance) if your outward concernments onely, though it were even to life it selfe, were imported in that great occasion; which is now on foot, and hath beene againe and againe recommended unto you; but behold greater things then these. Your spirituall concernments also, are like to suffer, and that in a very high degree, if Gog and Magog prevaile, if ever you come to bee at the allowance of Cavaliers, Papists, and Athiests, that have taken the field against you, for the things of Heaven. You are like to have stones in stead of bread, and Scorpions in stead of Fish. Those golden Pipes, by which Heaven and Earth are (as it were) joyned together, and have lively communion each with other; I meane your pure ordinances of worship, which have both the wisedome, and grace, and goodnesse of God abundantly in their frame, will be cut off, and others of Lead laid in their stead; ordinances I meane of an humane constitution and frame, whose chiefe substance, or ingredients will bee the wisedome and will, i.e. the folly and corrupt affections of men, by which, not Heaven, but Hell, and the world will bee joyned together, and the trade and traffique betweene both places, much quickned and advanced, ordinances which will bee ready to bee cast as dung into your faces by God, when you have beene exercised in them. You must never looke to see the goings of God in the Sanctuary, as you have done, to see any more visions of life and immortalitie let downe from Heaven unto you, in these houses of vision: those excellent ravishments and raptures of spirit, those takings up into the third Heaven by seeing him that was greater then Solomon in all his glory; will cease from you. Those pure streames of the Gospell will bee all bemired and soyled, when they are given unto you to drinke: Yea happily and poysoned too, by the influence of the corrupt minds and judgements of those that shall give them unto you. You must looke to have the Gospell turned upside downe, and to be made to stand in perfect conjunction with Hell, with loosenesse, wickednesse, and prophanenesse, and in opposition to Heaven, Grace and Holinesse; to be made a Savour of death to those that shall bee saved; and a Savour of life to those that shall perish. It will bee made to frowne upon those that are godly, and to looke cheerefully and comfortably upon loose men. So that if your soule shall lust for these Sommer fruits, if you shall desire to have communion with God in communion and fellowship with his Saints, If you shall desire at any time to bee rained upon by a shower of life and peace from Heaven; you must repaire againe to the woods and mountaines, or to the covert of some close and secret place, where you must eate the bread of your soules in perill of your lives; as your forefathers did in Queene Maries dayes, on with danger of suffering whatever the malice and revengefull spirit of your enemies shall thinke good or can devise to inflict upon you.
Therefore now consider, you that have had the liberty of your Sanctuaries, and of your publike assemblies, that have beene fed with hony out of the Rocke, and with the finest wheate of Heaven, you that have had an open and free trade to Heaven, and have had glorious returnes from them day after day, to whom the Ministery of the Gospell, hath beene as the wings of the morning, as Chariots of fire to carry you up and downe as it were in spirituall state and triumph betweene Heaven and earth; Oh how will that day be as the shaddow of death unto you, wherein you must exchange your Quailes and Manna from Heaven, for the Garlike and Onyons of Egypt, when you shall heare the Pope and his Hierarchie preached up to the Heavens, and Jesus Christ with his Saints preached downe to the earth, and made to sit at their footstoole, when your soules and consciences shall bee compassed about with lies and errors and the Commandements of men, in the Ministery of the word, in stead of those spirituall and glorious truths, which were wont to bee as so many Angels sent from the presence of God to comfort you; doubtlesse if ever you saw the heavens opened over your heads by an effectuall and sound Ministery, and Jesus Christ standing at the right hand of God in glory, as Stephen did, if ever you smell the savor of life by Jesus Christ preached; the day wherein such a ministery shall bee taken from you, will bee like the day wherein the Sunne shall bee covered with Sack-cloath, and the Moone turned into blood, and the Starres in the Firmament of Heaven lose their light. The change will bee every whit as sad unto you, as that was unto David, when hee was driven from the Sanctuary and presence of God, and compelled to dwell in Mesech, and make his habitation in the Tents of Kedar. If this exchange made him cry out, woe is me: you must thinke it will bee a double woe unto you, when the Arke of God shall be taken from you, and Dagon set up in its stead, when the dispensations and administrations of Heaven, which were spirit and life, the light of Gods countenance it selfe unto you, shall bee exchanged for the statutes and ordinances of Rome, which are like tombes and sepulchers, having nothing in them but rottennesse and dead mens bones. If such a day were now upon you, what would you give to buy it off? and is not the purchase of the prevention of it worth as much?
It may be there are some amongst you whose soules and consciences were never yet engaged, eyther by the puritie or power of any of the ordinances of God; who never yet knew what it was to bee kindly touched from Heaven by any spirituall administration; to such as these it is like Dagon may bee as good as the Arke; the devices and inventions of men, as beautifull, as savory, in the house and worship of God, as those ordinances themselves which have the perfect image and superscription of God upon them: a ministery that is low, and cold, and set in consort with the Earth, and the things thereof; as that which is calculated for the Meridian of Heaven, and breathes life and immortalitie in the faces of mens soules continually. If such as these lend but a dull or deafe eare to the motion, cannot finde so much as two mites in their estates to cast into the treasury of God, it is not much to be marvelled at. But for you that know how little the chaffe is to the wheate; I beseech you to have this sence of the businesse recommended to you, that when you have done the utmost of what you are able to doe for the advancement of it, you would yet unfainedly desire to doe more.
Thirdly, To engage you yet further to give out your selves fully & freely as you have bin exhorted, you may please to consider, that as all your pretious interests, whether in the things of this life, or of that which is to come, are deepely concerned in it, so are all the like interests of all your brethren, the godly persons in the land concerned likewise. And if the cause should suffer or miscarry, it would bee as a sword that would passe through all the righteous soules throughout the land; it would bring such a day of sorrow, lamentation, and woe upon the generation of the servants of God throughout the Kingdome, as scarce hath beene heard of in all ages: it will cause all their hands to hang downe, and their knees to wax feeble, and their hearts to wither as the grasse; it will fill all their eyes with teares, and their hearts with heavinesse: there will bee no end of those great evills and miseries which will come upon them in that day. The breach that will bee made upon them will bee like the great breaches of the Sea which cannot bee repaired. It was a night of much sadnesse to the land of Egypt, when God slew in every house one throughout the whole Land: the Text saith, There was a grievous cry throughout the whole land of Egypt upon it: But this cup was given to the Egyptians to drinke: And yet this stroke fell not so sore upon them neither, as the miscarriage of that great action wee speake of, would doe upon the Israell of God amongst us. That did but touch the Egyptians in the lives of one in every Family respectively: but the stroke which is now lifted up, and likely to be given in the land, whereever it light, should it fall upon the right hand, upon the people of God, it would wound them all, and that very sore, yea and that not in some, but in all their concernments and injoyments whatsoever, as well in those which relate to this world present, as in those, whose accommodations are more peculiarly for that world which is yet to come (as hath beene shewed already) If ever that mountaine of prophannesse, which now you are exhorted to put to your shoulders to remove, shall be established, doubtlesse it will magnifie it selfe against all that is called Holy in the Land; it will lie heavy and oppresse, if not overwhelme and bury under it, all that have the marke of the living God upon them. Therefore I beseech you consider what you doe: If this great evill shall come upon the Church and people of God amongst you, and you bee found dull and heavie, negligent and remisse in the preventing of it, and not improve your selves to the utmost that way, when as it hath beene so fully and feelingly, and frequently both represented and recommended unto you, shall you not bring the guilt of it all upon your heads? Shall you not bee looked upon both by God and men, as accessaries (if not principalls) in all those sore afflictions and calamities, which in this case shall fall upon them? will not God require their sorrowes, and their teares, and their troubles, and their afflictions, and all the extremitie they shall endure at your hands? When I shall say unto the wicked (saith the Lord to his Prophet Ezekiel) Oh wicked man, thou shalt die the death, if thou dost not speake and admonish the wicked of his way, that wicked man shall die for his iniquitie, but his blood will I require at thine hand, Ezek. 33. If God will require the blood of a wicked man at the hand of his Prophet in case he did not seeke to prevent it by admonishing him: will he not much more require the sorrowes, sighings, troubles, teares, extremities, blood of a whole nation of Saints, at the hand of those by whose unfaithfulnesse, coldnesse, covetousnesse, negligence in any kind, they shall come upon them. The Sonne of man (saith our Saviour) goeth his way, as it is written of him: but Woe be to that man, by whom the Sonne of man is betrayed: it had beene good for that man,Matth. 26. 24. if he had never beene borne: In like manner the Church and people of God amongst us may yet suffer grievous things, but woe bee to those, whomsoever they bee, bee they fewer, be they more, bee they rich, be they poore, by whom their peace and safety shall bee betrayed.
Fourthly (and lastly) All our owne concernments and the concernments of all our deare brethren in the faith throughout the land, are bound up in the businesse, which hath bin so frequently and affectionately recommended unto you; so are the like concernments of others of our brethren also, partakers of like precious faith with you, in other lands and Kingdoms, bound up likewise herein; though not all (perhaps) in the same degree. There is a common report of a strange sympathie between Hippocrate’s twins, that they alwayes cried together, and laughed together. And doubtlesse there is some such simpathye betweene all the Reformed Churches (as we call them) in these parts of the world: amongst which likewise I comprehend those plantations of our Brethren of this Land, in America, and other Westerne parts, at least betweene all that are truely faithfull and sound in that profession which they make in these Churches. I doe not speake here of that inward or spirituall simpathie, which in respect of reciprocall affections and mutuall tendernesse, intercedes betweene all the true and living members of the mysticall body of Christ, though never so remote asunder, but of that mutuall dependencie which the outward affaires and condition of every one hath, upon the condition of the other, so that the prosperitie and well established peace of any one, hath an influence into, and contributes more or lesse towards the like establishment of the other: As on the contrary, the shaking, trouble, ruine, or destruction of any one weakens the strength, and impaires more or lesse the securitie of all the other. So that they must needs all weepe together, and all laugh together. Now then, this is that which I say and hold forth to your Christian and godly considerations in this motive; that the action wherein the Church and people of God in the Land are now ingaged, and which is yet depending betweene them, and their adversaries, will in the issue, close, and fall of it, bee of very remarkable concernment to all the Saints of God in all those other Churches mentioned; if it falls on the right hand, it will bee the riches, strength, and increase of them; if on the left, it will be the diminishing, shaking, and impairing of them, therefore consider I beseech you, the great weight and importance of the opportunitie that is before you, if through your zeale, and forwardnesse, and faithfulnesse to advance it, and the blessing of God upon it, your present service shall prosper, your light will be like the lightning which (as our Saviour saith) shineth from the East even unto the West: the heate and warmth and living influence thereof, shall pierce through many kingdomes great and large, as France, Germany, Bohemia, Hungaria, Polonia, Denmarke, Sweden, with many others, and finde out all the children of God, and all that are friends to the Kingdome of Heaven, and will bee a cheering and refreshing to them: Especially to your brethren in their severall plantations in farre countries; and most of all to those in these united and neere kingdomes, Scotland and Ireland, it will be as a feast of fat things, and of wines well refined: and particularly to poore bleeding, dying Ireland, it will be as a resurrection from death unto life. Now then in-as-much as God hath set you this day, as the Sunne in the firmament of Heaven, from whence hee hath an opportunitie and advantage to send forth his beames, and to furnish and fill the world with his light and influence round about him; since you have the commodiousnesse of such a standing, that you may doe good to all that is Gods, I meane to all the Saints in all their dispertions and quarters throughout so many kingdomes, and such a considerable part of the world as hath beene mentioned, so that you may cause them to rise up before you and call you blessed; I beseech you doe not betray this first-borne opportunitie of Heaven: looke upon it as a great and solemne invitation from God himselfe unto you, to do greater things for the world, at least for the Christian world, then ever you did unto this day; or then ever you are like to doe the second time, yea then any particular Christian State ever did, or is like to doe while the world stands. God hath prepared and fitted a Table for you large enough, if you will but spread and furnish it with such provisions as are under your hand, that you may feast, and give royall entertainment, to the whole houshold of faith, almost throughout the whole world at once. And shall it now seeme any great thing in our ages, or bee in the least measure grievous unto any man or woman of you, even to lavish his gold out of bagges, to bestow his whole substance to devest himselfe of all he possesseth in the world, even to his shooe Latchet, to furnish and set out such an occasion as this is, like it selfe? Shall not the very conscience and comfortable remembrance of such a thing as this done with uprightnesse and simplicitie of heart by you, be a thousand times better then any superfluities of silver or of gold, or of meates, or of drinkes, or of houses, or of or of jewels, or apparell whatsoever? Nay if we shall bring povertie and nakednesse, and hunger and thirst upon our selves, to purchase and procure it, will it not bee better then an estate, then cloathing, then meates and drinkes unto us? will it not take out the burning, and allay the bitternesse of all these? Doubtlesse the honour and conscience of the fact, will beare all the charges, and answer all the expence of it to the full. The opportunitie and occasion is so rich and glorious, that it calls to remembrance (as sometimes the shadow doth the substance) the great opportunitie that was before the Lord Jesus Christ, for the salvation of the world: We know that he being rich, became poore, that the world thorough his poverty might be made rich. You have the patterne in the mount before you: See that according to your line and measure, you make all things like to it.
T.19 (1.8.) [William Walwyn], Some Considerations Tending to the Undeceiving (10 November 1642).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.19 [1642.11.10] (1.8) [William Walwyn], Some Considerations Tending to the Undeceiving (10 November 1642).
Full title[William Walwyn], Some Considerations Tending to the Undeceiving those, whose Judgments are Misinformed by Politique Protestations, Declarations, etc. Being a necessary discourse for the present times, concerning the unseasonable difference between the Protestant and the Puritan.
Estimated date of publication10 November 1642.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 193; Thomason E. 126. (45.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
The end of the Parliaments consultations, and actions, is to free the Kingdome (the care whereof is to them by the Kingdome committed) from all those heavy tyrannies and oppressions which for many yeares, against expresse Lawes, and cautions to the contrary, have surrounded and overwhelmed the Kingdome, all which, if wee have not a desire to let them slip our memories, the Parliaments first Remonstrance will fully present unto us. Those men that do oppose the Parliament, are generally such as some way or other have thrived under those pressures, as being made instruments and actors in them, or else being addicted to vice and loosenesse, found that connivence and indulgence, then which, in times more reformed they cannot expect. Those men that doe now side with, and assist the Parliament, are such as in those corrupt times were trodden under foot, such as were vext and impoverisht by insulting Courts, and Court-officers, forc’t against conscience to perswade to the breach of the Sabbath, compelled to flie their Countrie, or separate from the Church, by inducing vaine and empty Ceremonies, which direct our mindes from consideration of Gods love to us in Christ, and are utterly inconsistent with the true, and spirituall worship of God; and indeed therefore pressed upon us, that thereby their friends might be knowne from their foes, the easie to be abused from the more difficult, that they might be imbraced, and have all encouragements both from the Minister, and men of high places; and these disgraced, prosecuted, and though of never so honest lives, yet if in all things not conformable, scandalled, and made odious: Ceremonies were therefore too pressed upon us, that by them the Church becomming more pompous, and outwardly specious, the Clergy (by whom the Statesmen were especially to doe their ill intended worke) might win greater esteeme, and grow more and more reverenced by the people, who seldome they know dive into the reasons of things, but are usually carryed away by outward shewes and appearances. The Parliaments other friends are such as have beene tormented with the permitted corruption of Lawyers, those devouring Locusts, no lesse ravening then the Ægyptian ones that overspread that Land; such likewise as had lost the liberty of Trade, for the gaining of which, they served a long and tedious apprenticeship, by unlawfull engrossements, and Patents; and all the multitude of good men, who are sensible either by their owne, or their nighbours sufferings, of the injuries of former times, or desirous to prevent and divert our oppression and slavery for the future: Now as it is a notable policy of evill men, though of quite different and opposite conditions to combine and associate together against all that oppose them, bearing with, and passing by any thing for the present, though at other times much distastfull. So how much more does it behove the honest men of this Kingdome, who are likely to taste equally the sweetes of liberty, or the bitter pills of slavery, how ever they may be perswaded otherwise for the present, to unite themselves heart and hand, to joyne together as one man, against all those whom they shall discerne either to oppose the Parliament, or endeavour to raise divisions and differences among themselves. The only way for our enemies to doe their worke, is not by strength, and force of Armies, for what ever their brags be, and how great soever their boasts by which they would seeme to have what they have not, that thereby they may encourage their party, and dishearten their adversaries, yet indeed their forces are but small, their provisions scanty, their meanes and mony only supplyed by rapine, which cannot be lasting, having neither Forts, nor Shipping, so that it cannot be that by strong hand they should have any hope to doe their worke: No certainly, and yet notwithstanding they still dare to hold up the Cudgels, seeme as confident as ever, beare up, as if the world were of their side; what should be the reasons hereof; reasons there are, we must perswade our selves, it is not to be supposed that they are foolehardy, or that the sense of their many mischiefes have made them desperate, because past hope of reconcilement (though they well may) their Councels are notable, and surely come not short of the most able the world affords, their subleties exceeds the Foxes, or the Serpents, Romes or Spaines; whose most damnable glory it is, that from meane beginnings they, by their wits especially, have raised themselves to the most extended tyrannies in the Christian world: and why should our politique enemies then despaire? Since their wits are as quick, their consciences as deeply pained and sencelesse, many of our people as easie to be deluded as ever men were, having the assistance of former contrivances in making men slaves, furnished with Machiavils, and Staffords instructions from Florence, with all the assistance Romes consistory, or Spaines can afford: and what force cannot doe, deceit may: a subtill deceitfull Declaration may doe much more mischief then an Army, the one kills men outright, and so leaves them unserviceable for both sides, but deceitfull words, when for want of consideration, unsettlednesse of judgement, and weake information, they captivate men, they make them not only dead to good mens assistance, and their Countries service, but promoters likewise of their deluders interest, to the insensible ruine and slavery of their brethren, and in conclusion, of themselves. Deceits and delusions are the principall weapons with which the evill Counsellors now fight; by which they subdue and captivate the understandings and affections of men; to scatter these, they hurry about from one County into another, and there at Assises, and other forc’t Assemblies practise, in one place they colour and glose over their owne evill actions, with seeming pretences of Law, Religion: in another, they scandalize and traduce the Parliament, for as they cannot want paint to make fowle and unsightly actions seeme faire and specious, so neither can they want dirt and mire to disfigure the best formed, and most honest enterprises in the world; words are never defective to make evill seeme good, and good evill: what villany was there ever committed, or what injustice, but words and pretences might be found to justifie it: Monopolies were once pleaded legall, and very wholesome for the people, we were once perswaded Ship-money was lawfull, and now Commission of Array; if unjust things were offered to us, as they are, without disguise and artificiall covering, they would appeare so odious, as that each man would cry out upon them, and therefore it is a high point of policy to make the worst things shew fairest, speake best, when they intend most mischiefe. In other Counties the people were thanked for their affections and assistance, when they found them wiser then to yeeld any, and when they were driven by necessity to a place, they would seeme to be invited by love, and certainty of compliance, when God knowes in many places they found it much otherwise, and would likewise elsewhere too, but that the people were necessitated to their assistance by force, rather then forward, out of any liking. Well, their policies and delusions are most numerous, and every day increasing, and therefore it behoves every wise man to stand upon his guard, to be wary and watchfull that he be not apprehended by their subtilties: in nothing there is required greater care, their invasions being insensible, and having once seised upon a man, he no longer dislikes, but approves of them, they force a man to love what erewhiles he hated, what he but now cryed downe, to plead for, and not to observe, because his intentions are honest, and he meanes no ill, that he is even against his knowledge his Countries enemy: Hee that can give any cautions how to resist their wyles, or shew wherein we are already seduced by our cunning adversaries, doth doe very good service to his Country, and deserves to be heard; this discourse was written principally for that end, namely, to discover to all good men how they have suffered themselves to be wrought upon by the adversary in a case very considerable, and thereby, though they observe it not, are become friends to their Countries chiefe foes, and foes to their principall friends. The worke of evill Counsellors, as it is to unite and joyne together their friends, so is it likewise to separate and divide their foes amongst themselves: all such are their foes as truly love their owne liberty, and desire to free themselves from their insulting tyranny: it must needs be very advantagious to them, if by any meanes they can divide these, for being disjoyned, they cannot possibly be so powerfull against them as otherwise they would be, did they continue at union: now amongst many other wayes that they have used to accomplish this end, there is not one hath been more effectuall then in raising, and cherishing differences concerning formes and circumstances about Religion, that so setting them together by the cares about shadowes, they may in the meane time steale away your substance: there is no difference they full well know is so permanent, as that which any way touches upon Religion, and therefore like cunning Pioners, have lighted upon what is likely to make the greatest breach, which by continuall plying the work, the difference dayly increasing, it is much to be feared that all the paines the Parliament takes, the assistance of good men, the hazards of our resolute souldiers, or whatever endeavours else are used for the accomplishing of good mens desires, will by this one difference, if continued, be utterly frustrate, and come to naught: for it is almost come to that passe, that the Puritan and Sectaries, as they are called, are more odious to the Protestant, then the Cavalier, Malignant, or Papist: all our discourses are diverted now by the cunning practise of the Polititian from our forepast calamities, plots, and conspiracies of lewd men, from thinking what will be the best wayes to speed and advantage our undertakings for our liberty, to raylings against the Puritan, to crosse and oppose the Puritan, to provoke him by many insolencies, and affronts to disorders, and then to inveigh with all bitternesse against his disorders: if at such times as these, when so great a worke is in hand, as the freeing of us from slavery, we can be so drowzily sottish as to neglect that, for the satisfying our giddy and domineering humour, what can be said of us, but that our fancy is dearer to us then our liberty, that we care not what goes to racke, though it be our substantiall Religion, Lawes, and Liberties, so we doe but please our selves in crying downe our Brethren, because they are either more zealous, or else more scrupulous then our selves: These things my friends, (for all good men are such) doe shew that you are not considerate, nor doe not sufficiently beare in mind what was told you in the Parliaments first Remonstrance, that it was (and still is) one of the principall workes of our common enemy, to sow division between the Protestant and Puritan, you have beene too easie, and quickly wrought upon by him for the accomplishing that worke: I would to God you would lay it to heart; the Puritan intends no mischiefe to any, you may assure your selves he does not: if you inquire you shall finde that they had no hand in our former oppressions, they were no maintainers of any unjust courses, or Courts, unlesse by those many fines which were extorted from them, for that they of all men had the courage to withstand their injuries: wee heare of daily plunderings, rapes, and murthers of the Cavaliers, women with child runne through, and many other butcheries, and yet wee passe by these, as if by no interest they concerned us, and let flie our speeches only against the Puritan for plucking a raile downe, or a paire of Organs, a Surplice, Crucifix, or painted window, which are indeed no way conducible to the substantiall worship of God, and yet retained by the ill disposed Clergy, as fuell to yeeld matter to that discord they would continue amongst you: See how much too blame we are, see how exceedingly the polititian has deluded us, that we should doe thus, and yet see not that we doe unwisely. If thy brother bee weake and thou strong, beare with his weakenesse, or if the Puritan esteeme thee weake, and himselfe strong, it will be a good lesson to him; if wee be strong we should beare with them that are weake; if we are weake we should not judge them that are strong, it will be no shame for any one to take the Apostles advice; let not slight and indifferent things divide our affections; let them not especially when substantiall things lie at the stake; it is all one as if our enemy being in the field with full purpose and speed to destroy us, wee should turne aside to exclaime against a man that flung dirt upon us or laught at us: and wholly neglect altogether to defend our selves: what a shame will it be unto us, when hereafter it is said that the English might have freed themselves from oppression and slavery, but that in the doing of it they neglected their common enemy, and fell at variance among themselves for trifles. Ceremonies and other things that occasion difference, are stickled for by the Protestant, not for that they thinke them necessary, for surely unlesse it be for some indirect end they cannot be urged to be so, but for that they are not yet taken downe by authoritie: The Puritan they would have them taken away for that they conceive them vaine, unwarrantable by Gods Word, reliques of the Romish Religion not throughly purged away, and therefore they desire they should be left off by us, which are the principall cause of their separation from us: In all differences to bee unwilling to reconcile, shewes not a spirit of love, which Christians should ever be possest withall, but of pride and contention, the Protestant hath not the engagements of conscience upon him, as the Puritan has, and therefore may the easier beare with the Puritans infirmities, if meat offend my weake brother I will eate no meat as long as I live, what an excellent thing were it if we could have that hold fast over our selves that the Apostle had to refraine from any thing, how pleasant and deare soever unto us, rather than give any offence, or occasion any difference betweene our selves and weake brethren: let every man thinke of the answering this question to himselfe: whether if lewd men doe get the better over the Parliament and honest men of the Kingdome, either Protestant or Puritan are likely to be any other but slaves: Certainly if any of them doe perswade themselves otherwise, they are like the stiffenecked and unweildy Hebrewes, that wisht they were slaves in Egypt againe, where the much loved Flesh pots were, for that it was troublesome and dangerous passing through the Wildernesse into Canaan, a land of plenty and lasting liberty. Be not deceived with deluding thoughts of former times, when plenty covered our oppressions, and because of peace wee could not see our slavery: it was a time when such as Buckingham, Stratford, domineering Bishops, corrupt and lawlesse Judges, grew rich and potent: when Courts Minions for no services but slavery and luxury were exalted, when offices were not conferred on foreseene vertue and honest desert, but were bought and sold; when honours that ought to be the rewards of vertue, were by gold purchased, and they onely deemed fit Subjects for both, that were easie to be corrupted, such as had stupid consciences, & would suffer their masters to undertak any dishonest employment. He that wishes for former times wishes for such times wherein it had beene much better for a man to let goe his right of inheritance, though never so apparantly his, to any varlet that would have laid but any colorable claime to it, rather then have bin wurried by Court Mastives, & eaten to the bare bones by griping Judges and avaritious Lawyers, wherein a murder in one man was not so much punished as a word in another, wherein a poore man was hanged for stealing food for his necessitie, and a luxurious Courtier of whom the world was never like to have any other fruits but oathes and stabbes, could be pardoned after the killing the second or third man: wherein in a word, knaves were set upon honest mens shoulders, all loosenesse was countenanced, and vertue and pietie quite out of fashion: In these times, who kept themselves so steddy as the Puritan, who opposed against those exorbitant courses, and by that meanes who smarted more then they: sure I thinke their sufferings are yet in each mans memory, who but they, or they especially withstood all Church innovations, and other taxes and impositions, for which both the Bishops and Clergy, as also the corrupt Statesman, and Projector were their protest and open enemies, and even then to make them odious, invented ridiculous names for them, and studied scurrilous tales and jests against them, and ever signed new devices concerning them, to direct our thoughts from our every dayes oppressions, to sport at the Puritan. The wayes of wicked men are like the way of a Ship in the Sea, so quick and speedily covered, that without much observancy we cannot trace them: So that we see these endeavors to make the Puritan odious is no new policy, nor yet the reasons why it is endeavored, and how great a blemish it is unto our judgement, that though this deceit hath beene so long in practise, and so apparently mischievous to good, and advantageous to bad men, we should not yet discover it, or being discovered and declared unto us, wee should not lay it to heart, and endeavor to avoid it. Sure I thinke there is no more evident marke of our disaffections to the Parliament, then our invectives against the Puritan, whom the Parliament and all good men ought in all reason to esteeme well of, for that they have beene so abundant in their contributions, so forward in their services, so neglective of their private, to advance that necessary and most allowable work, both by God and all reasonable men in the world, of freeing us and our posterity from loathsome Tyranny and oppression: whatsoever faults the Puritan hath, this is not a time to cast them in his dish, neither are we certaine that they are faults, we have but so digested them to our selves, what he can say for himself, in his own justification, is not yet heard, nor is there yet a time of hearing: we may assure our selves that the Parliament will endeavour all that possible they can to give all sorts of men that will not prove obstinate, and unsatisfiable, the best and largest satisfaction: If they should now goe about it, or if they should at any time heretofore have enterprised it, they might in the meane time have had their throats cut, it is and hath been the endeavour of the Kings evill advisers, to urge them alwayes to the settlement of the Church, a worke they know requires much time for the performance of it, and so must of necessity have diverted all considerations and provisions for their safety, when in the meane time those advisers would have been most active and vigilant, losing no jot of time, nor balking no opportunity or advantage to have fortified themselves, made a prey of the Parliament, and in their mines have buryed all thats neer & deer unto us: We see, that though the Parliament have only intended one business, the defence and preservation of themselves, and the Kingdome, so great opposition hath yet been made, and so difficult a worke have they found it, that there is no man can say they are too forward: and therefore if we will not willfully make our selves a prey to our common enemy, let us resolve for the time to come firmly to unite our affections beyond the policy of evill-witted men to dissolve: let those whom the malignant and inconsiderate call Puritans, endeavour all that they can possibly, to give no offence to the Protestant, and let the Protestant be slow in taking any at the Puritan: the Puritan indeed is too blame in his not observing all hee can to win by love, gentle behaviour, such as differ from him in opinion, in not endeavouring all he can to bridle his passion, and not suffer his different opinion to coole his love and affection to other men: what? We have all need one of another, and till such time things are throughly canvassed, and examined, how ever each man concludes himselfe to be in the right (we know we are partiall to our selves) he may be mistaken, and upon better reasons which as yet he sees not may alter his judgement and be convinc’t; let us unite together as one man to the extirpation of certaine and discovered enemies both of our substantiall Religion, our lawes, and liberties, that so all being quiet, and wee assuredly freemen, all stratagems dissolved, arid the Sunne of peace againe appearing, the Church may be so purged and so religiously setled, that the Puritan may have no cause of seperation (which cannot be according to his desire but that to which by the instigation of his conscience he is necessitated too) and so may be no longer an eyesore and distastfull to the Protestant, but both may with mutuall joy and peace of conscience joyne together in praises and thanksgivings to that God, who by the free, and alone death of his Sonne attoned and reconciled us to himselfe, and in giving us his Sonne hath together with him given us all things also. But to what purpose will this, or other discourses of this nature be, when there is a sort of people in this kingdome, who make it their study and bend all their endeavours for to encrease and enlarge this difference: and yet have full permission, and all opportunity that may be to doe their worke; neither could the polititian have ever made this breach or extended it to that businesse it is at, but for the certaine assistance of the Clergy, who for that end bound them his instruments, by the liberall distribution of honours and preferments, by enlargements of dignity & livings, by giving them power in Courts, & letting them tast the sweets of domination: by authorising them in their advance of tithes, multiplying their duties, favouring them in their abundant differences, and restlesse lawsuits; and in all likelihood they must bee their servants who pay them such large wages; insomuch that in all the time of this Kingdomes slavery and wicked mens oppressions of us, who were greater promoters of both then the Clergy; what was the politique subject of their Sermons then, and discourses, but the advance of prerogative, and unlimited sway; the gayning of estimation to themselves not by their doctrines or lives, for what could be more corrupt and scandalous, but by subtill delusions, and delusive sophismes; the fitting of our minds for slavery, the abasing of our courages against injuries in Church or State; by preaching for obedience to all commands good or bad, under deceitfull termes of active and passive, by which meanes injurious men were heartned in induring mischiefes, and good men moap’d and stupified to a patient sufferance of them, their very tongues tied up and no libertie given so much as to motion against apparent injuries, or to discover to the world the iniquitie of them: This use is made of those most admirable guifts we admire the Clergy for, to this good end serves their great learning and excellent parts; and as in former times by these and many other wayes they onely employed their studies to make us apt and easie to admit our slavery without grudging or gainsaying, so doe they still continue the Statesmens hirelings, to further that difference betweene the Protestant and Puritan, which makes so much for their advantage: And that they may be truely serviceable, to this end they are brought up in the Universities fitted for the purpose; no man there countenanced unlesse he is like to prove a champion against the Puritan, the greater their abilities are that way, their preferments are answerable, insomuch, that generally those Ministers are onely good, that trusting onely to themselves, and not taking the pleasing course, could expect no encouragement from the Bishop or others in high places, but very contentedly did betake themselves to such places their honest friends and deserts obtained for them, whereas men of that other straine were almost courted into benefices, where the former benefits did not more sway with to justifie injustice, and sow division, then the longing expectation after greater and greater preferments; and what though some have refused preferments, and yet are zealous in your worke; it is well knowne yet that they live in abundance, drinke the sweet, and eate the fat of the Land, are recompenced with large gifts, and abundant Legacies; who by a cunning refusall of what they need not, and perhaps they thinke would be too troublesome, have taken so deepe root in unwatchfull mens minds, that there are none so great promoters of this worke as they; who likewise being the most subtill of all the tribe, order the businesse so, that what by their abilities of speech, reverent estimation men have of their persons, of their functions, of their sinceritie, they even delude them as they list, and have so farre fomented this fire of dissention, that it is to bee feared it will very shortly breake out into a flame: they have even heightned this hatred to an insurrection, the people rise up one against another, grow into factions and acquaintances by wearing colours, and publike meetings, outfacing authority, and slighting the most soveraigne power, even of the Parliament it selfe; nor is this likely in short time to be extinguisht, though much care be used, and great paines taken for the doing it, so long as a cunning malicious sort of men are suffered without controule or just punishment to yeeld new matter to this destructive flame of contention; to curbe the licence, and punish the insolencies of those licentious Clergymen may very well be one of the principall workes of the Parliaments, whose earnest endeavours and noble undertakings doe find no greater opposition from any sort of men, no not from the Cavalier himselfe, or the Kings evill Councellors, then from these men of malice and dissention; many of them are Delinquents, and so voted, others likewise would appeare to be so, did the people thinke it a fit time to make their complaints, many of them are of scandalous and debaucht lives, all of them indeed are bound by the respects they have to their owne safetie to destroy the Parliament, by whom they know, were they at leasure they should be sifted, and their crimes censured, and to bring in againe the former government, wherein they found so great connivance in all sorts of vices whatsoever: And now what more seasonable councell can there bee to all sorts of men, then to try and examine all that they heare, to entertaine nothing for the opinion we have of the man, for the judgement is never so likely to be deluded as when the person is too highly esteemed, to see likewise in how many respects the Clergyman is bound to make the Puritan odious to the Protestant, and how greatly disadvantagious that is to the worke, all honest men are bound in conscience to further, and likewise to conclude those Clergy men disaffected that shall hereafter endeavour it, and to let both them and others in authority know it, to be firme in their affections to the Puritan, past all their subtilties to disunite them, that so all honest men being heartily united, the greater may be their force, and the kingdomes enemies the speedier subdued.
The Ministers under pretence of railing against, [the Puritan, Sectary, Brownist, and Anabaptists] doe scandalize and defame all the honest men of the Kingdome, yea even of the Parliament themselves: so that if we be not the more cautious we may be so farre deluded, as to disesteeme even their actions, not for that to any reasonable discreet man they can appeare to be any other then as the actions of the most wise should bee, but because they are approved of by the honest Puritan: It is not safe they thinke to rave against the Parliament point blanke, they would then indeed appeare so palpably malicious and villanously disaffected, that men would have much adoe to tarry their tryall by Law without doing present execution on them: & therefore like men full of subtlety, they wound the Parliament through the Puritans side, and therein take so vast a liberty, that almost provokes an honest hearted man beyond his patience; sometimes they speake in a doubtfull sense, so as that all who are misled by them can understand them, and yet they thinke that if they should be questioned, as out of guilt of conscience they cannot but expect if they shall bee able to give such an interpretation to their words, that thereby they can delude the holdfast of Law and the censure of justice: thus they provide an excuse before they act their villany, and proceed as farre as they imagine that will beare them out; what high time it is that these men should bee crushed, least in time they sow so many tares in the hearts of men, that no wisedome of man shall be able to plucke up, but that they choake even the seeds of good doctrine, and root out of our minds the very principles of reason: Another villanous worke they have in hand, is to take away our courages and dull our resolutions by commending peace unto us, when we are necessitated to take up our Swords; what fooles they imagine us to be, as if we did not know what were the sweets of peace, but then it must be accompanied with liberty, the bondman is at peace; there is peace, there is peace in a dungeon, yet I thinke no man can bee heartily in love with such kinde of peace, no certainly, if our liberty and our religion be much dearer to us then our lives, as I thinke they are to every wise man, then sure they must be dearer to us then our rest, our swords are drawne for them, and so long as they are violated, what peace? what peace? so long as the insolencies and conspiracies of unjust men, and their usurpations are so many? what peace? so long as those that would free us from former oppressions, and would provide for our future liberties, are in no safety but in continuall hazard of their lives? were wee not necessitated to it, it were madnesse to thinke wee could take pleasure in shedding of our owne bloods: what shallow men doe they imagine us to be, that thinke, that through their sweet words, and smooth faces, we doe not see their fowle and mischievous intentions: yes to their griefe of heart and the joy of all good men they behold that, notwithstanding they have in many other things deluded us, in this they have not; the Militia is setled in safe and trusty hands, the Forts and strong holds made good, the Navy secured and commanded by a faithfull and couragious lover of his country, that a strong and a welfurnished Army is a foote to the terrour of wicked men and we hope to the suppression; they are quite frustrate of their ends, all their cunning discourses and subtle motions for peace, though delivered with never so much pretended piety, and seeming love to our safeties, come short of their purpose, they have not thereby lulled us asleepe, and made us too secure, no, we have the courages of men, of valiant provoked men upon us, provokt by an insight into all our injuries, which are now fresh in our memories, provoked by discovery of their delusions, and animated by the amiable sight of liberty which we may now if we will our selves obtaine, of which for many yeares we have beene deprived: and therefore it is not good nor honest that they continue their invitations to peace, so long as the Parliament see it needefull to provide for warre. This it is when they will be overwise and passe the bounds of their office, nor are they more mistaken in this, then in other matters, especially when they plead the Kings cause, their engagements and flatteries here make them starke blind, and let them not see how under stickling for the Kings prerogative they comprehend under that such things, the obtayning whereof if duly considered would make his Maiesties office the most hazardous, and fraught with least content of any one in the Kingdome. A negative voyce they much stand for, a power of calling and likewise of dissolving Parliaments; these things because they carry power with them, and seeme to adde much greatnesse and high prerogative to the King, they stickling for them, and see not that if the King should have them, he would be thereby ever liable to the blame, and censures of the people; for if any thing should be consulted of by the Parliament, and by them concluded to be safe and necessary for the Kingdome, and that the King by that power they claime for him, should crosse it if the people should in the time to come by necessitie for the want of what the Parliament would have provided for them, and the King would not, whom have they then to blame but the King; and he likewise must of necessitie lie under their hard opinions, should the neglect of calling Parliaments bring oppressions upon the people: or the too soone dissolving them without consent of the House before their businesse were fully dispatcht. Both which in their booke of Canons and constitutions ecclesiasticall, where without once mentioning the Parliament, they take liberty to make the Kings Prerogatives what they please, there I say have they peremptorily concluded the power of calling and dissolving all assemblies to bee the Kings undoubted right, and would likewise have possest the people so by the quarterly reading of those decrees of theirs in Churches by their owne order: It is true indeed these commons are most justly damned by the Parliament, but by the remembrance hereof we may palpably observe, what a power they then usurpt to themselves, and how notoriously they abused that power to the prejudice of the King, his perpetuall hazard and disquiet: The King past all question saw all this when he so willingly assented to those two acts for the constant calling of Parliament, and not dissolution of this, both which the Clergy had no other meanes to disanull and make of no effect, then by infusing into his Maiesties eares, and insinuating to the people, that the King hath a negative voyce by which all that the Parliament shall doe comes to nothing, unlesse it pleases the King to assent, which is not like to be but when those that are so powerfull (his evill counsellors) over him shall give way to; by which meanes alone those evill men have a power of crossing and making voyd all the debates and conclusions of the Parliament, and though this bee in effect to make the safety and freedome of the people to depend upon one mans will & understanding, an absurdity in government; a man would think these men could not have the impudence to plead for, much lesse that the people should be so unadvised as to admit it to enter their thoughts as a thing just and reasonable, yet indeed so impudent are those as to plead for it, and so ignorant are the people, as to admit it, which is the ground and occasion of all the evils and mischiefes which at this day threaten both his Maiesty and the whole people. So that wee see the King hath little to thank them for their too hasty forwardnesse in clayming what is so unsafe for him, and so likely to divide the affections of the people from him: But what care they, the King getting power, they get advancement, credit, honour, and what not? so little respect they what is safe for him or prejudiciall to the people, so their owne ends bee served; there comes no harme from good consideration, the advice then cannot be amisse, to wish every one to consider what they heare, to examine all not timorously, nor prejudicially, but impartially by that uncorrupt rules of reason, and to give no credit to what is spoken for the credit or estimation of the speaker, but because it is the truth, and nothing but the truth.
T.20 (8.9.) Richard Ward, The Anatomy of Warre (26 November, 1642).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date


Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.20 [1642.11.26] (8.9) Richard Ward, The Anatomy of Warre (26 November, 1642).
Full titleRichard Ward, The Anatomy of Warre, Or, Warre with the wofull, fruits, and effects thereof, laid out to the life: VVherein from Scripture, and experience, these things are clearely handled; to wit,
1. What Warre is.
2. The grounds, and causes of Warre.
3. The things requisite in War.
4. The nature, and miseries of War, both Civill, and Forraigne.
5. What things are justly taxed in War.
6. When War is lawfull.
7. Whether it be lawfull for Christians to make War.
8. Whether Subjects may take up armes against their Soveraignes.
9. The remedies against War.
10. The Meanes to be freed from War.
11. The Remedies, and Meanes both Military, and Morall for the obtaining of Uictory in War.
By R. W. Minister of the Word at Stansteed Mount Fitchet in Essex.
Hoc & Ratio doctis, & Necessitas Barbaris, & Mos gentibus, & seris Natura ipsa praescripsit, ut omnem semper vim quacunque ope possent, à corpore, à capite, à vita sua propulsarent.
Cicero pro Milone.
LONDON, Printed for Iohn. Dalham, and Rich, Lownds.
Estimated date of publication26 November, 1642.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 199; Thomason E. 128 (15.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
AS Children through ignorance of the nature, and perill of Fire often times fall thereinto, and are burnt: so Men not acquainted with the nature, and danger of Warre, too often desire it,a and too soone rush into it, to their own ruine. And therefore that we may see clearly, as in glasse, the true nature of this heavy plague of Warre, which now threatens our desolation, and the downfall of our Church and state, I have once againe stept upon the Stage, and for the good of my Country, exposed my selfe to the sight, and censure of all eyes and tongues. Omitting wholly what I have handled concerning Warre, both in my Pious &illegible; &illegible; Parliament time; and in The Principall duty of Parliament men; and in The Vindication of the Parliament, and their proceedings; I will here for the information of the judgment, the clearing of the understanding, and the satisfaction of the conscience of all those, who will peruse this Treatise, lay down many things, concerning both Warre in generall, and Civill Warre in particular; although for brevities sake I shall omitt many things concerning both, which might be said, and treat but briefly of those things which I do handle.
What Warre is.Warre in generall, is a lawfull defence, whereby the ordinary, and lawfull Magistrate, for just causes taking up Armes, doth publickely repell force with force, revengeth publicke, and generall injuries, or recovers generall, or generally sustained losses. In this Definition these things are observable. viz.
I. That Warre is not to be undertaken, but for just causes.
II. That it belongs onely unto the Magistrate to make Warre, and not to private persons
III. That it is not to be moved, but repelled: not kindled, but quenched: that is, rather for defence then offence: for the punishing of injuries, than the doing of wrong. All which showes evidently the lawfulnesse of the Parliaments Warres, their Cause being Religion, and the Republiques good; Themselves the greatest Magistrates, and of greatest power; and this designe of theirs declined as long as possibly they could, with the safety of the State.
The Causes of Warre.Q. 1. It may here be demanded, What the grounds, & causes of Warre are?
A. 1. First, in generall, the great Alexander being once demanded, why he endeavoured by Warre, to be Lord of the whole world, made answer; All the Warres that are raised in this world, are for one of these there Causes; viz. either to have many Gods, many Lawes, or many Kings: therefore I desire by Warr to possesse the world, and to command it, that all the inhabitants thereof may honour but one God, serve but one King, and observe but one Law.(b)
A. 2. Secondly, and more particularly, Warrs come sometimes from a good ground, or cause, sometimes from a bad bottome, or foundation.
First, sometimes War comes from good grounds, it being onely ordained to make men live in peace; whence Augustine(c) saith, That even amongst, yea by the true Worshipers of God, Warrs are often raised, and undertaken, not out of coveteousnesse, or cruelty, but out of a true, and sincere desire of setling peace. Yea hence the Emblematists devised this Hieroglyphicke to expresse this truth, viz,(d) a Helmet which had been used in War, being in time of peace neglected, and laid by, a swarme of Bees (emblemes of sweet peace) come and hire, build, and breed therein: the Motto or word was, ex bello pax. Peace is the off-spring of War, or War the Parent of Peace: much like unto the souldiers sword, which in Martiall was turned in the time of peace unto a Reapers siele.
Pax me certa ducis placidos curvavit in &illegible;:
Agricolæ nunc sum, militis ante fui.
Secondly, sometimes Warr comes from a bad bottome, or foundation, yea for the most part springs from one, or other of these evill rootes; to wit, either,
I. From some unbridled pleasures, and immoderate, and inordinate lusts.(e) Or
II. From diversity of Religion. For,
I. Sometimes Satan the father, and Prince of Heresy, stirs up Ware against the woman. And,
II. Antichrist, alwayes having an intestine hatred, and bitternesse of spirit, and mind against Christ, and his truth, instigates, and sets on work still some instruments or other, for the opposing, distracting, and dividing of those places, and persons who professe the Gospel. Or
III. From some coveteous desires, and affections. The fountaine, and originall of all Warrs, and seditions (saith Plutarch.:f:) are the corrupt coveteous desires of man, whereby, by hooke, and crook, right or wrong; he pursues after vehemently whatsoever he conceives, to be for his profit, and advantage. Whence Seneca(g) faith:
Si duo de nostris toll as pronomina rebus.
Praliacessarent, pax sine lite soret. That is,
Take from the world these Pronounes, Mine, and Thine,
The Warrs will cease, and peace through the world will seine.
IV. From ambition, or, a desire to rule:(h) It is observed by Entropius, and others, that the Romanes were 400, yeares in conquering of Jtaly, and that for the most part; they were ever in their Warrs Assailants, and but seldome times Defendants: and why so? but onely from their ambition to rule others, and to bring all into their subjection. Yea what but ambition, and a desire of supreame Soveraigery was the cause of all Alexanders, and the great Turkes Warrs?
V. Warrs alwayes, at least on one part, or in regard of one side comes from some sinne or other: according to that of Plutarch.(i) There is no Warr whereof some sinne, or vice is not the cause; viz, either pleasure, coveteousnesse, ambition, desire to rule, or the like.
VI. As Warrs come from some sinne or other of those who raise them, so they come from or for the sinnes of those against whom they are raised: for the sword is sent by God unto a people for their sinnes, and is therefore the punishment of sin. Yea sin is Causa sine qua non, such a cause of all Warrs, that no Nation should be annoied with any, if it were not for their sins.(k)
Qu. 2. Having thus cursorily run over the grounds or causes of Warr, in the next place we will consider Requisita, what, or how many things are requisite in Warr?
A. 1. I may answer hereunto, either as a Souldier, or as a Scholler.The things required in Ware.
First, if I should answer this as a Souldier, or as a Scholler in Mars his Schoole, then I might say, as Brasidæs was wont to say,(k) That these three things are requisite, and necessary in Ware: to wit,
I. To be willing to fight: for if a man hunt with unwilling hounds, he will scarrely ever catch the hare, and if a man fight against his will, he will hardly endeavour as he ought to overcome him, or them, with, or against whom he fights. And,
II. To feare disgrace, and shame: for if he be shamelesse, and fearelesse of disgrace, he will quickly flee, and forsake his colours. And,
III. To be obedient to Commanders; for if the souldier do not obey his Captaine, and Commanders, he will quickly be disranked; he may quickly be slaine, or taken by the enemy: and cannot performe any good service for him, under whom he fights.
A. 2. Secondly, if I should answer this as a Divine, or as a Scholler in Christs Schoole, then I must say, that these three things are required in every lawfull Ware, viz.
I. A lawfull Authority commanding it; for Warr must not be attempted without the Authority of the Magistrate.
II. A just, and lawfull end, or cause, occasioning, and moving it. Now what the lawfull Causes of Warre are and when Warre is lawfully undertaken followes by and by.
III. A good affection in following it, or a due consideration of the manner of the enterprising, and prosecuting of it: for although the cause of Warre be just, yet it must not be rashly set upon, but all other meanes must first be tried.(l)
The nature and noiseries of Warre.Qu. 3. It may now be enquired, What the Nature of Warre is?
A. 1. First, Warre is sometimes the whet-stone of fortitude, and the encourager, and stirrer up of youth unto Martiall discipline. When the King of the Lacedamonians did threaten, that he would utterly destroy and raze a certaine Citie, which had often annoyed the Lacedamonians, & found them work, the Ephori would not permit it, saying(m) Thou shalt not destroy, nor abolish the whet-stone of youth: calling thus that Citie which so often troubled them, the whet-stone of youth: because their young men thereby were whetted, and their affections set on edge to be skilfull in the art of Warre, seeing there were those so neare them, who would try both their skill, and strength upon every occasion, and advantage.
A. 2. Secondly, most commonly Warre is evill; whence the Scripture sometimes calls it, a grievous evill. Isa. 21. 15. sometimes an oppressing evill. Jerem. 46. 16. sometimes a bitter evill. 2. Sam. 2. 26. sometimes a devouring evill. 2. Sam. 2. 26. Ier. 50. 22. sometimes an evill which pierceth unto the heart, and soule. Ierem. 4. 10.
A. 3. Thirdly, Warre is of that nature that few are enriched thereby, as appeares thus; If any grow rich by Warre, then it is those who gather the spoiles thereof; but seldome these; therefore few or none. We say, Malè parta, malè dilahuntur; goods ill got wast like snow before the sun: as money wonne at playe, or got by theft. Yea lawfull prey, for pillage is seldome long enjoyed, according to our English Proverbe, Gightly come, Gightly go; or, to the Greek Adage &illegible; πολεμίας, I got this booty in the warrs from an enemie, and therefore I may spend it the more freely.
A. 4. Fourthly, Warre is the cause of all innovations, alterations, and mutations in a State, they being still brought in by the sword, or an overawing power. Whence Lucien saith, πήλεμ&illegible; &illegible;π&illegible;ν τ
ν π&illegible;&illegible;ί
, Warre is the father of all things, or the Author of all changes in States, and Kingdomes, from which all things seeme to proceed. Historians observe, that there is a vicissitude, and intercourse of all things, and that once in a 100 or at least in 400. yeares there is some great change, and alteration in all governments, and States, either in Religion, or manner of government, or Governours, which change whatsoever it is, seldome comes but by Warre. As for example, if ours or any Protestant Prince should desire to introduce, or set up Popery, it would very hardly be don but by the sword, and a strong power; Warre producing all innovations, and mutations in States.
A. 5. Fiftly, Warre is a miserable plague; whence this word Warre in the Hebrew tongue, hath its name from cutting, biting, and devouring, because warrs devoure, and consume many. Hence the sword is said to have a mouth, that is, an edge.(m) and to eat(n) that is, to kill. Warre is one of Gods 4. fierce, and devouring plagues:(o) yea one of his 3. forest judgments(p) and seemes to be the greatest of all the 3. or 4.(q)
Qu. 4. Some may here say, If Warre &illegible; of this nature, then what may we thinke thereof?
A. 1. First, we may safely thinke, that some Warre is lawfull; for (as Augustine saith,)r If Christianity should blame, or taxe all warrs, then when the souldiers asked Christ what they should do for the salvation of their soules, he would undoubtedly have bidden them to cast away their weapons, and to give over Warre, which he doth not but onely forbids them to wrong any, and bids them he content with their wages: which showes plainely, that some Warrs are lawfull, and therefore not all to be condemned.
A. 2. Secondly, we may thinke that the event of Warr is most uncertaine; and therefore they are much mistaken who expect from the Warrs nothing but good news, and prosperous successe in all designes, and enterprizes,(s) for he who puts on his armour must not bragge, as &illegible; that puts it off. Philip of Macedon warring upon the Grecians, Diogenes came into histent, and being conducted to the Emperour, and asked if he were a South-sayer, or Fortune-teller? answered(t) yes I am a true Fore-teller, and Fortune-teller of thy folly, and vanity, who (when none compells thee) comes to hazard thy life, and Kingdome, and to cast the dice of warr, whether thou shalt live or not, and whether thou shalt have a Kingdome at command, or to possesse or not. When 2. Armies are in the fields, we see both of them to have warlike weapons, and both to have humane bodies(u); and not the one of them to be armed, and the other naked, and the one mortall, but the other immortall; and therefore successe, event, and expectation, never deceive us, or frustrats our hope so much, in any thing as in Warr.
A. 3. Thirdly, we may thinke of Warr, that it is a thing not to be desired; and that none delights in the sound of the warlike Drums, or in the the Alarmes of Warr; but onely they who never tasted the bitternesse thereof(w) for he who hath once felt the smart of it, will tremble as oft as he thinks of its approach, or summons therunto. And therfore we must use all our best skill, and cunning alwayes to avoide warr as much as possibly we can,(x) it being a thing of that nature, that no wise man will desire it, nor willingly (when he can, and may avoide it) cast himselfe into Mars his armes, or expose himselfe to the mercy of his enemies sword, and his body, and life to perill, seeing it is not in our power to overcome or conquer, the issue of all warr being doubtfull, and hazardous.(y)
A.4. Fourthly, we may well thinke, that Warr is not so easily ended as begun; and that all should take notice of this who undertake Ware, that it is easily begun, but hardly ended, easy to enter into, but hard to get out of, (like a curious drawn Garden maze) the beginning and ending not being in the same mans power:(z) for every coward, or fresh water souldier may begin Ware, but it is laid aside, when the Conquerour will.(a)
A.5. Fiftly, we may thinke, that Warr is such a thing, that to be free from it, is a great blessing, and happinesse, and so pronounced to be by God. Isa. 2. 4. Mich. 4. 3. And therefore is never to be attempted, but upon immergent necessity.
A.6. Sixthly, we may thinke this of Ware to wit, That if peace may be procured, Warr is not to be Waged; as Marcian the Emperour was wont to say(b) Kings must not take up Armes against their subjects or any, so long as they may live quietly, and in peace.
A.7. Seventhly, we may thinke of Warr, that it ought not to be undertaken rashly, or unadvisedly, but with most mature deliberation; and that before we begin Ware, we should well consider what may happen in Ware(c) and not onely thinke with our selves, what power, and strength we have: but what the power of chance, or common sate of Ware is, or may be.(d)
A.8. Eightly, we may safely thinke of Ware, that it is evill, or a great judgment, or an evill, alwayes in some regard. The Æolians intending to ayd the Argives in their Warrs, Archidamus writ a letter unto them, wherein were onely these words, Quietnesse is good; and therefore if that be (as indeed it is) most true, then by the rule of contrarics it will follow, that War is evill. Yea Warr simply considered, and in it selfe, may be reckoned in the number of evills; that is, either.
I. Of evill of sinne, for it cannot be just on both sides. Or
II. Of evill of punishment; for it was ever held a scourge of God; and is onely therefore esteemed good, because we are bad.
Ninthly, we may think from the word of God that the war wherby whole Kingdomes are infested, wastest, and destroyed, comes not by chance, but by the purpose, permission, and providence of God, for the punishment of mens sinnes(a). And thus by these particulars we may ghesse at the nature of war, and see a little what we may think thereof: We will now briefly lay downe.
Quest. 5. What things are justly taxed in warre?
Ans. 1. An implacable desire of revenge, or to mischeeve those with, or against whom we fight: For although we may punish offences, yet we must not revenge our selves; and I conceive that in war we should bee more ready and inclinable to spare when wee can take, and with safety keep alive, than to kill; especially when the warre is undertaken for the punishment of Delinquents, because then if we keep them alive, they may fall by the sword of justice in the Magistrates hand, as well as by us in battell; and therefore they who have no mercy upon any in war are justly taxed.
2. Cruelty in revenging, and punishing in warre is justly taxed, for although a man may kill his enemy in battell, yet he should not delight in using cruelty towards him, by devising new or strange: orments to make him die.
3. Covetousnesse of prey and pillage is taxed in warre; for althoug it is not a sin to fight in war, yet to fight or war only for prey or pillage, is a crime(b).
4. Ambitious desires to rule, or possesse the Thrones and Crownes of others, are justly taxed in war. A Philosopher presenting Antigonus with a book, de justititia, concerning just and upright dealing between man and man, be said(c), Thou art a foole in graine oh Philosopher, who when thou seest me oppressing with war strange Cities, telst me of justice and upright dealing: Implying thus much, That they who for the enriching of themselves, or for the enlarging of their Territories, or for the glory of their Name, seek other mens Cities and Crownes, cannot observe the Lawes of righteousnesse. And therfore this ambitious desire is in war justly worthy of blame.
Quest. 6. I will now lance this plague soare of War, and touch it to the quick, in and by this quere: What the miseries of war are?
The miseries and miserable fruits and effects of war are many and great; as for example.
Answ. 1. In war the most wicked are held the most warlike, yea, except a man be exorbitantly wretched, he is scarce esteemed a resolute and right bred souldier; for as a plough-man except he be crooked and bending to his labour, doth never make cleare work, nor furrow his land handsomely, as the Jewes were wont to say; so except a souldier can sweare, swagger, ravish Maids, deflower Matrons, and play the villaine in graine, he is scarcely counted a man at armes in these corrupt times.
2. War continued, or long wars make men inhumane, for consuetudo peccandi tollit sen sum peccati, that is,
At first sinne seemes to us loathing, but often sinning makes sinne seeme nothing; reade and compare together, 2 King 8. 12. 13. with 10. 32. 33. where before Hazael ever truly entred into the wars, he thought he could never be so cruell, as to dash the childrens braines against the stones, as the Prophet foretold; but afterwards when he was inured with warre, he did it. And thus the continuall warres which the Siciliant had, made them like savage beasts, as Plutarch saith.
3. Warre brings populous Cities to utter destruction, and desolation(a); as we see by Fridericus Oenobarbus, who when he had overthrown Millain, sowed salt there, and harrowed it, to shew that that City was brought to utter destruction.
4. War brings misery, and desperate distractions upon, and unto that Kingdome were it is: For, as the Sea (though vast and great) is tossed and troubled when the winds strive and rage; so when Kings contend, and make war one upon another, their whole Kingdoms are disquited, perplext and vext(b).
5. War wasts that in an instant, which was long a finishing, and ruines in a trice what was long are edifying; for as Herestratus, an obscure and base man, could easily burn the Temple of Diana of the Ephesiant, which was 220 yeeres a building of all Asia, at the cost of many Kings, and beautified with the cunning labours of many excellent workmen; so it is most easie in war, by fire and sword quickly to subvert famous and admired Cities, as we see by Niniueh, Jerusalem and others, and shall see (we hope) by Rome. Wofull experience in poore Ireland shewes that warre wasts and consumes all wheresoever it comes, whether Townes, Cities, Villages, Corne-fields, Vine-yards, Forts, Orchards, and whatsoever is necessary for the sustentation of man.
6. Warre spares none, neither man, woman, nor child, neither young nor old: Virgins and Wives in warre are ravished and vitiated: Infants are trampled without pity or mercy under the horse feet, or tossed upon speares points: Women with child are often cut up and diffected.
7. War exposeth all things to prey, plundering and pillage. And
8. Caffeth, or carrieth those who are left unslaine into exile, captity, banishment, and bondage.
And thus I have briefly shewed the nature and misery of War in generall: I will now proceed to the consideration of Civill-war, wherein first we will take a view of the nature, then of the misery thereof.
Quest. 7. What is the nature of Civill war?
Answ. 1. It is a misery of miseries, for when wars arise in a Commonwealth, great calamities do invade that place, both publikely and privatly(c): war being like a swelling and overflowing streame and tide, which scatters, wasts, overturnes and beates down all things before it; much more Civill wars, wherein one part of the Land wars upon, or against another, as it is now in Ireland, and begun in England(d). In Civill wars nothing but misery can be expected, for if the worst part prevaile, their mercies are cruell, and if the better side get the better, yet it cannot be without much losse and blood-shed of the Inhabitants of the Land(e): And therefore Civill (or uncivill) wars is a misery of miseries.
Quest. 8. But may some say, What are the miseries of Civill war?
Many and great, as namely.
Answ. 1. Civill war is not easily appeased, nor quickly quieted, but once begun continues long; For as the wings of birds though clipt, doe speedily grow out againe, so the fire of Civill war once kindled, is not easily quenched, but although it be raked up for some time in the enibers of seeming reconciliation, yet upon every occasion it breaksforth againe.
2. Civill war is the wasting of the subject, and brings the Inhabitants of the land into a consumption: For as Dragons sucking the blood of Elephants, kill them, and they in like manner being drunk with their blood are squeesed in peeces by the fall of the Elephant, and so die; so oftentimes, yea for the most part in Civill war, both parts doe destroy and are destroyed, and both sides doe endammage and are endammaged(f).
3. Civill war exhausts the exchequer, or brings the Treasure or riches of the Land into an Hectique Fever, being like a vessell capt at both ends, which quickly runs out. This we see to our griefe both in Ireland and at home.
4. Civill war is the overthrow of all Estates and Monarchies, as appeares by the Roman Empire, and the &illegible; Monarchy of Alexander the Great.
5. Civill wars beget corruption of manners, and makes wicked men and deceivers grow daily, by much, worse and worse. And
6. It begetteth a change of Lawes, for as ex malis moribus bonæ leges, good Lawes come from evill customes and corrupt conversation, if the good side or party prevaile, but the enslaving and envassalling of the subject by a Law, if the worse win the Field.
7. Civil war exposes or layes a Land open unto the rage and fury of others, or invites forraigne Forces, and power to endeavour the conquering and subduing of them: For as the Eagle and Crane doe so vehemently contend and strive, that oftentimes clasping together in the aire they fall down unto the earth and are taken up alive of Shepherds; so now and then it commeth to passe, that whilst Princes perversly exercise mortall and deadly wars against their subjects, another invader when he finds him sufficiently weakned, puts in for a hand or lot, and carries all away; The Emblematists have observed this, and discribed it by a Lyon and wild Bore, who fight so long for victory or mastery, that at length they both become a prey unto the Vulture, who awaits them untill they have so weakned one another that they are unable to defend themselves; the word is, Ex damno alterius, alterius utilitas, The losse of the Inhabitants in Civill and uncivill wars is the gaine of forragn Invaders.
8. Civill war beget want of reverence towards God, for the madnesse and outrage thereof is such and so great, that it profanes and polutes every holy thing and place(g); neither times, places, nor persons, that is, neither the Lords day, nor his House, nor his Deputies the Magistrates, nor his Messengers the Ministers, being regarded by rude uncivill souldiers in Civill wars.
9. Civill war makes that King who undertakes unjust wars against his subjects to repent him of his victory, when he truly sees what hee hath done; and he overcomes in Civill wars wofully who repents him of his victory: and had therefore much better pardon his subjects if they doe offend him, then repent after Conquest the slaughter and destruction of them(h).
10. Civill war maketh many poore, according to that of Antisthenes, to whom one saying, That in wars the poore perish, answered(i); Nay, in war the poore are multiplied, many being impoverished thereby, as we finde it true both in this Land and in Ireland.
11. Civill war brings good and bad into misery, or the sword of civill warre wounds, yea murders both the innocent and guilty: for when the fire or flame thereof breaks forth in a Land, both guilty and guiltlesse, both wicked and righteous, feele equally the smart, and misery thereof;(j) neither love nor hatred being knowne by any externall thing.(k) And thus by these particulars we may easily ghesse at the Nature and Misery of civill warres.
Quest. 9. It may in the next place be demanded, when warre is lawfull? or, seeing that sometimes it is lawfull to fight, and sometimes not, how may we know when, with the peace of a good conscience, we may wage warre, or aid and assist these who fight?
Answ. 1. War is lawfull when it is for Religion, and the Republicks good. When Pope Eugenius offred to bestow some Cities upon Alphonsus, because he had recovered Piconum, and subjected it to the Sea of Rome, he answered, That he neither fought for profit nor prey, but only for Religion and the Churches cause.(l) And
2. When it is to procure the continuance and setling of peace and quietnesse. Men prepare war, when they desire peace, because (as we say in a proverb) weapons bode peace,(m) yea wars are undertaken that men may live in peace without injury and oppression.(n) And as men sustaine and endure hard labour upon hope of rest and case, so wise men make warre in hope, and for the effecting of tranquility and peace.(o) Indeed men doe not desire peace, that war may follow, but make war that peace may be obtained: Let those therefore who wage war with or against any, be peace-makers in their warring; that is, by labouring to overcome those against whom they fight and contend, that so they may bring them to embrace the sweet and profitable conditions of peace(p). In war, we say, the end must be good, which end in generall is Gods glory, in speciall the conservation of justice, and confirmation of peace: Pugna pacis mater, war is the mother of peace.
3. War is lawfull when it is for the defence of a mans owne right, or for the safety, safeguard, and preservation of our Cities, and habitations(q): For reason teacheth the learned, necessity the rude, custome the Gentiles, and nature the wilde beasts, to repay war with war, and force by force, when they are robbed and deprived of their right by injustice and oppression(r).
4. War is lawfull when it is to repulse our enimies: Moses(s) said to Ioshua, chuse us out men, and goe fight: upon which words Piscator observes, that it is lawfull for the people of God to defend themselves with weapons against their enimies; for Moses doth here nothing of himselfe, but by Gods direction. And
5. When it is deliberately begun, and speedily ended: undertaken with good advice, and given over with all willingnesse, when it may with safety, conveniency, and the good of Church and State. And
6. When it is in defence of the innocent: for that war whereby either our Countrey is defended from invaders, or the weak and innocent from oppression, or our friends from theeves and wicked persons, is a most just war(a). Or when war is attempted and enterprized to deliver the oppressed, and to bridle the insolency and cruelty of the wicked(b).
7. War is lawfull when it is for the punishment of publick injuries and wrongs; for just wars were wont to be thus defined, contentions whereby we endeavour to punish publick injuries and wrongs(c); and therefore that war was not only of old held just, but also necessary, which defended force by force.(d) And
8. When it is for Gods people, it is lawfull, 2 Sam. 10. 12. And
9. When the cause is iust, and weighty, not light and frivolous; &illegible; &illegible;ε σ
ε&illegible;ς
&illegible;&illegible;. vel de lana caprina, as about the shadow of an Asse, or, the fleece of a Goat, as the Proverbs are: that is, for trifles, and things of no value: but as Suetonius said to, and of Augustus, Quod nulli genti sine justis & necessariis causis bellum intulit, that he never made war with any Nation without just and necessary causes.(e) And
10. When it is undertaken by lawfull authority, to wit, of the Magistrate as was shewed before. And
11. When it is only against those who injure us, or raise uniust war against us, or our Countrey. Note here, that our Countrey, or Kingdom may be injured by an enimy two manner of wayes, to wit:
First, When he invades, by unjust forces, our temporall possessions and good things, labouring by a strong hand to deprive us of them, whether it be our liberties, lawes, lives, riches, inheritances, wives, children, &c. Now against such as these we have just cause to defend our selves.(f) And
Secondly, When he labours to rob and spoile us of our spirituall and eternall treasure and riches, viz. the true worship of God, the true, pure, and holy Religion; and consequently the salvation of our soules.(g)
12. War is lawfull when it is carried in a good manner: for although God himselfe hath taught Stratagems in war, and consequently allowes them; yet lawfull Covenants and Faith given must bee kept inviolable.
13. When Malefactors, Malignants, and Delinquents are maintained, and protected, as Iudg. 20.
14. When Rebellion is moved, or raised in a Land, and defensive armes are prepared for the preservation of the State, as David waged war against Sheba, 2 Sam. 20.
15. When it is against Apostates, and back-sliders in Religion, Deut. 13. 12. &c. Lyran in Numb. 31.
16. When it is better than peace; for(h) an honest war is to be preferred before a base and shamefull peace.
17. When it is enterprized by the speciall commandment of God, as Saul was sent against Amaleck.
18. When it is for the rescuing and recovering of such things as are unlawfully taken away, 1 Sam. 30.
19. When it is incruentum bellum, an unbloody warre; or as Laertius saith, δα
ς πόλεμος, a warre without weeping; that is, when the victory is got without blood-shed, and murder.
20. When it is for the preservation of liberty, and prevention of slavery and bondage. When time and necessity requires (saith Tully) we must fight, because death is to be preferred before base slavery and servitude, and a man had better die in the wars, than live in disgrace and bondage.(i)
Lastly, War is lawfull, when there is no other meanes left; for that warre is lawfull which is necessary, and those armes are just and warrantable, which are not taken up untill there is no hope at all of peace or safety, but by warre.(k) And hence the Jewes in all their voluntary wars, first offered peace unto their enimies, and then denounced warre; but did not execute it untill first they had made this threesold Proclamation, viz.(l)
- 1. He that will have peace, let him have peace.
- 2. He that will flee, let him flee.
- 3. He that will make war, let him make war.
This we must alwayes remember in warre, that though both the cause be just, and the authority sufficient; yet must it not be rashly or hastily undertaken,(m) for no man trieth extremities at the first. Warre is one of the sharpest remedies to cure the maladies of a Common-wealth, and the event thereof is both doubtfull and dangerous; and therefore it should bee the last refuge, and only then used when necessity enforceth.
Quest. 10. Although it be not much doubted or questioned, whether the Jews or Gentiles of old did lawfully, as occasion served them, make warre, yet it is ordinarily enquired, whether it be lawfull for Christians, now under the Gospel, to make war or not?
Answ. It is, as is proved by these grounds, viz.
1. God, by Moses prescribes a forme of making warre, Deut. 20. 1. and therefore certainly he did allow his people sometimes, and upon some occasions to make warre.(n)
2. We read that many of Gods faithfull servants have made warre, as Abraham Gen. 14. 28. Moses, Exod. 17. 8. Ioshua, Exod. 17. 9. Iosh. 1. 14. and 12. 7. the Judges, 1. 3. 4. 5. 7. 8. 11. chapters, the Kings, David, Asa, Iosaphat, Hezekiah.
3. Iohn Baptist forbids not souldiers to fight, neither commands them to give over warre, if they would be saved; but to wrong none, and be content with their wages, Luke 3. 14.
4. The Magistrate is said, Rom. 13. 4. not to beare the sword in vaine, but to bee the Minister of God for our good, and a revenger to execute wrath upon him who doth evill. Which plainly shews, that the right of the sword is allowed both against private faults and offenders, and also against publick, who by armes are to be resisted and opposed.
5. Cornelius the Centurion, Acts 10. 1. is commended for his faith, and did not give over warfare (that we read of) when he was baptized: which undoubtedly the Apostles would not have suffered if war had been prohibited unto Christians. And so Math 8. 10. the saith of another Centurion is highly commended.
Rom. 13. 4.6. It is most certain, that a great part of the Magistrates duty is, to protect and defend innocents, orphans, widdowes, and those that are oppressed, which sometimes without Armes cannot be done. And therfore if the case require it, the godly Magistrate may flee unto this last remedy of war. It is the office of the Magistrate, to take vengeance on him that doth evill: Now it may fall out that not one or two, or a few, but a multitude may do evill, and commit some outrage, who cannot be resisted but by force of armes; and then the Magistrate is to use this meanes of the sword for the suppression of evill, and the vengeance of evill doers.
7. That which God perswades unto, and which is done by the inspiration and assistance of his holy Spirit, is lawfull; but God often perswades and exhorts the Saints to make warre, and is said to be present with them by his spirit, and to give victory unto them; and therefore warre is lawfull, Iosh. 1. Iudg. 6. 11. and 13. chapters, 1 Sam. 15. and 30. chapters, Psal. 44.
8. That which the Saints doe by faith is lawfull unto them, but by faith they make warte, Heb. 11. 34. therefore warre is lawfull unto them.
9. The Scripture saith, There is a time to war, and a time to make peace, Ecclesiast. 3. 8. And therefore warre is lawfull.
10. God is stiled, The Lord of Hoasts, a man of war; One who teacheth our hands to warre, and who giveth victory in battell, and therefore warre is lawfull.
Quest. 11. But whether is it lawfull for Subjects to take up armes against their Soveraigne?
Answ. Dr. Sharp (Symphon. Proph. & Apost. pag. 244.) answers hereunto, that there are two sorts of Subjects, to wit.
1. Some who are meerely private, and these ought not of themselves to take up armes against their King.
2. Some who are so private, that the superior power in some sort doth depend upon them, as the Tribunes amongst the Romans; the Ephori amongst the Lacedemonians; and our Parliaments amongst us: And if Princes observed not their Covenants and promises, these might reduce them, and if they sought the overthrow of the State, these might withstand them.
Quest. 12. What are the Remedies against warre, that is, both for the preventing and removall of it?
Answ. 1. The Remedies are either Morall, Martiall, or Theologicall.
First, the Morall meanes are these two, to wit:
1. Humble sutes and supplications for peace, unto them from whom a warre is feared.
2. Expressions of the Loyalty of our actions, and sincerity of our intentions and desires, however they may be wrested or misconstrued.
Secondly, The Military meanes are many, as namely,
1. To follow close a victory: this was Hanibals fault, who could tell better how to winne the field, than how to use his victory: and this Casar blamed in Pompey, that having once the better of him, he did not follow his fortune.
2. To give way to a storme. Pleu andet andax quam fortis, a foolehardy man dare doe more than one truly magnanimous; for the property of a good souldier is not to runne himselfe into such desperate hazards, that there is no probability for him to come off with safety; but couragiously to adventure upon any feazible designe, and to give it over, when it may bee given over, but cannot bee effected or brought to passe. It is better (as all know and will confesse) for souldiers sometimes to retreat, that they may returne againe to their greater advantage, than to keep their stations and die. Whence Antigonus once forced to give way to the violent onset of his enemies, said,(o) That he did not flie, but pursue his profit and advantage, which was placed backwards, or behinde him; intimating, that in such a case it was more commodious for him to goe backwards than forwards, to retire than to advance.
3. Another Military meanes for the removall of warres is Prudence, Magnanimity, and skill in Martiall discipline, in the Captaines, Commanders, and Officers.
4. Another is, for Captaines and Commanders to observe, and mark diligently all conveniences and advantages of time, place, &c. both for pitching their tents, and fighting their battells.
5. Another is, in the souldiers strength, courage, resolution, and obedience to their Commanders.
6. Another is, for Captaines and souldiers in necessity, when they can, to help one another.
7. Another is, for Captaines and Common Souldiers to bee well armed, for and against all assayes, and assaults: But more amply of these by and by in the way unto Victory.
Thirdly, the Theologicall or Religious Remedies or Means for the preventing and removing of Warre, are these which follow, and the like, viz.
1. To warre upon our selves; The Oracle of Apollo answered those of Cyrrha, That if they would live in peace at home, they should make war with their neighbours abroad; but if we desire peace with others, we must wage continuall war with our selves, and our own sins, wickednesse within, being the true cause of war without.
2. To humble our selves before and unto God, by fasting, Joel 2. & 3. Jonah 3.
3. To enter into a covenant and holy league with God, Hose 2. 18.
4. Seriously to repent and to turne truly unto God, Levit. 26. 40 &c. Devt. 30. 1. and 32. 36. and 1 Sam. 7. 3. Jer. 4. 8. and 6. 26.
5. A promise of thankfulnesse or thanksgiving unto the Lord, if he will be pleased to give victory unto us or preserve and deliver us from warre, and the performance of this promise when he hath answered our desires.
6. Prayer unto God, and that both in generall and particular.
First, in generall we must pray that the Lord would be our Captain in the time of War, and take our part and fight for us, there being nothing without him which will or can help us, that is, neither
1. Strong, and well instructed Armies, Psal. 33. 16. Nor
2. Fenced Cities, Amos 5. 9. Nor
3. Great or mighty colleagues or confederates, Psal. 60. 13. and 62. 10. And therefore let us not trust in any of these or the like, but only in the Lord, as these his Saints have done, to wit, Asa(p), Iosaphet(q), David(r), Isa(s) Hezekiah(t).
Secondly, Because the Lord works ordinarily by meanes, therefore we must in speciall and more particularly pray when we are anoid and infested with war.
1. That the Lord would bestow upon our Captaines, Commanders, and Officers, such wisedome, and prudence, yea such fortitude and courage, that they may consult of, manage, and order all things wisely and discreetly, and prosecute, yea execute all things prosperously, magnanimously, and with good successe, Psal. 20. 1. 5.
2. That the Lord would encline the hearts of the souldiers unto obedience, and subjection to their Captaines; and preserve them from all sedition and rising up against their Commanders
3. That the Lord would preserve both Commanders and Common Souldiers from all wickednesse and impiety, especially from those hainous offences which too frequently follow the Camp and accompany wars; as namely, blasphemy, fornication, rapes, drunkennesse, gaming, jarres, contentions, theft, pilsering, &c.
4. That the Lord would strengthen the hands of all in battell, giving them courageous hearts, resolute minds, and firme resolutions, that their battels and endeavours may be crowned with victory.
Now that these our prayers may become effectuall, two things are required, viz.
First, They must proceed from a pure mind, or an heart purged from sinne(u).
Secondly, They must proceed from faith unfained, or from a firme confidence and assurance, that the Lord will heare our prayers in as much as may stand with his glory and our good(x).
And thus much for the Remedies against, or Meanes for removall of this plague of war from us.
Quest. 13. It may now in the last place be demanded, How victory may be obtained in War? Or by what means we may not only be preserved from the power of our enemies in battell, but also bring them by conquest and victory into subjection?
First, The Martiall meanes for the obtaining of victory in war, are either Negative, or Affirmative.
1. Negative, if souldiers desire conquest in fight, Then
1. They must not fall to pillaging too soone, lest their enemies take occasion thereby to fall upon them, and to take them unprovided.
2. They must not pursue their enemies in flight so eagerly, that they mingle themselves with them or run themselves so far in amongst them, that they are not able to bring themselves off againe with safety.
3. They must not at all trust to their multitude; for not alwayes that Army which is the greatest prevailes, but oftentimes the least. Darius against Alexander, Pompey against Cæsar, Hamball against Scipio, Antonius against Augustus, and Mithridates against Sylla, had greater Forces without comparison then their enemies, and yet were overcome.
4. They must not at all trust in their own strength: Thou hast therefore oh man (saith Augustine(a) not overcome in battell, because thou presumedst of thy selfe; for he who before fight, trusts in his own strength, shall be overthrown(b).
Secondly, There are Affirmative martiall meanes for the obtaining of Victory in War; as namely.
1. For Captaines highly to prize their souldiers, Fabius Maximus sent to Rome to the Senate for money, to redeeme his souldiers which Haniball had taken Prisoners, and being denied thereof, commanded his sonne to sell all his lands, and bring money for their ransome; so highly did he value and esteeme the freedome of his men. And thus every Captaine should doe if he would winne the love and affection of his souldiers, without which a Commander should hardly obtaine victory.
2. Courage and resolution in battell: 300 Noble-men of the house of the Fabii, tooke upon them alone to wage battell against the Vientines(c). To shew that a true and magnanimous souldier will not fear to undertake any noble feazible enterprize for the obtaining of Victory in the day of battell.
3. Long preparation for the undertaking thereof: Hee must long prepare for warre who would speedily overcome, because a long preparation of war makes a speedy victory(d).
4. To prosecute the wars with good counsell and advice; for there must be counsell at home when there is warre abroad(e).
5. A diligent observation of all conveniences and inconveniences which may happen, whether of Sun, winde, mists, &c. for the Sun and dust hinders our sight, and the winde being contrary, or in our face, is noxious both to horse, rider, and all kinds of darts, arrows, and shot.(a)
6. The use and assistance of expert and experienced souldiers, who know their termes of art, postures, conveniences, inconveniences, when to advance, when to fall off; and how to use their weapons, or handle their armes &c. One saying on a time to Epaminondas, that the Athenians were all armed with new armes and weapons, answered, What then? shall Antigenidas (who was a most curious Musitiam) weepe, because Tellia (who was a most poore player of instruments) hath got a new Pipe? signifying, that the Athenians were to small purpose armed with new weapons, seeing they knew not how to use them.(b) If an Army consist of raw, yong, and fresh-water souldiers, who seldome or never saw men wounded or slaine; when they come to see such sights, they will tremble and be confounded with feare, and begin to think rather of flying than fighting.(c) Experience shewes, that knowledge and skill in Military and Martiall discipline doth exceedingly embolden a souldier in battell; and that in warlike enterprizes, a few ancient and expert Warriours hath overcome, got the day, put to flight, yea to a fore slaughter, a great multitude of rude ignorant, untaught and untutered souldiers(d).
7. Subtilty, Policy, and secret stratagems: Note here, That Policy in war, is threefold, to wit,
1. For the immediate endangering of the enemy: It is observed That Haniball never sought any battell without laying some ambush for the ensnaring of his enemies: And when just war is taken in hand, it matters not whether a man endeavour to conquer, subdue, and master his Adversaries by open force or secret politike devices: for the Lord commanded Ioshua by deceit, or a secret stratagem, to overcome the Inhabitants of Ai(e). Good Captaine, doe not alwayes Vi & armis, by open force labour the overthrow of their foes, but chiefly endeavour it by secret stratagems, because in open warre there is a common danger, but in warlike devices those who lie in wait are not in such perill, as these are for whom they lie in walt(f). Antigonus being asked, How a man should give the onset upon his enemy? answered, either by force or frand, either openly or by deceit(g).
2. Policy in war is sometimes for the immediate preservation of themselves, and mediate or consequent disadvantage of their foes: P. &illegible; to avoid the Sunne that shined in the face of his Hoast, was so long in ranging his Army, that by the time the battells should joyne, the Sunne was upon his back. The like policy used Marius against the Cymbrians, and Augustus against the Flemings.
3. Policy in warre is sometimes for the encouraging of the souldiers against their enemies: Polemon to make his souldiers fiercer in assailing the Lacedemonians, cast his colours into the midst of his enemies, whereupon they pressed upon them with great violence, esteeming it a great shame to abandon their Ancient, or to have their enemies possesse their Ensigne.
8. Another martiall meanes for the obtaining of Victory, is the Captaines encouraging of his souldiers and convincing them of the lawfulnesse of the war in hand. Themistocles leading out the Army of the Athenians against their enemies, saw two Cocks fighting most fiercely; whereupon, hee turned him to his Souldiers, with these words(h): These neither fight for their Countrey, nor for their Religion, nor for their Possessions, nor for their fathers Sepulchers, nor for honor, nor for their wives & children, nor for their Lawes, or Liberties, but only, Left the one should be overcome of the other, and forced to yeeld unto him: How much more then should we hazzard and adventure our lives when we fight for all these? with which words his souldiers were so encouraged, that they went most courageously and resolutely against their Adversaries.
9. Another meanesis, experienced Commanders and stout Captains; Cæbriat the Athenian was wont to say(i): That an Army of Deere was more terrible if they had but a Lyon to be their Captaine, than an Army of Lyons having an Hart to be their Captaine.
10. Another meanes is, to cope with the enemy, before his strength encrease too much; whence Iulius Cæsar was wont to say,(k) That it was a great madnesse for any to stay untill the Hoast or their enemy was encreased and multiplied; because he who desires to conquer and subdue his foe, may in all probability sooner doe it when his Army is small, than when it is great, when he hath few to aid him, than when he hath many.
11. Another meanes is, to be resolute, and couragious in battell. There is a people in Germany called Catti, whose strength consisteth in their foot-men; of whom it is said,(l) Others goe to skirmish, and the Catti to warre; such was their courage, magnanimity and undaunted resolution in the day of battell: much like to that speech of King Iames, That he had foure and twenty Players, and six Actors. Souldiers must not be like the Frenchmen, of whom it is said,(m) That if they loose the first encounter, they loose also the victory; but rather like the Lacedemonians, who of all people were most valiant, being both in the beginning and end of the battell more than men.
12. Another meanes is, to aime principally at the principall, and to levell at the Leaders, (as Scanderbeg was alwayes observed to doe) because, smite the sheepherd, and the sheep will be scattered. Epaminondas viewing a huge and well harnessed Army, but without a Leader, Generall, or Captain, said,(n) How great and faire a beast is here, but without an head.
13. Another meanes is, to warre only upon just causes. It is observed, That the Emperour Trajane was never overcome, or vanquished in warre, because he never undertook warre without just cause, as Hely the Spartan doth say. The Romans were never so foiled, neither ever received so much dishonour in all their warres in Asia, or Africa, as they received at the siege of Numantia; and this was not for default of battery or assault, or because the City was impregnable, but because their warres against Numantia were unjust, and the Numantines had just cause to defend themselves. Titus Livius observes, that Marcus Marcellus would not be Captaine of that warre, which was not very well justified; and that Quintus Fabius would never undertake that warre in chiefe, which was not very dangerous; and that these two Noble Princes were of high esteeme with the Romans: But in the end much more was the estimation of Marcus Marcellus for being just, than of Quintus Fabius for being valiant. Whence it hath beene said(o) That if the cause of the Warriour be good, the end of the warre cannot be evill; and contrarily the end of a fight is not judged to be good, except a good cause and a right intention did precede the fight.
These and the like, are the Military and Martiall Meanes which are to be used for the obtaining of Victory in Warre.
Object. Against these it may be objected, that victory in warre comes only from God; and therefore all Military meanes are vaine, none being able to preserve us from warre.
Answ. To neglect the meanes wholly, is to tempt Gods Providence, and to trust in the meanes, is to distrust Gods Providence; and therefore we must observe, how meanes profit, and how not, viz.
1. Military meanes will help us, as they are meanes ordained by God, for the removall of the malady of warre, if we use them in the feare of the Lord, and because ordained by God, putting our trust, confidence, and affiance for our protection and preservation wholly in Him, notwithstanding the use of the meanes
2. These meanes will not help us, if God being despised, neglected, and not looked at as all in the use of them; wee being intent only upon them, or at least respect them primarily, hoping that they will profit us without God: for victory in war is neither got by multitude, nor strength, but by the ayd, assistance, and power of God(p). And therfore these military meanes must now be used, and those Theologicall, mentioned in the 12 question, and then trust solely, wholly, and onely to our good and gracious God, who is the God of victory, and maketh wars to cease in the world: and to whom all praise and glory belongs both for the enjoyment of all good, and preservation from all evill, whether of sinne, or punishment.
FINIS.
Endnotes
[a ] Duke bellum inexpertis.
[b ] Guevara samilier. epist pag. 240.
[c ] Qua non crudelitate, aut cupiditute, sed pacis studio geruntur, Aug in libr de Verb. &illegible;
[d ] Andr. &illegible; emblem. Pag. 445.
[e ] Iam. 4, 1.
[f ] &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; & &illegible; &illegible; &c. Plutar consol. &illegible; &illegible;
[g ] &illegible; 4. Piou.
[h ] Genes. 14, 3.
[i ] Nullum &illegible; bellum, cujus virium aliquod to sit causa, &c Plut. de repugn. Stoir.
[k ] Livit. 26, 24, 25: Deut. 28, 36, 49 Iud: 2, 13, & 3, 1, 8, & 4, 1, & 6, 1, & 10, 6, & 13, 1, & 1, King 8, 33, Jsa. 5, 25, Ier. 5, 15.
[k ] &illegible; 52 &illegible; ferm 52.
[l ] Iudg. 10. 13. 2 King. 18. 14.
[m ] Nequaquam abolobis, neque subveries juvenum cotem. Plutar. in Lacon. Brusolth. 3. 6. 15.
[m ] Iob. 1, 15, Hebr. 11, 34.
[n ] 2, Sam. 11, 25.
[o ] Ezech. 14. 21.
[p ] 2, Sam. 24, 13, 14.
[q ] Levit. 26, 16, 17, 25, 33, Deut. 28, 48, &c.
[r ] Si Christiana disciplina omnia bella culpares, &c Aug. &illegible; de centur.
[s ] &illegible; qui in bello &illegible; &illegible; rerum &illegible; expectant, Iul. Cæs. Comm. &illegible; 7.
[t ] &illegible; vanitatisq, tuæ &illegible; &illegible; specutator, &c.
[u ] Virinque serrum, & cerpora humana crunt: nusquam &illegible; quam in &illegible; eventus respondent, Lev. lib. 3. &illegible; Duke &illegible; non expertis, at quigustauit, cotremiscit &illegible; quoties &illegible; illud videt. pindar &illegible; &illegible; &illegible;
[w ] Duke &illegible; non expertis, at quigustauit, cotremiscit &illegible; quoties &illegible; illud videt. pindar &illegible; &illegible; &illegible;
[x ] &illegible; &illegible; prudenter derliuanda, G. eg. in nor
[y ] Sapientis non est velle certare, & periculose velle committere &c. Lactaut. l. 6.
[z ] Scito omne bellum &illegible; sacile, cæterum ægerrimè disincre, &c. Salust, in Ingurth.
[a ] Bellum &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; sicet. deponitur cum victores velint, Tull. in quæst.
[b ] Imperatori ar, ma non essceaplenda, dum pacẽ habere liceret, Zo. naras to. 3. &illegible;
[c ] &illegible; evenire in &illegible; potest, priusquam ingrediare considera, &illegible; &illegible;
[d ] cum tuæe vires, &illegible; imfortunæ, Martemque belli communem propone animo, Liv. lib. 30.
[(a) ] &illegible; 26. 17. &illegible; 31. &c. 2 Sam. 17. 24. 12. 13. Psal. 46. 9, 10.
[(b) ] Militare non est delictuns, sed prepter prædam militare, peccatum est. Ambros.
[(c) ] Despis, qui cum me videas alienas ubes armis vexantem, tamen apud me de justitia dicetis. Erasæ. lib. 4. Apoph. ex &illegible;
[(a) ] terem. 48. 2. Hose. 5. 8. 9.
[(b) ] Quemadmo dem certantibus &illegible; mare concuritut, &illegible; Reg bus sibi adversantibus, populus &illegible; vexacur. Cheysost in Matth.
[(c) ] Cum &illegible; et publice & privarim magnæ urbem calamitates invadunt Plato lib. 1. de l. ge.
[(d) ] &illegible; torrenen infiat omnia sternir, & vastat. Plut. de educat. puer.
[(e) ] Omnia in bellis civilibus misera, &c. Tul. ad Mr. Marc.
[(f) ] Plin. lib. &illegible; Chap. 32.
[(g) ] Bellotum civilium insania omne sanctum & sa rum profanatur. Sen. lib. 1. de benef cap &illegible;.
[(h) ] Male vicit qui pænitet victoriæ. Melius est enim ignoscere quam post victoriam pænitere, Senec. &illegible; 15.
[(i) ] Imò tum plures fiunt &illegible; serm. 18.
[(j) ] Vbibelium civile ingiur, innocentes, & &illegible; juxta cadunt. Tac. &illegible;
[(k) ] Ecles. 9. 1.
[(l) ] Senequaquã quæstus aut prædæ, sed ecclesiæ gratia hanc expeditionem &illegible;. Panorm lib. 3. de reb. gest. Alphon.
[(m) ] qui desiderat pacem, præparat bellum. Vigitius.
[(n) ] suscipienda bella sunt ut in Pace sine injuria vivotur. Tul. 1. offic.
[(o) ] Sapientis pacis causa bellum gerunt ut laborem spe oth sustentant. Salust. ad Cæs.
[(p) ] Non quæriturpax ut bellū exerceatur, sed bellum geritur, ut pax acquiratur. esto ergo belando pacificus, ut cos quos ex pugnas, ad pacis utiliratem vincendo perdu cas. Aug. in l de verb. dom.
[(q) ] 2 Sam 10. 12.
[(r) ] Hoc & ratio doctis, & necessitas barbaris, & mos gentibus &c. Cic. pro Milone.
[(s) ] Exo, d. 17. 9.
[(a) ] Forti &illegible; q’æ per bella tuetar a &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; defend &illegible; infirmos, vela latronibus locios, plena &illegible; est. Ambros de &illegible;
[(b) ] Gen. 14. 14.
[(c) ] Iusta bella &illegible; &illegible; quæ &illegible; injuries. &illegible;
[(d) ] Be lam illu lest non &illegible; iustum, sea &illegible; necessarium, quum &illegible; illata defenditur. Gices. pro Milone.
[(e) ] Sueton. in Aug. Chap. 21.
[(f) ] Iudg. 19. 25. and &illegible; 1. 5. 2 Sam. 10. 12. Nehem. &illegible; 14.
[(g) ] Deut. 13. 14. 2 Sam. 10. 12.
[(h) ] Bellum honestum turpi pace preferendome? Demosthen.
[(i) ] Quum tempus necessitasq; postulat, decertandu est manu & mors servituti turpitudinique anteponenda; nam occidi pulchrum est, si ignominiose servis, Cicer. in Tule, qu.
[(k) ] Bellum est justum quod necessarisi est, & arma sant pia quibas nulla nisi in armis relinquitur spes, Liv. l. 9. dec. 1.
[(l) ] Dedatse qui vult, fugiat qui vult, pugnet qui vult.
[(m) ] Extrema primo nemo tentavit loco.
[(n) ] Num. 10. 9. and 31. 2, 17. Iudg. 1. and 3. chapters.
[(o) ] 5. nonfugere, sed utiltatem retro sitam perlequi.
[(p) ] 2 Cro. &illegible; 11
[(q) ] 2 Cro. 10. 12
[(r) ] Psal. 44. 6. & 108. 13.
[(s) ] Isa. 33. 2.
[(t) ] Isa. 37. 20.
[(u) ] Pro. 1. 16. & 28. 9.
Isa 1. 15. & 59. 2 Mic. 3. 10.
[(x) ] Iam. 1. 6.
[(a) ] Oh homo ideo non vicisti quia de cuopræsumpsisti. Qui præsumit de viribus &illegible; pugnet, prosterniter. Aug. de verb. Apost
[(b) ] Eccles. 9. 11
[(c) ] Livius.
[(d) ] Diu apparandum est bellum ut vineas &illegible; quia lõgabells præpatatio celeré facit victorian Senec. epist. &illegible;.
[(e) ] Parva sunt arma foris, si non est consilium domi. Sen. Epist. 15.
[(a) ] Ordinaturus aciem, tria debet ante prospicere, solem, pulverent, ventum, &c. Veget. l. 13. cap. 14.
[(b) ] Plutarch. in apoph.
[(c) ] quirarò aut nunquam viderens homines vulnerari, vel occidi &illegible; prlmum aspexerint &c.
[(d) ] Vigetius de re militari. lib. 1. cap. 6.
[(e) ] Quum justà bell im suscipitur utram apertè pugnet quis, an ex insibus, nihil ad justitiam interest. Aug. 2d, Bonif.
[(f) ] Boni duces non aperte prælio, in quo est cómune periculum, sed exocculto semper attentant. &c. Viget. l. 3. ca. 9.
[(g) ] Aut &illegible; aut vi, aut apertè aut per insidias. Stob.
[(h) ] Hi neque propagation neq. pro atis & focis, neque pro monumentis avorum, neque pro glorta, neque pro liberis neque pro libertate, periculum subcunt, sed tantum, ne alter ab altero superetur, ciq; cedere cogatur Ælian. lib. 2. cap. 28.
[(i) ] &illegible; esse exercitium &illegible; duce Leone, quam Lenum duce cevo. Erasm. lib. 2. cap. 32. Facet.
[(k) ] Expectare dum hostium copiæ a gentur, summa den. entia est. Iulius Cæl. Comment lib. 4.
[(l) ] Tacitus.
[(m) ] Livius.
[(n) ] Quanta bellus, sed absque capi e. St. b.
[(o) ] Si bona sucrit caula pugnantis, pugnæ exitus &illegible; &illegible; non potest & vice versa &c. Beru. denova militia.
[(p) ] Victoria in bello nec multitudine, neque fortitudine patatur, sed divino auxilio. Xenophon. Stob. serm. 49.
T.21 (8.10.) William Prynne, A Vindication of Psalme 105.15 (6 December, 1642).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date
OLL Thumbs TP Image

Local JPEG TP Image

Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.21 [1642.12.06] (8.10) William Prynne, A Vindication of Psalme 105.15 (6 December, 1642).
Full titleWilliam Prynne, A Vindication of Psalme 105.15. (Touch not mine Anoynted, and doe my Prophets no harme) form some false Glosses lately obtruded on it by Royallists. Proving that this Divine Inhibition was given to Kings, not Subjects; to restraine them from injuring and oppressing Gods servants, and their Subjects; who are Gods Anoynted as well as Kings: And that it is more unlawfull for Kings to plunder and make War upon their Subjects, by way of offence, then for Subjects to take up Armes against Kings in such cases by way of defence. With a briefe exhortation to peace and unity.
2 Samuel 23.3. He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the feare of God.
Ecclesiastes 4. 1, 2. I returned and considered all the Oppressions that are done under the Sunne; and behold the teares of such as were oppressed, and they had no Comforter : and on the side of their oppressors there was power, but they had no Comforter. Wherefore I praised the dead which are already dead, more then the living which are yet alive.
Proverbs 28. 15, 16. As a roaring Lyon, and a ranging Beare, so is a wicked Ruler over the poore people. The Prince that wanteth understanding is also a great oppressour; but he that hateth covetousnesse shall prolong his daies.
Galathians 5. 15. But if ye bite and devoure one another, take heed that ye be not confused one of another.
Printed, 1642.
Estimated date of publication6 December, 1642.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 203; Thomason E. 244. (1.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
THere is nothing more pernicious to the souls of men, or destructive to the republique in distracted times, then Clergy-mens wresting of Scriptures from their genuine sense to ensnare mens consciences, the better to accomplish some sinister designes. How sundry sacred texts have been thus perverted of later yeers, not by the* unlearned and unstable vulgar, but by the greatest Seraphicall Doctors in our Church, is too apparent unto all; and among* others that of the Psalmist, Psal. 105. 15, (which is repeated 1 Chron. 16. 22.) Touch not mine Anoynted, and do my Prophets no harm; hath not had the least violence offered it, both in Presse and Pulpit, to try up the absolute irresistable Prerogative of Kings in all their exorbitant proceedings; and beat down the just liberties of the Subject, without the least defensive opposition; when as this text, in real verity, is rather a direct precept given to Kings themselves, not to oppresse or injure their faithful subjects, then an injunction given to subjects, not to defend themselves against the oppressive destructive wars, and projects of their Princes. In which regard it wil be no unseasonable nor ungratefull worke, to cleare this text from all false Glosses, and restore it to its proper construction.
In former ages when popery domineered, the popish Clergy grounded their pretended exemption from all temporall jurisdiction on this Scripture; suggesting, that they onely, at least principally were Gods Anointed here intended; and therefore ought not be touched nor apprehended by Kings or temporall Iudges for any crimes. But this false Glosse being long since exploded, many Court Divines, not so much to secure as slatter Kings, have applyed it primarily unto Kings, and secundarily to Priests, as meant of them alone, excluding their faithfull Subjects out of its protection and limits; when as the text is meant of none else but they in general and of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, with their families in particular.
1. To put this out of question: you must first observe, that this Psalm from the 5 verse to the end, is meerely historicall. The 7 first verses of it are but a gratulatory preamble (interlaced with some exhortations) to the subsequent historicall narration; as he that reads them advisedly will at first acknowledge: In the 8, 9, 10, & 11. verses, the Psalmist begins his history, with the covenant which God made to Abraham, and the oath which he sware to Isaac; and confirmed the same unto Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting testament: saying, unto thee will I give the land of Canann, the lot of your inheritance. In the 12, 13, 14, & 15. verses, he expresseth the special care and protection of God over Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and their several families after his covenant thus made unto them, in these words: When they (to wit, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, with their families) were but a few men in number, yea very few, and strangers in it: When they went from one Nation to another, from one Kingdom to another people (which cannot possibly be expounded of Kings and Priests, but onely of those Patriarcks) He suffered no man to doe them wrong, but reproved even Kings for their sakes, saying, Touch not mine Anoynted, and doe my Prophets no harme. Then in the very next verse to the end of the Psalm, he proceeds with the story of the famine in Egypt, and of Iosephs sending thither beforehand by God, &c. So that by the expresse words and series of the story in this Psalm, these persons of whom God said, Touch not mine anointed, and do my Prophets no harme, were Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, and their families, (as S. Augustin with sundry other Expositers of this Psalm conclude;) who in truth were neither Kings nor Priests by office, but onely Gods peculiar people and servants: of whom he took special care. Whence I thus reason, in the first place.
These words, Touch not mine anointed, &c. were originally spoken and intended only of Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, and their families, who were neither actual Kings nor Priests; & they were meant of them, not as they were Kings or Priests, but only as they were the servants and chosen people of God; as is evident by the 6 verse of this Psalm. O ye seed of Abraham his SERVANT, ye children of Jacob his CHOSEN.
Therefore they are to be so interpreted; and to be applyed not to Kings and Priests, as they are such; but only to the faithful servants and chosen people of God, though, and as subjects.
Secondly, Consider to whom these words were spoken; not to Subjects, but to Kings themselves; as the Psalmist resolves in expresse terms, Vers. 14. He suffered no man to do them wrong, but reproved even KINGS for their sakes; saying, (even to Kings themselves) Touch not mine anointed, and do my Prophets no harme. Now that these words were spoken to Kings themselves is apparent, by those histories to which these words relate, recorded at large, Genes. 12. 10. to 20, Gen. &illegible; throughout, and Gen. 26. 1. to 17. and vers. 29. Where when Abraham by reason of the famine went down into Egypt, with Sarah his wife, and King Pharaoh tooke her into his house, God first permitted neither Pharaoh nor his servants to do either of them any injury (though Abraham out of over-much feare, suspected they would have killed him, and therefore made Satah say she was his sister,) and likewise plagued Pharaoh, and his servants because of Sarah Abrahams wife; whereupon they and all theirs went away in safety. After which Abraham and his wife sojourning in Gerar, Abimelech king of Gerar sent and took Sarah: But God said to Abimelech in a dream, behold thou art a dead man for the woman that thou hast taken, for she is a mans wife, &c. Therefore I sufferred thee not to touch her; Now therefore restore the man his wife, for he is a Prophet: (where, Touch not mine anoynted, and do my Prophets no harme, were litterally fulfilled:) and he shal pray for thee, and thou shalt live; and if thou restore her not, know that thou shalt surely die, thou and all that are thine: whereupon Abimelech restored Abraham his wife, and gave him Sheep, Oxen, Men-servants, and Women-servants, and leave to dwell in the Land where he pleased, After which Isaac and his wife dwelling in Gerar, and he telling the men of the place that she was his sister, lest they should kill him for her, because she was faire, king Abimelech discovering her to be his wife, charged all his people, saying, he that toucheth this man or his wife shall surely be put to death; yea he kindly intreated him, and did unto him nothing but good, and sent her away in peace. To which we may adde, the story of Gods prohibiting and restraining both Laban and Esau (who were as potent as Kings) to burt Jacob when they came out maliciously against him. Gen. 31. 24, 29, 52, 55. & ch. 33. 1, 2, 3, 4, &c. This prohibition then, Touch not mine anoynted, &c. being given to Kings themselves, not to touch or hurt these Patriarchs whiles they sojourned among them as forraigners and subjects (as all expositours grant) and not to subjects touching their Kings; these two conclusions will hence necessarily follow.
- 1. That this inhibition, given to Kings themselves with reference to subjects, and the people of God, cannot properly be meant of Kings and Priests, but of subjects fearing God. It is most apparant, that Kings, Princes and Rulers of the earth have alwaies been the greatest enemies and persecutors of Gods anointed ones, to wit, of Christ and his chosen members; witnesse Ps. 2. 2. & Act. 4. 26, 27. The Kings of the Earth set themselves, and the Rulers take counsell together against the Lord, & against his anoynted: For of a truth against thy holy child Iesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod and Pentius Pslate, with the Gentiles and people of Israel were gathered together, &c. And now Lord behold their threatnings. Which truth you may see exemplified by Ps. 129. 23, 161. Ier. 26. 21, 22, 23. c. 36. 26. c. 37. 15. c. 38. 4, 5, 6. Ezek. &illegible; 6, 7, 27, 28. Mich. 3. 1. to 12 Zeph. 3. 3. 1 Sam. 22. 16. to 20. 2 Chron. 24. 21. 1 King. 22. 26, 27. c. 29. 2. 10. Rev. 17. 12, 13, 14. c. 18. 9. 10. c. 19. 18, 19. Math. 10. 17. 18. Ln. 21. 12. Iam: 2. 6. Act. 12. 1, 2, 3. with sundry other Scriptures, and by all ecclesiastical histories since. In which regard God in his infinite wisdome gave this divine inhibition, not to subjects and inferiour persons; but to Kings, Princes and the greatest Potentates (who, deem their wils a law, and think they may do what they* please to their godly subiects,) Touch not mine anointed, and do my Prophets no harme: which being spoken to Kings themselves; it cannot be meant of Kings but subjects; unlesse you wil make this nonsence exposition of it. That Kings must not touch nor hurt themselves; and that it is unlawfull for one King to make war against, imprison, depose, or kill another: which the practise of all ages, with infinite* presidents in Scripture and story, manifest to be lawful, and not prohibited by this text; which can properly be applyed to none, but subjects fearing God.
- 2. That all Gods faithfull people are Gods anoynted, as well as Kings: and therefore as our Court Sycophants conclude from hence, That Subjects may in no wise take up Armes (though meerely defensive) against their Kings, because they are Gods anoynted: so by the self-same reason, the genuine proper meaning and expresse resolution of this text, Kings ought not to take up Armes against their Subjects, especially those professing the true feare of God, because they are Gods anoynted too, as well as Kings.
If any Court-Chaplan: here demand; how I prove beleeving Subjects fearing God, to be his anoynted, as well as Kings or Priests?
I answer: first the scripture resolves expresly: That all true Christians are really (in a spirituall sence) both* Kings and Priests to God the Father, though they be but subjects in a politicke sence yea God hath prepared a heavenly kingdom, (with an eternall crown of glory) for them, where they shall raigne with Christ for ever and ever. Mat. 5. 3. c. 25. 34. Lu. 6. 20. c. 12. 32. c. 22. 29. 30 Col. 1. 13. 1 Thef. 2. 12. Heb. 12. 28 Iam. 2. 5. 2 Pet. 1. 11. 2 Tim. 4. 8. 1 pet. 5. 4. 1 Cor. 9. 25. Rev. 22. 5. 2 Tim. 2. 12. Being therefore thus really Kings and Priests, and having an heavenly Kingdome and Crown of Glory, wherein they shall raigne with Christ for ever in this regard they may as truly be called Gods anoynted, as any Kings and Priests whatsoever.
Secondly, all true Christians are members of Christ and of his body, flesh and bone and made one with Christ, who dwelleth in them, and they in him. 1. Cor. 11. 12. 17. Ephes. 1. 22. 23. c. 3. 17. c. 5. 29. 30. 32. Iohn 6. 51. c. 17. 21. 23. In which respect they are not onely stiled Christians in Scripture, Act. 11. 26. c. 26. 28. 1. Pet. 4. 16. But Christ himself, 1. Cor. 10. 12. Ep. 4. 12. 13. Now our Saviour himself is stiled Christ in Scripture, in the abstract, by way of Excellency, onely because he is the Lords anoynted; anoynted with the oyle of gladnesse above his fellowes. Ps. 45. 7. Psa, 2. 2. Isa. 61. 1. Ac. 4. 23. c. 10. 38. Lu. 4. 18. He. 1. 9. Christos in the Greek, signifying anointed in English, being derived from Chris to anoynt: And Christians had this very title given them, because they are Christs members, and have a spirituall* anoyntment in, by, and from Christ, and his Spirit, 1 Iohn 2. 27. But the ANOYNTING which ye have received of him abideth in you. and ye need not that any man teach you, but as the same ANOINTING teacheth you of all things. Therefore they are really and truly Gods anoynted, and may be as properly so phrased, as any Kings and Priests whatsoever.
Thirdly, the scripture in direct termes oft cals Gods people, (though subjects) Gods anointed: as Psa. 28. 8. 9. The Lord is their strength, and be is the saving health of his anoynted. Now who those are, is expressed in the following words, save thy people, blesse thine inheritance, guide them and lift them up for ever. Gods people are here defined to be his anoynted. So Ps. 18. 50. And sheweth mercy to his anoynted; (but who are they?) to David & to his seed for evermore, that is, to Christ and his elect childre here caled Gods anointed, Ha. 3. 13. Thom wentest forth for the salvation of thy people, even for salvation with thine anoynted. 2 Cor. 1. 21. Now he which establisheth us in Christ, and hath anoynted us, is God, &c. 1 Joh. 2. 27. The anoynting which ye have received of him, abideth in you, &c. All these, with other scriptures, thus resolving Gods people (though subject) to be his anointed ones; they may be properly said to be the persons specified in this text, Touch not my anoynted; being an injunction given to Kings themselves, and not meant of Kings, but of Gods people, as I have formerly manifested.
I shall willingly and cordially professe, that Kings in sacred writ, are commonly called Gods anointed; because they were usually anoynted with oyle upon their inauguration to their thrones Sa. &illegible; &illegible; 15. 17. c. 12. 3. 5. c. 16. 3. 5. c. 16. 3. c. 12. 13. c. 24. 6. 10. c. 26. 6. 11. 16, 23. 2. Sa. 1. 14. 6. c. 2. 4. 7. &illegible; &illegible; 34. 3. &illegible; 2 Kin. 9. 3. 6. 12. 2 Chro. 6. 42. Psal. 20. 6. Psal. 89. 20. 38. 51. Psal. 92. 12. &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; 45. 1. Lun. 4. 20. And in this regard their persons are sacred, & no violence ought to be &illegible; upon their persons, especially by their subjects, as is cleare by the 1 Sam. 24. 3. to 12. 17. 18. 19, ch. 26. 7. to 25. 2 Sam. 2. to 7. And thereupon this text, Touch not mine anointed, and doe my Prophets no harms, though not properly meant of Kings, may yet be aptly applyed to their personal safety. But then I say, on the contrary part. That all Gods saints and people though Subiects, are his anoynted ones as well as Kings; wheesore Kings must no more offer violence to their persons or estates (without legal conviction and iust cause) then they offer violence to their Kings, which I shall thus make cleare.
First, because God hath given this expresse injunction even to Kings themselves, Touch not mine anoynted (that is your subiectes, my faithfull seruants) and doe my Prophets no harme, ps. 105. 14. 15. 1 Chr. 16. 2. 12. Prohibiting Abimelech, and he his subiects so much as to touch Abraham, Sarah, or Isaac. Gen. 20. 6. ch. 26. 11. 29.
Secondly, because he that toucheth them (to do them harme) toucheth the very apple of Gods eye. Zep. 2. 8. psal. 17. 8. 9. Deu. 32. 9. 10. 11. Yea, persecuteth God, nay Christ himselfe, Isai. 36. 9. Mat. 25. 45. Act. 9. 4. 5. And what Kings, how great soever, may or dare touch or persecute God and Christ, the King of Kings?
Thirdly, because God himself hath quite &illegible; Kings and their posterities, for offering violence to his servants though their subiects. Thus Ahab, Iezabell, and their posterity were destroyed for putting Naboth to death, and seizing on his Vineyard wrongfully without cause, though under a pretext of law, 1 Kin. 21. & 22. 2 Kin. 9. So King Ioash exciting his people to stone the prophet Zachariah without good cause, which they did at his commandement; the Princes and people who did it were soon after destroyed by the Syrians; and the Kings own servants conspired against him for the bloud of Zachariah, and stew him on his bed, and then buried him dishonourably, not in the sepulcher of the Kings, So as his prayer at his death (the Lord look upon it and require it) was fully executed on the King and people, 2 Crho. 24. 20. to 27. Thus King Ichoahaz, leharachin, and Ichoiachins with all their Princes and people were carried away captive into Babilon, and destroyed for mocking, abusing and despising Gods messengers, prophets and people, 2 Chr. 36. 16. 17.* Many such instances might be added, but these may suffice, and that of the King of Babilon, Isa. 14. 4. 19. 20. 21. 22. But thou art cast out of thy grave as an abominable branch, &c. as a carcase trodden under feet. thou shalt not not beloyned with them buriall. BECAUSE THOU HAST DESTROYED THY LAND, AND SLAINE THY PEOPLE: the seed of evil doers shall never be renouned, prepare ye slaughter for his children, for the iniquity of their fathers, that they doe not vise, nor possesse the land, nor fill the face of the world with cities. For I will rise up against them saith the Lord of Hosts, and cut off from Babilon the name and remembrance, and sons, and nephewes, saith the Lord. A notable text, for oppressing Princes to meditate upon.
Fourthly, because God himselfe hath given an expresse command, Ezek. 44. 15. 16. 17. That the Prince shall not take of the peoples inheritance by oppression to thrust them out of their possession, but he shall give his sonnes inheritance cut of his own possession. Which well interpreteth and fully answereth that much abused text in the 1 Sam. 8. 11. 12. 19. and proves the Kings taking their Fields, Vineyards, Oliveyards, &illegible; and sheep to give his servants there specified, to be a meere oppression, which should make them cry out in that day because of their King, ver. 18. and no lawfull act, as some royalists glosse it. If then Kings may not take away by violence or oppression their subjects lands or goods; muchlesse may they offer violence to their persons, being Gods anointed, yea his Temple, 1 Cor. 6. 19. c. 3. 16. And if any man (be he King or Emperour) destroy the temple of God, him will God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple they are 1 Cor. 3. 17. Hence Ioah, Davids Generall, comming to besiege Abel to which Shebasted, a women of that place thus &illegible; with him thou seekest to destroy a City and mother in Israel: why wilt thou swallow up the inheritance of the Lord? Whereupon Ioah answered and said: for be it, for be it from me that I should swallow up or destroy, 2 Sam. 20. 19. 20.
Fiftly, because no law of God or man hath given any authority to Kings to iniure or oppresse their subiects, in body lands or goods, but only to feed, defend, protect them; and to fight their battels for them, not to wage war against them. 2 Sam. 6. 2. c. 23. 3. Psal. 78. 72, 73, 74. 2 Chron. 9. 8. Pro. 20, 8, 24. c. 29. 4. 14. Esay 49. 23. 1 Tim. 2. 3. Therefore Kings having no right at all to injure or oppresse their people, they* neither lawfully can nor ought to do it, either by themselves or instruments; there being nothing more severely prohibited and censured in Scripture then Princes and Magistrates oppression of their Subjects, Prov. 28. 15, 16. Zeph. 3. 3. Michah. 3. 9, to 12. Ezek. 22. 6, 7, 27. Take but one text for many, Ezek. 45. 8, 9. My Princes shal no more oppresse my people, and the rest of the land shal they give to the house of Israel according to their Tribes. Thou saith the Lord God, let it suffice you, O Princes of Israel, remove violence and spoyle (or plundering) and execute judgment and justice; take away your exactions from my people, saith the Lord, See Esa. 1. 23. c. 3. 12, 14, 15.
Sixtly, Because as there is a solemne* Oath of allegeance, of the people to their Kings, to honour and defend their persons; So there is the like oath from kings to their people, to protect their rights and persons, goods, estates, lives, lawes, and liberties, from all violence and injustice, solemnly sworn at their Coronations. By vertue of which oath Kings are as strictly tyed not to wage war against their Subjects,Esay 45. 4. 1 Sam. 8. 19, 6, 20. nor to oppresse or offer violence to their persons, liberties, or estates; as their subjects are by their oath of allegiance, not to rebel against them. And seeing Kings were first created by and* for their subjects; and not their subjects by and for them; and are in verity but publicke servants for their peoples welfare,1 Chr. 9. &illegible; 1 Cor. 3. 21. 22. their subjects not being so much theirs, as they their subjects; from whom they* receive both their maintenance and royalties. There is as little (if not far lesse) reason, for Kings to oppresse and take up offensive armes against their subjects though perchance more undutiful and refractory then they expect; as there is for people to take up offensive armes against their Princes, in case they become more oppressive and invasive on their persons, goods, lawes, liberties, then they should.Rom. 13. 4. The husband hath no more right or authority to injure or destroy the wife, or the master the servant, the head the inferiour members, then they have to destroy the husband, master, or head. And as the leudnesse of the King, husband, parent, master, must not cause the people, wife, child, servant, to rebel against them,Math. 22. 17. to 22. and utterly to reject their bonds of duty, so the undutifulnes or vices of the people, wife, child, or servant, must not cause the King, husband, parent, or master, (as long as these relations remain actually undissolved) to give over their care* protection, and vigilancy over them, or any waies injuriously to intreat them 1 Pet. 2. 18. 2 Chro. 10. & 11.
Finally, the* Hebrew Midwives, notwithstanding K. Pharohs command, would by no means kil the Israelites male children; (though but bondmen and no free subjects) and God blessed, and built them houses for it: but* drowned Pharoah and his host in the red sea, for drowning them, and transgressing this inhibition, Touch not mine anointed: When* K. Saul commanded his footmen and guard, to turn and slay the Priests of the Lord at Nob, because their hand was with David (whom he deemed a traytor) and knew when he fled, and did not shew it him, they all refused (this his royall unjust command, though not only his Subjects, but servants too) and would not put their hand to fall upon them, being Gods anointed: And because Doeg the Edemire slew them, by Sauls command, Saul himself was soon after slaint by his own hand, 1 Sam. 31. 4. When* K. Saul had twice solemnly vowed to put his innocent son and subject Ionathan causelesly to death, onely for tasting a little honey; his subjects were so far from assisting him in this unjust action, that they presently said to their King, Shal Ionathan die who hath wrought so great salvation in Israel? God forbid: As the Lord liveth, there shal not one haire of his head fall to the ground: So the people RESCVED Jonathan that he died not, notwithstanding Sauls double vow to the contrary, and Ionathans being not only his subject, but son too, which is more; neither are they taxed of disobedience or treason, but commended for it. When* K. Rehoboam raised an army to fight against the ten tribes, who revolted from, and rebelled against him, (for giving them harsh language by the advice of his yong Counsellors;) electing a new King over them: God himself by his Prophet Shemiah, spake thus to Rehoboam and his army,* Ye shal not go up, nor fight against your brethren, return every man to his house, for this thing is done of me: Whereupon they all obeyed the words of the Lord, and returned: neither King nor subject daring to fight against them, contrary to Gods expresse command, though rebels how much lesse then may Kings wage war upon their innocent loyall subjects? When* K. Ichoram in his fury made this &illegible; &illegible; do so, and more also to me, if the head of Elisha (his subject) shalest and on him this day; and withall sent a messenger to Elisha his house to take away his head. This Prophet was so far from submitting to this his unjust design, that he commanded the Elders sitting with him to look when the messenger came, and &illegible; the doore, and hold him fast, though the sound of his masters (the Kings) &illegible; were behind &illegible; which they did; not suffering the messenger or King to do him violence. You the great* Prophet &illegible; when K. Ahariah sent two Captains with their fifties one after another to apprehend and bring him down to him by violence; was so far from rendering himself into their hands; that in his own defence, he commanded fire twice together to come down &illegible; heaven which confused these two Captains and their mon; though sent by the King his Soveraign. Which divine miracle from heaven wrought by God himself &illegible; That it is lawful for subjects to defend themselves against the unjust violence of their Kings; and that it is dangerous for Kings themselves, or any of their officers by their commands to offer violence or injury to their subjects.* This may be further cleared by Gods exemplary judgement upon K. Ieroboam; who stretching forth his hand to smite the Prophet, which prophecied against his idolatrous Altar, it dried up forthwith, so that he could not pull it in again.* Upon those Princes who caused Daniel to be unjustly cast into the Lyons den, where he was preserved safe from danger; but they their wives and children had there their bones broken in pieces by the Lyons or ever they came at the bottom of the &illegible; And upon those* mighty men in Nebuchadnezzars army, who bound Shadrach, Mesech, and Abednego, and cast them into the burning fiery fornace, by the kings speciall command, because they peremptorily refused to worship the golden image which he hath set up; who for executing this his unjust precept, were by Gods just vengence slain by the flame of the fiery furnace; when as those three godly persons unjustly cast into it by the Kings command, were miraculously preserved in the midst of the fiery furnace, without any harme, there being not an haire of their heads singed, neither their coates changed, nor the smell of fire passed upon them. So safe is it for people to* obey God rather then men, then kings themselves in their unjust commands: so dangerous and destructive is it for Kings, or others upon their unjust commands, to offer any injury or violence to their subjects; or violate this injunction, Touch not &illegible; anointed, &c. In a word, I read Ier. 12. 3. to 12 that God commanded King. Shallum, to execute judgment and righteousnes, and deliver the spoiled out of the hands of the oppressor; & do us wrong nor violence to the stranger, fatherles, or widow, neither shed innocent blood in this place. Adding, But if ye shal not heare these words, I swear by my selfe, saith the Lord, that this house (even the kings house of Judah) shal become a desolation, I wil make it a wildernesse, and prepare destroyers against it, every one with his weopan, &c. And v. 15. to 30. in the same chap. God thus speaks to K. Iehoiakim, Shalt thou raign because thou closest thy self in Cedar? Did not thy father eat and drink, & do judgment and justice, and then it was well with him? &c. But thine eyes, and thine heart were not but for thy covetousnes, and to shed innocent blood, and for oppression, & for violence to do it. Therfore thus saith the Lord concerning Jehoiakim K. of Iudah; they shal not lament for him saying, ah my brother, or ah sister; ah Lord, or ah his glory; but he shal be buried with the burial of an asse drawn & cast forth beyond the graves of Ierusale. Neither doth this judgment for oppressing & slaying his subjects rest here, but extend to the utter extirpation of his posterity, ver. 24. 30. As I live, saith the Lord, though Coniah the son of Iehoiakim, K. of Iudah, were the signet on my right hand, yet would I pluck thee thence. Write ye this man childlesse, a man that shal not prosper in his daies, for no man of his seed shal prosper sitting upon the thron of David. So fatal is it to Kings and their posterity to oppresse and murther their subjects. And as for those subjects who by their Kings commands shal take up armes against their brethen to murther, plunder, or oppresse them, I shal desire them first to consider, that precept of Iohn Baptist given to souldiers themselves, Luk. 3. 14. De violence to no man, &c. muchles to your brethren and fellow-subjects: and next that of &illegible; v. 10. to 16 For thy violence against thy brother Iacoh, shame shal cover thee, and thou shalt be cut off for ever. In the day that thou stoodest on the other side, in the day that the strangers carried away his substance, and enteredinto his gates; and cast lots upon Ierosulem, even thou wast as one of them. But thou shouldest not have looked on the day of thy brother, neither shouldest thou have rejoyced over the children of Judah in the day of their destruction; neither shouldest thou have spoken proudly in the day of distresse, Thou shouldest not have Entered into the gate of my people, nor have looked on their affliction, nor have laid hands on their substance in the day of their calamity; Neither shouldest thou have stood in the crosse way, to cut off those of his which did escape; neither shouldest thou have shut up those of his that did remain in the day of distresse. As thou hast done it shall be done unto thee, thy sword shal return upon thine own head. All which cosidered, I shal humbly submit it to every mans judgment, whether the whol state in Parliament and his Majesties faithful subjects, may not upon as good or better grounds of conscience, take up armes to defend and preserve their persons, wives, houses, goods, estates from unlawful violence, rapine, plundering and destruction, now every where practised by his Majesties Cavaleeres in a most* barbarous manner, to the utter ruine of many thousands for the present, and whol kingdom in likelihood for the future, contrary to the fundamental lawes and liberties of the subject, his Majesties Coronation oath, and frequent protestations and Declarations; As his Majesty, by advice of ill counsellors, raise an army at home, and bring in forren* forces from abroad, to make war upon his Parliament and people, to plunder, murder, undoe them, and being the whole kingdome to utter desolation? Certainly, if the subjects defensive war in this case be unlawful; as all Royalists aver, against Scripture, reason, and the principles of nature, which instinct all creatures to defend themselves against unjust violence and oppession, as others have proted at large. Then the Kings offensive war upon his loyall poore innocent subjects and Parliament, must much more be unjust and unlawful, for the premised reasons, and Scripture authorities.
For my part, it is so far from my intention to foment this most unnatural destructive war between King Parliament, and people, that the thoughts of its deplorable effects do make my very soule to bleed, and heart to tremble. For if ever Christ, the Oracle of truth, uttered any verity truer than other, it was this,* That a kingdom divided against it self cannot stand, but shall be brought to desolation;* And if we bite and devour one another,Marke 3. 24, 25, 26. we shall be consumed one of another. O then (if God in his justice hath not devoted us to a totall & final desolation for the sins and abuses of our long enjoyed former peace) if there be any remainder of policy or prudence, any bowels of mercy on tender affection left within us, towards our most deere native bleeding and also expiring Country, Engand; to poore dying Ireland; to our religion lives wives children, parents, kindred, neighbours, goods, estates, liberties; or any care of our own safety, tranquillity or felicity; let all of all sides now at last, (after so much sensible experience of the miseries of an intestine uncivill war) with all convenient expedition lay down offensive and defensive armes, & conclude such a sweet solid peace throughout our divided and distracted kingdom as may last forever without the least violation, upon such just and honourable terms, as may stand with Gods glory, religions purity, his Majesties honour, the Parliaments priviledges, the subjects liberty, the whole kingdoms safety and felicity; least otherwise we become not only a scorn and derision, but likewise a prey to our forraign enemies. Alasse, why should the head and members have any civil contestations, since both must perish if divided?* neither subsist, but being united? why should the Kings prerogative, and the subjects liberties, which seldom clashed heretofore, and ended all differences in Courts of justice, be now at such irreconcileable enmity, as to challenge one another into the field, and admit no trial but by battel? when I read in* Scripture, of sundry presidents where Kings, Princes, and people, have unanimously concurred in their counsels heretofore; and consider how our King and Parliament have most happily accorded till of late, I cannot but bewaile their present discords; which O that the God of peace and unity would speedily reconcile.
2 Sam. 18. 4. c. 19. 43, c. 9. 2. 10. 11. lomh 3. 7. Ester 1. 13. to &illegible; 30. 40.I shal close up all, with his Majesties printed speech to both houses annexed to the petition of right by his Royal command. I assure you my maxime is, That the peoples Liberty strengthens the Kings Prerogative, and that the Kings Prerogative is to defend the peoples Liberties: And with the Statute of Magna Charta, ch. 29. No freeman shal be taken or imprisoned, or be disseised of his freehold, or liberties or free customs, or be outlawed or exiled, or any other waies destroyed, nor we shal not passe upon him, nor condemn him, but by the lawful judgment of his Peers, or by the law of the Land. We shal sel to we man, no shal deny nor defer to no man justice or right: Which in effect is a most exact paraphrase on this misconstrued text, Touch not mine anointed, and do my Prophets no harme.
FINIS.
Endnotes
[* ] 2 Pet. 2. 16.
[* ] As the 2 Sam. 15. 24. For Rebellion is as the &illegible; of Witchcraft, & &illegible; is as iniquity and idolatry; now applied to subjects opposing their Princes unlawfull commands, when it is meant only of King Sauls rebellion against the command of God, as the content and story manifest.
[* ] Zech. 11. 5.
[* ] Read the 2 Chr. 36. Dan. 5. 30. 31. Ps. 136. 17. 18. 19. 20. 10f. 12. for all the rest.
[* ] Rev. 1. 6. c. 5. 10. c. 20. 6. Exo. 19. 6. 2 Pet. 2. 5.
[* ] See Eze. 16. 9. I anoynted thee with Oyle, &c.
[* ] See Dr. Beards The &illegible; of Gods Iudgements. L. 2. c. 17. 18. 19. 38. 39. 40. 41.
[* ] Cooks 11: Rep. f. 72. 86. Plowd. Com. f. 146, 147, 487. 21 E. 3. 47.
[* ] 1 Eliz. c. 2.
[* ] 2 Sam. 5. 12 1 Pet. 2. 13. Deut. 17. 14, 15.
[* ] Rom. 13. 6.
[* ] Nam Rex ad tutelam legis, corparuim & bonorum erectur est, Ca. 7. Rep. Calvins case, f. 4, 10, 12.
[* ] Exo. 1. 15. to 20.
[* ] Exod. 14. 13. to 31. Psa. 106. 21.
[* ] 1 Sam. 22. 17, 18.
[* ] 1 Sam. 14. 38, to 46.
[* ] 2 Chro. 10.
[* ] 2 Chro. 11. 4. 1 King. 11. 21, 22, 23, 24.
[* ] 1 King, 6, 31, 32, 33.
[* ] 2 Kin. 10, 9, to 16.
[* ] 1 Kings 12. 6.
[* ] Dan. 6.
[* ] Dan. 3.
[* ] Act 4: 12 c. 5. 18, 19, 40, 52. c. 11, 1, to 19. Este. 3. 2, 3 Iohn 7. 33, to 48. Numb. 22. & 23. & 24.
[* ] See the Relation of Brainford businesse.
[* ] See the Letter fro the Hague newly printed.
[* ] Luke 11. 17, 18, 19.
[* ] Gal. 5. 25.
[* ] See 1 Cor. 12. 14. to 26.
[* ] 1 Chro. 13. 1, 2, 3, 4. 2 Chro. 23. 3. c. 13. 1. to Iudg. 10. 1. 10. 12.
T.286 [1642.12.29] Charles Herle, A Fuller Answer to a Treatise written by Doctor Ferne (29 Dec. 1642)↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date
Local JPEG TP Image

Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.286 [1642.12.29] Charles Herle, A Fuller Answer to a Treatise written by Doctor Ferne (29 Dec. 1642).
Full title[Charles Herle, 1598-1659]
A
FVLLER ANSWER
TO
A TREATISE
Written by Doctor FERNE,
ENTITVLED,
The Resolving of Conscience upon this Question,
Whether upon this Supposition, or Case (The King will not defend, but is bent to subvert Religion, Lawes and Liberties) Subjects may with good Conscience make resistance.
Wherein the Originall frame, and Fundamentalls of this Government of England, Together with those two Texts of Scripture are sufficiently cleered. viz.
Rom. 13.1.
Let every soule be subject unto the higher powers: for there is no power but of God, The powers that be, are ordained of God.
1 Pet. 2.13.
Submit your selves unto every Ordinance of man for the Lords sake, whether it be to the King as Supreame.
Done by another Authour.
And by him revised and enlarged by occasion of some late Pamphlets
Complaining in the Name of the City against the Parliament.
LONDON,
Printed for Iohn Bartlet, and are to be sold at the Signe of the Gilt-Cup in Paul’s Church-yard, neare to Austins Gate, 1642.
Estimated date of publication
abc
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationabc
Malcolm/Editor’s Introduction
Charles Herle, a Presbyterian divine from Cornwall, was educated at Oxford. He was closely linked to James Stanley, later seventh earl of Derby, and his family. It was through the good offices of these future royalist stalwarts that he became rector of the rich rectory of Winwick in Lancashire. In the 1640s Herle preached frequently before the Long Parliament. He was also active in the Westminster Assembly of Divines. In his numerous pamphlets on behalf of Parliament he stressed the coordinate nature of the English government, which he saw as based upon an original contract. His views have been seen as prefiguring those of the Whigs at the Glorious Revolution. In the matter of resistance he followed Calvin’s advice that the privilege belonged not to individual subjects but to the magistrates and courts of a kingdom.
Herle was one of several parliamentarian pamphleteers who crossed literary swords with Henry Ferne after the publication of Ferne’s “Resolving of Conscience.” His first effort, “An Answer to misled Dr. Ferne . . .” was followed by “A Fuller Answer to a Treatise Written by Doctor Ferne,” which was published on 29 December 1642, only days after Ferne had failed to appear before Parliament to answer for his tract. The “Fuller Answer” appeared in two virtually identical editions, the second of which is reprinted here. Ferne replied to his critics on 18 April 1643 with “Conscience Satisfied . . . ,” which Herle attacked the following month in “An Answer to Dr. Fernes Reply.” Ferne attempted to have the last word on 1 November 1643 with “Reply unto severall Treatises. . . . ” This paper war, intended to provide constitutional guidance to Englishmen perplexed by the unfolding civil war, clarifies the theoretical differences as well as the shared notions of the antagonists.
Although his side emerged victorious, Herle did not approve of the execution of Charles I and was summoned by the government in 1651 on a charge of aiding royalists. It was not until September 1653 that he was freed from restraint. Thereafter he retired to Winwick where, in September 1659, he died. He is buried in the chancel of his church.
Text of Pamphlet
An Answer to a Treatise Entituled
The Resolving of Conscience upon this Question, Whether upon such a supposition, or Case as is now usually made (The King will not discharge His trust, &c.)
Blowing aside the Magistery of the Title, Author, Style of this Treatise, as but the pin-dust of it, that gilds but intercepts the Letter: I find the substance of it to be a groundlesse supposition of the Parliament’s taking up Armes, upon a bare supposition of the King’s meere intention to subvert Lawes and Liberties; for so we see the question itselfe is proposed: Whether upon such a supposition? The King will not, &c. Here I confesse we have much of the Chaire upon the resolving part, but as much beside the Cushion on the supposing part; for whoever maintained that the Parliament might upon such a bare supposition of such a meere intention of the King’s, take up Armes, the actuall invasion of Liberties, invitation and detention of Delinquents from triall by Law, to be a party in Armes against the Parliament, thereby to dissolve, or at least to remove it without the Houses’ consent, flatly against a Law of this very Parliament, Importation of forraigne Armes and Souldiers, illegall Commissions to imploy them, &c. all voted in Parliament to have been done, amount to more than suppositions of meere intentions. But to passe by this, (as the property of the Ferne, which uses to have a broad top, but a narrow roote) the thing that he prosecutes, though not proposes, is that 1. No supposition, or case can authorize Subjects to take up Armes against their King; and then 2. That such a case as the present Parliament pretends to have, it hath not; and 3. Therefore no Subject can take up Armes with good conscience.
The best way therefore of Answer, will be to cleare these three Propositions.
1. A Parliament of England may with good conscience, in defence of King, Lawes and Government establisht, when imminently endangered, especially when actually invaded, take up Armes without, and against the King’s personall Commands, if he refuse.
2. The finall and casting result of the State’s judgement concerning what those Laws, dangers, and meanes of prevention are, resides in the two Houses of Parliament.
3. In this finall Resolution of the State’s Judgement the People are to rest, and in obedience thereto may with good conscience, in defence of the King, Laws and Government, beare and use Armes.
These made good, the answer to his severall Sections will be very easie.
If anyone thinke much I doe not answer the Doctor in his three proposed Resolves upon his Question, I answer I am enforced to answer what he would say, for (to say truth) resolving, as he doth, upon a Question that never came in Question; That no conscience upon such a supposition as was never made, can have safe ground for such a resistance as was never undertaken, he sayes (upon the matter) nothing at all. Only sets up an Army ingaged in a quarrell of his owne fancy, a Mawmet of his own dressing, which he cudgels into the Clouts he himselfe hath put it in. He disputes with his owne corner Cap, and is his owne John a Nokes, and John a Style both: much what as Mountebankes use to doe, who make wounds only, the better to sell their plasters. And to answer him word by word, as he goes along in the Treatise (wherein for the more gravity and (it may be) the more to amuse and loose the Reader, he makes the Nominative case in every sentence, to give the Verbe twelve-score at starting) would swell the Answer into too great an affliction upon these dispatchfull and urgent times. How many weekes soever the Doctor hath been about the Treatise, it is well known to many, the answer cost not many houres the doing.
Propos. 1. A Parliament of England may with good conscience in defence of King, Laws and Government established, when imminently endangered, especially when actually invaded, take up Armes without, and against the King’s personall Commands, if he refuse.
Before we judge of what a Parliament can doe in England, it will be needfull to know what kind of Government this of England’s is. We are therefore to know, that England’s is not a simply subordinative, and absolute, but a Coordinative, and mixt Monarchy. This mixture, or Coordination is in the very Supremacy of power itselfe, otherwise the Monarchy were not mixt: all Monarchies have a mixture, or composition of subordinate, and under-officers in them, but here the Monarchy, or highest power is itselfe compounded of 3 Coordinate Estates, a King, and two Houses of Parliament; unto this mixt power no subordinate authority may in any case make resistance. The rule holds still, Subordinata non pugnant, subordinates may not strive; but in this our mixt highest power, there is no subordination, but a Coordination: and here the other rule holds as true, Coordinata invicem supplent, Coordinates supply each other. This mixture the King’s Majesty himselfe is often pleased in his Declarations to applaud, as by a mutuall counterpoise each to other, sweetening and alaying whatever is harsh in either. The Treatiser himselfe doth no lesse, calling it, That excellent temper of the three Estates in Parliament, confessing them (there) to be the Fundamentals of this Government, and if Fundamentals, what subordinations (I pray) can there be in them? Fundamentals admit not of higher and lower, all foundations are principall alike. And I cannot but wonder that that position of the Observator, the King is Universis minor, should be by this Resolver and others so much exploded, for if the temper (as he speakes) of this Government be of three Estates, he need not buy the Almanack (he speakes of) to reckon by, that one is lesse than three.
But you say, what? Is not the Parliament subordinate to the King? Are they not all Subjects? I answer; the Parliament cannot be said properly to be a Subject, because the King is a part, and so hee should be subject to himselfe: no, nor are the two Houses without him Subjects; every member seorsim, taken severally, is a Subject, but all collectim in their Houses are not, nay, Bracton the great Lawyer is so bold, as to say, The King hath above him, besides God, the Law, whereby he is made King, likewise his Court of Earles and Barons, &c. But we need not goe so high, it will serve our turne, if the Houses be in this mixture or temper of Government, not subordinate or subject, then, if they do as Coordinates should, supply each other’s failings, no highest power is resisted.
But you’ll say, how can they which are every one apart Subjects, not be all Subjects in their Houses? Doth the King’s Writ unsubject them? No, it was the consent of both King and people, in the first coalition or constitution of the Government, that makes them in their severall Houses coordinate with his Majesty, not subordinate to him, how else were the Monarchy mixt more than that of Turkie? But doth not the King’s Writ make them a Parliament? It doth ordinarily, in actu exercito,1 but in actu signato,2 it is the Constitution of the Governement designes them to it, and accordingly provides for it in an annuall, or now triennuall vicissitude; where note by the way, that whereas it is often urged, that they are but his Councell, to be called by him; it is true, that office is ordinarily betrusted to him, but they are by the first constitution not to be elected by him, but assigned to him, not assumed (as Moses his under-officers, of Jethro’s advice) not only the King’s, but the Kingdome’s Councell, elected by it, not him, and have not only a power of consulting, but of consenting. The Writ for the House of Commons is ad faciendum, & consentiendum,3 however, we know they must consent before it can be a Law, whereby it sufficiently appeares, they are a coordinative part in the Monarchy, or highest principle of power, in as much as they beare a consenting share in the highest office of it, the making of Lawes.
But you’ll say, can there be more than one highest? No, there is but one, but that one is a mixt one, else the Monarchy were not mixt.
But you’ll say, how doth it appeare that the constitution of this governement is such? I answer (besides his Majestie’s above mentioned confession, and the Houses’ share in the highest office of governement, that of making Lawes) by the mutuall Oathes the King and people are to take to maintaine the Lawes that have so constituted it. Fortescue is herein full and home, (i) The King is to governe his people by no other than that kind of power which flowes to him from their consent, and that is a polliticall not regall power. Now he that knowes anything of Greek, knowes the word Polliticall implies a mixt Principal, specially when opposed to regall.
But you’ll say (with the Treatiser) the King is King before he takes his Oath. ’Tis true, but he is King but upon the same trust which his Predecessours (in whose right he followes) swore to; and the Oath which the Law provides for the King and his Predecessours to take, virtually binds him even before he take it, while he holds the Kingdome, but in the right of succession, for the same Law that conveys upon him the Crown in right of succession, charges upon him the taking of the same Oath his Predecessours have done, from whom by that Law he claimes the Crowne; in that respect it is, that the King is said in Law not to die, but demise, because they all still live in him.
But you’ll say, ’Tis hard to apprehend how the same men that are all Subjects severally, should in their houses not be subject, but coordinate with the King? It may appeare easily thus: a Father and a Sonne are by a deed of enfoement jointly entrusted with certaine Lands to uses, the Sonne is still subordinate to the Father as Sonne; but as Feofee, in the trust, he is not subject but coordinate and joint with him. And therefore it is not a little to be wondered at, that so many especially of the Lords, who are Conciliarii nati, borne Councellours to the State, in whom their shares both of trust and interest in this Supremacy of power in Parliament, the very constitution itself of the government hath invested their very blood with, should be so much wanting to themselves, their posterities and it, as upon a bare whistle to desert that trust and interest in the governement, which their Fathers with so much of their care conveyed upon them, and so much of their bloud preserved for them. Their very style Comites and Peeres imply in Parliament a coordinative Society with his Majesty in the government; they are in Parliament his Comites, his Peers. I know ’tis strongly alleadged that they could not stay with safety for routs and tumults. I must confesse ’tis much to be wished there had been none; but the Houses alleadge againe, they hindered them what they could, and there was no Law to punish them, specially comming but as Petitioners, and that his Majestie’s feare was so little from them, that the morrow after the greatest of them, he went into London with an ordinary retinue; and that most of the Lords departed not, till long after all was quiet; what had become of Israel, if Moses had left his charge upon every tumult? But of this but by the way.
The world hath been long abused by Court-Preachers (such may be as this Doctor) first crying up the sole Divinity of Monarchy in generall, and then (what must follow) the absolutenesse of this in the King’s sole Person. No marvell,—id sibi negoti—by this craft they got their living. Now they doe (with this Resolver) begin to fore-see and acknowledge, that if Monarchy were of morall and speciall institution from God, it would at once condemne all other formes of government of rejecting a divinely morall, and therefore universall institution, and make this Monarchy as unlimited as any other; for what limits or afterbounds can man set to God’s speciall institution? That there be in all Societies of men, a governement (capable of it’s end, safety) is out of question God’s institution and morall; but that this governement be so, or so moulded, qualified and limited, is as questionlesse from the paction or consent of the Society to be governed, Hanc potestatem à populo efluxam Rex habet (as Fortescue before) the qualification of the power is an eflux of the people’s consent, as the power itselfe (as the Doctor tells us) an eflux of God’s Providence; and to say truth, he himselfe acknowledges as much, confessing, That no particular forme of government is, jure divino, it must be then humano sure, from the people’s consent.
It was but a while since good Pulpit stuff with Court-Doctors, That safety being the end of government, and the King only by God solely entrusted with it, he was not bound by or to any human Lawes in the managing it to that it’s end; he was to use whatever the result of his owne judgement concluded fit and conducing thereunto, nay he was not bound to keepe any Oath he tooke to the people to be ruled therein by Law; there could be no commutative justice betweene him and them, only distributive from him to them, so that all they had was his, to the very parings of their nails, his Oath was but a peece of his Coronation show, he might take it today and breake it tomorrow without perjury, because he was under a former and higher obligation to God (by whom only he was trusted, and to whom only accountable) to use whatever meanes he should thinke conducing to the end for which he had it only from God: that the Salus populi committed only by God, and solely to Him, was a Law between God and him only, before all other Laws, and therefore these must not hinder him in the discharge of that to God by any means, which he should find in his owne judgment conducing therunto, the Oathe’s fault (not his) was in being taken, not broken. And to this purpose the whole body of the Cannon Law was mercilesly racked and raked into, for rules miserably mis-applied, as A turpi voto muta decretum, Quod incautè vovisti ne feceris,4 and Non perficienda promissio sed paenitenda praesumptio,5 &c. yea and some seeming Scriptures shamefully suborned too, as that of David’s confession, against thee only have I sinned, spoken, only in respect of the secrecy of his sinne, and therefore ’tis added, and done this evill in thy sight, or because sinne is properly against no one but God, being a transgression of his Law. As if the King tho’ he be, custos utriusque tabulae, Keeper of both Tables, yet were bound to keep only the first, he owes no duty to man at all? And againe, that other of David’s praise, My Lord the King is as an Angell of light; now Angels are accountable to God only, not men; and therefore the Oath the King takes, is (forsooth) not to men but God; (whereas Divinity tells us the formall difference betweene an Oath and a Vow, is, that a Vow is to God, an Oath is by God, wherein there are 3 parties still, who, by whom and to whom; belike then, if he sweare to God, the people are the party by whom he sweares. Nay, our owne Dialect will tell us, That the King is our liege Lord, as well as we his liege people, that is (as the word signifies) mutually bounden each to other). All this and much more of this Demetrian divinity was ordinarily preached by these Court Earewiggs, and all upon this errour that the Doctor resolves on, that the sole Supremacy of power was in the King’s Person, and that his judgement was the sole supreame rule of that power. But we go on.
Now the end or purpose of this mixture of the 3 Estates in this government, ’tis the safety of its safety, as all governement aimes at safety, so this temper in it at the making this safety more safe or sure. The common interest of the whole body of the Kingdome in Parliament, thus twisted with the Kings, makes the Cable of its Anker of safety stronger. So then, the government by Law its rule, unto safety its end, is ordinarily betrusted to the King, wherein, if he faile and refuse, either to follow the rule Law, or to its end safety, his coordinates in this mixture of the supreame power must according to their trust supply. But you’ll say, there is no written or fundamentall Law for this. I answer (to speake properly) if it be written it is superstructive and not fundamentall, written Lawes, that were not Lawes before written, are repealeable and alterable, even while the government remaines the same, fundamentals cannot: a foundation must not be stirred while the building stands. That of Magna Charta, where most of these fundamentals are (at least) implied was Law before ’twas written; and but there, and then, collected for easier conservation and use; but if we would know what is meant by those fundamentall Lawes of this Kingdom, so much jeered at in this and other Pamphlets; it is the originall frame of this coordinate government of the 3 Estates in Parliament consented to, and contrived by the people in its first constitution, and since in every severall raigne confirmed both by mutuall Oathes between King and people, and constant custome time (as we say) out of mind, which with us amounts to a Law, wherein the rule is, Quod non disprobatur praesumitur,6 it cannot be disproved from taking place upon all occasions, therefore it is to be presumed to have continued from the beginning, even in the Parliament Summons of Edward I. This Law is called, Lex stabilita, & notissima,7 even before it was a record.
Now as this mixture, the mean unto this fuller safety, dies not, ’tis not personall but incorporate, and Corporations (the Law sayes) die not, so, that Reason or Wisdome of State that first contrived it dies not neither, it lives still in that which the law calls the Reason of the Kingdome, the Votes and Ordinances of Parliament, which being the same (in the construction of the Law) with that which first contrived the government, must needs have still power to apply this coordination of the government to its end safety, as well as it had at first to introduce it; otherwise it should not still continue in the office of a meane to its end.
Here, in our present case the necessity of applying this coordination or mixture of the government is imminence of danger, which (if any man will make himselfe so very a stranger at home and to all the world besides) as to deny it, the matter is not great, ’tis coram non judice,8 it has another competent and entrusted judge, the two Houses (wherein the Law makes the Reason of the Kingdom to reside) who have by Vote concluded it. Nay the King’s Majesty himselfe acknowledges imminence of danger in his Writ of Summons, Mandamus quod consideratis dictorum regotiorum arduitate, & periculis imminentibus,9 imminent dangers: where, (by the way) we may take notice, that his Majesty is by the above-mentioned fundamentall Law to call a Parliament when there shall be any imminent danger.
Well, in this imminent danger of the State, the meane thought fit by this the Kingdome’s reason to this end its safety, is, the securing of its Militia: (the seeds of Reformation are to be sowne, and no man but makes his fence before he sowes his seed; the State is in its unsound and rotten parts to be lanced, it may be dismembered, and who will goe about such a cure, but he will first bind the patient). In this, the ordinary way is taken, by a Bill offered the King, he refuses to passe it; I know ’twill be said, he never refused to passe it. It cannot be denied but that he refused to passe it according to the advice of the Houses, which is (sayes the Law) the same ever-living reason of the State that first advised the government, and must still advise the way of applying it. But doth not this you’ll say deny the King his negative voice in making Law? No. This Vote or Ordinance of the two Houses, ’tis not an Act of Parliament, or Law; ’tis but an occasionall supply of this coordination of the government (in case of one part’s refusall) least the whole should ruine, and to continue but untill a Law may be had.
But you’ll say, how, and where doth this Reason of the State thus residing in the Votes of Parliament, live in the intervals of Parliament. I answer, virtually it lives to the needs of the State, in the present Laws, the births of those Votes, potentially in Parliaments to be called when there is need, it being but occasionall, needs no continued actuall existence.
Well, hereupon the ordinary way of Bill failing, the Houses must not desert their trust, but apply it that way which by the first constitution of the government in such case is left them, that is, by their Votes and Ordinances, wherein (as before) the same Reason of the State still lives to pursue its safety. The King still persists in his refusall, and insteed of passing a Bill for this secured Militia, raises an Army against their Ordinance for it, claiming trust thereof to belong to him; they deny it not, so he discharge it by this entrusted Reason of the Kingdom, the advice of Parliament. He will doe it, but it shall be by the advice of them against whom it is to be secured, whom the Parliament has voted enemies of the State, and against whom especially it was first called. Now ’tis a rule in Law, Interest reipublicae ne sua re quis malè utatur, No man may use his own right to the Common-wealth’s wrong or damage; the Law provides, that a man burne not his own Corne, drowne not his own Land; nay, that a man bind not himselfe from Marriage, or the manurance or tillage of his own Land, because against the good of the Common-wealth.
Well, the King insteed of applying this trust of the Militia (ordinarily his) against these voted enemies of the Common-wealth’s, gathers those very enemies into an Army against the Parliament, that had voted them such, or which is all one, the over-voting party therein; ’tis certaine the Law allowes not the King without consent of Parliament to raise an Army, ’tis as certaine these men thus in Armes, tho’ raised by his Personall command, are enemies to him in his politicke capacity as King, because they are in Armes against Law, and so against the Kingdom, and so against him as King; who (tho’ in place he be) cannot in Law be divided from his Kingdom or Parliament, no more than the head can from the body; nay, they are not only in Armes against Law (i) without its authority, but against the very being of it which depends on Parliament. What shall the two other Estates doe? Nothing but an Army is left whereby to represse these enemies of King and Kingdome; the third Estate, the King, is so farre from joining to raise an Army to that purpose, as he invites and detaines these enemies of the Kingdome from its justice. What, but use that power in Armes, which the government in such case of the King’s refusall hath entrusted them with to its preservation, especially when ’tis but for the apprehending of such enemies to it, as (besides their voted delinquency by the State’s judgement) are sufficiently convinced by their own flight from its justice; qui fuget Legem fatetur facinus, flight argues guilt alwayes. Every Court in its capacity, has power to apprehend and bring Delinquents to the justice of it, and that by force, and if need be, by arming the posse comitatus to enforce it, and why not the Parliament the regall Court, the posse Regni? An attempt to kill a Judge on the Bench, the Law makes treason, and why? But because ’tis in his Laws and Courts that the King specially raignes, ’tis in them his Crowne and dignity is more specially impeached. But you’ll say, ’tis the King makes it a Parliament, and he is not there.
To which I answer, in a coordinate and mixt government, one part’s refusall exempts not the other from its duty, nor must it defraud the whole of its safety; so, it should frustrate the very end of that its coordination, which is (as we have seene) supply, for the more security of its safety.
Next, at all times the Houses are a part in the supremacy of power, and in case of the other part’s absence and refusall both, virtually the whole, but more specially at this time, now the King hath bound himselfe by Law not to dissolve them without their consent: for however many style them now in the King’s absence no Parliament at all, and his Majestie’s own Papers have some expresses tending that way, yet I would faine know, whether there be now actually in England a Parliament or no? If there be not, how came it dissolved? The King hath bound himself from being able to dissolve it without their consent, they cannot without his, neither consent hath been obtained. Legally dissolve it he cannot by his removall, for, then he should be able to keepe and breake his Law at once, for the Act is against removall without consent as well as dissolution. And illegally dissolve it he cannot, if so dissolved, it would remaine a legall Parliament still, an injury cannot take away a right. Well then, a Parliament it still remaines in his absence, and if a Parliament, why should it not have the power of a Parliament? A Parliamentary power is the inseparable adjunct of a Parliament: why not able then, in order to the end of a Parliament his and its preservation, and therein of the whole, to apply the power of that whole wherewith it is entrusted? Why should the whole be frustrated of its safety, the end it first coordinated, and thereby fitted the government to, by one part of that government’s refusall, when the other part is willing? Specially when that one part hath bound itselfe out from hindering the other’s willingnesse, willingnesse to preserve the whole, and in the whole that unwilling part too. However this Resolver slight the Observator’s Argument drawn from the highest end of government, the people’s safety, he cannot deny but that the rule holds alwayes, finis quo ultimatior eo influxu potentior, the highest end hath the strongest influence, to that end still all other subordinate ends stand but in the office of meanes, and this that very Text the Resolver so much clings to, evinces, where the higher power is called a Minister for thy good. The people’s good is the highest end of the highest power, and therefore that which gives essence and denomination to that power according to those rules in nature, Finis habet rationem formae in moralibus, the end hath the office of the forme in moralls, and Forma dat nomen & esse, the forme gives denomination and essence both, the end then being tho’ last in the execution yet first in the intention of the efficient, must needs qualifie and regulate the worke.
Yes, a fine way you’ll say of preserving the King by fighting against him; no such matter, the King hath a double capacity, politick and naturall, in his politick capacity as King, in fighting for the preservation of the Land and Kingdome they fight for him, what King could he be without a Kingdome to governe, and Law to governe it by? In that therefore the Law tells us, he cannot be severed from his Kingdom, or Parliament its representative body (tho’ never so farre in Person distant from it). And in his naturall capacity, as a man, they fight not against him in that neither, they humbly begge his safer presence with them, at least his withdrawing from his, and their enemies; nay, they fight for him this way too, we never reade of a King once unkinged but he is quickly unmanned too, they fight to disingage and unthrall his Person from that unsafe and unworthy imployment those enemies to him and his Kingdom put it to, in making it a shelter, a breast worke, but a mudd wall to their own dangers, which they feare from his own Laws: for however his Majesty may be perswaded by them, ’tis his cause has engaged them, (most of them) ’tis their own guilt and danger that hath engaged them, and engaged them to engage him. And although in their mutuall engagements, they may think either’s turne served, it may be neither sufficiently knows who steers their course, what depth of water they draw; certainly, he that looks on the conjunctures of the late affaires of this and the neighbour States, cannot but beleeve (tho’ unknown to his Majesty, and it may be many about him) that those long-spoones to feed with the Devill with, (as one calls them) the Jesuites, both at home and abroad throughout most parts of Christendome have (tho’ at a distance) the first and highest and therefore strongest influence into his Majestie’s present councels, baiting their unseen hooks with his and his Armie’s interests, making them but to pull at the Oare while those sit at the stern. His Majestie’s aime (may be) is to bring his Crown out of wardship, (as Lewis II of France bragged of his) his Army’s (may be) many of them but at keeping their necks out of the haltar, but those Basilisks (that kill with their eyes at distance) look further, and have their ends mingled with, and lapt up in these, upon Religion and the State both.
2. The finall and casting result of this State’s judgement, concerning what those Proposed Laws, dangers, and means of prevention are, resides in the two Houses of Parliament.
Well, in this mixture of the Monarchy or supreame power and trust of Government, the two Houses of Parliament making a coordinate part, what is their share? You’ll say, they are the King’s great Councell, but what, only to consult? (Then questionlesse; he, and not we were to elect them, who chuses not his own Counsell that he is but to consult with? No, but to consent with him in the making of Lawes the highest office of Government; but how a Councell voluntarily assumed by him (as Moses his substitutes in the Wildernesse) no, but assigned to him by the first constitution of the Government from the very same consent of the people that first made the King, and by succession him that King, in whom the first King still lives as in a Corporation (as the Law calls him) which dies not; For the Doctor dares not speak out, when he talkes of the King’s right by conquest to the Kingdome. Conquests (I confesse) may give such a right as plunderers use to take in houses they can master, a jus in re, not a jus ad rem, (as the Law speaks) a jus tenoris, not a tenorem juris, a right of tenure, but no tenour of right; how, not only undoctorall, but how unchristian, inhumane a barbarisme is it, to talke of a right of Conquest in a civill, a Christian State? Were a Land inhabited by Wolves and Tigers only conquest might give a right because none could claime any other; but among men capable of, and invested in a right, there was never more than two wayes of alienation of a right, forfeiture and consent, and even in that of forfeiture there is a consent too implied, the condition is (therein) consented to, on both sides, and what forfeiture can there be where there was never any covenant? If Conquest may create a Title where there was none before, certainly it may make that Title as absolute and arbitrary as the Conquerour pleases, for what should let, where there needs no consent or covenant, and then, why might not such sooner a King in a limited Monarchy (as this is) make himselfe as Arbitrary as he pleased by Conquest? ’Tis easier to augment than to create: no conquest may restore a right, forfeiture may loose a right, ’tis consent only that can transact or give a right. And I cannot let passe how many ways this Resolver abuses his Majesty herein. A Title he has (he sayes) by conquest; but he must not rule by it; a King as Conquerour, and yet he must not rule as Conquerour; what a strange Title is this that makes him a King, but gives him not any Rule? And how injurious doth he (herein) labour to make the King to his posterity, as well as rulelesse in himselfe? How much doth he wrong his inheritance that subscribes and sweares to a limited Title, and has a free one the while to hold by?
Well a power of consenting is of all hands agreed on to be in the two Houses, the faculty of Legem dare10 is not in difference, the question is about the Declarative that of Legem dicere,11 the Law is the rule, and cannot be framed without all the three Estates, but who must apply this rule by giving it the finall and casting resolution of its sence? without which the Record is but the Sheath, ’tis the sence is the Sword of the Law; such a power or faculty there must be in every legall government, after all debatement to give Lawes their sence, beyond all further debatement, otherwise, there would be a Processus in infinitum, debatement still upon debatement, and as nature avoids infinitudes, so the Law inconveniences, even above mischiefs: and it were a defect of no lesse than infinite inconvenience to the end of the Law, Government. If this decisive faculty after the debative hath passed upon the sence of the Law, were not some where resident in the governement, Perfectum est cui nihil quod convenit deest, and ’tis a monster in Nature, quod deficit necessariis, That is perfect which wants not what is convenient, that a monster in Nature which is defective in what is necessary. And where should this faculty reside, but in the two Houses? in whose Votes the Law itselfe places that very same specifick reason of the kingdome, that at first contrived and still animates the Government; and which ever since contrives the very Laws themselves to be declared, (every one abounding most in his owne sence); which thus we prove.
This Principle which all debates about the sence of the Law are to be resolved into without further debatement, must be either the Records themselves, or the Judges, or the King, or Houses of Parliament: Not 1. The Records, for that’s the peculiar Priviledg of God’s word to be autocriticall, its own last Judge, and even therein too, ’tis he who was the first contriver, that is, the last Interpreter. God only could fore-see from the beginning, what doubts may arise about the meaning of any part of his Records, and therefore he only can supply & fit those with some other part thereof to interpret them; Man’s Laws are therefore still liable to repeales & dispensations, because the makers could not for-see how unfit they might prove for after times, & even then those repeals & dispensations given them are (in construction of Law) no other than interpretative still; it is interpreted that had their first makers of them lived to see their unfitnes, they would have consented to those their repeals and dispensations; the Records then may be helps to their Interpreters, not the Interpreters, because ’tis they that are to bee interpreted, they are the rule, they cannot be the hand too, to apply it; though penned with never so much care, time will weare them into a capacity (at least) of different sences to different understandings, and a different or double sence cannot be this highest principle of resolution, there can be but one highest.
Why not the Judges then? They take solemne Oathes to interpret Law aright; true, yet we see their interpretations and Oathes to fall under further debatement still, witnesse (besides many other) the late case of Ship-money, the Oath they take ’tis to the State, and therefore that by its reason residing in the Votes of Parliament, is to judge how truely they have kept it. It comes then to fall betweene the King and Parliament, which shall have it? Both cannot, if devided, as now they are (at least personally) and the principle of ultimat resolution cannot be a divided one, for then it cannot resolve.
But you’ll say the principle of making Law is King and Parliament jointly. True, jointly, a joint principle it may be, but not a divided one. But you’ll say, If Lawes cannot when the principle is divided be made, nor must they in such a case be declared? I answer there is more need of declaring old Lawes than of making new, a State may be governed by the old ones without new; but not by the old ones without this finall resolution of their sense, they are of no use without it, the making of Law, is a standing permanent Act in facto, done at once, the applying them by their interpretations, a transient one, in fieri alwayes a doing. But you’ll say then, if this declarative power be so necessary, and so necessarily in the Houses, how shall we doe in the intervals of Parliaments? I answer the judgements of inferiour courts must stay further debates untill a Parliament be had to try those judgements by, which therefore should (by Law) be once a yeare (at least). Well then, if this last casting principle be so necessary, and cannot be a divided one, why not the King? He cannot in himselfe be divided, the Parliament may? I answer, first, though the Members be devided, the major part that carry the Vote cannot be. Next, this principle as it is thus necessary, so it must be a competent one too, and that requires two things, ability and fidelity; ability to know what he is to judge, and fidelity to judge but what he knowes aright; for matter of ability to take cognizance of the cause by. His Majesty often professes himselfe no Lawyer; therefore, in Law he judges not but by his Courts, in the meanest of which the sentence past stands good in Law, though the King by Proclamation or in Person should oppose it: whereas there is nothing more frequent or proper to Parliaments than to reverse any of their judgements. But the King (you’ll say) has promises of assistance from God himselfe to enable him herein, A divine sentence is in the mouth of the King, and his lips shall not transgresse in judgement; and againe, my Lord the King is as an Angell of God to discerne betweene good and evill. True, such Scriptures I know have been taught to speake what Kings can doe instead of what Kings should doe, but these are no promises but precepts, at least but particular praises of one, no generall claimes of all Kings, nay one of the wisest Kings (and ours too) experimentally confesses, That with Kings ’tis so much the more hard to doe right, by how much ’tis so easie to doe wrong; and indeed what would such a power be lesse than arbitrary, if what he please to declare to be so, must be Law, so, what vaine things would Parliaments be, what wild things Kings, and what miserable things Subjects? But in point of fidelity, why not the King rather than the Parliament? Why may there not be a factious, packt or enslaved Parliament, as well as a willfull, flattered, abused King? Yes I confesse ’tis possible, but nothing so likely, and it behoves the wisdome of a Government, where nothing can be contrived against possibility of miscarriage, to secure what may be against probability. So much the Resolver acknowledges, Wee cannot (he says) expect absolute meanes of safety in a State, but such as are most reasonable. Now experience shews that most men’s actions are swayed (most what) by their ends and interests; those of Kings (for the most part) as absolutenesse of rule, enlargement of Revenue by Monopolies, Patents, &c. are altogether incompatible and cross centered to those of Subjects, as Property, Priviledge, &c. with which the Parliament’s either ends or interests cannot thus dash and interfer, the Members are all Subjects themselves, not only entrusted with, but selfe interested in those very priviledges and properties; besides they are many, and so they not only see more, but are lesse swayable; as not easily reducible to one head of private interest; but by a neer equality of Votes (you’ll say) in Parliament it may come to an odde man to cast by, and then the whole trust and interest both, lies in him wholy.
I answer, no such matter, ultimum Stilricidium non exhaurit Clepsydram the last odde sand doth not make the houreglasse empty more than any of the rest it doth but tell us when ’tis empty suppose 200, of one side and 201 of the other, the odds is carried by the one but the vote by the whole 201. The odde one tells us ’tis the major part but ’tis all the rest that make it so: so that we have (however) the judgement, trust and interest of 201 chosen men engaged in the equity and fitnesse of the Vote. This is it that great Father of the Law, so much magnifies the wisdom of this government in, Dum non unius aut centum solum consultorum virorum, sed plus quam trecentorum electorum hominum, quali numero olim Senatus Romanorum regebatur, ipsa sunt edita, and neer upon that number of 300 the major part of both Houses falls to be.
But you’ll say, how if one or both Houses be devided, and that into equall Votes, how then is the principle either one, or able to resolve? I answer, de impossibilibus non est deliberandum, impossibles are not to be consulted on, it cannot be; for in such a case of either House’s, equality of Votes their severall Speakers have then, and not till then Votes to cast by.
But how yet doth it appeare, but that (at least) this power of last Resolution, is as Arbitrary in the Houses, as it would be in the King. I answer, it cannot be denied nor avoided, but that as the Government (in the forme or qualification of it) was at first an act of the will, and so Arbitrary; so it still remaining the same it must remaine somewhere arbitrary still, else our forefathers should not convey that same government to us which they began, but should bind us in that wherein they were themselves free. It is the priviledg of God’s Laws only to bind unalterablie, now where should the arbitrariness of this facultie reside for the State’s use, but where it was at first in the consent and reason of the State? which as (we have seen) the Law places in the Votes of Parliament, where this arbitrariness allaied and ballanced by number, trust, self interest, ’tis best secured from doing hurt; in the naturall bodie the will followes always the last dictate or resolution of the understanding, and that, (in this politick bodie) being the wisdom of its great Councell, what so fit as it to give dictate to what necessarilie remains of will or arbitrariness in this faculty? The Resolver himself acknowledges no lesse, when he sayes the King is to see with their eyes that are of different judgment from him. But yet further if ability and fidelity make up the competency of a faculty to give Law, its finall resolution by; why not then the Judges in the Checquer-chamber rather than the Members in Parliament? They for matter of ability are skilled, and for matter of fidelity sworn, have more dexterity to judge and lesse liberty to erre. I answer, for their skills and oath, the Houses may make use of both if they please. It was the wisdom of this government, considering men’s aptness rather to warpe after their interests and ends, than to be kept upright by their skills and oaths, to trust it rather to many independent men’s interests, than a few dependent men’s oaths, every daye’s experience tells us that interests are better state security than oaths, specially when those interests have (as here) the command of those oaths, to bind all that skill too to their service. Besides, as their interests with us tie them more to do a right, so our elections of them tie us more to suffer what they do if not a right: because, what they do, we do in them, and self wrong is seldom self revenged. Lastly, if theirs be the finall judgment what is Law, then (à fortiori) much more when it is endangered, and the state in it? And what fitting meanes of prevention are to be used.
PROP. 3
In this finall Resolution of the State’s judgment the people are to rest, and in obedience thereto, may with good conscience, in defence of the King, Laws, and Government bear and use armes.
This last and casting resolution of judgment then (we see) resides in the two Houses of Parliament, which are therefore called the great Councell, not of the King only, but of the kingdom, and therefore by it elected and entrusted, but how resides it in them? Infallibly? (As this Resolver imposes on their Idolizers (as he speaks) no. They are not therein in themselves infallible, but to us inevitable. Our judgments are not enthralled, ’tis our interests are entrusted and so, subjected to their decisions. Our judgments are not infallibly guided from either erring with them or differing from them, but bound up in, and superseded by theirs from gaine-saying or resistance; here then (we see) is no Parliament Papacy at all (as the Doctor pleases to descant) he himself well knowes, that though the Pope claim an infallibility, and we deny it him, or a generall Councell either, yet we ascribe to a rightlie constituted generall Councell; a power of binding all under it, from all manner of disturbance to its decisions; and why should a civill generall Councell of England have lesse power in it? Yea further, why should we not, (as we have bound ourselves by our choice and trust, externally to submit to their determinations, so) be enduced too, to believe their joint judgments better than our single opinions? There intelligence and assistance is, (in all likeliehood) much better, I must confesse in the Militia Ordinance, my opinion (possibly) and another’s, of this, or that Lord’s fidelity, may incline us to think they might have been as well continued in their trusts. But why should we not beleeve, we may sooner erre therein than they? We know our own, we know not their informations, discoveries, reasons; the Law is called mens sine appetitu, a mind without passions, and the Lawmakers should be (as neer as may be) so too, the Parliament a speaking Law, as the Law a silent Parliament. Law-makers should be (as Aristotle speaks) but λόγοι than ἄνθρωποι rather reason than men, and (as he speaks) but [. . .] at most, but peeces of quick and walking reason; every Member of Parliament, (’tis like) is not such, yet certainly if some neighbour Members might personally hate this or that Lord, upon particular entercourse of wrongs, yet, no one Lord hath in all likeliehood provoked the greater number of the Commons House, and ’tis that must go to the displacing him; or if he should, ’tis very much if the other House should jumpe with all them in such a personall hatred.
Well then, wee see what power the Law, through our trust, gives the two Houses, and all, in order to the safety of the King, Law and State. They judge by the reason of this State, and rule of this Law (both residing in them) that all three, King, Law, and kingdom, (in Law, as we have heard before not separable), are not only imminently endangered, but actually invaded by an Army, engaged by the adjudged forfeiture of their own lives. There remaines no way in the highest result of the State’s reason to preserve these, and prevent those from apparent mischief, but an army to withstand this other army ready to advance, nay in actuall attempts of hostility; of whom should this army of the state consist, but those who are endangered, nay assaulted, yes assaulted, and plundered too, nay murdered, before in any Parliament army there was so much as man listed, all before were but Musters, and manning of Forts, for the kingdome’s better defence against Forraign dangers.
Well the case thus standing, this great Centurion of the kingdom the Parliament (for the King refusing, we may now (better than our forefathers) give that name to the Houses) sayes unto one of this now necessarily yet voluntarily listed army too, go and he goes, to another come and he comes, to a third do this and he doth it; and wherein lies now the unconscionablenesse of this obedience? It is naturall all the faculties and members in the naturall body are to the defence of the whole commanded to their offices by the understanding’s last result or dictat. It is politick, prevention is the right eye of policie, recovery is but the left, the after game. What other authoritie hath a Sheriff or executioner to put a malefactor to death? But you’ll say conscience must have some higher footing, ’tis God’s Accomptant, and must have his warrant: and it has that fully to. First, a warrant of Charity, in the sixth commandement, which not only forbids murder but commands the preservation of our own & our neighbour’s lives. Secondly, of justice: Render to all what is due, and we have seen, that in case of the King’s refusall (already voted by the kingdom’s Reason) the command of the kingdom’s power (in order to its safety) ’tis its Councell’s due.
Lastlie, of obedience, submit yourselves to every ordinance of man, and that for the Lord’s sake. Sayes S. Peter, we have seen it was the ordinance of man, the first men that introduced the government of this State, and now of the men that are ordained to administer that government. Let every soule be subject to the higher powers (saith S. Paul) and that not for wrath but conscience’ sake, (which place I shall sufficiently cleer anon) besides David in his own defence used an army, & (though against the King) yet is said to fight the Lord’s Battells. Now we have seen the Coordination of this highest power in this kingdom for its better safety, & therein the entirenesse still of its efficacy to its end, though one part withdraw; if the King (especially now he has bound himself by Law not to dissolve this present Coordination) he should be able legally to break the Law, then his government were utterly absolute, or rather absolutely impossible, and illegally he cannot, for the Law hath provided that as King he can do no wrong, (I) nothing against Law, because he cannot, (in that capacity) be severed from his Parliament, and what they enact together is Law. So then the houses’ commands are in this our case acts of the highest power to which the Apostle bids us to be subject.
I do not say if any Souldier in this Army of the King and Parliament’s (for we see legally severed they cannot be) do fight not satisfied in his own conscience, but that he sins, and that (as the Doctor urges so often) Damnably: I say only, that he hath warrant enough for his conscience if he apply it, & if he do, the Doctor’s Damnation is not that of the Apostles, but much what of the nature of that of the Dammees12 of these times. And now these three Propositions being cleered, the Answer to the severall Sections of his Treatise will be both very short and easie. To answer that all his arguments and instances against resistance are mis-scaened in absolute Monarchies, whereas this of ours is mixt would serve the turne; however particularly thus.
The first Section containes little else than the laying down of the manner of consciences, discourse, by assuming to the Proposition granted, and so concluding: saving that he there tells us, that all his fellow Divines deny to the King an arbitrary Government, and yet, in his fifth Section he tells us too that the chief power and finall judgment is in one, and he that one: which what (I pray) amounts it lesse to, than an Arbitrary Government? And he denies that again too almost the next word, in his omnibus ordinibus regni consentientibus, for what consent of all needs there if the finall Judgement be in one? Now that (though the King in Person withdraw) there are virtualy, omnes ordines regni consentientes,13 it hath sufficiently appeared; and for his person, if that were with them to consent or dissent either, doubtlesse there would be no resistance made at all.
The 2d. Section begins with certaine instances of resistance, as that of the people in behalfe of Jonathan, David’s resistance, and Elisha’s, but wee make no use of them, need them not, and therefore need not answer the Doctor’s refutation of them, only (by the way) David’s resistance was by an Army, and what use of an Army unlesse it may fight against, as well as avoid the danger, besides ’tis said that (though against the King) he fought the battels of the Lord (as before). Other instances hee there hath against resistance, but in all simple and absolute Monarchies, those of the Jewes and Romans: nothing to our case. Only take notice by the way, that those Monarchies were absolute and arbitrary not by conquest, but by consent of the people, the Jewes desired of God a King, to be governed by, after the manner of the Nations (sayes the Text) which was arbitrarily (as the Doctor observes out of Justin) and thereupon is it that God by Samuel tells them what such a King would doe to them, not what he might do (as the Doctor seemes to inferre from the place). And for the Roman Empire, its arbitrarinesse was not introduced by conquest, but by consent of the Senate, (however it may be awed thereto by Armes). And for that Title of succession (he there speakes of) it no way excludes consent, for it begins first in the election and consent of the people, and virtually continues so still in the mutuall bonds of oathes betweene King and people, to governe and bee governed by Lawes by them jointly to be made.
But the maine substance of this Section is a couple of Texts, that of Rom. 13. and I Peter 2. To the first we easily answer (if not written particularly to the Romans, who were under an absolute Monarchy, and so no more to concerne us than the Judiciall Law doth (i.e.) only in the generall equity of obedience) yet suppose it referre to all government in generall it makes (as ’tis often alledged) altogether for us, it requires obedience to ordained powers, (i.e.) legall commands not willfull pleasures of Governour. Now ours is ordained to be coordinate and mixt, and resides in that part of it from which the other though withdrawing in person cannot take it, and to which the Law in such a case cleerely gives it, including (as we have seene) in it virtually the other part too, who in his politicke relation cannot be thence (as King) divided. The meaning of the place then must be this; The power that be (i.e.) so or so established by consent of man, are ordained of God to be obeyed; or it is God’s ordinance that men should live under some government, and submit without resistance to that kinde of government they have by consent established, just (as Saint Peter followes him) to the ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake. When the Papists pressed with this Text, aske us why wee, that are so much for obedience to higher powers, doe not submit to the Church’s highest highest power in the Pope? we answer, ’tis a usurpt, not an ordained power, ulcus protestatis, a tumor or wen, no part of the body, a power never either consented to by the body of the whole Church, or substituted by its Head CHRIST JESUS. There are two kindes (wee use to say of tyranny, regiminis and usurpationis, that which is only of Governement, though never so heavie yet must be endured, not only to the good (sayes the Apostle) but the froward too, and therefore I know no man that defends the tenne Tribes’ revolt from Rehoboam as the Doctor insinuats. That other kind of usurpation it hath no right, no ordination at all, and so no subjection due to it. In all power of government Divinity tells us there are foure things; the institution, the constitution, the acquisition, and the use: the two latter acquisition and use are confessed to be often times rather from the Devil by bribery, blood, rapine and the like: the constitution alwayes from man’s consent, the institution alwayes from God, so that here is more than God’s bare permission or approbation either (as the Doctor charges us to hold). Here is in every ordained power as well God’s institution of it, and injunction of obedience to it, as man’s constitution of it. That there be a Government, ’tis of God, what this government shall be, whether Monarchy or Aristocracy: or if Monarchy, whether simple and meerely subordinate, or mixt and coordinate ’tis of man, so then, Let every soule be subject to the higher powers, for the powers that be, are ordained of God, (i.e.) therefore let every soule be subject to powers (not wills) because God’s providence hath instituted them and so subject as man’s consent hath constituted them. Now we have sufficiently seene by the constitution of the power of government of this kingdom, the Law (as the rule) is put into the hands of the two Houses of Parliament by their Votes, (as its reason) wherein we must rest to be applied to its end, the safty of K. & State.
I wonder therefore the Doctor should so much insist on this Text, for if he cannot prove (what he indeed denies) the government to be absolute, and soly in the King, he cannot hence enforce obedience to his personall commands.
The next text is that of I Pet. 2. Submit to every ordinance of man, wherein the Dr. hath espied a double advantage, one from the Greeke word ἀνθρωπίνῃ which rather signifies human than of man, so that it is called human (i.e.) in or on man (as he would have it) as only the subject of it, not any way the cause. ’Tis strange a Doctor of Divinity should trifle thus with Scripture, and as Shoomakers doe with their Leather, with his teeth stretch it thus to his Last, doth he not a few lines after acknowledge (to use his owne words) that the forme, whether Monarchy, or Aristocracy and qualifications of either forme (i.e.) if Monarchy, whether absolute or tempered, are not jure divino, what then? Not jure diabolico sure, it must be humano then, and in jus humanum, as ’tis opposed to divinum, man sure is the cause and Author, and not the subject only, nay why should the word human be there at all, but as contradistinct to what followes, for God’s sake? Why unlesse to make the sence this? that although the ordinance or government, in the manner of its constitution be from man, yet because in the necessity of its institution ’tis from God, submit to it though of man for the Lord’s sake.
His other advantage is in the words supreme and sent, the King as supreme, and such as are sent (i.e.) (sayes hee) the Parliament: but the Parliament is called, not sent, a difference (at least) as great as betweene too and from; but wee have already seene how the King is supreame, not (as those of S. Peter’s times) absolutely so, but in his mixture and coordination with his Parliament, in which every subject is a subject still (as the Doctor urges) but the whole accordinate part with him in the supreame otherwise they could not hinder him from making Lawes, nor finally declare Law without him, the two highest acts of Supreame power.
The third Section especially containes two other texts of Scripture, the first of Prov. 8.15. By me Kings Reigne. I answer, ’tis spoken of and by Wisdome, and doth shee not as well say (as followes) by mee Nobles and Senators decree Judgment? What is here said more of Kings’ Reignes, than of Parliament’s Decrees, they should both be guided by Wisdome, that is all the place will beare.
The second place is that Psal. 82.6. I have said yee are God’s; and doth hee not there too (when he speakes it) stand in the Congregation of the Judges (as the text speakes) reproving such as judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked, all Rulers are God’s alike, (i.e.) God’s substitutes and representatives towards men, upon whom hee derives some of his power and authority; doth not the word of God come to them all alike (i.e.) as it followes in the Doctor’s own words, a commission for the setting up of a governing power, whereof the manner of its constitution, hee himselfe before confesses to be from the people, not God; did not this word come to Pilat, as well as to Caesar. Pilat had not his power but from above, (as our Saviour tells him), as well as them the Doctor speakes of I wonder touch not mine Anointed comes not in among the rest? (as usually it doth) a Text plainely spoken to Kings of God’s people, not to the people of KINGS; they were (sayes the very Text) Kings whom he reproved for their sakes, saying touch not mine Anointed.
What remaines in this Section, ’tis nothing else but a jeering the fundamentall Lawes of this kingdome, so often mentioned by the Parliament, which what they are I have before shewed, not as the Doctor would have it the same with those of France, Turkie and all other kingdomes, but proper to coordinate and mixt ones, and especially this.
The fourth Section is spent upon a confutation of any power in the people to reassume the power they first betrusted to the King, the which no man (for ought I know) maintaines, what need the people reassume that which in the first Coalition of the Governement they reserved (as hath appeared before).
The fifth Section. Here, wee have nothing but strange involutions of the matter, and intanglings of the Reader, most what inconsistent as well as impertinent, one while the state hath meanes of preservation such as the Law prescribes, and yet not twentie lines after, wee cannot expect absolute meanes of safety in a state, meanes of preservation, but not absolute safety; if it bee preserved, questionlesse ’tis absolutely preserved, dubiam salutem qui dat afflictis, negat, he that gives not absolute safety gives none, againe this chiefe power and finall judgement (he sayes) must be in one, scarce twelve lines after but Parliaments (hee sayes) are the only remedy for the distempers of the Kingdome, Parliament is the only remedy and yet the only judgement is in the King.
And yet againe he tells us in the same Section, that that only judgement too of the Kings is to see with their eyes that are of different judgment from him. What remaines in this Section is a plaine begging of three questions hee would faine have us to maintaine.
First, that every state whether reserving it or no, hath this meanes of safety by resistance, and to this purpose that of the Church is objected: a State indeed, but neither civill nor of its own constitution, this state Christ the head did not only institute but constitute it too, and that without any concurrence of its own consent. Then the Christians in Tertullian’s time are objected, as if they were a civill distinct state from the Romans, in which they lived, or the Roman other than an absolute Monarchie by consent of the Senat (as before).
A second question begged is, that in case the King and Parliaments should neither discharge their trust, the people might rise and make resistance against both a position which no man (I know) maintaines the Parliament’s, is the people’s owne consent, which once passed they cannot revoke; hee still pursues his owne dreame of the people’s reassuming power, whereas wee acknowledge no power can be imployed but what is reserved, and the people have reserved no power in themselves from themselves in Parliament.
This groundlesse preassuming aspertion of the people reassuming power I wonder the Doctor so much insists on it.14 There is indeed a late sawcie Scurrilous pasquill that hath broken prison out of the Gate-house from a company of Delinquents there (and no marvaile if such would reassume all Parliamentary power) by the resolving title it should bee a Journyman of the same Trade to this of the Doctor’s: where after many stale malitious slanders on the Parliament’s proceedings, disproved long since by almost every man’s experience, as well as severall Declarations, all to disable the Parliament from the kingdome’s urgent preservation by any way that the written Lawes prescribe not, (as if the Circumstances and exigences of publike actions of this sort did not (above written laws) warrant and even element their justnesse) this raving Bedlam (I say) broke loose without a Keeper, (deserving (as it professes to desire) no answer, one of Vulcan’s forge I confesse were best, fire or fetters); threatens the People’s reassuming the entrusted power of Parliament, and with Salomon’s foole, Pro. 26.18. throwing about him arrowes and fire-brands and death; complaining and threatening both (according to its Title) concludes at length with this Resolution, to lay hold of what is next at hand, to the reassuming this power: otherwise for ought I know this reassumption of power is like that Popish reassumption of the House of Loretto, a meere Castle in the air of the Doctor’s brain.15
The 3d. question in this Section begged is; that we hold the cause may warrant a resistance, and here we are told what the Primitive Christians suffered without resistance: and that the Netherlands had greater cause than we to make resistance, a contrary Religion was urged on them, whereas we have ours still offered us. No, we hold not whatever cruelty can be suffered cause enough to make resistance, ’tis not the cause, ’tis the constitution of the governement, reserving in its coordination a power of resistance, in order to its preservation: otherwise were this an absolute Monarchy, should the King alone, or (as it is) should King and Parliament enjoin us all to deny Christ and worship the Sun, we were (though never so able) not to make any resistance but by suffering; the cause cannot alter the case here, ’tis the constitution must doe it: and yet, if his Majesty might (in case of Religion) helpe the Rochellers to resist their King in an absolute Monarchy, why much more might not the Parliament in this.
The sixth Section containes in substance three bitter invectives, sharpened I believe at the Philistine’s forge (the Doctor speaks of) for they defie the host of Israel.
The first calls the Parliament, a prevailing faction of a few. Is the representative Body of the Kingdome become but a prevailing faction? And how a Faction, if prevailing, though never so few, ’tis the major part prevailes, and so prevailing is the body, and can the Body make a Faction or Schisme from itselfe; if many of the Members withdraw, the more fault theirs, and shame too, to desert their trust. The Law and reason both tells us, That no man can take advantage by his owne default; so, all Parliaments and their Acts too, how easily might they be eluded? Certainly what is punishable is not pleadable, and Crompton (we see) cites the Bishop of Winton’s case herein, who was arraigned in the King’s Bench, for that he came to the Parliament and departed without its licence.
The second invective is against the Parliament’s hostile manner of proceeding in this their warre. His Majesty hath alwayes been (he sayes) upon the defensive part, questionlesse he is upon the offensive part by whom the offence comes, and that is that part in this coordinate government (that in case of such danger) refuses to doe his part, and resists the other from making supply. Surely the Doctor’s Almanacke (he speaks of) is an Erra Pater, for untill his Majesty had hostilely entered the Commons House, with the attendance of his listed Souldiery; they had scarce so much as a voluntary guard, and when they had one, ’twas not a guard on the Members’ safeties, ’twas rather on the safety of their late Act against dissolution, for if at any time that House should have been by force but kept one halfe day out of the place, where they had the day before appointed their next meeting, it had been utterly dissolved. Since then, the manning of Hull, and (after his Majesty had in the name of a guard, raised an Army to take it from the Parliament’s trust) Sir John Hotham’s humble declining His Majestie’s entrance, but untill he should acquaint the Parliament in discharge of his trust; what Hostilities were these? The setling the Militia by Ordinance (His Majesty having refused it) in order to his and his Kingdome’s defence (where note that the Statute of II Henry 7.c.I. which charges all the King’s Subjects with his and the Land’s defence, makes the rule of that defence to be according to the duty of their Allegiance, and that binds them to doe their duty whether accepted or no, and what hostility in all this? Since then, look down through the sieges of Warwick, Coventry, Banbury, Wells, Manchester, &c. even to Keynton, and what other resistance than defensive has the Parliament made? And even there too his Majesty was but followed with a Petition (as Scotland had successefully done before) untill he was pleased to turn back upon them and give fire.
The third invective in this Section, is against its distrust of the reality of his Majestie’s Protestations, to continue Religion, Lawes and Liberties, &c. To this, all that I have to say is, that be his Majestie’s Protestations never so reall and hearty, yet if there be in the Parliament’s power a surer bottome to set these on, than the most reall purposes and protestations of a mortall man they discharge not their trust if they do it not. I know his Majesty (besides his constant and fixed goodness of disposition) hath more and stronger ties upon him of honour, hazard, trust, than any else whoever; but all men must follow their principles, which in morals will and must vary with the last results of their judgements, and even those in creatures that know not by intelligence as Angels, but discourse as men, are things that upon further light must vary too; the Law as we observed before is mens sine appetitu a better bottome for government to stand on, than the most constant Resolution or Protestation that ever meer man made, besides his Majesty dispences but by his Ministers, and then his Protestations rise to no more than this, That he will governe us by such Lawes and Cannons as his Judges and Bishops will by their interpretations fit us with.
The 7 Section containes little more than a setting on the same charges with more bitternesse, calling the Parliament’s Declarations wicked Pamphlets, false, odious, scandalous imputations of this giddy age, &c. wherein both his virulence and impotence at once appears; in that (he sayes) he will with Michael use no railing accusations on the Parliament, and yet uses the most railing and accusing one of all other, in likening them as he doth (therein) to the Devill the Archrailer and accuser both; if he looke but a little further than the place he above urged in the Apostle Peter, he will tell them who they be that are thus presumptuous and do speake evill of Dignities, and that Michael did not so.
For those empty feares and jealousies (as hee calls them) grounded on reports of forraigne power and preparations, the Queene’s Religion, the great resort of Papists to his Majesty, His intercepting Ireland’s reliefe, &c. I have no more to say to these, then, than for the first; abundans cautela non nocet,16 State jealousie it has no right-hand error, none on the excesse side, its extention intends it, the more the better, an Enemy is met anywhere better than within our owne doores. Besides, if forraigne States have (possibly) with their engagements altered their designes, may we condemne the vigilancy of ours that (may be) was it that diverted those designes from us; nor are those clouds yet so farre blowne over us (as the Doctor would have it) for ought I see they grow blacker still.
2. For the Queen’s Religion it was as well knowne (as he speaks) before as now, but (may be) not so justly feared, as since we heare of so many Priests and Jesuites let out of prisons at back doors, of Pope’s Nuncios and orders of Friers in England, especially now, when we see a Popish Army raised in their defence, when the enemies of our State have armed the enemies of our Church against both.
3. For the resort of Papists to his Majesty, whom the Doctor calls such good Subjects, so much better than the Parliament: all that I will say is, that if such are become the King’s better Subjects, God help him, he hath but a few good ones left; what? such as professe to owe a greater subjection to a forraine State, and a State, not only utterly crosse centered in its interest of State, but meritoriously malicious by its very Articles of Faith to this of his Majestie’s, these better Subjects than those of his great Councell? How will Rome ring of this suffrage from the mouth of a Protestant Doctor? And yet why not the best Subjects, if we may judge by their usage? for of all sorts of men we heare not one of them by his Majestie’s Army plundered yet. Sure there is some Covenant, these Aegyptians’ doors are sprinkled with somewhat questionlesse, they enjoy this Passeover so solemnly.
Lastly, for the interception of Ireland’s reliefe, if all the rest that was taken, was the King’s, because the Kingdom’s, at least the poor Carrier’s horses were his own proper goods. Necessity is the excuse of all, but if in a man’s choice, it is no necessity at all, the definition of it is, quod aliter se habere non potest, (i.) that can no otherwise be; well, necessity is pleaded yet, but on both sides, I pray God it be not shortly on backs and bellies too. I shall only add this short Prayer, and with my very soule I speak it, God blesse the King and send us peace, and if it must not be untill one side have prevailed, I pray God it may be that side that loves the King best.
In the act as performed (i.e., without explicit awareness).
In the act as made reflectively explicit (i.e., done while one is adverting to it expressly).
To be done and consented to.
By a shameful vow change the decree, Do not do what you have carelessly vowed to do.
The promise is not to be performed, but presumption is to be regretted.
Whatever is not disproven is presumed.
An established and well-known law.
In the presence of one who is not a judge.
We command that the arduousness and the imminent dangers pertaining to the business stated be taken into consideration.
To give the law.
To utter the law.
“Dammees” was a nickname given to royalist soldiers because of their reputation for blasphemy.
All consenting orders of the kingdom (probably referring to the orders or estates of Parliament, the king, lords, and commons).
This paragraph was added to the second edition, probably in order to respond to the “late sawcie Scurrilous pasquill” mentioned in the next sentence. This tract was “A complaint to the House of Commons, and resolution taken up,” Oxford [London], 1642, Wing C5620. There were two subsequent editions, both printed in Oxford.
The so-called “House of Loretto” in Italy was believed to be the original house at Nazareth in which the Virgin Mary was born and brought up and had received the annunciation. Legend had it that this stone house had been brought to successive sites and eventually to Loretto by angels.
A lot of warning does no harm.
T.22 (8.11.) Anon., The Privileges of the House of Commons (31 December, 1642).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date
OLL Thumbs TP Image

Local JPEG TP Image

Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.22 [1642.12.31] (8.11). Anon., The Privileges of the House of Commons (31 December, 1642).
Full titleAnon., THE PRIVILEDGES Of the House of COMMONS IN PARLIAMENT Assembled. Wherein ’tis proved their Power is equall with that of the House of Lords, if not greater, though the King joyn with the Lords. However it appears that both the Houses have a Power above the King, if He Vote contrary to them. All which is proved by severall Presidents taken out of Parliament Rolls in the TOWER. By P. B. Gentleman.
London, Printed for J. R. 1642.
Estimated date of publication31 December, 1642.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 214; Thomason E. 83 (39.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
The Priviledges of the House OF COMMONS IN PARLIAMENT.
WHen after the period of the Saxon time, Harold had lifted himself into the Royall Stat: the great men to whom but lately he was no more then equall, either in fortune or power, disdaining that Act of Arrogancy, called in William then Duke of Normandy, a Prince more active then any in these Western-parts, and renowned for many Victories, he had most fortunately archieved against the French King, then the most potent Monarch in Europe.
This Duke led along with him to this work of glory, many of the younger. Sonnes of the best Families of Normandy, Picardy, and &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; accompanyed the undertaking of this fortunate man.
The Usurper was slain, and the Crown by this Duke was gained; and to secure certain to his posterity, what he had so suddenly gotten, he shared out his purchase, retaining in each County a portion to support the Dignity, Soveraign, which was styled &illegible; Regni; and assigning to the rest of his Adventures, such portions as suited to their quality and expence, he retained to himself, dependency of their personall service, except such Lands as in free Alms were the portion of the Church; and these were styled Barones Regis, the Kings immediate Freeholders, for the word Baro imported then no more.
Now as the King to these, so these to their followers, subdivided part of their shares into Knights Fees, and their Tennants were called Barones Comites for we (as in the Kings Writs) in their writs, Baronibus suis & Francois & Anglois, the Soveraign gifts for the most part extending to whole Counties, or Hundreds an Earl being Lord of the one, and a Baron of the inferiour Donations to Lords of Townships or Mannors.
And as the Land, so was all course of Judicature divided, even from the meanest, to the highest portion, each severall had his Court of Law; preferring still the manner of our Ancestors, the Saxons, who jura per pages reddebant; and these are still termed Court-Barons, or the Freeholders-Court, twelve usually in number; who with the Thame or chief Lord were Judges.
The Hundred that was next, where the Hundredus or Aldermanus, Lord of the Hundred, with the chief Lord of each Township within their Lymits were Judges.
The County or generale placitum was the next, This was to supply the defect or remedy, the corruption of the inferiour Courts. Ubi curiæ Dominorum probantur defecisse, pertinet ad vicecomitem provinciarum; and the Judges here were Comites, Vicecomites, & Barones Comitatus qui liberas terras habebant.
The last and supreme (and upon which I am to treat) was generale placitum apud London, Universalis Synodus in the Charters of the Conqueror, Capitalis curia by Glanvile, or magnum & commune consilium coramrege & magnatious suis.
In the Rolles of Henry the third, It is not Stattve but summoned by Proclamation, Edicitur general: placitum apud London, (saith the Book of Abingdon) whether Epium Ditces principes, Satrapæ rectores, & causidici ex omni pærte confluxerunt ad istam curiam, saith Glanvile. Causes were referred, propter aliquam dubitationem quæ emergit in Comitatu, cum Comitatus nescit dijudicare. Thus did Ethelweld Bishop of Winchester, transferre his suite against Leostine from the County, ad generate placitum; in the time of King Etheldred, Queene Edgine against Goda from the County, appeald to King Etheldred at London, Congregatis principibus & Angliæ sapientibus. In the tenth yeer of the Conqueror, Episcopi, Comites, & Barones Regni ad Universalum Synodum pracausis audiendis & tractandis convocati, saith the Book of Westminster; and this continued all along in the succeeding Kings raign, untill towards the end of Henry the third.
As this great Court or Councell, consisting of the King and Barons, ruled the great affairs of State, and controuled all inferiour Courts: So were there certain Officers, whose transcendent Power seemed to be set to bound in the execution of Princes Wills, as the Steward, Constable, and Marshall, fixt upon Families in Fee for many Ages; They as Tribunes of the people, (or ex plori among the Atherians) grown by unmanly courage, fearfull to Monarchy, fell at the feet and mercy of the King, when the daring Earl of Leicester was slain at Evesbam.
This chance, and the dear experience, Henry the third himself had made at the Parliament at Oxford, in the fortieth yoer of his raign, and the memory of the many streights his Father was driven unto (especially at Rumny-Mead neer States) brought this King wisely to begin what his Successor fortunately finished in lessening the strength and power of his great Lords; and this was wrought by searching into the Regality they had usurped over their peculiar Soveraigne, whereby they were as the Book of Saint Albane termeth them, Quot domini tot tiranni; and by the weakning that hand of Power which they carried in the Parliaments, by commanding the Service of many Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses, to that Magnum consilium, or generale placitum, which we still call Parliament.
Now began the frequent sending of Writs to the Commons, their assent being used not only in Money, Charge, and making of Laws, (for before all Ordinances were passed by the King and Peers) but their consent is likewise used in all Judgements of all Natures, either Civill or Criminall: In proof whereof, I will produce some few presidents out of Record.
When Adamor that proude Prelate of Winchester, the Kings half Brother, had grieved the State by his daring Power, he was exiled by joynt sentence of the King, the Lords and Commons; and this appears expressely by the Letter sent from Pope Alexander the fourth, Expostulating a Revocation of him from banishment, because he was a Church-man, and so not subject to any censure: to this the answer was, Si dominus Rex & regni Majores hoc vellint (meaning his Revocation) Communitas tamen ipsius ingressum in Angliam nullatenus sustincret. The Peers subsigned this answer with their names; and Petrus de Mountford vice tatius communitatis, as Speaker of the Commons. Lib. S. Alban. fol. 20. Anno 44. H. 3.
And by that style, Sir John Tiptofe, Prolocutor, affirmeth under his Arms, the deed of intail of the Crown by King Henry 4. in the 8. yeer of his raign for all the Commons.
The banishment of the two Spencers in Edward the seconde time, prælati Comites & Barones & les auters Peers de la terre & Communes da be Roialme, give consent and sentence to the Revocation and Reversment of the former sentence; The Lords and Commons accord, and so it is expressed in the Roll.
When Elizabeth the Widdow of Sir John de Burgo complained in Parliament, that Hugh Spencer the younger, Robert Boldock, and William Cliffe his Instruments had by duresse, forced her to make a writing to the King, whereby she was despoiled of all her Inheritance; sentence is given for her in these words, Pur ceo que avis est al Evesquez Counts & Barones & les auters grandes, & a tout Cominalte de la terre que le dit escript est suit encounter be ley; & &illegible; manner deraison si suist le dit escript per agard del Parliament dampne elloques abliune a le dit Elizab.
In Anno the fourth of Edward the third, Prarl. Prim. rot. 11. It appears by a Letter to the Pope, That to the sentence given against the Earl of Kent, the Commons were Parties, as well as the Lords, or Peers; for the King directed their proceeding in those words; Comitibus Magnatibus Baronibus & aliis de Communitate dicti regni ad Parliamentum illud congregatis injunximus ut super his discercetent & judicarent quod rationi & justitiæ conveniret, & haberent pro oculis solum deum qui eum concordi, &c.
When in the fortieth yeer of Edward the third, the Lords had pronounced the sentence against Richard Lions, otherwise then the Commons agreed to. The Commons appeald to the King himself, and had redresse, and the sentence entred to their desires; Yet this does not prove that the Kings Power is so farre beyond the Parliaments, as that he can do what he will, notwithstanding them.
When in the first yeer of Richard the second, William Weston, and John Jennings, were arraigned in Parliament, for surrendring certain Forts of the Kings; the Commons were parties to the sentence given against them as appears by a Memorancium annext to that Record.
In the first of Henry the fourth, Although the Commons referred by Protestation, the pronouncing of sentence of deposition against Richard the second, unto the Lords; yet they are equally interressed in it, as it appears by the Record. For there was made Proctors or Commissioners for the whole Parliament, one B. one Abbot, one Earl, one Baron, and two Knights, Grey and Erpingham for the Commons; and to inferre, that because the Lords pronounced the sentence, the point of judgement should be only theirs, were as absurd as to conclude, That no authority was left in any other Commissioner of Oyer and Terminor, then in the Person of that man solely that speaks the sentence.
In the second of Henry the fifth, The Petition of the Commons importeth, no lesse then a right they had to Act and Assent to all things in Parliament, and so it was answered by the King; and had not the adjournall Roll of the higher House bin left to he sole entry of the Clark of that House (who either out of his neglect to observe due forme, or out of purpose to obscure the Commons right, and to flatter them, which he immediately served) there would have been frequent examples of all times to clear this doubt, and to preserve a jast interrest to the Common-wealth; and most conveniently doth it suite with Monarchy to maintain this forme, least others of that well framed body, knit under one head should swell too great and monstrous: Monarchy again may sooner groan under the weight of an Aristocracy as it once did, then under Democracy, which it never yet either felt or feared.
FINIS.
T.23 (8.12.) John Norton, The Miseries of War (17 January, 1643).↩
Editing History- Corrections to HTML: 21 Jan. 2016
- Corrections to XML: 21 Jan. 2016
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date
OLL Thumbs TP Image

Local JPEG TP Image

Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.23 [1643.01.17] (8.12) John Norton, The Miseries of War (17 January, 1643).
Full titleJohn Norton, THE MISERIES OF VVAR. By a lover of TRVTH AND PEACE: And by him Dedicated to all that are such.
REVEL. 13.10. He that killeth with the sword, must be killed with the sword.
Printed for Nicholas Vavasor. 1643.
Estimated date of publication17 January, 1643.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 222; Thomason E. 85 (13.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
THE MISERIES OF VVARR.
WHen I consider our late lost happinesse of a blessed Peace, and the heavy pressures of this present Warre; I find it hard to judge, which of them may bee justly called our greatest affliction: but both being laid together (sure I am) harder misfortune nere befell a Nation. And yet I find a sort of Salamander spirits (in what torrid flames of cursed contention nourisht, I cannot tell) that will admit of nought that sounds of Peace; but cry downe all accommodation, unlesse their owne prodigious fancies (conditions worse then Warre) may be the ingredients.
Eccl. 10. 8But let such Incendiaries take heede least they fall into the Pit that they themselves have digged: For who may in common presumpsition be more justly charged to be the Authors, and Fomenters of Warre, then such as shall oppose a Peace: I have beene very inquisitve to know, what may bee the true ground of this unnaturall Warre; the most, and most discreet, to whom I have propounded that Question, Ingeniously confesse, they are ignorant of it: Others; that will be ignorant of nothing, and scarse rightly understand anything, will tell you the cause as readily, as if they were the Founders of it. Yet I cannot meet with any two of them that concurre in the same particular, onely thus farre they agree in the generall, that it is for the maintenance of the Protestant Religion, and the Lawes of the Land.
Why, this is pretended on both sides? But if that bee the quarrell, certainly the Question hath beene hitherto mistaken, or at least, mis stated; for neither Law nor Religion are any ways opposite to Peace.
Warre and the Law are inconsistent, for the Law hath its very subsistence by Peace; whence the rule is, Inter arma silent leges, that is, The Lawes are dumbe in time of Warre; and the Prophet David tels us, that Righteousnesse and Peace have kissed each other.Psal. 35. 10 Now Righteousnesse in the Latine Translation is rendred Justitia, which is Iustice; and every man, that understands any thing, knowes that Right or Iustice is the fruit and ende of the Lawe.
And in an other place you may heare the same Prophet speaking to God himselfe,Psal. 119. 165 saying, Great Peace have they that love thy Law. So you see Law and Peace still coupled together. And through the whole Scripture I find no Warring Law, but that which the Apostle Paul speakes of, saying,Rom. 7. 12 [Editor: illegible word] I see annother law in my members, warring against the Law of my minde, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sinne, which is in my members. And how good this warring law is, you may perceive by the Text. Now for Religion,Phil. 4. 9 2 Cor. 13. 1 Isa 9. 6. which is onely the service of God, the holy Scriptures will plentifully informe you, what relation and affinity that hath with Peace. For there you shall find God stiled, the God of Peace. And againe,Gal. 5. 21. 23 The God of Love and Peace. Our blessed Saviour is called, The Prince of Peace. In the Epistle to the Gallatians, it is said,Ephe. 4. 1, 2, 3. The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long suffering, gentlenesse, goodnesse, faith, meekenesse, temperance: against such there is no law. And the same Apostle in his Epistle to the Ephesians, farther saith, I therefore the Prisoner of the Lord,Ephes. 6. 15. beseech you, that ye walke worthy of the vocation wherewith yee are called:Isa. 54. 10. with all lowlinesse and weekenesse, with long suffering, forbearing one another in love, endeavouring to keepe the unity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace.Matth. 5. 9. And in the same Epistle, Christs Gospell is called The Gospell of Peace. God calls his Covenant, The Covenant of Peace.Psal. 29. 11. Our blessed Saviour in his Sermon upon the Mount, pronounces no small blessing on the Peacemaker. Blessed (saith he) are the Peacemakers,Prov. 12. 20. for they shall be called the children of God. And the Psalmist tells us, that The Lord will blesse his people with Peace.Mark. 9. 50. 2 Cor. 13. 11. 1 Thes. 5. 13. The wisest of men tells us, To the Counsellors of Peace is joy. How often are we commanded in the Holy Scriptures, To have Peace one with another. To live in Peace. To be at Peace among our selves.Psal. 122. 6. To pray for Peace. To love Peace. To seeke Peace and ensue it.Zach. 8. 19. [Editor: illegible word] 34. 14. & 1 [Editor: illegible word] 3. 2.
And is God the God of Peace? and doe they not feare his heavy judgements to bee denounced against them, and his dreadfull wrath and indignation to bee shoured downe upon them, who shall presume to Preach or Petition against a Peace? Is Christ the Prince of Peace? and can they thinke themselves his Subjects, and desire a Warre? Are the fruits of the Spirit Love and Peace? and can any man thinke himselfe moved, or inspired with the Spirit, who shall live in hatred, or oppose a Peace? Sure it must be with that lying spirit that perswaded Ahabs Propheas.1 Kin. 18. 22 Is the Gospell a Gospell of Peace? Then certainely his Religion cannot bee founded upon that Gospell, who shall not love and seeke Peace. Is Peace a blessing? Is the Peacemaker blessed? and shall hee bee called the childe of God? Accursed must he then be, and (it is to be feared) little better then the childe of the Devill, who breathes out nothing but Warre.
But some of these Botefeus, seeking to varnish over their blood-thirsty desires with a pretended inclination to peace, say, they refuse it not, so as it may be accompanied with truth. Tis well said, I wish it were as truely meant. He must be a man of a very easie credulitie that can assent to credit it; for I dare with confidence affirme, and I beleeve the whole Kingdome (besides their owne faction) will unanimously agree, that more lyes and faloities have fallen from the pennes of these kinde of men, within lesse then these two yeares, then ever were committed to the Presse, since Printing was invented.
Indeede, I thinke their desires of Peace and Truth, are equall; but let such take heede by Ananias and Saphiras judgements.Act. 9. 1. &c. And I hope this Kingdome will beware how they credit such Iesuiticall gulleries, least in stead of a pretended truth, we finde a certaine ruine. Were such men enforced to be the actors which are the greatest sticklers for this bloody warre, we had then some hopes of a happie peace, and consequently of truth, ever a better friend to peace, then warre.
We were indeede too happie in our late Peace, which made us to get our God, the giver of that blessing, and thereby justly called downe, his heavie vengeanee of a Civill Warre,Exod. 3. 8. for our ingratitude. We had then, a Land flowing with milke and honey; there was no complaining in our streetes:Psal. 144. 24. but each man sitting under the shade of his owne Vine, might without feare eat of his owne figtree, and drinke the waters of his owne cesterne.Isa. 36. 16. How richly habited were almost all rankes and degrees of people?Mat. 11. 8. In our Saviours time, those that were soft cloathing were in Kings houses: but in the time of our late peace, it was to be found almost in every pessants Cottage, silkes were the ware of every ordinary person; wee accounted him a very meane trades-man, that could not put his wife into a silke gowne and a beaver; nay, were not the wives of many Citizens of ordinary trades, habited in as rich Sattin, and bone-lace, adorned with as many orient peales, faire diamonds, and other jewels of value, as might well become a queene and yet now paradventure would gladly part with them, to be secured sustinance for themselves and families.
How munificent were we in our buildings with stately Turrets, seeming to threaten the very clouds? many of them already left dessolate without an inhabitant, and how great pitty is it to see such stately Fabrickes levelled with the ground? How did we abound in rich furniture, costly hangings, couches, bedding, and the like; massie plate, and other gallant house-hold-stuffe, already become a prey to the mercilesse souldiers, even those that pretend to fight for us. What curious gardens, brave orchards, faire meddowes, rich pastures, and fruitfull corne fields, are now ruined, defaced, and unmanured? Indeede wee did abound in all things that plenty could afford, or curiosity invent; we had health, wealth, pleasure, profit, now turned to sicknesse, penury, paine and mourning. Parents then injoyed the deare pledges of their love, their children; children their loving parents, friends and neighbours mutually happie in each others society, so that nothing was wanting to our felicity.
But this bloody tyrant Warre, hath put a period to all our joyes, all our happinesse. Monstrum horrendum informe ingens: that huge horrible, ugly Monster, Horresco referens, I tremble to speake of it. When David had committed that great sinne against the Lord in numbring the people, and as a punishment for it, was to submit to his choice of three heavie judgements, chose either Pestilence, or Famine, then that of the Sword, which he knew had no mercy.Sam 24. 14. Let us (saith he) now fall into the hand of the Lord (for his mercies are great) and let me not fall into the hands of man. Warre is one of Gods greatest Plagues, his fearefullest judgements, his heaviest scourges upon a Nation: for how ugly is the visage of it? how manifold are the miseries of it? Especially that of a civill warre, as ours is in this Kingdome.
Man, created after Gods owne image, destroying the image of his Creator; Christian most unchristianly slaughtring his brother in Christ: nay, Protestants linckt by a nearer tye of religion, massacring those of their owne Religion: the father most unnaturally ripping up the bowels of his sonne, and the sonne of the father, a brother beating out his brothers braines; kinsman against kinsman, friend against friend, most barbarously and inhumanely butchering one another: here a bullet, there a speare, or Poleax separating the soule and body in the very act of wrath and malice: the devouring Cannon heaping the mangled carcasses of horse and man together. What ghastly lookes, what hideous screckes, and dismall groanes, what grisly gaping wounds of dying men, besmeared with blood and dirt, doe even affright and terrifie the hearers and spectators, though their enemies. What out-cries, teares and sighes by new-made widdowes for their husbands deaths? What mournings by aged parents for their slaughtred sonnes? What lamentation by poore distressed children made fatherlesse by warre? What pillaging, plundrings, rapines, murders, massacres, by the cruell, barbarous, and bloody souldier? No liberty left us of ploughing, sowing, trafficking, or trading one with the other.
That with the industrious and painefull tradesman, or husbandman, hath with much labour and paines gathered together, to be the staffe and comfort of their age, and to be a portion and provision for their children, in an instant becomes the prey and spoyle of a few mercilesse men. And all these miseries usually seconded by pestilence and famine. Let us looke upon the miserable condition of Samaria, beseiged by the Syrians,2 Kings 6. 15. when by reason of the warre, the famine was so great, that an asses head was sold for fourescore pieces of silver, and the fourth part of a kabb of doves dung, for five peeces of silver. Nay women did eate their owne children, as appeares by a womans complaint to the King of Israel.verse 28. 29. And she answered, this woman sayd unto me, give thy sonne that wee may eate him to day, and we will eate my sonne to morrow, so we loyled my sonne and did eate him, and sayd unto her on the next day, give thy sonne that eve may eate him, and she hath hid her sonne.
Let us behold the miseries of Germany, a Kingdome once as famous and flourishing as ours lately was, but hath now suffered the miseries of almost 20 yeares warre: where many stately Townes and Cities have beene burnt to the ground, women ravished even in the very Churches, and after hewen in peeces: mens eares and noses cut off, and strings put through them, to make hat-bands: holes made in the legges and armes of men, and cords drawne through them, their guts pulled out at their mouthes, children tost on the points of speares; and so great hath the famine beene in some part thereof, that the people have beene glad to eate dogges, cats, dead men, and all manner of carrion for foode.
Nay let us goe no further then bleeding Ireland, (which now suffers for our distraction here) and we shall finde their miseries not behinde those of Germany, where after they had beaten out the husbands braines, they ravished the wife, and then ripping her up being with childe, cast the childe into the fire: ravishing maides and women before their parents and husbands faces: driving men and women naked out of their houses into the frost and snow, where hundreds of them have perished with cold and famine, hanging some, and with most exquisite tortures, mangling, gashing, and miserably tormenting others, without all sence of humanitie. And God Almighty knowes how soone it may bee our turnes to suffer the like, or worse calamities, unlesse we endeavour to prevent it, by applying all our diligence, industry, and affections towards the procuring of a Peace, while it may bee had. The long continued warre in Germany shewes us, Peace is not easie to be obtained, when a smaller Army then ours, on either side, hath beene for many yeares together attempted to be removed, but without successe. Neither doth God alwayes blesse either the greater or the better side with victory. For we have many examples in Scripture where great Armies have beene overcome with smaller numbers: and our Saviour himselfe tells you,Luke 13. 1, 2, 3, 4. that the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices, were not sinners above all the Galileans, because they suffered such things; nor those 18. upon whom the tower of Shiloh fell and slue, sinners above all men that dwelt in Ierusalem: which shewes they are not always the greatest sinners, whom God suffers to perish here. Let us therefore use all possible endeavours for a peace, and for prevention of farther shedding of blood; least by lamentable experience we finde ourselves included within that heavie judgement pronounced by our Saviour,Mat. 26. 52. which is, that All they that take the sword shall perish with the swerd.
FINIS.
T.24 (8.13.) Anon., The Actors Remonstrance (24 January, 1643).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (26 Jan 2016)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (26 Jan 2016)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date
OLL Thumbs TP Image

Local JPEG TP Image

Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.24 [1643.01.24] (8.13) Anon., The Actors Remonstrance (24 January, 1643).
Full titleAnon., THE ACTORS REMONSTRANCE, OR COMPLAINT: FOR The silencing of their profession, and banishment from their severall Play houses. In which is fully set downe their grievances, for their restraint; especially since Stage-playes, only of all publike recreations are prohibited; the exercise at the Beares Colledge, and the motions of Puppets being still in force and vigour. As it was presented in the names and behalfes of all our London Comedians to the great God PHOEBUS-APOLLO, and the nine Heliconian Sisters, on the top of PERNASSUS, by one of the Masters of Requests to the MUSES, for this present month. And published by their command in print by the Typograph Royall of the Castalian Province. 1643.
LONDON, Printed for EDW. NICKSON. Ianuar. 24. 1643.
24 January, 1643.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 225; Thomason E. 86. (8.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
The Actors Remonstrance or Complaint, for the silencing of their Profession, and banishment from their severall PLAY-HOUSES.
OPpressed with many calamities, and languishing to death under the burthen of a long and (for ought wee know) an everlasting restraint, we the Comedians, Tragedians and Actors of all sorts and sizes belonging to the famous private and publike Houses within the City of London and the Suburbs thereof, to you great Phœbus, and you sacred Sisters, the sole Patronesses of our distressed Calling, doe we in all humility present this our humble and lamentable complaint, by whose intercession to those powers who confined us to silence, wee hope to be restored to our pristine honour and imployment.
First, it is not unknowne to all the audience that have frequented the private Houses of Black-Friers, the Cock-Pit and Salisbury-Court, without austerity, wee have purged our Stages from all obscene and scurrilous jests; such as might either be guilty of corrupting the manners, or defaming the persons of any men of note in the City or Kingdome; that wee have endevoured, as much as in us lies, to instruct one another in the true and genuine Art of acting, to represse bebawling and railing, formerly in great request, and for to suite our language and action to the more gentle and naturall garbe of the times; that we have left off for our owne parts, and so have commanded our servarits, to forget that ancient custome, which formerly rendred men of our quality infamous, namely, the inveigling in young Gentlemen, Merchants Factors, and Prentizes to spend their patrimonies and Masters estates upon us and our Harlots in Tavernes; we have cleane and quite given over the borrowing money at first sight of punie gallants, or praising their swords, belts and beavers, so to invite them to bestow them upon us; and to our praise be it spoken, we were for the most part very well reformed, few of us keeping, or being rather kept by our Mistresses, betooke our selves wholy to our wives; observing the matrimoniall vow of chastity, yet for all these conformities and reformations, wee were by authority (to which wee in all humility submit) restrained from the practice of our Profession; that Profession which had before maintained us in comely and convenient Equipage; some of us by it meerely being inabled to keepe Horses (though not Whores) is now condemned to a perpetuall, at least a very long temporary silence, and wee left to live upon our shifts, or the expence of our former gettings, to the great impoverishment and utter undoing of our selves, wives, children, and dependants; besides which, is of all other our extremest grievance, that Playes being put downe under the name of publike recreations; other publike recreations of farre more harmfull consequence permitted, still to stand in statu quo prius, namely, that Nurse of barbarisme and beastlinesse, the Beare-Garden, whereupon their usuall dayes those Demy-Monsters, are baited by bandogs, the Gentlemen of Stave and Taile, namely, boystrous Butchers, cutting Coblers, hard-handed Masons and the like, rioting companions, resorting thither with as much freedome as formerly, making with their sweat and crowding, a farre worse stinck than the ill formed Beasts they persecute with their dogs and whips, Pick-pockets, which in an age are not heard of in any of our Houses, repairing thither, and other disturbers of the publike peace, which dare not be seen in our civill and well-governed Theatres, where none use to come but the best of the Nobility and Gentry; and though some have taxed our Houses unjustly for being the receptacles of Harlots, the exchanges where they meet and make their bargaines with their franck chapmen of the Country and City, yet we may justly excuse our selves of either knowledge or consent in these lewd practices, we having no propheticke soules to know womens honesty by instinct, nor commission to examine them; and if we had, worthy were these wretches of Bridewell, that out of their owne mouthes would convince themselves of lasciviousnesse: Puppit-plays, which are not so much valuable as the very musique betweene each Act at ours, are still up with uncontrolled allowance, witnesse the famous motion of Bell and the Dragon, so frequently visited at Holbourne-bridge; these passed Christmas Holidayes, whither Citizens of all sorts repaire with far more detriment to themselves then ever did to Playes, Comedies and Tragedies being the lively representations of mens actions, in which, vice is alwayes sharply glanced at, and punished, and vertue rewarded and encouraged; the most exact and naturall eloquence of our English language expressed and daily amplified; and yet for all this, we suffer, and are inforced, our selves and our dependants, to tender our complaint in dolefull manner to you great Phœbus, and you inspired Heliconian Virgins: First our House-keepers, that grew wealthy by our endevours, complaine that they are enforced to pay the grand Land-lords rents, during this long Vacation, out of their former gettings; instead of ten, twenty, nay, thirty shillings shares which used nightly to adorne and comfort with their harmonious musique, their large and well-stuffed pockets, they have shares in nothing with us now but our mis-fortunes; living meerly out of the stock, out of the interest and principall of their former gotten moneyes, which daily is exhausted by the maintenance of themselves and families.
For our selves, such as were sharers, are so impoverished, that were it not for some slender helps afforded us in this time of calamitie, by our former providence, we might be enforced to act our Tragedies: our Hired-men are disperst, some turned Souldiers and Trumpetters, others destin’d to meaner courses, or depending upon us, whom in courtesie wee cannot see want, for old acquaintance sakes. Their friends, young Gentlemen, that used to feast and frolick with them at Tavernes, having either quitted the kin in these times of distraction, or their money having quitted them, they are ashamed to look upon their old expensive friends. Nay, their verie Mistresses, those Buxsome and Bountifull Lasses, that usually were enamoured on the persons of the younger sort of Actors, for the good cloaths they wore upon the stage, beleeving them really to be the persons they did only represent, and quite out of sorts themselves, and so disabled for supplying their poore friends necessities. Our Fooles, who had wont to allure and excite laughter with their very countenances, at their first appearance on the stage (hard shifts are better than none) are enforced, some of them at least to maintaine themselves, by vertue of their bables. Our boyes, ere wee shall have libertie to act againe, will be growne out of use like crackt organ-pipes, and have faces as old as our flags.
Nay, our very Doore-keepers, men and women, most grievously complaine, that by this cessation they are robbed of the priviledge of stealing from us with licence: they cannot now, as in King Agamemnons dayes, seeme to scratch their heads where they itch not, and drop shillings and half Crowne-pieces in at their collars. Our Musike that was held so delectable and precious, that they scorned to come to a Taverne under twentie shillings salary for two houres, now wander with their Instruments under their cloaks, I meant such as have any, into all houses of good fellowship, saluting every roome where there is company, with Will you have any musike Gentlemen? For our Tire-men, and others that belonged formerly to our ward-robe, with the rest, they are out of service: our stock of cloaths, such as are not in tribulation for the generall use, being a sacrifice to moths. The Tobacco-men, that used to walk up and downe, selling for a penny pipe, that which was not worth twelve-pence an horse-load; Being now bound under Tapsters in Inns and Tippling houses. Nay such a terrible distresse and dissolution hath befallen us, and all those that had dependance on the stage, that it hath quite unmade our hopes of future recoverie. For some of our ablest ordinarie Poets, in stead of their annuall stipends and beneficiall second-dayes, being for meere necessitie compelled to get a living by writing contemptible penny-pamphlets, in which they have not so much as poetical licence to use any attribute of their profession; but that of Quidlibet audendi? and faining miraculous stories, and relations of unheard of battels. Nay, it is to be feared, that shortly some of them; (if they have not been enforced to do it already) will be encited to enter themselves into Martin Parkers societie, and write ballads. And what a shame this is, great Phœbus, and you sacred Sisters; for your owne Priests thus to be degraded of their ancient dignities. Be your selves righteous Judges, when those who formerly have sung with such elegance the acts of Kings and Potentates, charming like Orphens the dull and brutish multitude, scarce a degree above stones and forrests into admiration, though not into understanding with their divine raptures, shall be by that tyrant Necessitie reduced to such abject exigents, wandring like grand children of old Erra Paters, those learned Almanack-makers, without any Mæcenas to cherish their loftie conceptions, prostituted by the mis-fortune of our silence, to inexplicable miseries, having no heavenly Castalian Sack to actuate and informe their spirits almost confounded with stupiditie and coldnesse, by their frequent drinking (and glad too they gan get it) of fulsome Ale, and hereticall Beere, as their usuall beverage.
To conclude, this our humble complaint great Phœbus, and you nine sacred Sisters, the Patronesses of Wit, and Protectresses of us poore disrepected Comedians, if for the present, by your powerfull intercessions we may be re-invested in our former Houses, and setled in our former Calling, we shall for the future promise, never to admit into our six-penny-roomes those unwholesome inticing Harlots, that sit there meerely to be taken up by Prentizes or Lawyers Clerks; nor any female of what degree soever, except they come lawfully with their husbands, or neere allies: the abuses in Tobacco shall be reformed, none vended, not so much as in three-penny galleries, unlesse of the pure Spanish leafe. For ribaldry, or any such paltry stuffe, as may scandall the pious, and provoke the wicked to loosenesse, we will utterly expell it with the bawdy and ungracious Poets, the authors to the Antiodes. Finally, we shall hereafter so demeane our selves as none shall esteeme us of the ungodly, or have cause to repine at our action or interludes: we will not entertaine any Comedian that shall speake his part in a tone, as if hee did it in derision of some of the pious, but reforme all our disorders, and amend all our amisses, so prosper us Phœbus and the nine Muses, and be propitious to this our complaint.
FINIS.
T.25 (8.14.) Anon., Touching the Fundamentall Lawes of this Kingdome (24 February, 1643).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (26 Jan. 2016)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (26 Jan. 2016)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date
OLL Thumbs TP Image

Local JPEG TP Image

Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.25 [1643.02.24] (8.14) Anon., Touching the Fundamentall Lawes of this Kingdome (24 February, 1643).
Full titleAnon., Touching the Fundamentall Lawes, Or Politique Constitution of this Kingdome, The KINGS Negative Voice, and The Power of PARLIAMENTS. To which is annexed, The priviledge and power of the Parliament touching The MILITIA.
LONDON Printed for Thomas Underhill, and are to be sold at the signe of the Bible in Woodstreet. M.DC.XLIII.
24 Februarty, 1643.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 237; Thomason E. 90 (21.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later. See Joyce Lee Malcolm's intro??)
Text of Pamphlet
TOUCHING FVNDAMENTALL LAVVS, AND The Kings Negative Voice.
FUndamentall Laws are not (or at least need not be) any written agreement like Meare-Stones between King and People, the King himselfe being a part (not party) in those Laws, and the Common-wealth not being like a Corporation treated by Charter, but treating it selfe. But the fundamentall Law or Laws is a setling of the laws of nature and common equity (by common consent) in such a forme of Polity and Government, as that they may be administred amongst us with honour and safety. For the first of which therefore, we are governed by a King: and for the second, by a Parliament, to oversee and take order that that honourable trust that is put into the hands of the King for the dignity of the Kingdome, be rightly executed, and not abused to the alteration of the Politique Constitution taken up and approved, or to the destruction of that, for whose preservation it was ordered and intended. A principall part of which honour, is that royall assent he is to give for the enacting of such good Laws as the people shal choose, for they are first to consult their own safety and welfare, and then he who is to be intrusted with it, is to give an honourable confirmation to it, and so to put an Impresse of Majesty and Royall authority upon it.
Fundamentall Laws then are not things of capitulation between King and people, as if they were forrainers and Strangers one to another, (nor ought they or any other Laws so to be, for then the King should governe for himselfe, not for his people) but they are things of constitution, treating such a relation, and giving such an existence and being by an externall polity to King and Subjects, as Head and Members, which constitution in the very being of it is a Law held forth with more evidence, and written in the very heart of the Republique, farre firmlyer then can be by pen and paper, and in which sense we owe our Allegiance to the King as Head, (not onely by power, but influence) and so part of the constitution, not as a party capitulating for a prerogative against or contrary to it, which whosoever seekes to set up, or side with, doe break their Allegiance, and rebell against the State, going about to deprive the King of his juridicall and lawfull authority, conferred upon him by the constitution of this State, under the pretence of investing him with an illegall and unconstitutive power, whereupon may follow this grand inconvenience, The withdrawment of His peoples Allegiance, which, as a Body connexed with the Head by the constitution of this Kingdome, is owing to him; his person in relation to the body, as the enlivening and quickning head thereof, being sacred and taken notice of by the laws in that capacity, and under that notion us made inviolate.
And if it be conceived that Fundamentall Laws must needs be only extant in uniting, this is the next way to bring all to confusion, for then by the same rule the King bids the Parliament produce those laws that fundamentally give them their being, priviledges & power, (Which by the way is not like the power of inferiour Courts, that are springs of the Parliament, dealing betweene party and party, but is answerable to their trust, this Court being it selfe Fundamentall and Paramount, comprehending Law and Equity, and being intrusted by the whole for the whole, is not therefore to be circumscribed by any other Laws which have their being from it, nor it from them, but onely by that Law which at first gave it its being, to wit, Salus populi) By the same rule I say the Parliament may also intreat the King to produce those Laws that Fundamentally give him his being, power and honour. Both which must therefore be determined, not by laws, for they themselves are laws, yea the most supreame and fundamentall law, giving law to laws themselves but by the received constitution or polity, which they themselves are; and the end of their constitution is the Law or rule of their power, to wit, An honourable and safe Regiment of the Common-wealth, which two whosoever goeth about to divide the one of them from the other, breaks the fundamentall constitutive law or laws and polity of this kingdome, that ordinance of man which we are to submit unto; nor can or ought any statute or written law whatsoever, which is of later Edition and inferiour Condition, being but an off-spring of this root, be interpreted or brought in Plea, against this primary and radicall constitution, without guilt of the highest Treason and destructive enmity to the Publique weale and polity, because by the very constitution of this Kingdome, all laws or interpretation of laws tending to confusion or dissolution, are ipso facto void. In this case we may allude and say, That the Covenant which was 400. peers before the Law, an after-Act cannot disanull it.
Ob. It may be objected, that this discourse seems to make our Government to be founded in Equity, not in Law, or upon that common rule of Salus popali, which is alike common to all Nations, as well as any: and so what difference:
Ans. The Fundamentall laws of England are nothing but the Common laws of Equity and Nature reduced into a particular way of policy, which policy is the ground of our title to them, and interest in them: For though it is true, that Nature hath invested all Nations in an equall right to the laws of Nature and Equity by a common bounty, without respect of persons, yet the severall models of externall Government and Politie renders them more or lesse capable of this their common right: For though they have an equall right in Nature to all the Laws of Nature and Equity, yet having fundamentally subjected themselves by their politique Constitutions unto a Regal servitude, by Barbarisme or the like they have thereby much disabled and disvested themselves of that common benefit. But on the contrary, where the outward constitution or polity of a Republick is purposely framed for the confirming and better conserving this common right of Nature and Equity, (as in ours) there is not onely a common right, but also a particular and lawfull power joyned with this right for its maintenance and supportation. For whereas other people are without all supreame power, either of making laws or raising monies, both these bodies of supremacie being in the arbitrary hands onely of the Soveraigne Magistrate amongst many Nations, these with us are in the hands of the supreame Government, (not Governour) or Court of Judicature, to wit, the King and Parliament; here the people (like free-men) give money to the King, he both not take it; and offers Laws to be enacted, doth not receive them so: Now in such a constituted Kingdome, where the very Constitution its selfe is the fundamentall law of its owne preservation, as is this mixt Regiment of ours, consisting of King and Parliament, as Head and Body, comprehending Monarchie, Aristocracie, and Democracie; there the fundamentall laws are like fundamentall truths in these two properties: First, they are comprehended in a very little room, to wit, honour and safety; and secondly, they have their influence into all other inferiour Laws which are to be subjected to them, and correspondent with them, as lawful children and naturall branches.
Ob. But in processe of time there are many written Laws which form at least to contradict this fundamentall Constitution, and are not they binding notwithstanding it?
Ans. The Constitution of this Kingdome which gave it its being, and which is the radicall and fundamentall law thereof, ought therefore to command in chiefe, for that it never yields up its authority to those inferiour laws, which have their being from it, nor ought they which spring from it tend to the destruction of it, but on the contrary, it is to revive its radicall virtue and influence into all succeeding laws, and they like branches are to make the root flourish from whence they spring, with exhibiting the lively and fructifying virtue thereof, according to the nature and seasons of succeeding times; things incident in after ages not being able to be foreseen and particularly provided for at the beginning, saving in the fundamentall law of Salus populi, politiquely established; nor can any laws growing out of that root, bear any other fruit, then such as the nature thereof dictates; for, for a particular branch to ruine the whole foundation by a seeming sense contrary to it, or differing from it, is very absurd; for then how can it be said, Thou bearest not the root, but the root thee: Laws must alwayes relish of, and drink in the constitution or polity where they are made; and therefore with us, the laws wherein the King is nominated, and so seems to put an absolute authority into his hands, must never so be construed, for that were with a breath to blow downe all the building at once: but the King is there comprehended and meant under a two-fold notion; First, as trusted, being the Head with that power the Law conferd upon him, for a Legall, and not an absolute purpose, tending to an honourable preservation, not an unnaturall dissolution. Secondly, as meaning him juridically, not abstractly or personally, for so onely the Law takes notice of the King as a juridicall person; for till the Legislative power be absolutely in the King, so that laws come down from him to his people, and goe not up from them to him, they must ever be so interpreted: for as they have a juridicall being and beginning, to wit, in Parliament, so must they have a sutable execution and administration, to wit, by the Courts, and legall Ministers, under the Kings authority, which according to the constitution of this Kingdome, he can no more suspend for the good of his people, then the Courts can theirs; or if he doe, to the publique hazard, then have the Courts this advantage, that for publique preservation they may and must provide upon that principle, The King can doe no wrong, neither in withholding justice, nor protection from his people. So that then Salus populi being so principally respected and provided for, according to the nature of our constitution and polity, and so being Lex legum, or the rule of all laws branching thence, Then if any law doe by variation of times, violence of tyrannie, or misprision of Interpreters, vary there-from, it is a bastard, and not a son, and is by the lawful parents either to be reduced or cast out, as gendring unto bondage and ruine of the inheritance, by attempting to erect an absolute and arbitrary Government. Nor can this equitable exposition of particular Statutes taken from the scope of the politique constitution be denyed without overthrow of just and legal Monarchy, (which ever tends to publique good and preservation) and the setting up of an unjust and illegall tyrannie, ruling, if not without law, yet by abused laws, turning them as conquered ordnance upon the people. The very Scripture it selfe must borrow from its scope and principles for explantation of particular places, else it will be abused (as it is through that default) unto Heresies. See we not how falsely Satan quoted true Scripture to Christ when he tempted him, onely by urging the letter without the equity, or true intention and meaning? We are to know and doe things verum verè, justum justè, else we neither judge with righteous judgement, nor obey with just obedience.
Ob. But is not the Parliament guilty of exercising an arbitrary power, if their proceedings be not regulated by written laws, but by Salus populi?
Ans. For the Parliament to be bound up by written laws, is both destructive and absurd.
First, it is destructive, it being the Fundamental Court and Law, or the very Salus populi of England, and ordained, as to make laws, and see them executed, so to supply their deficiencie according to the present exigencie of things for publique preservation by the prerogative of Salus populi, which is universally in them, and but particularly in particular laws and statutes, which cannot provide against all future exigents, which the law of Parliaments both, and therefore are not they to be limits to this. And it would yet he further destructive, by cutting the Parliament short of half its power at once, for it being a Court both of Law and Equity (as appears by the power of making laws, which is nothing but Equity reduced by common consent into Polity) when ever it is cricumscribed by written laws, (which onely to the property of inferiour Courts) it ceaseth to be supreame, and divests itselfe of that inherent and uncircumscribed power which Salus populi comprehends.
Secondly, as it is destructive, so also it is absurd; for the Legislative power which gives laws, is not to receive laws, saving from the nature and end of its owne constitution, which as they give it a being, so they endow it with Laws of preservation both of it selfe; the whole, which it represents.
I would not herein be misunderstood, as if the Parliament, when as it onely doth the office of inferiour Courts, judging between party a party, were not limited by written lawes: there I grant it is, because therein it only deales between meum & tuum, which particular written lawes can and ought to determin: so that its superlative and uncircumscribed power I intend only as relating to the Universe and the affaires thereof, wherein it is to walke by its fundamentall principles, not by particular precepts or Statutes, which are made by the Parliament, between King and people, not between people and Parliament: they are ordayned to be rules of Government to the King, agreeing with the liberty and property of the people, and rules of Obedience to the people without detainment of their freedome by the exercise of an illegall, usurped, and unconsented power, whereunto Kings (especially in hereditary Monarchies) are very prone, which cannot be suspected by a Parliament, which is representatively the Publike, intrusted for it, & which is like to partake and share with the Publick, being but so many private men put into authority pro tempore, by common consent, for common good.
Nor is the Parliament hereby guilty of an Arbitrary Government, or is it destructive to the Petition of Right, when as in providing for publick weale, it observes not the letter of the law; first, because as aforesaid, that law was not made betweene Parliament and people, but by the people in Parliament betweene the King and them, as appears by the whole tenour of it, both in the complaining and praying parts, which wholly relate to the King. Secondly, because of the common consent, that in the representative Body (the Parliament) is given thereunto, wherein England in her Polity imitates Nature in her Instincts, who is wont to violate particular principles for publique preservation, as when light things descend, and heavy ascend, to prevent a vacuum: and thirdly, because of the equitable power which is inherent in a Parliament, and for publique good is to be acted above and against any particular Statute, or all of them: and fourthly, because the end of making that Law, to wit, the publique preservation, is fulfild in the breaking of it, which is lawfull in a Parliament that is chosen by the whole for the whole, and are themselves also of the body, though not in a king, for therein the Law saith, Better a mischeife then an inconvenience. But it may be objected, though it be not Arbitrary for the Parliament to goe against written law, yet is it not so when they go against the Kings consent, which the law, even the fundamentall law, supposeth in Parliamentary proceedings; This hath beene answered, that the King is juridically and according to the intention of the law in his Courts, so that what the Parliament consults for the publick good, That by oath, and the duty of his office, and nature of this polity he is to consent unto, and in case he do deny it, yet in the construction of the fundamentall law and constitution of this Kingdom, he is conceived to grant it, supposing the head not to be so unnaturall to the body that hath chosen it for good and not for evill.
But it will be answered, where is the Kings Negative Voice if the Parliament may proceed without his consent; I answer. That there is no known nor written law that gives him any; and things of that nature are willingly beleeved till they be abused, or with too much violence claimed. That his Majesty hath fundamentally a right of consent to the enacting of laws is true, which (as aforesaid) is part of that honourable trust constituted in him: And that this royall ascent is an act of honoer and not of absolute and negative power or prorogative, appeares by these following reasons.
First, by his oath at the Coronation mentioned in one of the Parliaments Declarations where he doth or should sweare to confirme and grant all such good lawes as his people shall choose to be observed, not hath chosen, for first, The word concedis in that oath were then unnecessary, the lawes formerly enacted being allready granted by foregoing Kings, and so they need no more concession as or else we must run upon this shelfe that all our laws die with the old King, and receive their being a new, by the new Kings consent. Secondly, Hereby the first and second clause in that interrogatory viz. Concedis iustas leges & permittas protegendas, are confounded and doe but idem repetere; Thirdly, Quas vulgus elegerit implies onely the act of the people in a disjunctive sence from the act or consent of the King, but laws allready made have more then quas vulgus elegerit, they have also the royall consent too, so that that phrase cannot meane them wherein the act or consent of the King is allready involved.
Secondly, by the practise of requiring> the royall ascent even unto those very acts of subsidies which are granted to himselfe and for his owne use, which it is supposed he will accept of, and yet Honoris gratia is his roiall ascent craved and contributed thereunto.
Thirdly, by the Kings not sitting in Parliament to debate and consult lawes, nor are they at all offered him by the Parliament to consider of, but to consent to, which yet are transmitted from one house to another, as well to consult as consent to, shewing thereby he hath no part in the consultory part of them (for that it belongs onely to the people in Parliament to discerne and consult their own good,) but he comes onely at the time of enaging, bringing his Royall Authority with him, as it were to set the seale thereof to the Indenture allready prepared by the people, for the King is head of the Parliament in regard of his authority, not in regard of his reason or judgement, as if it were to be opposed to the reason or judgement of both houses (which is the reason both of King and Kingdome) and therefore do they as consult so also interpret lawes without him, supposing him to be a person replenished with honour and royall authority not skilled in lawes, nor to receive information either of law or councell in Parliamentary affaires from any, saving from that supreame court and highest councell of the King and Kingdome, which admits no counterpoint, being intrusted both as the wisest Councell and justest judicature.
Fourthly, either the choise of the people in Parliament is to be the ground and rule of the Kings assent, or nothing but his pleasure, and so all Bills though never so necessary for publique good and preservation, and after never so much paines and consultation of both houses may be rejected, and so they made meere cyphers, and we brought to that passe, as either to have no lawes, or such onely as come immediately from the King (who oft is a man of pleasure, and little seene in publicke affaires, to be able to judge) and so the Kingdomes great councell must be subordinated either to his meere will, and then what difference between a free Monarchy, and an absolute, saving that the one rules without Councell, and the other against it, or at the best but to a cabinet councell consisting commonly of men of private interests, but certainly of no publicke trust.
Ob. But if the King must consent to such laws as the Parliament shall chuse eo nomine, they may then propound unreasonable things to him, as to consent to his own deposing, or to the lessening his own revenew, &c.
Ans. So that the issue is, whether it be fitter to trust the wisdome and integrity of our Parliament, or the will and pleasure of the King in this case of so great and publicke concernment. In a word, the king being made the fountaine of justice and protection to his people by the fundementall lawes or constitution of this Kingdome, he is therefore to give life to such acts and things as tend thereunto, which acts depend not upon his pleasure, but though they are to receive their greater vigour from him, yet are they not to be suspended at pleasure by him, for that which at first was intended by the kingdome: for an honourable way of subsistence and administration must not be wrested contrary to the nature of this Polity, (which is a free and mixt Monarchy and not an absolute) to its destruction and confusion, so that in case the King in his person should decline his duty, the king in his courts are bound to performe it, where his authority properly resides, for if he refuse that honour which the republicke by its fundamentall constitution hath conferred upon him, and will not put forth the acts of it, for the end it was given him, viz. for the justice and safety of his people, this hinders not but that they who have as fundamentally reserved a power of being & wellbeing in their own handes by the concurrence of Parliamentary authority to the royall dignity, may thereby provide for their own subsistence, wherein is acted the kings juridicall authority though his personall pleasure be withheld, for his legall and juridicall power is included and supposed in the very being, and consequently in the acts of Courts of justice, whose being he may as well suspend as their power of acting, for that without this is but a cypher, and therefore neither their being nor their acting so depend upon him, as not to be able to act and execute common justice and protection without him, in case he deny to act with them, and yet both so depend upon him, is that he is bound both in duty and honour, by the constitution of this polity to act in them and they from him, so that (according to that axiome in law) the King can doe no wrong, because his iuridicall power and authority is allwayes to controle his personall miscarriages.
Se Defendendo.
GOd and nature hath ordained Government for the preservation of the governed. This is a truth so undeniable, as that none will gain-say it, saving in practice, which therefore being taken for granted, it must needs follow that to what end Government was ordained, it must bee maintained, for that it is not in the power of particular persons or communities of men to depart with selfe preservation by any covenant whatsoever, nor ought it to bee exacted by any superiours from their inferiours, either by oath or edict, because neither oathes nor statutes are obligatory further then they agree with the righteous Laws of God and nature; further then so they ought neither to be made nor kept.
Let it be supposed then for argument sake, that the Militia of the Kingdom, is in the power of the King, yet now as the case stands it is lawfull for the Parliament to reassume it, because though they passed it into his hands, for the peoples preservation, yet it was never intended that by it he might compasse their destruction, contrary to the Law of nature; whereby every man, yea every thing is bound to preserve it selfe. And thus much in effect is confessed at unawares, by the Author of the Reply to the Answer of the London Petition: who affirmeth, saying The King is invested with the sole power of Training, Arraying, and Mastering, and then gives the reason, because it is most consonant to reason, as well as grounded on Law, That he wich is bound to protect, should be able to compasse that end. Which reason overthrows both his position and intention. 1. His position, for this is no reason why the sole power of the Militia should be in the hands of the King; because he is bound to protect, except he were bound solely to protect, that is, without the counsel and advice of Parliament: but it hath beene resolved that He is not sole judge of necessity, and therefore not sole protector against it, but together with His Parliament, who consequently shares in the power of the Militia. 2. It overthrows His intention, which is so to put the power of the Militia into the hands of the King, as to enable him to do what he wil with it, when as yet he himself cannot but affirm, it is his to protect withall, so that when he ceaseth to use it to its end, it ceaseth to be in his power for else let the man speake plain, and say, it is His to destroy as well as to protect.
Ob. But the Militia is passed to the King, absolutely without any condition of revocation expressed, or of limitation to circumscribe the use whereunto it ought to be imployed.
1. Ans. Laws of God and nature, neither are nor need to be expressed in contracts or edicts, for they are ever supposed to be supreme to humane ordinances, and to chalenge obedience in the first place, and other Laws so far onely as they are consonant to them, though these Laws be further backed with Oathes and Protestations: As for instance, I give a man a sword, and sweare I will never take it from him; yet if he actually assault me, or it manifestly appeare he intends to cut my throat, or take my purse with it, I may lawfully possesse my selfe of it again if opportunity serve, because in such agreements betwixt man & man, the laws of nature neither are nor can be exempted, but are necessarily implyed, still to be of force, because no bonds can lawfully invalid them, and id solum possumus quod jure possumus. But it may be asked how it appeares that the King intends to imploy the Militia to the destruction of his people. Why first because He hath refused to hearken to the wholsome counsel of His Parliament, the representative body, and the highest Court and Counsel of the Kingdom. 2 Because, è contrario, hee hearkens to the councels of notorious Papists and Malignants, men engaged against the publike good and welfare of this Kingdome, in a diametrall opposition, so that if they perish it prospereth, and if it prosper they perish. 3. Because &illegible; hath had a deepe hand in contriving and plotting the ruine and extirpation of the Parliament, by secret and open violence, and in them of the whole Kingdome of whom they are the Epitome, and as the King is the head, so they are the heart. But further it may be replied, that the King hath promised to maintain Parliaments and governe by Law. Ans. That is so far as he knowes his own heart, and as he can be master of himselfe: He sware the same at His Coronation and promised as much when he granted the Petition of Right, but how they have beene kept God knowes, and we are not ignorant. It may be His Majesty may meane as he speakes, but 1. Temptations may change his minde, as it hath done too often and as it did his that said to the Prophet, Is thy servant a dog that he should do such things? and yet did them. The welfare of Kingdomes is not to be founded upon bare spontaneous promises, but reall contracts. 2. He himselfe sayes, he himselfe is not skild in the Laws, and we have found it true, so that he must take information of them from some body from his Parliament (that is his people that made them) he wil not, and are any fitter to be Judges of the Law, then the highest Court; if they may be Judges that are delinquents to the Law, and Malignants against it, and have beene grievous oppressors of the People, even against the known Laws (so much cried up) we are like to have just Judges and righteous Lawyers.
2. Ans. If the Militia be so absolutely the Kings, as that all power of defence and preservation of our selves and our rights be taken from us, to what purpose do we strive for liberty & property, and laws to confirm them? these are but imaginary things, if they have no hedge to fence them; If the Militia be for the King, let us burne the Statutes we have already, and save a labour of making more. No man would thinke it a good purchase to buy land, and when he hath paid his money to have it in the power of the seller, to take it from him by his sword.
Ob. It is true that Kings are tied by oath, and legall contracts, to governe by Laws, and to maintain liberty and property to their people, which puts them under an obligation of conscience to God, so that they are responsible to him for the breach of fidelity and duty, but not to the people who may minde them of their duty, but not compell them to it.
Ans. This Objection hath two parts, First, That Kings are onely responsible to God. 2. That Subjects must suffer wrong, but not by force maintain their right. To the first I answer. That if Kings be solely answerable to God, then contracts are in vaine, for they shall answer for all their arbitrary and unjust tyrannie over their people, though there were no contracts. That which makes us happier then other Nations, sure is not this, that the King for the breach of his duty hath more to answer at the day of judgement then other Kings have, if that bee all wee have small cause to joy in our priviledges, they are neither worth the blood that hath been shed for them, nor the money that hath beene paid for them. Secondly, Government must be considered under a twofold notion, divine and humane. The Genus which is government it selfe is divine, so that people are absolutely bound to have government, but not bound to have an absolute government, for the species or the modus gubernandi is humane, and therefore the Apostle sayes, Be subject to every ordinance of man, that is, to every such kinde of Government as your lot falls to be under, by the constitution of the Common-wealth you live in. Now Government being thus of a mixt nature, the Ordinance both of God and man it is not onely subject to God but also to men, to be regulated, amended, and maintained by the people: for as it is Gods Ordinance for their good, so doth he give them liberty to provide it bee not abused to their hurt, so that when God shall put an opportunity into their hands, they ought to improve it to the setting of government up right, or the keeping of it so from apparent violations. There was a time when both Government and the manner of governing belonged to God, to wit, amongst the Israelites, for to that people he was both a God of moralls and politiks, and therefore he tooke it so ill for them to usurpe upon his right, as to desire to change their government from Judges to Kings, but this was a peculiar right he assumed over that particular people onely. To the second I answer thus. Every Subject taken divisim, and apart from the whole, is to suffer under abused authority, and to obey passively, rather then to breake union or cause confusion, but no Subject is bound to suffer by that which is not authority, as is the will of the Magistrate: If a Court of Justice should unjustly condemne a man, he is patiently to undergoe it, but if a Judge or the King himselfe should violently set upon him to kill him, he may defend himselfe; for the Ordinance of God and man both, is affixed to the office, and not unto the person, to the authority and not unto the will, so that the person acting out of office, and by his will may be resisted, though the ordinance may not. But the representative body of the Common-wealth, (which is all men conjunctim) they may not onely oppose the person and his will, but even the office and authority it selfe when abused, and are bound to it both in conscience to God when he gives them opportunity, and in discharging of their trust to them that imployed them. For first God calls to have the wicked removed from the Throne, and whom doth he call upon to doe it but upon the people (in case the King will not) or their trustees, for as he hath originally founded all authority in the people, so he expects a discharge of it from them for his glory, & the publike weale, which are the ends of Government, from which God and nature hath ordained it. Secondly, In discharge of their trust for the whole, for order sake, making them their representative actors, and putting that universall and popular authority, that is in the body of the people, and which (for the publike good and preservation) is above every man and all Laws, into their hands, they may expect and chalenge them by vertue of their stewardship, to provide for their safety and well being, against whomsoever shall oppose it, no one being above all, and therefore ought not that universall power, which by way of trust is conveyed over to the Parliament be betrayed into the hands of any by admitting or allowing any authority to be superiour, by tollerating abuses and usurpations, as if they had not power to regulate them.
FINIS.
T.26 (1.9.) William Prynne, The Soveraigne Power of Parliaments and Kingdomes (15 April 1643).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date
OLL Thumbs TP Image

Local JPEG TP Image

Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.26 [1643.04.15] (1.9) William Prynne, The Soveraigne Power of Parliaments and Kingdomes (15 April 1643).
Full titleWilliam Prynne, The Soveraigne Power of Parliaments and Kingdomes, Or, Second part of the treachery and Disloyalty of Papists to their Soveraignes. Wherein the Parliaments and Kingdomes Right and Interest in, and Power over the Militia, Ports, Forts, Navy, Ammunition of the realme, to dispose of them unto Confiding Officers hands, in these times of danger. Their Right and Interest to nominate and Elect all needfull Commanders, to exercise the Militia for the Kingdomes safety, and defence: As likewise, to Recommend and make choise of the Lord Chancellor, Keeper, Treasurer, Privy Seale, Privie Counsellors, Judges, and Sheriffes of the Kingdome, When they see just Cause: Together with the Parliaments late Assertion; That the King hath no absolute Negative Voice in passing publicke Bills of Right and Justice, for the safety, peace, and common benefit of his People, when both Houses deeme them necessary and just: are fully vindicated and confirmed,by pregnant Reasons and variety of Authorities, for the satisfaction of all Malignants, Papists, Royalists, who unjustly Censure the parliament proceedings, Claimes and Declarations, in these Particulars.
Judges 20. 1. 2. 8. 9. 10. 11. Then all the children of Israel went out, and the Congregation was gathered together, as one man, from Dan to Bersheeba, etc. And all the People arose as one man, saying, We will not any of us goe to his Tent; neither will we any of us turne into his House; But now, this shall be the thing, that we will doe to Gibeah; We will goe up by lot against it. And we will take ten men of an hundred, throughout all the Tribes of Israel; and an hundred of a thousand, and a thousand out of ten thousand, to fetch victualls for the people, that they may doe to Gibeah, according to all the folly that they have wrought in Israel.
Judges 11. 5. 6. 11. And it was so when the children of Ammon made warre against Israel, the Elders of Gilead said unto lepthah; Come, and be our Captaine, that we may fight with the children of Ammon, etc. Then Jepthah went with the Elders of Gilead, and THE PEOPLE MADE HIM HEAD AND CAPTAINE OVER THEM.
2 Sam. 18. 3. 4. And the king said unto the people, WHAT SEEMETH YOU BEST, I WILL DOE.
Jer. 38. 4. 5. Then Zedeckiah the Kind said unto the princes; Behold, he is in your hand; FOR THE KING IS NOT HE THAT CAN DOE ANY THING AGAINST YOU.
It is this 28th. day of March, 1643. ordered by the Committee of the House of Commons in Parliament concerning Printing, that this booke intituled, The Soveraigne Power of Parliaments and Kingdomes, be forthwith Printed by Michael Sparke, Senior. Iohn White.
Printed at London by J.D. for Michael Sparke, Senior. 1643.
15 April 1643.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 252; Thomason E. 248. (2.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
To The Reader.
COurteous Reader, our usuall Proverbe concerning Science; That it hath no enemies but Ignorants; is in a great measure now verified concerning the Proceedings of this present Parliament; that few or none malignantly clamor against them, but such who are in a great degree Ignorant of our Parliaments just Soveraigne Authority; though many of them in their own high-towring conceits deeme themselves almost Omniscients, and wiser than an hundred Parliaments compacted into one. Among these Anti-parliamentall Momusses, there are none more outragiously violent (Papists onely excepted) in exorbitant Discourses, and violent Invectives, against this Parliaments Soveraigne power, Priviledges, Orders, Remonstrances, Resolutions; then a Company of seemingly Scient, though really* inscient, selfe-conceited Court-Doctors, Priests, and Lawyers; who have so long studied the Art of flattery, that they have quite forgot the very Rudiments of Divinity, Law, Policy, and found out such a Divine, Legall, unlimited absolute royall Prerogative in the King; and such a most despicable Impotencie, Inanity, yea Nullity in Parliaments, without his personall presence and concurrence with them; as was never heard of but in Utopia, if there; and may justly challenge a Speciall Scene in the next Edition of Ignoramus.
What God himselfe long since complained off;* My people are destroyed for lacke of knowledge; may now be as truly averred of the people of England, (seduced by these blinde Guides, or over-reached by Iesuitically Policies,) they are destroyed for want of knowledge, even of the Kings just circumscribed Prerogative; of the Parliaments Supreame unlimited Authority, and Unquestionable Priviledges; of their owne Hæreditary Liberties, and Native Rights: of the Law of God, of Nature, of the Realme in the points now controverted betweene King and Parliament; of the Machivilian deepe Plots of Priests and Papists long since contrived, and their Confederacies with forraign States (now visibly appearing) by secret Practises, or open violence, to set up Popery and Tyranny, throughout our Realmes at once; and by false pretences, mixt with deceitfull Protestations, to make our selves the unhappie Instruments of our Kingdomes slavery, our Lawes and Religions utter ruine. The Ignorance, or Inadvertency of these particulars, coupled with a Popish blinde Obedience to all royall Commands though never so illegall; our of an implicit Faith, that what ever the King Commands (though against the expresse Lawes of God and the Realme and Resolutions of both Houses of Parliament) may and ought to be obeyed without contradiction or resistance; as some new Doctors teach: hath induced not onely many poore Ignorant English and Welsh silly soules, but likewise sundry Nobles and Gentlemen of quality, very unworthily to engage themselves in a most unnaturall destructive warre, against the High Court of Parliament, and their* Dearest Native Country, to their eternall infamies, and (which is almost a miracle to consider) to joyne with the Iesuiticall Popish Party now in Armes both in England and Ireland, and some say under the Popes owne Standard) not onely to subvert their owne Lawes and Liberties, but the very Protestant Religion here established, which they professe they fight for. In this deplorable warre many thousands have beene already destroyed, and the whole Kingdome almost made a desolate wildernesse, or like to be so ere this Spring passe over; and all onely for want of knowledge, in the premises, which would have prevented all those Miseries and Distractions under which we now languish almost to desperation, and death it selfe.
To dissipate these blacke Clouds of Egyptian Darkenesse, spread over all the Land, distilling downe upon it in showres of Blood insteed of Aprill drops of raine, (and I pray God they make not all our May-flowers of a Sanguine dye,) I have, (after a long sad Contemplation, of my deare Countries bloody Tragedies) at the speciall Request of some Members of Parliament, (according to my weake Ability, and few Houres vacancy from other distracting Imployments) hastily compiled this undigested ensuing Fragment, with the preceding Branch thereof, and by their Authority, published that in dismembred Parts, which by reason of its difficultie to the Printers, & urgencie of present publike affaires now in agitation, I was disabled to put forth (together with the remaining member) in one intire Body, as I desired. Be pleased therefore kindly to accept that in Fractions, for the present, which time onely must, and (God-willing) speedily shall compleat; which by Gods blessing on it, may prove a likely meanes to comprimise our present Differences; and re-establish our much desired-Peace; together with our Religion, Lawes, Liberties in their Native purity and glory; (the very Crownes, and Garlands of our Peace;) Peace accompained which Slavery and Popery (both which now menace Us,) being worse then the worst of Warres; and an honourable death in the field fighting against them, better by farre then a disconsolate sordid slavish life, or a wounded oppressed Conscience, (though in a royall Pallace) under them. From such a disadvantageous, enslaving, ensnaring, unwelcome Peace, Good Lord Deliver Us.
All I shall adde, is but this request; A Charitable Construction, of this meane Service for my Countries Liberty, Tranquility, Felicity: and if thou, or the Republicke reap any benefit thereby, let God onely enjoy thy Prayses, the Author thy Prayers. And because I have walked in an untrodden path, in all the Parts of this Discourse.
- — Si quid novisti rectius istis
- Candidus imperti; si non, his uteremecum.
THE SOVERAIGNE POWER OF PARLIAMENTS AND KINGDOMES.
HAVING answered in the former part,Object. 2. the Grand Objection against the Parliaments Soveraigne Power, I shall in this proceed to the particular crimes now objected against it. The second grand complaint of his(a) Majesty and others, against the Parliament is, That both Houses by a meere Ordinance, not onely without, but against the Kings assent, have unjustly usurped the power of the Militia, a chiefe flower of the Crowne, and in pursuit thereof, not onely appointed Lieutenants, and other Officers, to muster the Trained Bands in each County; but likewise seised the Ports, Forts, Navy, and Ammunition of the King, together with his Revenues; to regaine all which, his Majesty hath beene necessitated to raise an Army, and proceed against them in a Martiall way.
This unhappy difference about the Militia,Answ. being (next to the Introduction of Popery) the spring from whence our uncivill warres have issued, and the full discussion thereof, the most probable meanes to put a speedy period to them: I shall with as much impartiality and perspicuity, as I may, like a faithfull Advocate to my Country, and cordiall indifferent well-wisher both to King and Parliament, truely state and debate this controversie, beginning with the occasions which first set it on foote.
In the late happily composed warres betweene England and Scotland, (occasioned by the Prelates) divers Counties of England were much oppressed by their Lieutenants with illegall Levies of Souldiers, Coat and Conduct money, taking away the Trained Bands Armes against their consents, and the like, for which many complaints were put up against them to this Parliament; many of them voted Delinquents, unfit for such a trust, and all their Commissions resolved to be against Law; so that the Militia of the Realme lay quite unsetled.(b) Not long after, our Northerne Army against the Scots, the pacification being concluded; was by some ill instruments laboured to march up to London, to over awe or dissolve, the Parliament, and quash the Bill against the Bishops sitting in the House: Which plot being discovered, and the chiefe Actors in it flying over-sea ere it tooke effect, made the Parliament jealous and fearefull of great dangers, if the Command of the Forces of the kingdome then vacant, should be continued in ill-affected, or untrusty Officers hands; which distrustes and feares of theirs were much augmented by the suddaine generall Rebellion of the Papists in Ireland, who(c) pretended his Majesties and the Queens Commissions for their warrant; by his Majesties unexpected accusation of, and personall comming (with an extraordinary Guard) into the house of Commons to demand the five Members of it, whom he charged with high Treason; by his entertaining of divers Captaines, as a supernumerary Guard at White-hall; and denying a Guard to the House; by the Earle of New-castles attempt to seize upon Hull, and the Magazine there, by command; by the Lord Digbies advice to the King, to retire from the Parliament, to some place of strength; by the reports of foraine Forces prepared for England, through the solicitation of those fugitives, who had a finger in the former plots; and by the Queenes departure into the Netherlands, to raise a party there. Hereupon the Parliament for their owne and the kingdomes better security (in the midst of so many feares and dangers threatned to them) importuned his Majesty to settle the then unsetled Militia of the kingdome, by a Bill, for a convenient time, and seeing the King himselfe could not personally execute this great trust but by under-officers, by the same Bill, to intrust such persons of quality and sincerity (nominated by both Houses, and approved by the King) as both his Majesty, Parliament, and Kingdome might securely confide in, to exercise the Militia, and keepe the Forts, Magazine, and Ammunition of the kingdome under him onely (as before) till these blacke clouds were dissipated. Which his Majesty refusing to grant in so ample manner as was thought meete for their security; by a Vote of both Houses (when they were full) the Militia was committed to divers Noble Lords and others; many of whom have since laid downe their Commissions, which they at first accepted from the Houses, and instead thereof, beene active instruments in executing the Commission of Array; (issued out by his Majesty, in direct opposition to the Militia) which the Houses by two severall Declarations have since Voted and manifested, To be against the Law, and Liberty of the Subjects. And to prevent the arrivals of Foraine Forces, and a civill warre in the bowels of the kingdome, they first put the Tower of London, by the Kings consent, into a confiding hand, trusted by either party; then they secured Hull and the Magazine there; after this, when they were informed his Majesty had seised Newcastle, and was raising an Army, they possessed themselves of the Navy, Portsmouth, with other Ports and Forts; and sequestred his Revenues; (the Nerves with which he should support this unnaturall civill warre) which by degrees hath now overspread the whole kingdome, and threatens inevitable desolation to it, if not speedily determined, by an honourable safe accommodation.
This being the true State and progresse of the Militia, the sole question will be; Whether all the former circumstances of danger, and his Majesties refusall to settle the Militia, Ports, &c. by an act; in such trusty hands, as both King and Parliament might confide in; the Parliament by an Ordinance of both Houses onely, without the King, refusing to joyne with them, and wilfully absenting himselfe from the Parliament, might not in this case of necessity and extremity, (for their owne, and the kingdomes safety) lawfully settle and seise the premises, for the present, as they have done? and whether this be a just ground for the King to beginne or continue a desperate civill warre against his Subjects? For my part, I shall not undertake to justifie all passages on either side, in the managing of this businesse; it may be there have beene errors at least in both parties: which to reconcile, as neer as possible, I shall premise such propositions on either hand, as neither can in justice deny.
On the Kings part it is irrefragable:
First, That the Kings of England, (yea generally all Kings where ever) have usually enjoyed the chiefe Ministeriall Ordering of the Militia (in such sort as it hath beene setled by their Parliaments) for the defence of the kingdome by Land and Sea, against Foraine Enemies: A truth acknowledged, not onely by Judge Crooke, and Hutton, in their Arguments against Ship-money, but by the Parliament it selfe in their two Declarations against the Commission of Array; the(d) Scripture it selfe in sundry places, together with(e) Aristotle,(f) Polybius,(g) Cicero,(h) Jacobus Valdesius, the(i) Histories of all Kingdomes attesting, that the originall cause of erecting Kings was, and one principall part of their Royall Office is, to be their Kingdomes Generals in their Warres, and fight their Battailes for them; the Kings of Sparta, and others, yea, the ancient Roman Emperours, being(k) nothing but their Generalls to manage their Warres, and oft Elected Emperours by the Roman Legions, for their skill in Martiall affaires.
Secondly, That it is not onely(l) expedient, but in some respects necessary, that this chiefe ministeriall command of the Militia, Forts, and Navy, should constantly continue in the Crown; unlesse it be in some speciall cases; as when the King is an Infant, or unable, or unwilling to discharge this trust; or intends to imploy this power against his Subjects to infringe their Liberties, and erect a Tyranny instead of a Royalty over them: And that it is not meete nor honourable to deprive his Majesty of this part of his Soveraignty at this present, but onely to recommend unto him such persons of trust and quality to manage the Militia, Forts, and Navy under him, in these times of warre and danger, in whose fidelity the Parliament and whole kingdome may confide, and so be freed from their just jealousies, feares, and dangers. Thus farre the Houses have already condescended; and upon these indifferent termes (as they conceive them) have oft(m) profered to resigne up all the Ports, Forts, Ships, Magazines, and Ammunition they have seised on, into his Majesties hands, they never desiring, nor intending to devest him of this his Soveraigne power over them.
On the Parliaments part, it must necessarily be granted to them by the King:
First, That the whole power which either his Majesty hath or claimes, or his Predecessors enjoyed over the Militia, Forts, Navy, Ammunition, and Revenues of the Crowne; was originally derived and granted to his Ancestors, by the Parliaments and kingdomes free consents,* And that onely upon trust and confidence for their protection, benefit, security, as the premises abundantly evidence.
Secondly, That the King hath no other power over the Militia, to Array, Arme or Muster his Subjects in any case, then onely in such manner as the Parliament by speciall Acts hath prescribed, as Sir Edward Cooke in his Institutes on Magna Charta, f. 528, 529. this Parliament in the two Declarations against the Commission of Array; and Judge Cooke and Hutton in their Arguments against Ship-money, have largely proved.
Thirdly, That in ancient times, in and before Edward the Confessors dayes, and since, the Heretoches (or Lord Lieutenants of every Province and Country) who had the chiefe power of the Militia, and commanded them as their Generalls in the Warres, were elected by the Common Councell of the Kingdome (the Parliament) throughout all Provinces of the Realme, and in every County (by the Freeholders) in a full Folkmote, or County Court; as appeares by the expresse words of King Edwards owne Lawes, Recorded in(n) Mr. Lambard; Recited and affirmed by Sir Edward Cooke in his Institutes on Magna Charta, f. 174, 175.
Fourthly, That the Sheriffe of every County (who both* then had, and now hath full power to raise the Militia, and Forces of the County upon any occasion, to apprehend Delinquents, execute Proces of the Law, suppresse Riots, and preserve the peace of the County) were not elected by the King, but by the Freeholders of each County, as the(o) Conservators of the Peace, and all great Officers of trust, then were, and the(p) Coroners, Foresters, and other Officers, then and yet are elected by the Free-holders, (as well as(q) Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses of Parliament) even at this very day; This is evident by the expresse words of King Edward the Confessors Lawes, Cap. de Heretochiis (Recorded by Mr. Lambard, Archaion, p. 135. and Sir* Edward Cooke) attesting; That the Sheriffes of every County were chosen by the Free-holders in the County Court: And by the Articles of deprivation against Richard the second, charging this upon him as an illegall encroachment,* That be put out divers Sheriffes lawfully ELECTED (to wit, by the Freeholders) and put in their [Editor: illegible word] divers of his owne Minions, subverting the Law, contrary to his Oath and Honour.(r) In the yeare 1261. The Barons, by vertue of an Ordinance of Parliament made at Oxford, in the 45. yeare of Henry the third, admitted and made Sheriffes of divers Counties in England, and named them Guardians and Keepers of these Counties, and discharged them whom the King had before admitted. After which, great tumults and seditions arose throughout the Counties of England about the Sheriffes; for the* King making new Sheriffes in every County, and removing with regall indignation, those to whom the custody of the Counties was committed by the Barons and Commons of the Land; the inhabitants of the Counties animated with the assistance, and ayded with the Counsell of some great men of the Realme, by whom they were instructed; with great sagacity, Novos repulere viriliter Vicecomites, manfully repulsed the new Sheriffes; Neither would they answer, regard, or obey them in any thing. Where at the King being grievously troubled in minde, to gaine the peoples devotion and fidelity, directed his Letters to all the Inhabitants of the severall Counties of England, moving to piety and tending to regaine the Subjects Love. Whereupon, great discord increased betweene the King and his Barons; who comming to London with great Forces, the King finding himselfe too weake, ended the matter for the present with a fained Accommodation, which soone after was infringed by him; and so, Conquievit tandem per internuncios ipsa perturbatio, SUB SPE PACIS reformande, sine strepitu guerra, quorundum Procerum ad boc electorum considerationibus, parte utraque concorditer infinite. Sicque Baronum omnis labor, atque omne studium præcogitarum din, QUORUNDAM (ut putabatur) ASTUTIA INTERMIXTA eassature est ad hoc; tempus, & emarcuit; quiæ semper nocuit differre paratis; writes Matthew Westminster. Notwithstanding these contests, the people still enjoyed the right of electing Sheriffes, which is evident by the Statute of Articuli super Chartas, in the 28. yeare of King Edward the 1. ch. 8. The King granteth to the people (not by way of grace but of Right) that they shall have election of their Sheriffe IN EVERY SHIRE (where the Shrevalty is not of Fee.) IF THEY LIST, And ch. 13. For as much as the King bath granted the election of Sheriffes to the COMMONS of the Shire, the King will, that THEY SHALL CHUSE such Sheriffes, that shall not charge them &c. And Sir Edward Cooke in his Commentary on Magna Charta, f. 174, 175. 558. 559. 566. proves at large, the right of electing Sheriffes, to be antiently, of late, (and at this day in many places) in the Freeholders and people, as in London, Yorke, Bristoll, Glocester, Norwich, in all great Cities which are Counties, & in Middlesex. Seeing then the Parliament and Free-holders, in ancient times had a just right to elect their Generals, Captaines, Sheriffes, (who had the sole power of the Militia, and Counties in their hands next under the King himselfe,) and there is no negative Law in being (that I can find) to exclude them from this power; I humbly conceive, that their setling the Militia by an Ordinance of both Houses, and electing of Commanders, Lieutenantes, Captaines in each County to execute it, and defend the Counties from plundering and destruction, without his Majesties consent (especially after his refusall to settle it by an Act) can be no incroachment at all upon his Prerogative Royall, but onely a reviving and exercising of the old undoubted rightfull power enjoyed by their Predecessors, now necessary to be resumed by them (in these times of feare and danger) for the kingdomes safety.
Fifthly, The Mayors, Bayliffes, Sheriffes, chiefe Officers of Cities and Townes corporate throughout the Realme, (who under the King have the principall command of those Cities, Townes, Ports, and in many places of the Militia, and Trained Bands within them;) are alwayes chosen by the Corporations and Freemen, not the King, without any derogation to, or usurpation on his Prerogative. Why then may not those Corporations, (yea each County too by the like reason) and the Parliament, which represents them and the whole Kingdome, without any prejudice or dishonour to his Majesties Authority, by an Ordinance of both Houses of Parliament, without the King, dispose of the Militia, and these Military Officers, for the defence of those Corporations, and the Realme too, now, in times of such apparent danger?
Sixthly, all *Military Affaires of the kingdome heretofore, have usually, even of right, (for their originall determining, counselling, and disposing part) beene Ordered by the Parliament; the executive, or ministeriall part onely, by the King; and so hath beene the use in most other kingdomes: To instance in particulars.
First, the denouncing of warre against forraine enemies, hath been usually concluded and resolved on by the Parliament, before it was proclaimed by the King: as our Records of Parliament, and Histories of warres in the Holy-Land, France, Scotland, Ireland, abundantly evidence.(f) King Henry the fifth by the advise of his Prelates, Lords, & Commons in Parliament, and at their encitement, twice denounced and undertooke his victorious warre against France, to which Crowne he then laid claime, for which end they granted him Subsidies: King(t) Edward the 1. in the 21. yeare of his reigne; calling a Parliament at London, de Concilio Prælatorum & Procerum, &c. by the advise of his Prelates, Lords and Parliament, denounced war against the King of France: to recover his right and lands there seised. Which to effect both the Clergy and Laity granted him large Subsidies. In the(u) fifth yeare of King Edward the third, the warre against Scotland was concluded and resolved on, in and by the Parliament; all the Nobles and Commons of England telling the King, they would gladly and willingly assist and goe with him in that expedition; which they vigorously prosecuted: Before this, Anno 1227. A peace (as well as warre) was concluded with the Scots in and by a Parliament at Northampton. (x)Anno 1242. King Henry the third summoning a Parliament, and demanding ayd of his Subjects to assist him in his warre against the King of France to recover his rights there, they gave him a resolute answer, that they would grant him no ayde, and that he should make no warre with France till the truce were expired: which Matthew Paris thus further expresseth: The Nobles answered him with great bitternesse of heart; that hee had conceived this warre and voyage into France without their advise: Et talia effrons impudenter postularat, exagitans & depauperans fideles suos tam frequenter, trabens exactiones in consequentiam quasi a servis ultimæ conditionis, & tantam pecuniam toties extorsit inutiliter dispensandam. Contradixerunt agitur Regi in faciem, nolentes amplius sic pecunia sua frustratorie spoliari. The King hereupon put them off till the next day (Romanorum usus versutis fallaciis) and then they should heare his minde concerning this and other matters. The next day he calls them one by one into his Privie Chamber, now one, then another, like a Priest calling penitents to confession; and thus those whom hee could not altogether overcome, weakned by being every one apart, hee endeavoured more cunningly to enervate with his words; and demanding a pecuniary ayd of them he said; See what this Abbot bath granted me towards my ayd; behold what another bath subscribed, producing a fayned roll, that such and such an Abbot or Peere had subscribed such a fumme, when in truth not one of them had consented to it, neither came it into their thoughts. The King therefore with such false copies, and ensnaring words cunningly inveagled many: Notwithstanding most stood out, and would by no meanes recede from the common answer, which they had swarne not to recede from under paine of an Anathema. To whom the King answered in anger, Shall I be perjur'd? I have sworne with an inviolable oath, that passing over Sea, I will with a stretched out arme demand my rights of the King of France, which I cannot doe without store of treasure, which must proceed from your liberality, else I can by no meanes doe it. Neither yet with these, or other words could he entrap any, albeit, he called every man single to conferre with. After this, he againe called others which were more familiar with him, and so talking to them said, What a pernitious example give you to others? you who are Earles, Barons, and valiant Souldiers, ought not to tremble as others, to wit, Prelates of the Church doe. You ought to be more covetous to demand the Kings rights, and valiantly to fight against those who wrong me, &c. with what face then can you relinquish me poore and desolate now, being your Lord, in such a weighty businesse which concernes the Common-wealth, when I am bound by promises to passe the Seas, which I ratified with an oath? Which when it came to the knowledge of all, they answered:
We admire beyond all that can be spoken, into what bottomlesse pit the inmmerable summes of money are sunke, which thou Lord King hast cunningly gained, by divers wardships of great men, by various escheates, frequent extortions, as well from Churches voyd of a Pastor, as from the lands of Noblemen, free granted Donatives, engendring amazement in the hearts of the hearers, all which have never brought so much as the least increase to the kingdome. Moreover all the Nobles of England doe overmuch admire, QUOD SINE EOR VM CONSILIO ET CONSENSV, that without their counsell or consent you have undertaken so difficult and perilous a businesse, giving credit to those who want faith, and contemning the favour of thy naturall Subjects, exposest thy selfe to cases of so doubtfull fortune: thou dishonestly and impudently, not with unjust perill of thy soule, and wounding of thy same breakest the Articles of the truce betweene the King of France and thee, which thou hast sworne upon thy soule indissolubly and unviolably to keepe for three yeares space, &c. The King hearing these things, was exceeding angry, swearing by all the Saints, that he would be revoked by no terrour, nor perswaded by any circumstances of words, to retard his begun purpose, and taking ship on quindena Paschæ, would undauntedly try the fortune of warre in forraine parts. And so the Parliament dissolving in discontent and secret heart-burning on both sides, the Lords and Barons for a perpetuall memory of their heroicke answer returned to the King, set it downe in a notable Remonstrance (too large to transcribe) which you may reade in* Matthew Paris. After this in the yeare 1248. this* King summoned a generall Parliament at London, wherein hee demanded an ayde from his Lords and Commons to recover his right in France; who instead of granting it, informed him very roundly and fully of his unkingly and base oppressions both of his Subjects and strangers, to his owne and the kingdomes dishonour, and of his tyranny and rapines: At which the King being confounded and ashamed in himselfe, promised a serious and speedy reformation; which because they thought to be but feigned, he answered they should shortly see it; whereupon they replyed, they would patiently expect it till 15. dayes after Saint John Baptist, adjourning the House till then. But the King seduced, hardned and much exasperated by his bad Counsellers and Courtiers, giving then a very high displeasing answer to their demands; they all unanimously answered, that they would no more unprofitably impoverish themselves to enrich and strengthen the King and Kingdomes enemies; and that he had precipitately and indiscreetly, and WITHOVT THEIR CONSENT hastened into Poictiers and Gascoygne, and engaged himselfe in that warre; whence he returned ingloriously with losse of his honour and treasure, to his great reproach. And so this Parliament dissolving with discontent, the King grew very angry with his ill Counsellors, for putting him upon these courses which lost the hearts of his Nobles and people: who to pacifie his anger and supply his wants, advised him to sell all his Plate, Utensils and Jewels to the Londoners, and then to resume and seise them againe as belonging to the Crowne.
(y)Anno 1256. The same King Henry summoned a Parliament to assist him in his warres in Apulia; but because he had taken upon him that warre WITHOVT HIS BARONS AND PARLIAMENTS CONSENT they and his own brother, Richard Earle of Cornewall, refused to grant or lend him any ayde. And* because all the Barons and Commons were not summoned to this Parliament, as they ought to be, according to the tenor of Magna Charta, they refused to doe any thing, or grant any ayd without the rest of the Peeres were present; and so returned home discontented. After this,(z) Anno 1258. this King summoning a Parliament at London, demaunded ayde of them towards his warres in Apulia; to which the Parliament gave this resolute answer, that they cou’d no wayes supply him in this case without their owne undoing: And if he had unadvisedly, and unseemingly gotten from the Pope the Kingdome of Apulia for the use of his sonne Edward, he should impute it to his owne simplicity, and that he had PRESVMED VNCIRCVMSPECTLY WITHOVT THE CONSENT OF HIS NOBLES TO UNDERTAKE THIS WARRE, as a contenmer of deliberation and prudence, which is wont to forecast the end of things; therefore he should bring in to what issue he best could, and should take example from his brother Richard, who refused the Empire tendred to him, &c. In the second yeare of(a) King Edward the second, he consented to this Act of Parliament, That he would begin no warre without common consent in Parliament, which be then confirmed with an oath. So(b) Anno 25. Edward 1. The Lords and Commons utterly refused to goe with the King to his warres in Flanders, though they were summoned to doe it; because this warre was proclaymed without their consents and good likings; and they were not bound by their Tenures to got unto it; Petitioning the King to desist from this warre; and at last caused the King in Parliament to release these services. And(c) Anno 1205. The Lords and Commons for this very reason, refused to goe with King John to his warres in France to recover his inheritance there. *In the sixt yeare of King Richard the second, in a Parliament holden at London, it was for many dayes together debated, whether the Bishop of Norwich (Henry Spenser) whom the Pope bad made Generall of his forces against the Schismaticks of Flanders, giving great indulgences to those who should assist him in person or with monies in this warre) should undertake that warre or no? and after much opposition of the Captaines of the kingdome, alleadging, that it was not safe to commit the people of the King and kingdome to an inexpert Priest; it was at last resolved in Parliament (through the constancy and valour of the Knights and Commons) that he should undertake this warre, and goe Generall of the Army. Which office he valiantly managed with good successe; being a better Souldier then Preacher And the same yeare in another* Parliament at London; it was decreed BY THE PARLIAMENT, that because the Scots bad broken their faith with the English, faith should be broken with them. (Frangenti sidem, fides frangatur eidem:) And that a select power should be sent into Scotland out of England, (to wit, a thousand Lances, and 2000. Archers) to curbe their attempts, under the conduct of the Lord Thomas of Woodstocke which the Scots being informed of, were greatly afraid, and in the end of the Parliament sent humble supplicants to it, to treat with them about a peace or truce, which they desired. But the English having had such frequent experience of their falshood, would neither treat nor compound with them; but reviling their messengers, commanded them to returning home, wishing them to defend their heads and rights as well as they could. Who returning, the Northerns Lords undertooke the defence of their Country, untill Thomas of Woodstocke should be prepared to ayd them with greater Forces. Loe here both Generalls, Armies, Warres appointed by the Parliament, and Subsidies likewise granted to supply them; and the making of a peace or truce referred to them, it being agreed in a former Treaty that if any dammage or injury should bee done by eyther Nation one to another, some special Committees should be sent to the Parliament of hoth kingdomes every yeare, who should publike by relate the injuries susteyned, and receive amends according to the dammage suffered, by the judgement of the Lords.
In the Printed Statutes of [Editor: illegible word] Ed. 3. Parliament 2. and in our(d) Historians too (and I find this preamble, recited almost verbatim, the next Parliament the same yeare, chap. 1.) It is to be remembred, that at the Parliament holden at Westminster, the monday next after the [Editor: illegible word] of the Holy Trinity, in the Reigne of our Soveraigne Lord the King that now is, of England the 18. and of France the 5. many things were showed in full Parliament, which were attempted by the adversary party, against our Soveraigne Lord the King of France, against the Truce late taken in Britaine, betwixt our Soveraigne Lord the King, and him. And how that he enforceth himselfe as much as he may, to destroy our said Soveraign Lord the King, and his Allies, Subjects, Lands and places and the tongue of England. And that was prayed by our said Soveraigne Lord the King of the Prelates, great men and Commons, THAT THEY WOULD GIVE HIM SUCH COUNSELL and AIDE AS SHOULD BE EXPEDIENT IN SO GREAT NECESSITY. And the same Prelates, great men and Commons taking good deliberation and advice, and openly seeing the subversion of the Land of England, and Kings great businesse, which God defend, if hasty remedy be not provided, HAVE COUNSELLED JOYNTLY and SEVERALLY, and prayed with great instance our Soveraigne Lord the King, that he would make him as strong as he might to passe the Sea, in assurance of the ayde of God and his good quarrell, effectually at this time, TO MAKE AN END OF HIS WARRES BY WAY OF PEACE OR ELSE BY FORCE. And that for Letters, words, nor faire promises, he shall not let his passage, till he see the effect of his businesse. And for this cause the said great men do grant, to passe and adventure them with him. And the said Commons doe grant to him for the same cause in a certaine forme, two Quinzimes of the Commonalty, and two Dismes of the Cities and Burroughes, to be levyed in manner as the last Quinzime granted to him, and not in other manner, &c. So that the money levyed of the same, be dispended in the businesse shewed to them this Parliament, BY ADVICE OF THE GREAT MEN THERETO ASSIGNED. And that the aydes beyond Trent, BE PUT IN DEFENCE OF THE NORTH. A pregnant Precedent of the Parliaments interest in concluding Warre and Peace, and disposing of the ayde contributed towards warres, to such persons and uses as they deeme meete to confide in. By these, with infinite other precedents, the Statute of 1 Jac. c. 2. and the Act of Pacification and oblivion betweene Scotland and England, made this very Parliament, enacting that no warre shall be levyed or made by any of either Nation against the other without consent of Parliament, under paine of High Treason; It is evident, that the principall right of concluding, denouncing Warre or peace, resides in the Parliament: and that the King without its previous advice and consent, ought not to proclaime any open warre, since the Subjects estates; and persons must support, wage it, and receive most disadvantage by it; a truth not onely implyed but resolved by his Majesties owne royall assent this very Parliament in the Act of Pacification betwixt England and Scotland, Neither is this thing unusuall but common in other Kingdomes,(e) Livy,(f) Polybius,(g) Grimston,(h) Plutarch,(i) John Bodin expresly affirme and confirme by sundry examples; That in the Roman State, both under their Kings and Emperours, the chiefe power of denouncing warre and concluding peace, was in the Senate and people: And if any of their Emperours, Consuls or Generals concluded peace without their consents, it did not binde, but was meerely voyd, unlesse the Senate and people ratified it by a new decree: neither might any warre be decreed, but in the great assembly of the Senate and people together, and by a publike Law. And because Cæsar had, without command of the people, made warre in France, Cato Uticensis delivered his opinion in the Senate, that the Army was to be called home, and Cæsar for his presumption delivered up to the Enemy. So in the States and Kingdomes of the(*) Athenians, Ætolians, Polonia, Sweden, Denmarke and Norway, no Warre was begunne, nor Peace concluded by their Kings but by the authority and preceding decree of their Senates, Parliaments and Diets, as(k) Bodin proves at large. The like(l) Buchman affirmes of the Kings of Scotland; and we have divine authority concurring with it, Josh. 22. 11, 12, &c. Judg. 20. 1. to 48. compared with Prov. 20. 18. c. 24. 6. and Judg. 11.
Secondly, All preparations belonging to warre by Land and or Sea, have in the grosse and generall, beene usually ordered, limited and setled by the Parliaments: as namely,
First, What proportions and summes of money should be raised for the managing of the warre; in what manner and time it should be levyed; to what hands it should be paid; and how disbursed: which appeares by all the Bills of Subsidies, Tenths, Taxes, Tonnage and Poundage in the Reignes of all our Kings.
(m)Secondly, How every man should be Mustered, Arrayed, Armed, according to his estate, as is cleare by all our Statutes of Armour, Mustere, Captaines, Ships, Horses, Warres, reduced under heads by(n) Rastall; where you may peruse them: by Justice Crookes and Huttons Arguments against Ship-money; Sir Edward Cookes Institutes on Magna Charta, f. 528, 529. the Parliaments two late Declarations against the Commission of Array: and the Statute of Winchester, 13. E. 1. c. 6.
Thirdly, How farre every man shall March when he is Arrayed,(o) when he shall goe out of his owne County with his Armes, when not: who shall serve by Sea, who by Land; how long they shall continue in the Warres; when they shall be at their owne, when at the Kingdomes, when at the Kings costs or wages, and for how long time; as the Marginall Statutes, and next forecited Law Authorities manifest.
Fourthly, When, where, and by whom(p) Liveries, Hats, Coates, shall be given in Warres, when not, and what(q) Protections or Priviledges those who goe to Warres, or continue in them shall have allowed them.
Fifthly, What(r) shares or proportions of Prisoners, Prises, Booties, Captaines and Souldiers should be allowed in the Warres: And at what(s) Ports and rates they should be Shipped over Sea.
Sixthly,(t) How and by whom the Sea shall be guarded, and what Jurisdiction, Authority, and share of Prises the Admirals of England shall have; When the Sea shall be open; when shut to enemies and strangers; What punishments inflicted for Mariners abuses on the Sea; And what redresse for the Subjects there robbed by enemies or others.
Seventhly, What(u) Castles, Forts, Bulwarkes, shall be built or repaired for defence of the Realme, in what places, and by whose charges.
Eightly, What(x) punishment shall be inflicted upon Captaines, who abuse their trust, detaine the Souldiers wages, and on Souldiers, who sell their Armes, or desert their colours without speciall License.
Ninthly, What(y) provision there shall be made for, and maintenance allowed to Souldiers hurt or maimed in the Warres by Land, and for Mariners by Sea. Tenthly, That(z) no ayde, Armour, Horses, Victuals shall be conveyed to the enemies by way of Merchandise, or otherwise during the Warres; that all Scots, and other enemies should be banished the Kingdome and their goods seised whiles the warres continued betweene England and them.
Eleventhly, How(a) Frontier Castles and Townes toward Wales and other places of hostility should be well manned and guarded, and no Welchmen, Irish, Scots or alien Enemies should be permitted to stay in England to give intelligence, or suffered to dwell or purchase Houses or Lands within those Townes; and that they shall all be disarmed.
(c)(f)Twelfthly, After what(b) manner Purveyances shall be made by the Captaines of Castles, and how they shall take up victuall. In one word, Warres have beene ended, Leagues, Truces made, confirmed, and punishments for breach of them, provisions for preservation of them enacted by the Parliament, as infinite Precedents in the Parliament Rols and* Printed Acts, demonstrate. So that our Parliaments in all* former ages, even in the Reignes of our most Martiall Kings, have had the Soveraigne power of ordering, setling, determining both the beginning, progresse, and conclusion of our Warres, and the chiefe ordering of* all things which concerned the managing of them by Sea and Land; being indeed the great Counsell of Warre, elected by the Kingdome, to direct our Kings; who were and are in truth but the kingdomes chiefe Lord Generalls, (as the(d) Roman Emperours, and all Kings of old were their Senates, States and Peoples Generals, to manage their Warres and fight their battailes) the Soveraigne power of making and directing Warre or Peace, being not in the Emperours or Kings themselves, but in their Senates, States and Parliaments, as(e) Bodin proves at large. And being but the kingdomes Generals, who must support and maintaine the Warres, there is as great reason that they should direct and over-rule Kings in the Ordering of their Warres and Militia when they see cause, as that they should direct and rule their Lord Generall now, or the King his Generals in both his Armies. During the(g) minorities of King Henry the sixth, and Edward the sixth, the Parliament made the Duke of Bedford Regent of France, and the Dukes of Glocester and Sommerset, Lord Protectors of England; committing the trust of the Militia; and Warres to them: And (i) 39. H. 6. the Parliament made(h) Richard Duke of Yorke, Lord Protector of the Realme, and gave him like power, when the King was of full aged And in our present times: The King himselfe this very Parliament voluntarily committed the whole care and managing of the Warres in Ireland and the Militia there to this present Parliament; who appointed both the Commanders and al other Officers of the Forces sent hence into Ireland and that without any injury, or eclipse, to his Majesties Royall Prorogative. If then the Subjects and Parliament in ancient times, have had the election of their Generals, Captaines, Commanders, Sheriffes, Mayors, and other Officers, having the chiefe ordering of the Militia under the King; if they have constantly Ordered all parts and matters concerning the Warres in all former Kings Reignes; appointed Regents and Protectors, committing to them the Kings owne Royall power over the Militia, during their Minorities; and his Majesty himselfe hath permitted this Parliament to Order the Militia of Ireland, to which they have no such right or Title as to that of England, without any prejudice to his Prerogative; I can see no just exception, why his Majesty should at first, or now deny the Parliament such a power over the Militia, as they desired for a time; or why in point of Honour or Justice, their Bill for setling the Militia in safe under hands, in such persons as both sides may well confide in, should now be rejected, being for the Kings, Kingdomes, and Parliaments peace and security; much lesse, why a bloody intestine Warre should be raised or continued, upon such an unconsiderable point on his Majesties part: who seeing he cannot manage the Militia in proper person in all Counties, but onely by Substitutes; hath farre more cause to accept of such persons of Honour and quality as his Parliament shall nominate (in whom himselfe and his whole Kingdome in these times of Warre and danger may repose confidence) to execute this trust, then any whom his owne judgement alone, or some private Lords or Courtiers shall recommend, in whom the Kingdome and Parliament, in these jealous deceitfull times, dare not confide. The yeelding to the Parliament in this just request, will remove all feares and jealousies, restore our peace, re-gaine his Majesty the reall affections of his discontented Subjects; the persisting in the contrary course will but adde fuell to our flames, feares, doubts, dangers, and frustrate all hopes, all endevours of Peace.
From the Militia it selfe, I descend to the consequencies of its denyall, the Parliaments seising upon Hull, with other Ports and Forts, the Royall Navy, Ammunition, Armes, Revenues, and detaining them still from his Majesty, the grand difference now pretended, whence the present warre hath emerged; which these ensuing considerations will in a great measure qualifie, if not altogether satisfie.
First, his Majesty and all Royalists must necessarily yeeld, that the Ports, Forts, Navy, Ammunition, Armes, and Revenues thus seised on by the Parliament, though his(i) Majesties in point of possession, yet are not his, but the Kingdomes in point of right and interest; they being first transferred to, and placed on his Predecessors and himselfe by the Parliament and Kingdome: not in right of propriety, but(k) conditionally upon trust, (his Majesty being but a publike Officer) for the defence and safety of the Realme; and though his Majesty came to them by descent, yet it was but in nature of the Heire of a Feoffee in trust, for the use and service of the kingdome; as a King in his politicke; not as a man or Proprietor in his naturall capacity; as our(l) Law Bookes, Terminis terminantibus resolve. Hence it hath been oft adjudged;(m) that the King can neither by his will in writing, nor by his Letters Patents, Devise or alien the Lands, Revenues, Jewels, Ships, Forts, or Ammunition of the Crowne (unlesse it be by vertue of some speciall(n) Act of Parliament enabling him to doe it by the kingdomes generall consent;) and if any such alienations be made, they are voyd in Law, and may be, yea have beene(o) oft resumed, reversed by the Parliament; because they are not the Kings, but kingdomes, in point of interest and propriety: the Kings, but in possession and trust for the kingdomes use and defence. Hence it is, that if the King dye, all his(p) Ships, Armes, Ammunition, Jewels, Plate, Debts to the Crowne, Moneyes, Arrerages of Rents or Subsidies, Wards, and Rights of presentments to voyd Churches, goe onely to his Successors, not to his Executors, (as in case of a common person,) because he enjoyes them not as a Proprietor (as other Subjects doe) but as a Trustee onely, for the(g) kingdomes benefit and defence; as a(h) Bishop, Abbot, Deane, Mayor, or such like Corporations, enjoy their Lands, not in their naturall but politicke capacities, for the use and in the right of their Churches, Houses, Corporations, not their owne. Upon this ground(i) King Harold pleaded his Oath and promise of the Crowne of England to William the Conquerour, and(k) King Philip, with all the Nobles of France, and our owne Parliament (40 E. 3. rot. Parl. n.n. 8.) unanimously resolved, King John his resignation and grant of the Crowne and Kingdome of England, to the Pope, without the Nobles and Parliaments consents, to be a meere nullity, voyd in Law, binding neither King nor Subject; the Crowne and possessions of it, being not the Kings but kingdomes.
And before this,* Anno Dom. 1245. in the great Councell of Lyons, under Pope Innocent, to which King Henry the third, sent foure Earles and Barons, together with the English Prelates, and one Master William Powyke an Advocate, to complaine of the Popes exactions in the Councell, which they did; where they likewise openly protested against the annuall tribute extorted by the Pope, by grant from King John, (whose detestable Charter granting that annuall tribute, was reported to be burnt to ashes in the Popes closet, by a casuall fire during this Councell) as a meere nullity, and that in the behalfe of the whole kingdome of England; EO QUOD DE REGNI ASSENSU NON PROCESSERAT, because the kingdome consented not thereto; and because the King himselfe could make no such Charter to charge the kingdome. Which Matthew Paris thus expresseth. W. De Poweric Anglicanæ Universitatis Procurator assurgens, gravamina Regni Angliæ ex parte universitatis Angliæ, proponeus satis eleganter; conquestus est graviter, quod tempore Belli per curiam Romanam, extortum est tributum injuriose, in quod minquam patres Nobilium regni, velipst consenserunt, nec consentiunt, neque in futurum consentient, unde sibi petunt justitiam exhiberi cum remedie. Ad quod Papa, nec oculos elevans, nec vocem, verbum non respondit.
*Upon this reason(l) Matthew Paris speaking of King Henry the third his morgaging his kingdome to the Pope, Anno 1251. for such monies as he should expend in the Warres: useth this expression. Rex secus quam deceret, aut expediret, Se, suumque Regnum, sub pæna exheredationis QUOD TAMEN FACERE NEC POTUIT NEC DEBUIT, Domino Pape obligavit. Hence King Edward the third, having the Title of the King and Crowne of France devolved to him, which made some of the English feare, that they should be put in subjection to the Realme of France, against the Law; the Parliament in the 14. yeare of his Reigne, Stat. 4. passed a speciall Act, declaring; That the Realme of England never was, nor ought to be in subjection, nor in the obeysance of the Kings of France, nor of the Realme of France: and enacting; that the King of England or his Heires, by colour of his or their Titles to the Crowne, Seale, Armes, and Title of the King of France should not in any time to come put the Realme of England, or people of the same, of what estate or condition soever they be, in subjection or obeysance, of him, nor his Heires nor his Successors, as Kings of France, nor be subject, nor obedient, but shall be free and quite of all manner subjection, and obeysance as they were wont to be in the time of his Progenitors, Kings of England for ever. By the Statute of 10 R. 2. c. 1. it is resolved, That the King could not alien the Land, Castles, Ships, Revenues, Jewels, and Goods of the Crowne; and a Commission is thereby granted to inquire of, and resume all such alienations as illegall. Hence the Commons in the Parliament of 16 R. 2. c. 5. of Præmunire, in their Petition to the King, and the whole Parliament in and by that Law, declared; That the Crowne and Kingdome of England, hath beene so free at all times, that it hath been in subjection to no Realm, but immediately subject to God, and to none other; which (by the prosecution of suites in the Court of Rome for Benefices, provided against by this Act) should in all things touching the Regality thereof, be submitted to the Bishop of Rome, and the Lawes and Statutes of the Realme be by him defeated and frustrated at his will, to the destruction of the King, his Soveraignty, Crowne and Regality, and of all his Realme; in defence whereof in all points, they would live and dye.
Hence the Kings of England have alwayes setled, entailed, and disposed of the succession and Revenues of the Crowne by speciall Acts of Parliament, and consent of the whole Realme, because the whole kingdome hath an interest therein, without whose concurring assent in Parliament, they had no power to dispose thereof: as the Statutes of 21 R. 2. c. 9. 7 H. 4. c. 2. 25 H. 8. c. 22. 26 H. 8. c. 13. 28 H. 8. c. 7. 35 H. 8. c. 1. 1. Mar. c. 1. and Parl. 2. c. 132. 1 Eliz. c. 3. 13 Eliz. c. 1. 1 Jac. c. 1. Hals Chron. f. 10. 15. 1 H. 4. Speeds Hist. p. 763. 928. to 932. Daniels hist. p. 122. 138, 139, abundantly manifest, and Cooke l. 8. the Princes case.
Hence in the Parliament Roll of 1 H. 6. Num. 18. The last Will and Testament of deceased Henry the fifth, and the Legacies therein bequeathed of 40000. Markes in Goods, Chattels, Jewels, Moneyes for payment of the Kings debts, are ratified by the Lords, Commons, and Protectors concurring assents by an Act of Parliament, as being otherwise invalid to binde the King or Kingdome. And Num. 40. Queene Katherines Dower of 40000. Scutes per Annum, concluded on by Articles upon her Marriage, and by a Parliament held the second of May in the 9. yeare of King Henry the fifth, well approved, authorized and accepted, which Articles that King then swore unto, and the three Estates of the Realme of England, to wit, the Prelates, Nobles, and Commons of England, in that Parliament, and every one of them, for them, their Heires and Successors, promised well and truly to observe and fulfill for ever, as much as to them and every of them appertained: Was after her Husbands death, upon her petition, by a speciall Patent made by this Infant King her Son, WITH THE ASSENT OF THE LORDS SPIRITUALL AND TEMPORALL, AND COMMONS OF ENGLAND, IN THAT PRESENT PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED, Assigned, setled, and confirmed, out of the Crowne Lands therein specified: else it had not beene binding to the Successor King or Realme: the Crowne Lands being the Kings but onely in the kingdomes right; whence all our Queenes Dowers and Joyntures have usually beene setled and confirmed in and by Parliaments, (whereas any other man may endow or make his Wife a good Joynture, without the Parliaments assent or privity;) And in* 2 E. 3. the Queene Dowagers great Joynture (which tooke up three parts of the Kings Revenues) by common consent in a Parliament, held at Nottingham, was all taken from her, (because not duely setled by Parliament, and too excessive, to the Kings and kingdomes prejudice) and she put to a pension of 1000. l. per annum, during her life.
And by the Statute of 1 H. 6. c. 5. it is expressely resolved, That King Henry the fifth could not alien or pledge the ancient Jewels or Goods of the Crowne, to maintaine his Warres, without a speciall Act of Parliament; and if he did, those to whom he pawned or sold them, were still accomptable to the Crowne for them, and the alienation voyd; whence, the carrying of the Jewels, Treasure, and Plate of the kingdome over Sea into Ireland without assent of the Nobility and Parliament, was one of the(m) Articles objected against Richard the second in Parliament, when he was deposed; the Jewels and Crowne Lands being not the Kings in right of property and interest, but the kingdomes onely; and so all alienations of them without the Parliaments consent voyd, and usually(n) resumed by the Parliament; witnesse the notable Act of Resumption in 8 H. 6. and 31 H. 6. c. 7. of all the Kings grants of any Honours, Castles, Townes, Villages, Manors, Lands, Rents, Reversions, Annuities, &c. from the first yeare of his Reigne till then, with divers other precedents in the Margin, in King Stevens, Richard the first, and Henry the 2 & 3. their Reignes.
These resolutions of our Common and Statute Law, are seconded by many forraigne Civilians, as Baldus in Proem. de Feud, n. 32. 33. Aretine in Rubric. Lucas de Penna. Cod. de omni agro deserte. l. Quicunque f. 184, 185. Albericus de Rosate: Quodcunque. præscrip. bene a Zenone. n. 4. f. 3. 1. 4. Boetius Epan. Hæroic. quest. qu. 3. n. 43. qu. 5. n. 19. 27. 34. Didacus Cavaruvius, Practic. qu. c. 4. n. 1. Martinus Laudensis, de Confæd, Tract. 1. qu. 13. John. Andreas, in cap. dilect. de Maior. & Obed. Franciscus Vargas de Author. Pontif. Axiom. 1. n. 2. Concilium Toletanum 8. Surius Concil. Tom. 2. p. 865, 866. with sundry others (many of whose words you may reade in Doctor Crakenthorps defence of Constantine, p. 169. to 175.) who affirme; That the Emperour or any other King cannot give away any Townes or Territories belonging to their Empire or Kingdomes, contrary to their Oathes and Trusts, they being the Kingdomes not theirs in right. Whence they conclude, Constantines pretended Donation of Rome, and Italy to the Pope, a meere Nullity. It is true,(o) our Law-books say; That the King cannot be seised of lands to any private Subjects use, by way of feofment, because it stands not with his honour to be any private man feoffee; because no Subpena lieth to force him to execute it, & he is a Corporation: yet he may have the possession of lands in others right, and for their uses (as of(p) Wards, Ideots, Lunaticks, Bishops during the vacation, and the like) and if he alien these Lands in see to their prejudice, the(q) grant is voyd in Law, and shall be repealed, as hath beene frequently judged; because he possesseth these lands not in his owne, but others rights. So the King hath his Crowne Lands, revenues, Forts, Ships, Ammunition, Wards, Escheates, not in his owne but the kingdomes right,(r) for its defence and benefit; and though he cannot stand seised to a private mans use, yet he may and doth stand seised of the premises to his whole kingdomes use, to whom he is but a publike servant, not onely in Law but Divinity too, 1 Sam. 8. 20. 2 Sam. 5. 12. Isa. 49. 23. Psal. 78. 72, 73, 74. Rom. 13. 4. 1 Pet. 2. 13. 14. 2 Chron. 9. 8.
Secondly, All the Ships, Ammunition, Armes the Parliament hath seised, were purchased not with the Kings, but Kingdomes monies, for the defence and service of the Kingdome, as the Subsidy Bils and(s) Acts for Tunnage and Poundage, the Kings owne(t) Declaration, and(u) Writs for Shipmony attest. If then the representative Body of the kingdome, to prevent the arrivall of forraine Forces, and that civill warre they then foresaw was like to ensue (and hath experimentally since fallen out even beyond their feares, and overspread the whole kingdome, to which it threatens ruine;) hath seised, sequestred the kingdomes Ports, Forts, Navy, Ammunition into trusty hands for the Kings and Kingdomes use, to no other end, but that they should not be imployed against the King and Parliament by his Majesties Malignant Counsellors, and outragious plundering Cavaliers, what indifferent sober can justly tax them for it?(x) Queene Elizabeth (and the(y) State of England heretofore) during the Warres with Spaine, inhibited the Haunse townes and other for foraine Merchants (over whom she had no jurisdiction) to transport any materials for Warre through the narrow Seas to Spaine (though their usuall Merchandize to those parts, and the Sea, as they(z) alleadged, was free, for feare they should be turned against our Kingdome, and after notice given, made them prise) for any of her Subjects to seise on. And it is the common policy this day, and anciently of all States whatsoever, to seise on all provisions of Warre, that are passing by way of Merchandize onely towards their enemies, though they have no right or propertie in them (and to grant letters of Mart to seise them, as we have(a) usually done) which they plead they may justly doe, by the Law of Nature, of Nations, to prevent their owne destruction. Much more then may the Houses of Parliament, after the sodaine eruption of that horrid Popish rebellion in Ireland, and the feares of a like intestine warre from the Malignant Popish Prelaticall party in England, expecting Forces supplies of mony and ammunition from foraine parts, seise upon Hull, other Ports, the Navy and Ammunition (the Kingdomes proper goods, provided onely for its defence in such times as these) when his Majesty refused to put them into such hands as the kingdome and they might justly confide in, and the contrary Malignant faction plotted to get possession of them to ruine Lawes, Liberties, Religion, Parliament, Kingdome: And what mischiefe thinke you would these have long since done to Parliament and Subjects, had they first gotten them, who have already wrought so much mischiefe without them, by the Kings owne encouragement and command? Doubtlesse the Parliament being the supreame power, now specially met together and intrusted by the Subjects, to provide for the kingdomes safety, had forfeited not onely their discretion, but trust, and betrayed both themselves, their priviledges, the Subjects Liberties, Religion, Countrey, Kingdome; and not onely their friends, but enemies would have taxed them of infidelity, simplicity (that I say not desperate folly) had they not seised what they did, in the season when they did it? which though some at first, imputed onely to their over-much jealousie, yet time hath since sufficiently discovered, that it was onely upon substantiall reasons of true Christian Policy. Had the Cavaliers and Papists (now in armes) gotten first possession of them, in all probability wee had lost our Liberties, Lawes, Religion, Parliament long ere this: and those very persons (as wise men conceive) were designed to take possession of them at first (had they not beene prevented) without resistance, whom his Majesty now imployes to regaine them by open warres and violence. It is knowne to all, that his Majesty had no actuall personall possession of Hull, nor any extraordinary officer for him there, before Sir Iohn Hotham seised it, but onely the Maior of the Towne, elected by the Townesmen, not nominated by the King; neither did Sir John enter it, by order from the Houses, till the King had first commanded the Major and Townesmen (whom he had constantly intrusted before) to deliver Hull up to the Earle of Newcastle, now Generally the Popish Northerne Army; The first breach then of trust, and cause of jealousie proceeding from the King himselfe in a very unhappy season; where the quarrell first began, and who is most blame-worthy, let all men judge. If I commit my sword in trust to anothers custody for my owne defence, and then feare or see that hee or some others will murther me with my owne weapon, it is neither injury nor disloyaltie in me for my owne preservation, to seise my owne Sword till the danger be past; it is madnesse or folly not to doe it, there being many ancient and late examples for to warrant it; I shall instance in some few. By the(b) Common Law of the Land, whiles Abbies and Priories remained, when we had any Warres with foraine Nations, it was lawfull and usuall to seise all the Lands, goods, possessions of Abbots, of Priors aliens of those Countries, during the warres (though they possessed them onely in right of their Houses) lest they should contribute any ayd, intelligence, assistance to our enemies. Yea it anciently hath beene, and now is the common custome of our owne and other kingdomes, as soone as any breaches and warres begin, after Proclamation made, to seise and confiscate all the Ships, goods, and estates of those countries and kingdomes with whom they begin warre, as are found within their dominions for the present, or shall arrive there afterwards, lest the enemies should be ayded by them in the Warres, (preventing Physicke being as lawfull, as usefull in politique as naturall bodies;) which act is warranted by(c) Magna Charta, with sundry other Statutes quoted in the Margin. And though these seisures were made by the King, in his name onely, yet it was by authority of Acts of Parliament, as the publike Minister of the Realme, for the kingdomes securitie, and benefit rather then his owne. But to come to more punctuall precedents warranted by the supreme Law of Salus Populi, the onely reason of the former.
*(d)Anno. Doni. 1214. upon the confirmation of the Great Charter and of the Forest by King John, it was agreed, granted and enacted in that Parliamentary assembly at Running-meade, that the 25. Barons then elected for the conservators of those Liberties and Charters, with the Commous of the Land, might distraine and enforce the King (if he violated those Charters, and made no redresse thereof within 40. dayes space after notice) by seising upon his CASTLES, lands, possessions, and other goods, till amends should be made according to their arbitration. And for more certainety, the foure Chatelaines (or chiefe Captaines) of the Castles of Northampton, Kenelworth, Nottingham, and Scarborough, should be sworne to obey the commandment of the 25. Barons, or the major part of them in WHATSOEVER THEY THOUGHT GOOD CONCERNING THESE CASTLES. Wherein NONE SHOULD BE PLACED BUT SUCH AS WOULD BE FAITHFULL and OBSERVE THEIR OATH. And upon this accord, Rochester Castle and others, whose custody, of antient right belonged to the Archbishop of Canterbury, with other Castles appertaining to the Barons, were restored to them by the King; who breaking all his vowes & Charters immediatly after, (through the Barons and peoples supine negligence, overmuch confiding to the Kings Oath and confirmations, and fond conceite of holding that by peace which they had recovered by violence from a perfidious King,) in halfe a yeares space recovers all the Castles againe even to the Borders of Scotland by meanes of foraine Forces, and a malignant, despicable, domemesticke party, (hee having scarce seven Knights faithfull to him, being generally forsaken of all) and made himselfe absolute Master of all England, except the Citie of London, the Suburbs whereof hee burned and sacked, and so tyrannised over his Subjects with fire, and Sword, pillaging them every where. *Vastando omnes domos, & ædificia Baromem divisis agminibus succendebat, spolia cum animalibus rapiebat; etc. de rapina iniquitatis ministros quos habebat nequissimos saginabat, &c. sufficiebat ad causam mortis simplicibus incolis, si aliquid habere credebantur, & qui nibil habebant, fateri habere cogebantur; & qui non habebat, habere ut persolveret, pænis exquisitis disiringebatur. Discurrebant ficarii cæde humana cruentati, uoctivagi, incendiarii, filii Belial sirictis ensibus, ut delerent a facie terræ, ab homine usque ad pecus, omnia bumanis usibus necessaria, eductisque cultellis villas, domos, cæmiteria, ecclesios perlustrabant, omnes spoliabant, ita quidem us nec muliebri sexui, nec parvulorum vel decrepitorum parcerent ætati. Et quod consumere non valebant, incendio tradebant, vel dispergentes inutile bumanis usibus reddebant. Et quos nulla nota premebant, INIMICOS REGIS VOCANTES (si inimici sui appellandi sunt, qui cum ad mansuetudinem & justitiam mansuetam introducere voluerunt) ubicunque reperiebantur, raptim tradebantur in carcerem pæuasem, vinculis mancipati, & tandem ad gravissimam coacti redẽmptionem, &c. (A true Character of our times, and plundering barbarous Cavaliers:) which so farre exasperated the Barons and people, that they elected another King. But the end for which I cite this precedent is, to manifest, that the Lords and Commons in that age, did not thinke the Kings owne Charter, Promise, Protestations, Oathes, Proclamations, the Bishops and Popes solemne excommunications, and those 25. new Conservators, a sufficient securitie to preserve their Lawes and Liberties against the invasions of an, unconstant, wilfull fœdifragous King, unlesse they had the Power and Command of his chiefe Castles and the Militia added to them; which wee see through overmuch securitie, and want of vigilancy, were all too little to preserve their Liberties against an unconstant oppressing Prince, whose oaths and protestations were but like (e)Sampsons cords, broken all to peeces like a thread in a moment, by those who had Sampsons strength. King Henry the third was no whit inferiour to his father John, in unconstancy, and perfidiousnesse to his Subjects, with whom when he had oft broken his faith and solemne oathes, the(f) Lords and Barons (having no other meanes of securitie, left to preserve their Lawes, Liberties, kingdome from vassallage and destruction, or to enforce the King to keepe those ordinances which hee had made and sworne to observe in a Parliament at Oxford but few yeares before; all which he laboured to rescinde, having procured a dispensation of his Oath from the Pope to colour his perjury;) in the yeare 1260. appointed new Sheriffes and Gardians of Shires, discharging such as the King had before admitted, and raysing a strong power in the Marches of Wales, sent a Letter to the King under the Seale of Sir Roger Clifford, beseeching him to have in remembrance the Oath and promises hee had made, for the observing of the Statutes enacted at Oxford, with other Ordinances made to the honour of God, for faith and allegiance to his person, and for the weale and profit of his Realme; willing him further to withstand and defie all such persons, as will be against the said acts, saving the Queene and her children. After which letter sent, and no answer to it received; the Barons with banners displayed, went against such Malignants as they knew held against those Acts. And first at Hereford, they tooke the Bishop and all his Chanons who were aliens borne, taking away their money and cattle, and plundering their houses and manors. And marching towards London, much people fiocking to them, in their passage, ever as they found any that they knew to be against the maintenance of the said Acts, they imprisoned them and spoyled their houses, were they spirituall or temporall men: furnished the especiall Fortresses of the kingdome with Gardians of their owne, and in DIVERS OF THE KINGS CASTLES THEY SET IN SUCH MEN AS THEY LIKED, and PUT OUT SUCH AS THE KING HAD PLACED THERE BEFORE; and gave them an Oath, that they would be true and faithfull to the King, and keepe those Castles TO HIS USE, and TO THE WEALE OF THE REALME. And when William de Valens denied with oathes to render up any Castle which was given him, by the King (his brother) to keepe; the Earle of Leycester and the rest of the Barons answered; they would either have his Castles or his head: which so terrified the Poictovines, that they left Oxford and their Castles to the Barons, and fled into France. Which (g) Castles when the King and Lords were accorded, together with the Castles of Dover (Nec Regi ablatum nec vetitum sed tanquam clavis totius Regni, custodis esset diligentiori a Baronibus deputatum) and the Castle of Rochester and others were readily delivered up by the Barons to the King, qui ubique liberum invenit introitum, & exitum juxta vota; & tunc primo Rex sensit se falsis deceptionibus circumventum, & Baronum suorum fidelitate, ubique licet ignoranter suffultum; and then the King first found he was circumvented with false reports of the Barons disloyalty, who so willingly restored his Castles to him, when those stormes were blowne over; though he made but ill use of it, & took occasion thence openly to recede from his Oath; whereupon they reseised these Castles for their safety. About Midsommer the Barons drawing neare to London, sent a Letter to the Mayor and Aldermen requiring to know of them, Whether they would observe and maintaine the Statutes made at Oxford; or not? or aide and assist such persons as intended the breach of the same? and sent unto them a Copy of the said Acts; with a proviso, that if there were any of them, that should seeme to be hurtfull to the Realme or Commonweale of the same, that they then by discreet persons of the land should be altered and amended: Which Copy the Mayor bare unto the King then at the Tower of London with the Queene and other great persons. Then the King intending to know the minde of the City, asked the Mayor, What be thought of those Acts? who abashed with that question, besought the King, That he might commune with his Brethren the Aldermen, and then he would declare unto him both his and their opinions. But the King said, He would heare his advice without more Counsell. Then the Mayor boldly said, That before times, he with his Brethren and commonalty of the City, by his commandement were sworne to maintaine all Acts made to the honour of God, to the faith of the King, and profit of the Realme; which Oath by his license and most gracious favour they intended to observe and keepe. And moreover, to avoid all occasions that might grow of grudge and variance betweene his Grace and the Barons in the City, they would avoyd all aliens and strangers out of it (as they soone after did) if his Grace were so contented. With which Answer the King seemed to bee pleased, so that the Mayor with his favour departed, and he and the Citizens sent answer to the Barons, that they condescended to those acts, binding themselves thereunto under the publike Seale of London, their Liberties alwayes upholded and saved. Then the Barons entred the City, and shortly after the King with his Queene and other of his Counsaile, returned to Westminster.
*Anna 1264. (the 48. of Henry the third) the King made his peace with the Barons then in Armes, upon these termes: That ALL THE CASTLES OF THE KING, throughout England, should be delivered TO THE KEEPING OF THE BARONS: the Provisions of Oxford be inviolably observed; and all Strangers by a certaine time avoyded the kingdome, except such as by a generall consent, should be held faithfull and profitable for the same: Whereupon the Barons tooke possession of most of the Castles by agreement, or violence where they found resistance, as they did in many places. And by the CONSENT of THE KING and BARONS, Sir Hugh le Spenser was made Chiefe Justice and keeper of the Tower. This done at London; the Barons departed to Windsor to see the guiding of that Castle, where they put out those aliens, whom Sir Edward the Kings Sonne had before put in, and put other Officers in their places; spoyling them of such goods as they had. Who complaining thereof to the King, he put them off for that season. After which they re-seised Dover Castle, and made Richard de Gray, a valiant and faithfull man, Constable of it; who searching all passengers that came thither, very strictly, found great store of Treasure, which was to be secretly conveyed to the Poictovines, which he seised, and it was imployed by the Barons appointment, upon the profitable uses of the Realme. The yeare following, the Commons of London chose Thomas Fitz-Thomas for their Mayor, and without consent of the Aldermen, sware him at the Guild-hall, without presenting him the next day to the King or Barons of the Exchequer. For which the King was grievously discontented; and being advertised that the Citizens tooke part with the Barons, caused his Sonne Edward to take the Castle of Winsor by a traine; to which the King and Lords of his party repaired. And the other Lords and Knights with great Forces drew towards London; but by mediation of friends, there was a peace concluded, and the differences were referred to the French King to end. Who giving expresse sentence that all the Acts of Oxenford, should from thenceforth be utterly forborne and annulled:
The Barons discontented with this partiall sentence, departed into the Marches of Wales; where raising Forces, they seised on many Townes and Castles of the Kings, and Prince Edward going against them, was sore distressed and almost taken. Hereupon to end these differences, a new Parliament was appointed at Oxford; which tooke no effect, Because when the King had yeelded the Statutes of Oxford should stand, the Queene was utterly against it; whose opposition in this point being knowne to the Londoners, the baser sort of people were so enraged, that she being to shoot the Bridge from the Tower, towards Winsor, they with darts, stones, and villanous words, forced her to returne. After which, the Lords sending a Letter to the King, to beseech him not to beleeve the ill reports of some evill Counsellors about him, touching their loyalty and honest intentions; were answered with two Letters of defiance. Upon which ensued the bloody battle of Lewis in Sussex, in which the King and his Sonne, with 25. Barons and Baronets, were taken prisoners, & twenty thousand of the Commons slaine. Richard King of Romans, the Kings Brother was likewise taken prisoner in this Battle, (h) who a little before comming over into England with some Forces to ayde his Brother, the Barons hearing thereof caused all the Ships and Gallies of the Cinqueports and other places to meet together armed to resist him by Sea, and sent horse and foot to withstand him by Land if he arrived: Which Richard having intelligence of, disbanded: his Forces; and sent word to the Barons, that he would take an Oath to observe the Articles and Statutes made at Oxenford: whereupon he was permitted to land at Dover with a small Traine, whither King Henry went to meet him. But the Barons would not suffer this King, nor any of his Traine to enter into Dover Castle, because he had not taken his Oath to observe the foresaid Statutes; nor yet the King of England to goe into it (for feare of surprisall) because it was the principall Bulwarke of England; (the Barons then having both it and all the Cinqueports in their Custody to secure the kingdome from danger) Neither would they permit King Richard to goe on towards London, till he had taken the Oath* forementioned. After this battle all the prisoners were sent to severall prisons, except the two Kings and Prince Edward, whom the Barons brought with them to London; where a new Grant was made by the King, that the said Statutes should stand in strength: and if any were thought unreasonable, they to be amended by foure Noblemen of the Realme: and if they could not agree, then the Earle of Angiou, and Duke of Burgoin to be Judges of the matter: And this to be firmely holden and obeyed by both the Kings; who granted that both their Sonnes and Heires should remaine as Prisoners, and Hostages with the Barons, till all things were finished according to this agreement. Upon which a Peace was proclaimed in London betweene the King and his Barons. Then it was agreed by the King, that for his more surety and the weale of the Land, the Earle of Leycester should be resident in his Court; Upon which agreement, many of the Prisoners were set at large. In the meane while, before the battaile of Lewis, the Queene and King of Romans, had sent over-sea for Souldiers, to ayde the King against the Barons, which now were come in great number unto Dover, and there hovered on the Sea to have landed. Whereof the Barons hearing, they sent the King of Romans as Prisoner to Barkhamsted, untill the said Almaines were returned, and caused King Henry with a great power to ride to Dover, and force the said Host of strangers to returne unto their Countries. After which by the counsell of the Lords, a Parliament was agreed and held at Westminster, wherein a generall Pardon was granted to all the Lords and their adherents, for any matter of displeasure done to the King or his Sonne. Prince Edward before that day; which to uphold, the King and he tooke a solemne Oath before the Lords; and it was further agreed, That the Prince should reside in the Kings Court, and not depart thence without license of the King and of certaine Barons. Then were many instruments and bonds made by the King and Prince, for the performance of sundry Covenants betweene the King and Barons; which shortly after tooke small effect, and begat new warres; this Kings fresh breaches of Oathes, and promises, procuring him alwayes new insurrections and forced Parliaments, which the Barons constrained him to call and hold, against his will. How the Lords and Parliament oft seised upon the Castles, Forts, Ammunition in King Edward the second, and Richard the seconds Reignes, when differences grew betweene them, I have already in part remembred, and you may read the residue in the Histories of their lives. In(i) the 33. yeare of King Henry the sixth his Reigne, the valiant Earle of Warwicke, was made Captaine of Calice by the Parliament; a place of great honour and trust in those dayes; by vertue whereof, all the warlike affaires and businesse, rested principally in the Earle of Warwicke: After which the Queene (an ambitious stirring woman) to breake the peace newly made and ratified by oath, betweene the King, Lords, and Duke of Yorke, (created Lord Protector by the Parliament) caused a fray to be made on the Earles men, which produced a warre and bloody battle, wherein the Earle gained the field.
Whereupon the King displeased with the Earle, by his Letters Patents, granted the Captainship of Caleyes to John Duke of Summerset; who going over to Caleyes, in the 38. yeare of King Henry, to take possession of his place; shewed his Patent to the Earle, who refused to resigne his place, answering, that he was put into it by the Parliament, and so could not be outed of it but by Parliament; and kept the Duke forth of the Towne; who being thus expelled from his office, after some skirmishes with the Earles Garrison, (wherein the Duke had the worst) hee sent over to the King and Queene for ayde, in defence of this quarrell; whereupon they provided 400. warlike persons to passe the Seas for his ayde, and ships to transport them: who lying at Sandwich for a winde; the Earle of Warwicke being therewith acquainted, sent John Dingham a valiant Esquire, with a small number of men, but a multitude of couragious hearts to Sandwich; who suddainly entred the same, tooke the Lord Rivers and his Sonne (who commanded those Souldiers) in their beds, pillaged some houses and ships, and besides this, tooke the principall ships of the Kings Navy then lying at the Port well furnished with ordnance and artillery (through the favour of the Mariners, who favoured the Earle most) and brought the royall ships loaden with booty and prisoners to Caleyes; With these ships the Earle after passed to the Duke of Yorke into Ireland, and afterwards into England, where the Duke of Yorke in full Parliament laid claime to the Crowne, which his Sonne after obtained, deposing King Henry, as having no lawfull Title thereunto. I recite not this Story to justifie all particulars of it, but onely to prove, That the Parliament in those times, had the conferring of Captaines places of greatest trust, who had the command of the Militia; and that, as this Earle in policy onely, for his owne safety, seised on the Kings royall ships, and Ammunition, in which he had no right; so by the same reason, the Parliament may dispose of such places of Military trust in these times of danger, and of the Navy and Ammunition of the kingdome, in which they have a reall interest, for the kingdomes safety and their owne.(k) A Sheriffe, Justice, Constable, and other Officers, by the Common and Statute Law of the Land, may and ought to disarme and seise any mans weapons whatsoever, and imprison his person for a time, when by act, or apparent intention onely, he shall but disturbe the peace, or make any Fray, Rout, or Riot, to the annoyance of the people, till the tumult and danger be past, and the peace secured. Much more then may the highest Soveraigne Court of Parliament, seise the Forts, Armes, Navy, Ammunition of the Realme, (in which they have reall interest) and secure them for a season, to preserve the whole kingdomes Peace, and prevent a civill Warre, without any injury to his Majesty, till all feares of warre and danger be removed. Not to trouble you long with forraine histories of this Nature; in the Roman state the(l) chiefe power of making warre or peace, of ordering of the Militia and disposing of the custody of Castles, Forts, Ammunition was in the Senate and people, not the King or Emperour; as it is in Germany, and most forraine States and kingdomes, at this day; without any diminution to those Kings and Princes just prerogatives. It is the determination of the prime Politician(m) Aristotle (seconded by(n) John Mariana and others) that in lawfull kingdoms the chiefe strength & power of the Militia ought to reside in the kingdomes hands; not Kings, who ought to have onely such a moderate power and guard of men, as may suffice to suppresse riots, and maintaine the Authority of the Lawes; but not so great a force as may master all his kingdome,* lest he become a tyrant, and his Subjects slaves.
In the kingdome of Arragon in Spaine (as I read in* Hieronymus Blanca) this is a fundamentall antient Law, (made about the yeare of Christ 842. by their Suparbiense Forum, how commonly stiled, Justitia Arrogoniæ during the Interregnum; to preserve their Countries Liberties, to keepe their Kings power within due bounds of royaltie, & prevent a tyranny, with divers others of this nature, which their Kings solemnly sweare to observe, before they are crowned) the words of which law are these, The King shall take heed that he neither undertake warre, nor conclude peace, nor make truce, nor handle anything of great moment, but by the advise and consent of the Elders: to wit, the Iustitia Arragoniæ, the standing Parliament of that kingdome, which hath power over and above the King. And at this day (as the same* Author writes) their Rici-homines, (or selected Peeres appointed by that kingdome, not the King) have all the charges and offices both of warre and peace lying on their neckes, and the command of the Militia of the kingdome; which they have power by their Lawes to raise, even against their King himselfe, in case be invade their Lawes or Liberties; as he there manifests at large. So in* Hungary, the great Palatine of Hungary, the greatest officer of that kingdome, and the Kings Lieutenant Generall, who commands the Militia of that Realme, is chosen by the Parliament and Estates of that country, not the King. It was provided by the Lawes of the* Ætolians, that nothing should be entreated of CONCERNING PEACE OR WARRE, but in their Panætolid, or great generall Councell of state: in which all Ambassadors were heard and answered; as they were likewise in the Roman Senate. And* Charles the fifth of France, having a purpose to drive all the Englishmen out of France and Aquitain, assembled a generall assembly of the estates in a Parliament at Paris, by their advise and wisedome to amend what by himselfe had not beene wisely done or considered of, and so undertooke that warre with the counsell and good liking of the Nobilitie and people whose helpe he was to use therein: which warre being in and by that Councell decreed, prospered in his hand; and tooke good successe as Bodin notes; because nothing giveth greater credit and authority to any publike undertakings of a Prince and people in any State or Commonweale, then to have them passe and ratified by publike advise and consent.
Yea the great Constable of France, who hath the government of the Kings Sword, the Army, and Militia of France, was anciently* chosen by the great Councell of the three Estates & Parliament if that kingdome; as is manifest by their election of Arthur Duke of Britaine to that office, Anno 1324. before which, Anno 1253. they elected the* Earle of Leycester a valiant Souldier and experienced wise man, to be the grand Seneschall of France, ad consulendum regno desolato, & multum desperato, quia Strenuus suit & fidelis; which office he refused, lest he should seeme a Traytour to Henry the third of England, under whom he had beene governour of Gascoigne, which place he gave over for want of pay. In briefe, the late examples of the(o) Protestant Princes in Germany, France, Bohemia, the Low countries, and of our brethren in Scotland within foure yeares last; who seised all the Kings Forts, Ports, Armes, Ammunition, Revenues in Scotland, and some Townes in England to preserve their Lawes, Liberties, Religion, Estates, and Country from destruction, by common consent, (without any Ordinance of both Houses in their Parliament) will both excuse, and justifie all the Acts of this nature, done by expresse Ordinances of this Parliament; which being the Soveraigne highest power in the Realme, intrusted with the kingdomes safety; may put the Ports, Forts, Navy, Ammunition (which the King himselfe cannot manage in person, but by substitutes) into such under Officers hands, as shall both preserve and rightly imploy them for the King and kingdomes safety, and elect the Commanders of the Militia according to the expresse letter of King Edward the Confessors Laws (which our King at their Coronations were still sworne to maintaine) wherewith I shall in a manner conclude, the Legall part of the Subjects right to elect the Commanders of the Militia, both by Sea and Land. *Erant & aliæ potestates & dignitates per provincias & patrias universas & per singulos Comitatus totius regni constitutæ, qui Heretochii apud Anglo: vocabantur; Scilicet, Barones, Nobiles, & insignes, sapientes & sideles, & animosi; Latin vero dicebantur Ductores exercitus; apud Gallos, Capitales Constabularii, vel Maraschalli Exercitus. Illi vero ordinabant acies densissimas in præliis, & alas constituebant, prædecuit & prontiis melius visum fuit, ad Honorem Coronæ, ET AD UTILITATEM REGNI. Isti vero viri ELIGEBANTUR PER COMMUNE CONCILIUM PRO COMMUNI UTILITATE REGNI, PER PROVINCIAS ET PATRIAS UNIVERSAS, ET PER SINGULOS COMITATUS (so as the King had the choyce of them in no Province or Countrey, but the Parliament and people onely) in pleno Folemote. SICUT ET VICECOMITES PROVINCIARUM ET COMITATUUM ELEGI DEBENT. Itaquod in quolibet Comitatu sit unus Heretoch PER ELECTIO NEM ELECTUS ad conducendum exercitum Comitatus jui, juxta præceptum Domini Regis, ad honorent Coronæ, & UTILITATEM REGNI prædicti, semper cum opus adsuerit in Regno. Item qui fugiet a Domino vd socio suo pro timiditate Belli vel Mortis in conductione Heretochii sui IN EXPEDITIONE NAVALI, VEL TERRESTRI (by which it is evident these popular Heretochs commanded the Militia of the Realme both by Sea and Land, and might execute Martiall Law in times of warre) perdat omne quod suum est, & sitam ipsius vitam, & manus mittat Dominus ad terram quam ei antea dederat. Et qui in bello ante Dominum suum ceciderit, sit hoc in terra, sit alibi, sint ei relevationes condonatæ; & habeant Hæreder ejus pecuniam & terramejus sine aliqua diminutione, & recte dividant interse. An unanswerable evidence to satisfie all men.
To which I shall onely adde that observation of the learned Antiquary Sir Henry Spelman in his* Glossarium; Title Dux, and Heretochius; (where he cites this Law of King Edward) That the Heretoch was Magister Militiæ, Constabularius, Mariscallus, DUCTOR EXERCITVS, SIVE NAVALIS, SIVE TERRESTRIS; called in Saxon* Heretoga: ab Here, Exercitus, & Togen, Ducere. Eligebantur in pleno Folemote, hoc est, non in illo sub initio calendarum Maii, at in alio sub capiti Calendarum Octobris. Aderant tune ipsi Heretochii, & QUÆ VOLUERE, IMPERABANT EXEQUENDA; consvlto tamen PROCERUM COE TU, ET JUDICIO TOTIUS FOLCMOTI APPROBANTE. Then he subjoynes POPULARIS IS TA HERETOCHIORUM SEU DUCUM ELECTIO, nostris Saxonibus cum Germanis aliis COMMUNIS FUIT. Vt in Boiorum ll. videas, Tit. 2. cap. 1. S. 1. Siquis contra Ducem suum, quem Rex ordinavit, in Provincia illa AUT POPULUS SIBI ELEGER IT DUCEM, de morte Ducis consiliatus suerit, in Ducis sit potestate, &c. Hue videtur pertinere quod apud Greg. Turon. legas l. 8. Sect. 18. Wintro Dux à Pagensibus suis depulsus Ducatu caruit, &c. sed posteà pacato papulo Ducatum recepit: Eligebantur enim interdum Provinciarum Ducem AB IPSO POPULO. In the* Roman State, the Senate, and some times the people alone, without their advise, had power to appoint Lieutenants and Governours of Provinces whence the* Senate commanded those Governours of Provinces whom the Emperour Maximinus had made to be displaced, and others to be substituted in their roomes, which was accordingly executed: yea* the Senate had power to dispose of the common Treasure, and publike revenue, one of the greatest points of Soveraingty. And so we read in Scripture, Judges 11. 5. to 12. That when the children of Ammon made warre against Israel, the Elders of Gilead went to setch Jephthah out of the land of Job. And they said unto Jephthah, Come and be our Captaine, that we may fight with the Children of Ammon, &c. Then Jephthah went with the Elders of Gilead, and THE PEOPLE MADE HIM HEAD and CAPTAINE OVER THEM: the Princes and people, even under Kings themselves, having the chiefe disposing power of the Militia and denouncing war, as is evident by Josh. 22. 11. to 32. Judges 20. and 21. throughout 1 Sam. 14. 38. to 46. c. 29. 1. to 11. 2 Sam. 18. 2, 3, 4. c. 19. 1. to 9. Prov. 20. 18. c. 24. 6. compared together.
And for a close of all, lest any should object, that no late direct precedent can bee produced to prove the office of the Lord Admirall, and custody of the Seas disposed by Parliament, I shall conclude with one punctuall precedent of many. In 24. H. 6. prima Pars Pat. ma. 16. The King grants to John Duke of Exter, the OFFICE OF ADMIRALL OF ENGLAND, IRELAND and AQUITAIN, with this subscription, Per breve de privato sigillo, AVCTORITATE PARLIAMENTI, the former Patent of this office made joyntly to him and his sonne by the King alone, in the 14. yeare of his reigne, being surrendred in the Parliament of 24. and a new one granted them by its direction and authority. Yea most of the Admiralls Patents (which anciently were not universall for all England, but severall for such and such parts onely, and commonly but annuall or triennuall at most) as Sir Henry Spelman observes in his Glossary, in the word Admirallus, where you have an exact Kalender of all the Admiralls names, with the dates of their severall Patents and Commissions, are DE AVISAMENTO ET ASSENSU CONSILII; which is almost as usually taken for the Kings* great Counsell, the Parliament, as for his privy Counsell. And if our Kings have constantly disposed of this Office by the advise or assent of their privy Counsell, there is more reason and equitie they should doe it by the advise of their great Counsell, of which his privy Counsell are but a part, and by whom they have frequently beene elected, as I shall plentifully manifest in the next objection.
Now, whereas some pretend, that the Parliaments seising and detaining of the Kings Castles, Ports, Ships, Armes and Ammunition is High Treason, within the Statute of 25 Ed. 3. c. 3. and a levying of warre against the King.Object.
I answer, first; that the Parliament was never within the meaning, nor letter ofAnsw. that, or any other Act concerning Treasons, as I have formerly proved; the rather because the King is a member of it, and so should commit Treason against himselfe, which were absurd.
Secondly, because both Houses are of greater authority then the King, (a member of them as they make one Court) & so cannot commit Treason against the lesse.
Thirdly, the Parliament is a meere(p) Corporation and Court of justice, and so not capable of the guilt of Treason: A Judge, Maior, or particular persons of a Corporation may be culpable of high Treason, as private men, but not a Court of justice, or Corporation.
* Fourthly, by the very Statutes of 25 E. 3. and of 11 R. 2. c. 3 21 R. 2. c. 12. 1 H. 4. c. 10. 21. R. 2. c. 3. the Parliament is the sole Judge of all new Treasons, not within the very letter of that act; and if any other case supposed Treason, not there specified, happens before any Justices, the Justice shall tarry without any going to judgement of the Treason, till the cause bee shewen and declared before the King and his Parliament, whether it ought to be judged Treason. And if the Parliament be the sole Judge of all Treasons, it cannot be guilty of Treason, for then it should be both Judge and Delinquent; and if so, no doubt it would ever acquit it selfe of such a crime as High Treason, and never give judgement against it selfe. And no Judge or person else can arraigne or judge it, or the members of it, because it is the highest soveraigne Court, over which no other person or Court whatsoever hath any the least jurisdiction: So that if it were capable of the guilt of Treason, yet it could not be arraigned or judged for it, having no superiour or adequate Tribunall to arraigne it.
Fiftly, admit it might be guilty of High Treason in other cases, yet it cannot be so in this. For having a joynt interest with the King in the premises in the Kingdomes right, (the sole propriator of them) it cannot doubtles be guilty of treachery, much lesse of High Treason for taking the custody and possession onely of that which is their owne; especially when they both seise and detaine it for its owne proper use, the Kingdomes security and defence; without any malicious or traytorous intention against King or kingdome.
Secondly, I answer, that the seising or detaining of these from the King are no Treason, or levying of Warre within this Law, as is most evident by the Statutes of 6. Ed. 6. c. 11. which expresly distinguisheth, the seising and detaining of the Kings Forts, Ammunition, Ships, from the levying warre against the King in his Realme, and by an expresse new clause, enacts this seising and detayning to be High Treason from that time, because it was no Treason within 25. Ed. 3. before, which if it had beene in truth, this new clause had beene superfluous; which law of King Edward being repealed by primo Mariæ, Rastal Treason, 20. this offence then ceased to be Treason: whereupon by a speciall act of Parliament in 14 Eliz. c. 1. it was made High Treason againe, (which had beene needlesse, if it had beene a levying of warre, or Treason within 25. Ed. 3. before.) And that with this proviso, this Act to endure during the Queenes Majesties life that now is, ONLY; and so by this Parliaments resolution, it is no Treason since her death, within 25 Ed. 3. for then this proviso had beene idle and repugnant too. And therefore being now no High Treason in any person, cannot without much calumny and injury be reputed Treason in both the Houses of Parliament, uncapable of High Treason, as the premises demonstrate.
In briefe, he that seised and detained the Forts and Ships of the kingdome, when it was Treason, was not a bare Traytor against the Kings person or Crowne onely, but against the King and his Realme too, like those Traytors, mentioned in the severall statutes of 11 R. 2. c. 4. and 21 R. 2. c. 2. 4. He shall be judged and have execution as a TRAITOR and ENEMY OF THE KING and TO THE REALME: and in 28 H. 8. c. 7. HIGH TRAITORS TO THE REALME, As the Gunpouder Traytors were to the Parliament and Realme in them, being the representative Body of the Realme: the Parliament then being the Realme representatively and authoritatively too, and so the party against whom this Treason is principally to bee committed, cannot bee a Traytor to it selfe, by the words or intendment of any expired Act which made such a seisure or detainer Treason. And therefore those Lawyers, who pronounce this Parliaments seising and detaining of the Ports, Forts, Navy, Armes, or Ammunition of the Realme to keepe them out of worser hands, for the Kings and kingdomes right use and safetie, to be High Treason declare themselves Greater Malignants then Artists in their owne profession.
But some body (say Malignants and Royalists) must be trusted with the Militia,Object. Ports, Navy, Armes, Ammunition; and who so fit to be confided in as the King himself, and those whom he shall appoint? Especially since hee and his owne substitutes, have formerly beene intrusted with them by the kingdome; and wee have now so many deepe* Protestations, yea publike printed Asseverations and Promises from his Majestie, to maintaine the Protestant Religion, our Lawes, Liberties, Properties, Parliaments, with their just Priviledges; and shall we not beleeve and trust his Majesty after so many royall assurances, seconded with many Acts of grace for the publike safetie already passed by him in this Parliament? especially the Acts against Shipmoney, and all other unlawfull Taxes; with the Bils for the continuance of this, and calling of a Trienniall Parliament, when this shall be determined? Shall we yet be diffident of his Majesties sinceritie after so many Protestations, Promises, Imprecations; so many Pledges of his gracious affection to his people, and some publike acknowledgements of his former misgovernment and invasions on his Subjects Liberties? If all these Warrants will not content the Parliament, and perswade them to resigne up all the premises they have seised into his Majesties hand, to purchase the kingdomes much desired necessary Peace, and put a period to our destructive warre (in which there is nought but certaine ruine) what other security can his Majesty give or they expect?
To answer this plausible allegation, I shall, without prejudice to other mensAnsw. judgements, crave liberty to discharge my owne and others thoughts in this particular, in which if I chance to erre (out of overmuch zeale to my countries safety) I shall upon the first discovery professe a recantation; though for the present,
*Maluerim ver is offendere, quam placere adulando.
I shall reduce the summe of the answer to these two heads;
First, that as the state of things now stands, it will be (as many wise men conceive) not onely inconvenient, but dangerous, to resigne up the Militia, Forts, Ports, Navy, Ammunition of the kingdome into his Majesties sole disposing power, and those hands which himselfe alone shall appoint and confide in, till things bee throughly reformed and setled both here and in Ireland, and the Popish prevailing party in both kingdomes (now strongly up in armes) totally suppressed and secured.
Secondly, That till this be effected, it is more reasonable and safe, both for King and kingdome, that these should remaine in the Parliaments hands, then in the Kings alone.
For the first, there are these three generall reasons, generally alledged by many understanding men, equally affected to either party, and by most who are cordially inclined to the Parliament, why they deeme it not onely inconvenient, but perillous, to intrust the premises wholly with the King, and those of his appointment, as our condition now stands.
First, a more then probable long-since resolved designe in his Majesties evill Counsellors, to make him an absolute Soveraigne Monarch, and his Subjects as meere vassals, as those of France; which designe hath beene carryed on with an high hand from the beginning of his Reigne till this presert, as the Parliament in* sundry Declarations prove, yea divers* Lords and Members of both Houses, though now with his Majesty, in their Parliamentary Speeches, have openly professed; which they thus demonstrate.
First, by his Majesties severall attempts against the Priviledges, Power, and very being of Parliaments; manifested by the proccedings against Sir John Eliot, Mr. Hollice, Mr. Strode, Mr. Long, and others, after the Parliament in 3. Caroli; and the Lord Say, Mr. Crew, with others after the last Parliament before this: By his Majesties sad ominous breaking off in discontent, all Parliaments in his Reigne (unparalleld in any age or kingdome) till this present; which though perpetuated by a speciall Act, as long as Both Houses please, hath yet long since been attempted to be dissolved like the former, by his Majesties accusation, and personall comming into the Commons House with an extraordinary Guard of armed men attending him, to demand five principall members of it, to be delivered up to his hands as Traytors, in an unpatterned manner. By his wilfull departure from, and refusall to returne unto the Parliament, though oft petitioned and sollicited to returne; which is so much the more observed and complained of, because his Majesty (if not his Royall Consort and the Prince too) was constantly present in person every day this Parliament (for sundry weekes together) at the arraignment of the Earle of Strafford for high Treason, in a private manner, when by Law he ought not to be personally present in a publicke, to countenance and encourage a capitall Oppressor, and Trayterous Delinquent against all his three kingdomes, contrary to both Houses approbation; And yet now peremptorily denyeth to be present with or neare his Parliament, to countenance and assist it for the preservation of his kingdomes against such Traytors, Rebels, conspirators, who have contrived and attempted their utter desolation, in pursuance of his foreplotted designes; By his commanding divers Lords and Commons to desert the Houses, and attend his Person without the Houses consent, detaining them still* when the Houses have sent for them: and protecting those who refused to returne, against the common justice of the Parliament: by casting divers grosse aspersions on it, and naming it, A saction of Malignant, ambitions, spirits, no Parliament at all, &c. By raising an Army of Delinquents, Malignants, Papists, Forainers, to conquer and suppresse the Parliament, and deprive it of its Liberties; By proclaiming divers active Members of it, (specially imployed by Both Houses, for the defence of their severall Counties) Traytors, onely for executing the Houses commands, without any Indictment, Evidence, Conviction, against all Law, Justice, and the Priviledges of Parliament: By commanding, detaining the Lord Keeper of the Great Seale, (the Speaker of the Lords House) and some Judges from the House and City: By plundering divers Parliament mens houses, imprisoning their persons without Bayle, Maineprise, or Redemption, and laying intolerable taxations on their estates: By Declaring both Houses Traytors, if not in positive, yet at least in equivalent words, and by necessary consequence: By divers unparalleld violations of the Parliaments Priviledges by extrajudiciall Declarations out of Parliament, penned by Malignants in his Majesties name, and avowed by him, published of purpose to oppose, annull, reverse the solemne legall Resolutions, Declarations, and Votes of both Houses in sundry cases, and by name that against the Commission of Array: And finally by the manifold invectives in severall his Majesties Declarations, and Proclamations against the Parliaments Votes, Proceedings, Members; seconded with expresse commands, and invitations to the People, to *Contemne its authority, and disobey all its Orders made without his personall consent; which is indeed nought else, but to nullifie Parliaments, to make them altogether contemptible, ridiculous, and trample them under feete; and hath wrought a strong malignity, disobedience, if not disaffection, in many people to Parliaments, to the end they may never desire or enjoy them hereafter, notwithstanding the Act for trienniall Parliaments, when this is once dissolved. All these unparalleld, apparent high attempts against the very honour, essence, of this, and all other future Parliaments, (transcending both for quantity and quality all the violations of Parliaments Priviledges, in all his Majesties Predecessors Reignes, since England was a kingdome, summed up in one;) together with the late Oxford Propositions for an Accommodation; wherein the Houses finall Resolutions, Declaring what is Law, are called illegall, and required to be reversed; the power of imprisoning and fining men denyed, and prostituted to the censures, Writs, and Examinations of inferiour Courts, by way of Habeas Corpus; al high Violations and denials of the knowne priviledges of Parliament, contrary to his Majesties many former, and late Printed Protestations, and those Acts newly passed concerning Parliaments, (which will never recover their pristine dignity, honour, power, priviledges, if this should miscarry;) induce the most intelligent to opine, that his Majesty, long since weary of the yoke of all Parliaments, (the only Remora to his absolute intended Monarchy) and repenting of the Act for continuing this, since he hath gained his ends for which it was summoned, (more out of absolute necessity then love to Parliaments) to wit, peace with the Scots, for the present, by an Accommodation, wrought by this Parliament, & purchased with his Subjects mony, when as he saw no hopes of repelling them hence by force; & the paying of his then raised Army against them by the Parliaments free supply: is now resolved (in prosecution of his pristine Counsels) by force or policy to dissolve this Parliament in discontent, as he hath done all former, and that with such advantages of a generall ill opinion of Parliaments in the ignorant mis-informed vulgar on the one hand, and of a prevailing conquering power on his part on the other hand, as shall either utterly extinguish the hopes and Bill of summoning any future trienniall Parliamentary Assemblies, or at least so emasculate the vigour, and eclipse the power of them, if called; that they shall neither have courage, nor might, nor meanes to resist his foresaid grand designe, if he can now either by force or policy resume the Militia, Forts, Navy, Ammunition into his absolute dispose; the onely present obstacle (now his forces are so great) to gaine a compleate long-expected conquest over his peoples Liberties, Lawes, Estates, and all Parliaments Priviledges, if not beings too. And if our Parliaments (the onely Bulwarkes to protect our Lawes, Liberties, Estates, Lives, Religion, Peace, Kingdome, against the devastations of oppressing, lawlesse Princes, and Officers) be once conquered, or weakned in the least degree, we can expect no other issue, but that Tyranny, slavery, popery, shall be ere long entailed upon us and our Heires Soules and bodies for ever.
Secondly, By his Majesties frequent imposing of many unlawfull Taxes and Impositions on his Subjects, contrary to his Coronation Oath, the ancient Lawes of the Realme, yea his owne late Statutes, Declarations, Vowes, Promises; which designe hath beene carryed on with a strong hand all his Reigne till now; and at this present, with a farre higher hand then ever: which they exemplifie by the Loanes with other Taxes, Impositions, Grievances, complained of in the Petition of Right, in the third yeare of his Reigne; which Act when first passed, with this his Majesties solemne Oration and Protestation Printed with it; I doe here declare, That these things which have beene done, whereby men had some cause to suspect the Liberty of the Subject to be trenched upon, shall not hereafter be drawne into example for your prejudice: And in time to come (IN THE WORD OF A KING) you shall not have the like cause to complaine: (backed with his Royall Declaration to all his Subjects at the breach of that Parliament to like purpose) made most men thinke, they should never be grieved with illegall Taxes more; though the very annexing and Printing of his Majesties two Answers, & this Speech when he passed the Petition, at the end thereof (with the Scope and matter of this Speech and other then concurring circumstances) made the wisest men suspect, it was onely a baite to catch the *Temporalties and Clergies (five a peece) extraordinary great Subsidies, then aymed at, (a greater ayd then was ever before granted at once to any of his Majesties Predecessors) and a policy then seemingly to content, but subsequently to delude the over-credulous impoliticke Vulgar; the verity whereof was at that instant much confirmed, by his Majesties clayming (even in his very speech when he passed the Petition of Right) Tunnage and Poundage as a meere right, and his taking it as a just duty without grant by Parliament, from his comming to the Crowne till then and since; by his extraordinary strange commission granted under the great Seale to divers Lords and others for the laying of an intolerable illegall excise, on all the Subjects throughout England and Ireland, seconded with the Commission to Dalbere and others, for the raysing and importing of German Horse, and the billeting of Irish foot in sundry places of England to joyne with those horse, to set on this excise, even at that very instant, when this Petition of Right was debated and passed; the breaking up of that Parliament as soone as these Subsidies were granted, and the unpatterned inundation of all kinde of unjust Taxes as soone as ever that Parliament was dissolved; as fines for Knighthood, New-buildings; Inclosures, exacted Fees, (not to redresse, but authorize them by compositions to get money) Shipmony, Monopolies of Tobacco, Sope, Brickes, Pins, and a world of other particulars upon which annuall rents were reserved: Forrest-hounds, and offences prosecuted with all Rigour; Impositions upon Coale, Beare, Salt, Wines, Tobacco, and all kinde of Merchandise; Lieutenants rates, and wages, Coat and Conduct money, excessive high Fines in Starchamber, High Commission and other Courts, with sundry other Particulars complained off with open mouth in this and the preceding Parliament by most of the members of both Houses, and divers now present with his Majesty; who notwithstanding the many publike complaints against these oppressions, the Acts this very Session passed against them, and sundry duplicated deepe Asseverations to maintaine the Subjects Property, Liberty, and governe onely according to Law; hath, and still daily doth in a farre higher degree then ever (through the ill advise of Malignant Counsellors) proceed to afflict and ruine his people in this very particular of Property and Taxes, by weekely or monethly assessements and contributions imposed on sundry Townes and Counties where his Forces now lie, exceeding many mens racked incomes; his seising of their Ammunition, Armes, Horses, Carts, Goods, Provisions, Houses, Lands, (yea husbandmens Teemes and Horses of their Ploughes, *priviledged from distresses by Law, & by most Nations though enemies, in times of warre from spoyle to plunder,) so as they cannot till their ground, which must needs breed a famine: and stripping many thousands of his people in Brainford, Marleborough, Cicester, and other places (utterly sacked and ruined by his Cavaliers) of all their lively hoods, and estates, to their very naked skins; and carrying away those poore Subjects in triumph like Enemies and Traytors, who dare offer to defend their goods, houses, estates, or make any the least resistance, (though the Lawes,* Common and Statute, allow them in such cases, not onely to resist, but kill all those who shall assault their houses, or persons to spoyle them of their goods) or protect them or their Liberties, Lives, Properties, against his Army of theevish murthering Cavaliers. And which aggravates all the rest, his Majesty hath sent out such a Commission of Array to bee executed in every County, as pulls up libertie and propertie by the rootes; which, though both Houses by a speciall printed Declaration, have* proved to bee illegall, contrary to the fundamentall Lawes of the Realme, the Petition of Right, and some expresse Acts passed this present Session; yet his Majestie hath caused such an Answer to be published in his name to the first Declaration as good Law, which* frustrates all Acts whatsoever made in this a former Parliaments for the Subjects Libertie, Propertie; and layes downe such grounds, which will not onely justifie, but revive all former pressures and grievances whatsoever, as warranted by Law. All which considered, together with the frequent endeavours formerly and of late to raise and keepe an Army on foote among us to enslave us, and raise what taxes shall bee arbitrarily imposed without a Parliament on the Realme by force of Armes, according to the late use of France, begun by Strafford in Ireland, and now set on foote in divers countries of England, makes wise moderate men feare, that if the Militia, Forts and Navy be yeelded up unto the King before the Subjects Propertie, and these violations of it in the highest degree (so that none at this day can truely say that any thing hee enjoyes, no not his Lands or Life are his owne) bee better setled, all propertie will bee for ever lost, and Turkish Subjects as free as English, in common probabilitie.
Thirdly, the constant designe against the Libertie of the Subjects person (the better to invade the property of his goods) prosecuted all his Majesties time, and more then ever since the Petition of Right and this Parliament. The which is evidenced, by infinite illegall commitments of men for not paying the Lone, Knight-mony, Ship-mony, with sundry other unlawfull Taxes, without baile or mainprise; of sundry members of both Houses during this, and after former Parliaments ended, for things done in and triable onely by Parliament; by the exorbitant censures in the Star-Chamber and High Commission, and judging free men against Law, to close imprisonments; And that (which now grieves the very Soules of all English Spirits, who have any remainders of common humanity, in them, and would rend an heart of adamant) not onely by the strict close hard imprisonments of divers persons at Yorke and elsewhere, for executing the Militia, refusing the Array, or contribution Taxes, but by the more then barbarous,* yea beastly crueltie of his Majesties Cavaliers in chayning together in Ropes sundry Prisoners taken at Brainford, Marleborough and Cicester, (as the true printed Relations of these places sacking testifie) like a company of Turkish Gally-slaves, (though some of them were Gentlemen of worth and quality, others Ministers, others aged, sickly, and many who never bore armes in these present warres) and leading them chained (almost naked, and barefoot) through deepe filthy wayes in the cold winter season to Oxford in triumph (to his* Majestres great dishonour, and his Subjects griefe,) denying them, not onely meat and drinke, but even water it selfe (the commonest Element) to quench thier thirst, and keeping off, yea beating any such at Cicester, and Oxford, who offered to bring them any sustenance, though but a drop of water to coole their tongues: (O more then Turkish Barbarousnesse, that one man, one Christian, one English Subject even in, or neare the presence of his Soveraigne, should thus ill intreate another, without any punishment or checke, much more with approbation!) After which they have beene* shut up in prisons and dungeons lying on the cold ground, stones or boards without beds, straw, fire or any the least refreshment; allowed onely a poore pittance of Adams Ale, and scarce a penny bread a day to support their lives, though their friends would provide it for them; in which sad condition many of them are still detained close prisoners without bayle, mainprise, exchange, redemption, divers of them being dead of Famine and ill unaccustomed usage: Others have beene murthered without mercy, and their* Carcasses left unburied for the fowles to prey on; others maimed and left weltring in their blood without any reliefe; others forced to live exiles from their habitations; and all for this new point of High Treason; that they stood upon their guard, to defend the propertie of their persons, goods, houses, possessions, from the robbery and plunder of theeving Cavaliers (*borne onely for the publike mischiefe of the Reame) who now live by the Countries spoyle and robbery, and must not be resisted. If this proceeding be the so oft protested preservation, the vowed defence of the Subjects Liberties, Properties, Lives, the preserving of them in perfect and intire peace and safetie according to his Majesties Coronation oath, the governing of them according to the Law, even whiles the Parliament sits, and hath such Forces in the field, the possession of the Ports, Navy, and other premises in their hands (which if the King should die without heire devolve wholly into the kingdomes hands and possession, not to his Executors, as to the true proprietors of them, a strong unanswerable argument, they are not now the Kings but kingdomes in point of right and interest;) wee cannot (say many men) but suspect the like and worse usages when these are all surrendred into his Majesties power, and that he with his ill Counsellors (who had lately such a bloody treacherous designe against Bristoll during the Treaty of Peace, and now plainly professe,* that they never intended the Premises should be put into such persons hand as the Parliament and kingdome might confide in, but themselves alone;) will then as much over-awe the present and all future Parliaments, as they doe now the country people where they quarter; and handle many active worthy members of both Houses (particularly proclaimed rebels by the King without conviction, who hath not so violently proceeded against any of the Irish Rebels in this kinde, as he hath done against the houses of Parliament, and the chiefe well deserving members of it) as rigorously, if not far worse, as any now imprisoned by them; notwithstanding that true rule of* Seneca: Remissius imperanti melius paretur. Et non minus Principi turpia sunt multa supplicia, quam Mediro multa funera.
Their second generall reason is, an* ancient fore plotte confedenacie between the Popish and Prelaticall Party in the Kingdome to change Religion, and re-establish Popery Which designe hath been vigorously prosecuted long before his Majesties raigne, but more effectually since his marriage with one of that Religion; who in regard of her neerenesse to, and continuall presence with him heretofore and activitie to assist him now against his Parliament, hath such a meritorious interest in his affections, if not powerfull influence upon his will and Councells, as may induce his Majestie (as well as* King Salomon) to grant, at least a speedy publike long-expected tolleration and free use of the Romish Religion (if not a suppression of the Protestant faith) throughout the Realme, if all the premises be put into his Majesties unlimited power. And that which backes this more then conjecturall feare, is: First, the large visible progresse made in this designe before this Parliament, as not onely the Houses joynt Declarations, but divers Malignant Members declanatory Orations, (now with the King) testifie, together with our Prelates manifold Popish Innovations in Doctrines, Ceremonies, Ecclesiasticall proceedings; the Popes Nuncioes Residence neere, and free accesse to Court; our Agents residence at Rome; the Cell of Capuchins, Chapples erected for Masse, the infinite swarmes of Seminary Priests and Jesuites every where, with freedome and impunity, the suspention of the Lawes against them and Popish Recusants; the late persecutions and suppressions of all godly Preaching Ministers and most zealous Protestants, with other particulars clearely demonstrate. Secondly, the present generall Rebellion and bloody proceedings of the Papists in Jreland, to extirpate the Protestant Religion there; and the many prevayling Plots of the Irish Rebels party here, to delay, seize, or frustrate all ayde and opposition against them from hence: with his Majesties late Commissions to Papists and Protestants, and some who have beene in actuall Rebellion to treate and conclude a peace with these Rebells, contrary to the very Act he passed this Parliament for Irelands releefe. Thirdly, his Majesties late letter to the Councell in Ireland to exclude the Parliaments agents and members there from all their Councells and meetings; and if reports be credible, his Majesties Commissions lately issued to most notorious convicted Papists in* Wales, Lancashire, the North and other parts, to arme themselves and raise forces under their Commands (who are now in severall bodies in the field) and his intertaining of divers Papists and Irish Rebells in his Army to fight against the Parliament, contrary to the expresse Lawes of the Realme; his owne frequent Proclamations and Protestations, to entertaine no Papists neare him and to defend the Protestant Religion: Which added to the intercepting of the Parliaments provisions for the releefe of the Protestants in Ireland, the entertaining of some of the Commanders sent to Ireland by the Parliament against the Rebells, if not sending for some of them out of Ireland from that Service to warre against the Parliament; with the passes under his Majesties hand for the transporting of some Popish Commanders (since joyned with the Jrish Rebells) into Jreland; make many jealous heads suspect, the common vaunt, of the Irish Rebells,* that they have expresse Commissions both from the King and Queene to warrant their proceedings there, and that they fight but for them against the Parliament, Puritanes, and Parliament-Dogs (the Language of the Cavaleeres too, learned from them) are not onely possible, but probable; and that there is a generall designe on foote (towards which the Papists in forraigne parts, through the Priests and Queenes Negotiations, have made large contributions) by the Popish Armies now raised in both Kingdomes, to set up Popery in its perfection every where, and extirpate the Protestant Religion in all our Kingdomes, which nothing but an absolute conquest of these blood-thirsty Papists can in probability prevent, they being already growne so insolent, as to say Masse openly in all the Northerne parts and Army, and in Reading, in affront of God and our Religion: If therefore the premises should now be wholy surrendred to his Majestie, it is much to be feared, that the Popish party (now most powerfull) would in recompence of their meritorious service and assistance in these warres, at leastwise challenge, if not gaine, the chiefe command of the Ports, Navie, Ammunition; the rather, because the Lord Herbert (a most notorious Papist) both before and since this Parliament, enjoyed the sole charge and custodie of all the Military Engines and Ammunition royall at Foxes Hall, designed for the Kings chiefest Magazine; and then farewell Religion, Lawes, Liberties; our Soules and bodies must become either Slaves or Martyres.
Their third generall ground, is the constant practise of most of our Kings (as John Henry the 3d. Edward, and Richard the 2d, with others) who after warres and differences with their Parliaments, Lords, Commons, upon accommodations made betweene them, as soone as ever they got possession of their Castles, Ships, Ammunition, seised by their Subjects, brake all vowes, oathes, covenants made unto them, oppressing them more then ever; enlarging their owne prerogatives, and diminishing the Subjects Liberties, (yea taking away many of their lives against Law, Oathes, Promises, Pardons,) on purpose to enthrall them; which still occasioned new Commotions, as the premised Histories and others plentifully informe us. And that the King (considering all his fore-mentioned proceedings, and pertinacious adhearing to his former evill Councellours and their Councells) should degenerate from his predecessors Policies, in case the premises be yeelded wholy to him, before our Liberties and Religion be better setled, and the just causes of our feares experimentally removed, is hardly credible.
Object.But against these 3. Generall reasons, his Majesties many late solemne Protestations, and those Acts which he hath pasted this Parliament, are objected, as sufficient security against all future feares: To which they answer.
Answ.First, that if his Majesties Coronation Oath, to preserve his Peoples Liberties and Lawes of the Land in violable, have beene no sufficient security to his Subjects hitherto, against all the fore-mentioned grievances and illegall pressures: his verball Protestations and Promises are like to prove worse assurance: If solemne Oathes be most apparently violated, what trust can there be to unswore words?
Secondly, our Kings in former times (as I have plentifully proved and infinite examples more declare) seldome or never kept either Oathes or Promises made to their Subjects; but have broken oath after oath, agreement upon agreement, with all verball legall ties; reputing them onely lawfull policies to over reach their people, and effect their owne designes with greater advantage to themselves, and prejudice to their Subjects. And shall we dreame of a new world, onely in this dissembling age; when Kingcraft is improved to the utmost?
Thirdly, we had his Majesties* solemne Protestation, in the Word of a King, in the 3d, yeare of his Raigne, backed with* Two Printed Declarations then, to all his Loving Subjects, to maintaine the Petition of Right, their Lawes, Liberties, Properties, Religion in purity and perfection without the last violation, or any connivance at, or back-sliding to Popery: And what good warrants or securities these since proved to the Subjects to preserve them from severall inundations of oppressions, Taxes, grievances, Innovations and relapses to Popery (which have flowed in upon them ever since as if these had beene no bankes to keepe them out, but sluices onely to let them in the faster) the premises manifest, and we all experimentally feele this day. And are the new Promises and Protestations (thinke you) better then the old? or those made this Parliament more obligatory to the King, or his evill Councellors, then those made the two last Parliaments, infringed in an high degree (even to the imprisoning, the searching of Peeres, of Commons Pockets, and studies against the Priviledges of Parliament) within few houres after they were published in Print? Are not the Subjects dayly taxed, imprisoned, plundered, murthered; the Priviledges of Parliament dayly infringed, many wayes? Protestants dis-armed, Papists armed, forraigne forces introduced, Irish Rebels privately countenanced, the greatest acts of hostility and cruelty exercised whiles treaties of peace are pretended? the best Iustices removed in all Counties, ill affected persons set up in their places; illegall Commissions of Array executed, justified, the best Protestant Ministers, people most robbed, pillaged, murthered, banished every where; Sheriffes illegally made, Subjects (even at Oxford where the king resides) more inhumanely handled under his Majesties view, than Gally-slaves in Turkie; and scarce one Declaration or Promise observed so much as the very day they are published? notwithstanding so many multiplications of them in Print; that people may the better take notice how they are broken, if they be observant? And shall the Parliament then take, these so notoriously oft violated, never yet observed Protestations, for our Kingdomes onely substantiall security, to put all into his Majesties hands forthwith, before they see some reall performances and change of Councells? Certainely if they be so much over-seene, they are like to be so farre from mending our present condition, that they shall but make it worse, yea and betray themselves, with all that trust them, both for the present and posteritie.
But we have very good Lawes assented to by his Majestie this Parliament;The following marginalia text is unreadable and Liberty Fund has made no effort to partially transcribe it. for our security too. True! but are they not spiders Webbs, and already undermined in action or intention? Doe they secure us in any kinde for the present, and will they doe it for the future? will time (thinke you) make them binding to the King, if they oblige him not, as soon as made? Did the Petition of Right 3° Caroll, (a most inviolable security as most then dreamed) secure the Subjects in the least degree against any publike wrong, so long as for one moneths space? Was it not turned into a kinde of wrong as soon as made, and ever since? Nay, were there not only sundry actions don, but Iudgments too in the very greatest Courts of Iustice, given against it, yea against the very letter and unquestionable meaning of Magna Charta, and other fundamentall Laws, by corrupted, or over awed timorous Iudges? yea, are not most good Acts made this Session for the Subjects benefit, and all the Subjects Liberties at one stroke quite hewen downe and undermined by a pretence of Law it selfe, in his Majesties Answer to both the Houses Declaration, concerning the Commission of Array? Quid verba as diam, facta cum videam? The meanest Latine Scholler knowes, that verba dare, signifies properly to deceive; and Subjects have beene oft deceived, even with Acts of Parliament. Now that all may see how invalid assurances Lawes are to secure the Subjects Liberties, though ratified with never so many confirmations, oathes, seales; I shall give you 2. or 3. ancient presidents. The first is that of* King John, who Anno 1214. confirmed Magna Charta, the Charter of the Forrest, and other Liberties with his hand, seale, oath, proclamations, the Popes Bull, solomne excommunications against the infringers of it, denounced by all the Bishops in his presence; by appointing 25. Barons, who by oath were to see and force him, and all others to observe it; by seising on his Castles, Lands, goods; and by resigning the custodie of his 4. chiefe Castles to the dispose of 25. Lords; whom all other Lords and Commons were bound to assist; yet in lesse than on halfe yeare, space, these strongest obligations are all cancelled, these Gordians cut in sunder with the sword of warre, and the Subjects reduced to greater Vassellage than ever, as the premises evidence. So King Henry the 3d by oath sundry times successively ratified these Charters & the Subjects Liberties in Parliament, which they oft dearely purchased with great Subsides And* An. 1237. this King to gain a Subsidie of his Subjects, in a Parliament then assembled at London; denyed that he ever intended to revoke the great Charter, and other Liberties, or laboured with the Pope to due it, with which the Bnous truely charged him; and that if any such thing had beene casually suggested to him, he did utterly null and revoke it: and because he seemed not altogether free from the sentence of excommunication, which Steven the Arch-bishop, with all the other Bishops of England had denounced against all the infringers of the great Charter, which he through ill Councell had in part infringed; he commanded them all in publike, to renew the said sentence against all contradictors of the sayd Charter, so that if he himselfe, through any conceived rancor, had not peradventure observed it, he might more grievously relapse into the said denounced sentence. By which meanes, and speech, he wonderfully reconciled to him the hearts of all that heard of these things, and suddenly causeth the Earles Warren, and Ferrers, and John Fitz-Jeffry by the Parliaments appointment, to be sworne his Councellors; giving them this Oath; That by no meanes neither for rewards, nor any other cause, they should swarve from the way of truth, but should give good and wholesome Councell both to the King and Kingdome. Whereupon they freely gave the King the 30th part of all their movable goods, except their gold, silver, horses and armes, to be spent on the good of the Republicke, with this condition often annexed; that the King should leave the Councell! of Aliens, and onely use the advise of his naturall Subjects: Which Subsidie was ordered, to be collected by 4. knights, and one clerke in every County, and there layd up in some religious house or Castle, that if the King should receede from his promise and condition, every one might faithfully receive backe his owne againe. But no sooner was the Parliament ended, but the King breakes all his promises; shewes more favour to, and is more ruled by strangers then ever before; levies the subsidie in a stricter and farre other manner then was prescribed, and bestowes most of it on strangers to be transported; marrieth his sister Eleanor to Simon Monfort, (a new come French Exile, of meane fortunes) suorum que naturalium hominum consiliis factus est extranius & suis benevolis, Regnaque ac Republicæ utilibus factus est cervicosus, ita quod per eorum consilium parum aut nihil de negociis Regni tractaret aut operaretur, Which courses, with other, so incensed the Nobility, and generally all the subjects, as put them into a new commotion; which made him enter into new Articles and promises ratified with seales and Oathes, yet still infringed as soone as made. After this in the 37. yeare of his Raigne he ratified them in the most solemne and religious manner as Religion and State could ever devise to doe. * The King with all the great Nobility of England, all the Bishops and chiefe Prelates in their Pontificalibus, with burning Tapers in their hands assemble to heare the terrible sentence of Excommunication, and at the lighting of those candles, the King having one of them in his hand, gives it to a Prelate there by, saying: It becomes not me being no Priest, to hold this Candle, but my heart shall be a greater testimony; and with all layd his hand spread upon his breast, the whole time the sentence was read, in this forme. We Boniface Archibishop of Canterbury & c. by the Authority of God Almighty, and of the Sonnes and of the Holy Ghost, and of all Apostle, Martyrs, Consessens Virgins, and all the Saints of God (many of them there speciallly named) doe excommunicate, accurse and separate from the Church of God, all those who from henceforth, wittingly and willingly shall deprive or spoyle the Church of her right: likewise, if those, who by any art or cunning shall rashly violate, diminish or alter privily or openly or by order, deed or councell, shall rashly come against also any of the ancient Liberties or approved customes of the Realme, and especially the Liberties and free Customes which are conteined in the Charters of the Common Liberties of England, and of the Forest, granted by our Lord the King of England, to the Arch Bishops, Bishops Prelates, Earles, Barors, Knight’s and Free Tenants of England; likewise all them who shall make, or observe when made, any statutes, or introduce or keepe when introduced, any customes against them or any of them, together with the writers, Councellors, and executioners of such statutes and those who shall presume to judge according to them. In sempeternall memory whereof, we have thought meete to set our seales. And then throwing downe all their Candles, which lay smoking on the ground, every one cryed out; So let every one who incurres this sentence be extinct in hell. Then the Bells ringing out, the King himself solemnely swore and protested with a lowd voyce, with his hand upon his brest: As God me helpe, I will faithfully and inviolably keep these things, as I am a Man, a Christian, a Knight, a KING CROWNED & ANOINTED. Which done, Robert Bishop of Lincolne fore-thinking, that the King would violate the foresaid Charters, presently caused the like excommunication to be made in all his innumerable Parish Churches; which sentence would make mens cares to tingle, and their hearts not a little to tremble.* Never were Lawes amongst men (except those holy Commandments from the Mount) established with more majestie of Ceremony, to make them reverend and respected then were these: they wanted but thunder and lightning from heaven, (which if prayers would have procured, they would likewise have had) to make the sentence ghastly, and hideous to the infringers thereof. The greatest security that could be given, was an oath, and that solemnely taken; the onely chain on earth, besides love, to tie the conscience of man and humane Society together; which should it not hold us, all the frame and government must needes fall quite asunder. Who would have once imagined, that a man, a Christian, a Knight, a King, after such a publicke oath and excommunication, would ever have violated his faith, especially to his loyall Subjects? yet loe almost a miracle (though over-common among our Kings,) the very next words in my* Historian after this Oath and Excommunication, are these; The Parliament being thus dissolved, the King PRESENTLY using ill Counsell, studied how to infringe all the premises; these whisperers of Satan telling him; that he neede not care though he incurred this sentence, for the Pope for one or two hundred pounds will absolve him, who out of the fulnesse of his power can loose and binde whatsoever he pleaseth, &c. which the Pope soone after did; and the King returned to his former oppressive courses, more violently than before. Well then might the royall Prophet give us this divine caution,* O put not your trust in Princes. Surely, men of high degree are a lye; to be layd in the ballance they are altogether lighter than vainty, both in their oathes and promises. Hence* Isable Countesse of Arundle, a well spoken Lady, receiving a repulse from this Kings hands about a Ward, whereto she conceived she had right, the King giving her a harsh answere, and turning from her, sayd thus to his face: O my Lord King, why turne you away your face from justice, that we can obtaine no right in your Court! You are constituted in the midst betweene God and us, but you neither governe your selfe nor us discrectely, as you ought. You shamefully vex both the Church and Nobles of the Kingdome by all wayes you may, which they have not only felt in present but often heretofore. The King fired at so free a speech with a scornfull angry countenance, and lowd voice answered: What, my Lady Countesse, have the Lords of England, because you have tongues will, made you a Charter, and hired you to be their Orator and Advocate? Whereupon to she replyed: Not so my Lord, they have not made any Charter to me; but the Charter which your Father made, and which your selfe have oft confirmed, swearing to keepe the same inviolably and constantly, and often extorting money, upon promise, that the liberties therein conteined should be faithfully observed, you have not kept, but without regard to honour or conscience broken; Therefore are you found to be a manifest violater of your faith and Oath. Where are the liberties of England so often fairely ingrossed? so often granted? so often bought? I, though a woman and with me all the naturall and loyall people of the land, appeale you to the Tribunall of that high Iudge above, and heaven and earth shall be our witnesse, that you have most unjustly dealt with us, and the Lord God of revenge, avenge and right us. The King disturbed at these words asked her; If she expected not to obtaine her suite upon favour, seeing she was his kinswoman? Whereunto she answered. How shall I hope for grace, when you deny me right? Therefore I appeale before the face of Christ against those Councellours also of yours, who gaping onely after their own gaine, have bewitched and infatuated you. I wish none had cause at this very season to make the like appeales. As boldly, though in fewer words, is he reproved by the* Master of the Hospitall of Hierusalem, in Clarkenwell, who comming to complain of an injury committed against their Charter, the King told him; The Prelates, and especially the Templers and Hospitalers, had so many Liberties and Charters, that their riches made them proud, and their pride mad; and that those things which were unadvisedly granted, were with much discretion to be revoked; alleaging, that the Pope had often recalled his owne grants, with the clause, Non obstante; and why should not he cashiere those Charters inconsiderately granted by him, and his Predecessors? What say your Sir? (sayd the Prior) God forbid so ill a word should proceed out of your mouth: so long as you observe justice you may be a King, as soone as you violate the same, you shall cease to be a King. To which the King inconsiderately replied. O what meanes this! you Englishmen, will you cast me downe from the Kingdome as you did my Father, and kill me being præcipitated? I could instance in diverse like violations of Magna Charta and other good Lawes immediately after their making and ratification with solemnest Oathes and* excommunications, both in King Edward the 1. and 2. and Richard the seconds raignes, which because elsewhere lightly touched shall pretermit; concluding onely with one president more, in one of our best and justest Princes raignes, King* Edward the third, in whose reigne even then when by speciall Acts, there was not onely a trieniall Parliament but an annuall to be held; and sometimes 4. or 5. Parliaments held every yeare, and Magna Charta usually first confirmed by a new Law in every one of them, yet we shall finde not onely frequent complaints of the breaches of it, but* many new Lawes one after another, enacted to prevent and punish the violations of it; and yet all to little purpose, as those Act declare, and our late, yea present times attest: and which is very observable; when King Edward the 3d in the first Parliament, in then 5. yeare of his Raigne, had ordained and established divers good Statutes, which he willed and granted FOR HIM & HIS HEIRES that they should be FIRMELY KEPT & HOLDEN FOREVER, for the ratification of Magna Charta, and better observing other good Lawes and enacted, That the Chauncellour, Treasurer, Barons of the Exchequor, Iudges, and all other great Officers of the Kingdome should, then for the present in Parliament and forever after take a solemne Oath before their admission to their Offices, to keep and maintaine the points of the great Charter, and the Charter of the Forrest, and all other Statutes, without breaking any one point; No sooner was that Parliament dissolved, but the very same yeare, he publikely* revoked those Statutes: pretending, That they were contrary to the Lawes and Customes of the Realme, and to his Prerogatives and Rights Royall, all which he by his Oath was bound to maintaine; Wherefore willing providently to revoke such things, which he so improvidently had done. Because (saith he, marke the dissimulation of Princes even in Parliaments) We never really consented to the making of such Statutes, but as then it beloved Vs, WEE DISSEMBLED IN THE PREMISES: by Protestations of revocations, if indeed they should proceed to secure the Dangers, which By the Denying of the same we feared to come, for as much as the said Parliament otherwise had beene without any expedition in discord dissolved, and so our earnest businesse had likely beene, which God prohibit in vaine. And the said pretensed Statute, we promised then to be sealed; But since the Statute did not of our owne free will proceed, it seemed to the Earls, Barons, and other wise men, with whom wee have treated thereupon, The same should be voide, and ought not to have the Name nor Strength of a Statute: And therefore by their Counsell and Assent we have Decreed the said Statute to be void, and the same in as much as it proceeded of deed, we have brought to be anulled. And the same we doe onely to the conservation and redintegration of the Rights of our Crowne, as we be bound, and not that we should in any wise aggravate or oppresse our Subjects whom wee desire to rule by lenity and gentlenesse. And thus his Stablishing of these Lawes, for Him and his Heires, firmely to be holden and kept for ever, was turned into an estate at will, determined as soone as granted. By which pretence of Dissimulation, of a consent to Acts, yet not free, but fained onely to accomplish his owne ends, and of preserving and redintegrating the Rights of the Crowne; how easily may any King, (and how oft have many Kings, actually, though not Legally) invallid and nullifie all Acts they have passed for the Subjects benefit, as soone as they are made by Parliaments? What weake assurances then are Lawes alone, to binde Princes hands, or secure Subjects Liberties, let all wise men judge.
If then the ignorant vulgar will be deceived with these specious fruitlesse Protestations, and the bare grant only of some good Laws (already highly violated) without any apparent intention to observe them; yet most presume the great Counsell of the Kingdome (which in so many printed Declarations hath informed the Subjects of the premises, to make them cautious, and vigilant against all such circumventions) wil not be so easily over-reached, and find better assurances before they trust too far.
Fourthly, admit (say some) His Majesties Protestations and Promises upon the hoped accommodation should be reall, (wch the sending abroad of his Forces, West, South, North, at this very instant of Treating makes most doubt,) yet the sway of ill Counsellors about him, more prevalent with, more trusted by him, at this present then his grandest Counsell, the Parliament: the Potencie of the Queene; the great merits of her Grace & Papists (who will not be more modest with the King, then they are with God himselfe, in challenging rewards ex debito, for service done unto him) the deserts of divers Malignants about the King, who will challenge all places of trust from his Majestie, as a just reward for their faithfull service; as they did in Henry the 3rd his raigne, when* Mathew Paris complained, and the whole Kingdome with him, in this manner, Judicia committuntur injustis; leges ex legibus, pax discordantibus, justitia injuriosis, &c. Who when they have all power and offices shared among them, will be apt to meditate and act revenge on the primest of their Parliamentary Opposites, to oppresse and fleece the Subjects to repaire their losses, their expences in this warre, or their poore decayed fortunes. All these with other such like probable subsequent considerations, may iustly plead the inconvenience, and great danger to Parliament and Kingdome, to make an absolute present surrender of the Militia, Forts, Navie, ammunition into such untrusty hands, as are likely to turne them all against them, and to proove mischeivous, if not pernicious, unto both for the premised reasons;* Pestifera vis est valere ad nocendum; especially if it be in Malignant hands. And here, to avoyd all misinterpretations of this impartiall discourse, I seriously protest; that as I heartily desire and constantly endeavour a speedy, safe, cordiall vnion between King, Parliament, People; so have I most unwillingly been necessitated to repeat the premised objections, much feared designes, and experimentall contradictions betweene many late Protestations and actions, (frequent in Parliamentary Declarations, new printed Pamphlets, and most mens mouthes; not out of any disloyall seditious intention (as some will maliciously mis-conster it) to staine his Maiesties Reputation with his people, and make the breach between them incurable, that they may never trust one another more; but onely faithfully to demonstrate to his Highnesse and all about him, the great disservice and impoliticle pernicious advise of those ill Counsellors, who have most unhappily engaged him in such pernicious proiects and frequent repugnances of workes and words, and have given both Parliament and people, a more then colourable, if not iust occasion to distrust his Maiesties gracious words and promises for the present, till they shall visibly discerne them, more punctually observed, and reallized for the future; and made them so unhappy on the one hand, that now they dare not trust his Majesty so farre forth as they desire, out of a provident care of their owne future security, and His Highnesse so unfortunate on the other hand, as to grow jealous of their Loyalties, because they will not confide in his Royall Faith and Protestations, so farre as he expects, out of a care to preserve his owne Kingly Honour. In this unhappy diffidence (occasioned onely by His Majesties evill Counsell) betweene King and Kingdome, a reall future renouncing of all forenamed suspected designes, and actuall performance of all Regall promises, will be the onely meanes to cure all Iealousies, banish all feares, remove all diffidences; and beget an assured trust, firme peace, and lasting unity between King and Subjects, to their mutuall unexpressible felicity; which I shall dayly imprecate the God of Peace, speedily to accomplish, But to returne to the matter in hand.
Secondly, It is conceived by many indifferent men, to be farre more reasonable and safe both for King and Kingdome (as things now stand) that the Militia, Ports, &c. till our feares and jealousies be quite removed, should remaine in the Parliaments hands, then in the Kings alone: which they thus demonstrate.
First, Because all these* are the Kingdomes in right, property, use; not the Kings; Who being but the Kingdomes Royall publicke Servant, may with Honour and better reason deliver up the Custody of them to the representative Body of the Kingdome for a season, then detaine them from them, when they require it. Secondly, Because the Parliament is the Superiour Soveraigne power, the King but the Ministeriall; and it is more rationall and just, that the inferiour should condiscend to the greater Power, the Ministeriall to those hee serves, then they to him. Thirdly, Many men of Honour and fidelity are more to be trusted and credited, then any one man whatsoever, because not so mutable, so subject to seduction, corruption, errour, or selfe-ends as one, or very few. This is the true reason, there are many Iudges in all Courts of Iustice; most select Members in the highest Court of all, the Parliament, (as there* was in the Roman Senate, in Foraigne Parliaments, in Nationall and Generall Councels; because Courts of greatest trust and power) many being more trusty and Juditious then one, or a few; Whence Solemon doubles this resolution,* In the multude of Counsellors there is safety; yea,* no (saith hee) are better then one, in point of trust; whence wise men of great estates make many Feoffees, or Executors, and seldome doe confide in one alone, The Parliament therfore being many, and the King but one, are most to be confided in by the Kingdome, Fourthly, Kings have frequently broke their Faith and Trust with their Parliaments and Kingdomes; Parliaments seldome or never violated their trust to King or Kingdome; therefore its more just, lesse dangerous for King and Kingdome to trust the Parliament, then the King.
Fiftly, The Parliament is elective, consisting for the most part of the principall men in every County, City, Burrough, in whom the people who elected them, most confide; The King successive, not Elective. Therefore not so much confided in by the Kingdome, as the Parliament. Sixtly, The Parliament being the great Counsell both of King and Kingdome, consisting of the ablest men of all Counties; is better able to judge and make choyce of fit persons to manage and keep the premises for the publike safety, then the King alone, without their advise. Seventhly, The Parliament heretofore hath elected the greatest Officers of the Kingdome, (yea the King himselfe, when the Title to the Crowne hath been doubtfull, the inheritance and discent whereof hath in all or most Princes raignes,* beene constantly guided and setled by the Parliament, as I have formerly proved) because it most concernes the weal or woe; the peace & safety of the Realme to have trusty Officers; Therefore by the selfe-same reason they should for the present appoint all Officers for the custody and ordering of the Premises. Eightly, The Kings trusting the Parliament with these things for a convenient time, wil be the only meanes to remove the peoples feares, prevent their dangers, quiet their mindes, beget a perfect vnity and amity between King, Parliament, Subject, and prevent all future differences: whereas the present resigning of them to his Majesties trust and power, will but augment their jealousies, feares, dangers, discontents; and neither pacifie former differences, nor prevent future, but rather perpetuate and beget them; especially if any notorious Papists, Malignants (the likeliest men to be imployed vnder his Maiesty) be trusted with any of the premises, which will endanger both Liberties and Religion; of which there will be no feare at all, if the Parliament and such as they shall nominate be the onely Trustees. In fine, If neither King nor Parliament dare trust one the other alone with the premises, and it is neither Royall, nor Honourable as many beleev for the King to trust the Parliament now alone, with these, who in their* Declarations never desired, but professed the contrary, that the chiefest command of the Militia when indifferent Officers were appointed, should still reside in his Majesty, in as ample manner as before; there is no other equall, honourable, just, impartiall, probable way left to secure or accord both parties in this particular, but onely to commit the premises for a convenient time, to the custody of such trusty persons, nominated by the Parliament to the King, or by the King to the Parliament, as both sides ioyntly shall allow of, and by a speciall Bill to prescribe them such an Oath, as shall oblige them, to keep and imploy them onely for the ioynt use of King, Kingdome, and Parliament, by the joynt direction of King and Parliament, and not by the single warrant or command of either of them, whiles this Parliament continues; Vnder paine of High Treason, both against the King and Kingdome.
I shall close up this obiection with the words of Seneca,* Securitas securitate mutua paciscenda est: Errat enim si quis existimet tutum esse Regem, vbi nihil a rege tutum est. Vnum est inexpugnabile munimentum, Amor Ciuium; which the King shall then be sure of, when he takes up this resolution; Non rempublicam, suam esse, sed se Reipublicæ: and shall really trust the Kingdome and Parliament as much, as farre forth, as he expects or desires they should trust him.
The Parliaments Right to Elect Privie Counsellors, Great Officers, and Judges.
THe third grand Complaint of the King and Royalists, against this Parliament is:a That they take upon them a power to recommend and nominate to the King his Privie Councellors, Judges, with other great Officers of State; demanding, that none of them may hereafter (especially during Parliaments, be ordained by his Majestie, but by their Nomination or advice. A great affront, an intollerable encroachment on the Prerogative Royall, as is pretended.
This lowd clamor against the Parliament, if seriously examined, will speedily vanish into nothing. For; first, it isb already cleared, (cand Fortiscue so resolves) That Kings themselves (the highest Officers and Iusticials in their kingdomes) were both created and elected at first, by the free generall votes of their people; from whom alone they received all their Royall Authoritie, having still no other, for greater lawfull power then they conferred on them, (onely for the defence of their Lawes, persons, Liberties, Estates, and the Republiques welfare:) which they may regulate, augment, or diminish, for the Common good as they see just cause. Therefore doubtlesse the people who thus created and elected their Kings at first, did likewise constitute, and elect all publike Councellors, Officers, Iudges, Ministers of the State, giving both being and bounds to their severall Offices and Iurisdictions by publicke Lawes; which is most apparent not onely in thed Roman,e Lacedæmonian and other Kingdomes, but our owne to, by infinite Acts of Parliament creating, regulating and limiting the power and proceedings not onely of our Kings, but of their Counsellours, Chauncellors, Treasurers, Keepers of the Great Scale and privie Seale, high Stewards, Admiralls, Marshalls, Masters of the Horse, Presidents of the Marches, and of York, Masters and other Officers of the Court of Wards, Iudges, and Iustices of all Courts, all kinds; Sherifs, Coroners, Customers, Searchers, Escheators, and all other Temporall or Ecclesiasticall publicke Officers: the right of whose elections remaining originally in the kingdome, and Parliament representing it, was never yet irrevocably or totally transferred by them to the King, by any publicke acts that I have seene: and therefore when they see just cause, they may make use of this their primitive inherent right of Election, without any reall incroachment on the Kings Prerogative.
Secondly, I have already proved, that thef Heretochs, Leiutenants Generall, and Sherifs (as likewise the Conservators of the Peace) in every County through the Realme, were antiently elected onely by the Parliament and People, not the King, (though they had the custody, power, Command of the whole County,) without any impeachment to the Prerogative Royall; why then may not these other publicke Officers of the estate be thus nominated and chosen by the Parliament likewise, without any just exception or offence
Thirdly, Allg Coroners, Majors, Sherifs, Baylifs, Aldermen, Recorders of London Yorke, Bristoll, and generally of all Cities, Townes, and Burroughs throughout the Kingdome (which have the chiefe Government of these Corporations) Verderers of the Forrest, Constables and other officers, have ever anciently, and are still at this day elected onely by the People, not the King; Yea all Arch-bishops, Bishops, Abbots, Priors, with other Ecclesiasticall Officers, who were formerly Peers and members of the Parliament, and Rulers in the Church, were anciently chosen, not by the King himselfe, but onely by the Clergie and people, as sundryh Presidents andi Statutes manifest, and the Conge de fliers at this day for the Election or new Bishops, more then intimate: and all this without the least violation of the Kings Prerogative: why then may not the Parliament nominate all those publike Officers to the King by Parallell Reason, without Ecclipsing his Prerogative?
jlFourthly, The Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses of the Kings and Kingdomes greatest Court and Councell, the Parliament, (thek supreamest Counsellors and Iudges of all others, to whom all other Courts, Counsellors, Officers, Iudges, are responsible for their actions, Iudgements, advice;) have alwayes of right beene, and yet are elected onely by the Free-holders and Commons of the Realme: yea all the members of the Lords house, though sommoned thither by the Kings Writ, and not elected; sit there of right (not of grace, or the Kings free choyse) by the fundamentall Lawes and Constitutions of the Realme; neither can the King by his absolute Prerogative, elect any member of the Commons House, or exclude any member of it, or Peere of the Upper House (who by vertue of his Peerage ought to sit there) without the Houses consents: for then, if he might elect, or exclude one, he might like wise chuse and seclude more, yea most of them, by like reason, at his pleasure; and so subvert the subjects Priviledges, and by a Packed Parliament impose what Lawes or Taxes he would on his people, to their slavery and ruine. Which freedome of the subjects Election, and all Lords Summons is so essentiall and necessary to Parliaments, that the Parliaments of 2. 1. R. 2. at Westminster, and of 38. H. 6. at Coventry, were by the Parliaments of 1. H. 4. c. 3. 4. No. 21. 22. and 39. H. 6. c. 1. adjudged and declared to be voyd and no Parliaments as all, but unlawfull, yea devillish Assemblies, and Ordinances, for this very Reason; because in the first of them, the Knights were not duly elected by the Commons according to Law and custom; but by the Kings pleasure; and the Lords onely of the Kings party (contrary to right and reason) Sommoned to it: (by meanes whereon, Will, therein ruled for reason, men alive were condemned without examination; men dead and put in execution by privie murther, were adjudged openly to dye, others punished without answer, an Earle arraigned, not suffered to plead his pardon, &c.) and because the latter of them bym divers sediitioous eville disposed persons about the King was unduly sommoned, onely to destroy some of the great Nobles, faithfull and Lawfull Lords, and other faithfull leige people of the Realme out of hatred and malice, which the sayd seditious persons of long time had against them: and a great part of the Knights for divers Counties of the Realme, and many Burgesses and Citizens for divers Burroughs and Cities appearing in the same, were named, returned and accepted, sorse of them without due and free Election, some of them without any Election by meanes and labour of the sayd seditious persons, against the course of the Lawes, and Liberties of the Commons of the Realme; whereby many great Ieopardies, Enormities, and Inconveniences, wel-nigh to the ruine, decay, and subversion of the Realme, ensued, If then the grand Councellors and Iudges of this highest Courrare and ought to be elected onely by the Commons, not the King, because they are to consult, and make Lawes for the Kingdomes welfare, safety, government, in which the Realme is more concerned then the King; and Bishops, Abbott and Priors likewise, whiles members of the Lords House of Parliament were chosen by the Clergie, People, Commons not the King: by semblable, or better reason, the whole State in Parliament when they see just cause, may claime the nomination of all publike Officers of the Kingdome, (being as much or more the Kingdomes Officers as the Kings, and asn responsible to the Parliament as to the King, for their misdemeanors in their places) without any diminution of the Kings Prerogative.
Fiftly, the Parliament consisting of the mosto Honorable, Wise, Grave, and discreetest persons of all parts of the Kingdome, are best able clearely and impartially to Iudge, who are the fittest, ablest, faithfullest, most deserving men to manage all these publike Offices for the Kings, the Kingdomes honour and advantage, better then either the King himselfe, his Cabinet-Counsell, or any unconsiderable Privadoes, Courtiers, Favorites; (who now usually recommend men to these places more for their owne private ends and interests, then the Kings or Kingdomes benefit;) therefore it is but just and equitable that they should have the principall nomination and recommendation of them to the King, rather than any others whomsoever; and that the King should rather confide hereinto their unbiassed Iudgements, then to his most powerfull trustiest Minions; who would cut the Parliament of this just priviledge, that they might unjustly engrosse it to themselves; and none might mount to any places of publike trust, but by their deare-purchased private Recommendations; the cause of so many unworthy, untrusty, corrupt publicke Officers and Iudges of late times, who have (asp much as in them lay) endeavoured to enslave both us and our posterities by publike illegall Resolutions against their oathes and Consciences.
Sixthly, Though our Kings have usually enjoyed the choyce of Iudges and State Officers, especially out of Parliament time; yet this hath beene rather by the Parliaments and Peoples permissions, then concessions, and perchance by usurpation, as appeares by Sherifes and Lieutenants of Counties Elections, now claimed by the King, though anciently the Subjects right, as I have proved. And if so, a Title gained onely by Connivance, or Vsurpation, can be no good plea in Barre against the Parliaments Interest, when there is cause to claime it: however; the Kings best Title to elect these publike Officers, is onely by an ancient trust reposed in his Predecessors and him, by the Parliament and kingdome, with this tacit condition in Law (which* Listleton himselfe resolves is annexed to all Officers of trust whatsoever) that he shall well and lawfully discharge this trust, in electing such Counsellors, Officers, and Iudges as shall be faithfull to the Republicke and promote the subjects good and safety. If then the King at any time shall breake or pervert this trust, by electing such great Counsellors, Officers, and Iudges as shall willingly betray his Subjects Liberties, Properties, subvert all Lawes, foment and prosecute many desperate oppressing Projects to ruine or inthrall the Kingdome, undermine Religion, and the like (as many such have beene advanced of late yeares;) no doubt the Parliament in such cases as these; may justly regulate, or resume that trust so farre into their owne hands, as to recommend able, faithfull persons to these publike places, for the future, without any injury to the Kings Authority. It was a strange opinion of Hugh Spencers (great favorites to King Edward the second) which they put into a Bill in writing.q That homage and the Oath of Allegiance is more by reason of the Crowne, then by reason of the person of the King, and is more bound to the Crowne then to the person; which appeares, because that before the descent of the Crowne, no Allegiance is due to the person. Therefore put case the King will not discharge his trust well, according to reason in right of his Crowne; his Subjects are bound by the Oath made to the Crowne, to reforme the King and state of the Crowne, because else they could not performe their Oath. Now it may (say they) be demanded, how the King ought to be reformed? By suite of Law, or by asperity? By suite at Law, a man can have no redresse at all, for a man can have no Iudge, but those who are of the Kings party: In which case, if the will of the King be not according to reason, he shall have nothing but errour maintained and conneced, Therefore it behoveth for saving the Oath, when the King will not redresse a thing, and remove what is evill for the Common people, and prejudicall to the Crowne, that the thing ought to be reformed by force, because the King is bound by his oath to governe his Lieges and people, and his Leiges are bound to governe in ayde of him, and in default of him. Whereupon, these Spencers, of their owne private Authority, tooke upon them by Usurpation the sole government both of King and Kingdome, suffering none of the Peeres of the Realme, or the Kings good Counsellors, appointed by the Stage, to come neere him to give him good counsell, not permitting the King so much as to speake to them but in their presence. But let this their opinion and private unlawfull practise, be what it will; yet no doubt it is lawfull for the whole State in Parliament, to take course, that this part of the Kings Royall trust (the chusing of good publike Counsellors, Officers, Iudges, which much concernes the Republike) be faithfully discharged, by recommending such persons of quality, integrity, and ability to all publike places of trust and judicature, as both King and Kingdome may confide in; which will be so farre from depressing, that it will infinitely advance both the Kings Honour, Iustice, profit, and the Kingdomes to.
Seventhly, It is undeniable, that the Counsellors, Iudges, & Officers of the Kingdome, are as well the Kingdomes, Counsellors, Officers, and Iudges as the Kings, yea more the Kingdomes than the Kings, because the Kings but for the Kingdomes service and benefit. This is evident by the Statute of 14. E. 3. c. 5. which enacts; that as well the Chauncellor, Treasurer, Keeper of the Privie Seale, the Justices of the one Bench and of the other, the Chauncellour and Barons of the Eschequer, as Justices assigned, and all they that doe meddle in the said places under them shall make an Oath, well and lawfully to SERVE the King and HIS PEOPLE, in THEIR OFFICES: which Oath was afterward enlarged by 15. E. 3. c. 3. 18. E. 3. Stat 30. 20. E. 3. c. 1. 2. 3. 1. R. 2. c. 2. swearing and injoyning them: To doe even Law, and execution of right to all the Subjects rich and poore, without having respect to any person, &c. And if any of them doe, or come against any point of the great Charter, or other Statutes or the Lawes of the Land, by the Statute of 15. E. 3. c. 3. he shall answer to the Parliament, as well at the Kings suite, as at the suite of the party. Seeing then they are as well the Kingdomes Counsellors, Officers, Iudges, as the Kings, and accountable responsible for their misdemeanors in their places, as well to the Parliament and Kingdome as to the King, great reason is there, that the Parliament, Kingdome (especially when they see just cause) should have a voyce in their elections, as well as the King. The rather, because when our Kings have beene negligent in punishing evill Councellours, Officers, Iudges, our Parliaments out of their care of the publike good, have in most Kings raignes, both justly questioned, arraigned, displaced, and sometimes adjudged to death the Kings greatest Councellors, Officers, and Iudges for their misdemeanors: witnesse the displacing & banishing of William(r) Longcham Bishop of Ely, Lord Chauncellour, chiefe Justice, and Regent of the Realme in Richard the 1. his Reigne; Ofs Sir Thomas Wayland chiefe Justice of the Common pleas, attainted of Felony, and banished for bribery by the Parliament, 18. Ed. 1. the severall banishment of Piers. Gaveston and the 2. Spensers (the Kings greatest favorites, Officers, Counsellors) for seducing miscounselling Kingc Edward the second, oppressing the Subjects, and wasting the Kings revenues, the removall and condemnation off Sir William Thorpe, chiefe Iustice of the Kings Bench, for Bribery, 25. E. 3. the fineing and displacing ofg Michael de la Pole Lord Chancellor Alexander Nesell, and divers other great Officers, and Privie Counsellors, with the condemning, executing, and banishing of Tresilian, Belknap, and other Iudges, in 10. & 11. Rich. 2. by Parliament, for ill Counsell, and giving their opinions at Nottingham against Law. Ofh Empson, Dudley, and that grand Cardinall Wolsy, Lord Chancellor, and the Kings chiefest Favorite and Counsellour, in Henry the eight his Raigne: Of the Duke of Sommerset Lord Protector, and his Brother, Lord Admitall, for supposed Treasons in Edward the 6th. his Raigne; Of Sir Francis Bacon Lord Keeper, and Cranfield Lord Treasurer, in King Iames his latter dayes; with infinite other presidents of former and latter ages; and one more remarkable then all the rest:i In the Yeare 1371. (the 45. of King Edward the 3d. his Raigne) and somewhat before, the Prelates and Clergy-men had ingrossed most of the Temporall Offices into their hands; Simon Langham Archbishop of Canterbury, being Lord Chancellour of England, Iohn Bishop of Bath, Lord Treasurer, William Wickam Archdeacon of Lincolne, Keeper of the Privie Seale, David Wolley Master of the Rolles, Iohn Troy Treasurer of Ireland, Robert Caldwell Clerke of the Kings Houshold, William Bugbrig generall Receiver of the Dutchy of Lancaster, William Ashbey Chancellor of the Exchequer, Iohn Newneham and William de Mulso Chamberlaines of the Exchequer, and keepers of the Kings Treasury and Iewels; Iohn Roxceby Clerke and Comptroller of the Kings works and Buildings, Roger Barnburgh, and 7. Priests more, Clerkes of the Kings Chancery, Richard Chesterfield the Kings under-Treasurer, Thomas Brantingham Treasurer of Guives, Merke, and Calis; All these Clergiemen (who abounded with pluralities of rich Spirituall Livings, though they Monopolized all these temporall Offices) in the Parliament of 45. Edward the 3d. by a Petition and Complaint of the Lords, were displaced at once from these effices (no waies sutable with their functions) and Laymen substituted in their places: And a likek president I find about 3. Henr. 3d. where the Clergy Lord Chancellor, Treasurer, with other Officers were removed, upon a Petition against them, and their Offices committed to Temporall men, whom they better besteemed. If then the Parliament in all Ages hath thus displaced and censured the greatest Counsellours, State-Officers, Iudges for their misdemeanours, ill Counsell, insufficiency, and unfitnesse for these places, (contrary to that twice condemned false opinion, of the over-awed Iudges at Nottingham in 11. R 2.* That the Lords and Commons might not without the Kings will impeach the Kings Officers and Justices upon their Offences in Parliament, and he that did contrary was to be punished as a Traitor;) and that upon this very ground, that they are the Kingdomes Counsellors, Officers and Iustices, as well as the Kings, and so responsible to the Parliament and Kingdome for their faults. I see no cause why they may not by like reason and authority, nominate and place better Officers, Counsellours, Iudges in their steeds, or recommend such to the King, when and where they see just cause.
Eightly,l John Bodin a grand Polititian, truely determines and prooves at large, That it is not the right of election of great Officers, which declareth the right of Soveraignty, because this oft is, and may be in the Subjects, but the Princes approbation; and confirmation of them when they are chosen, without which they have no power at all. It can then be no usurpation at all in the Parliament upon the Kings Prerogative, to nominate or elect his Counsellors, great Officers, and Iudges, or recommend meet persons to him (which is all they require) so long as they leave him a Power to approve and ratifie them by Writs or speciall Patents, in case hee cannot justly except against them; Of which power they never attempted to divest his Majestie, though hee be no absoloute, but onely a politike King,m as Fortescue demonstrates,
Ninthly, It hath beene, and yet is usuall in most Forraigne Kingdomes, for the Senate and people to elect their publike Officers and Magistrates, without any diminution to their Kings Prerogative. Inn the Roman State, that people and Senate not onely constantly elected their Kings and Empereurs, but all their other grand publike Officers and Magistrates, (as Consuls, Tribunes, Dictators, Senators, Decembri, and the like) were elected by the people; who prescribed them Lawes, Oathes, and had power to question, to punish, remove and censure them when they offended. o Solon and Aristotle, with other great Politicians, debating this Question; Whether thepower of electing and censuring the Magistrates, and chiefe Officers ought to reside in the people. Conclude affirmatively, That it is most necessary and convenient this power should rest in the people; because else the people shall become both the servants and enemies of their Princes, if they have not this power; and because all the people together are more considerable, and better able to judge of the goodnesse and fitnesse of Magistrates for them then any few select particular men, which are more apt to be seduced with by ends, then a great multitude. Whence, among the Lacedemonians, and in most Kingdomes and Republicks in Greece, the people had both the election, yea and correction of their Magistrates and chiefe State officers, as they manifest. In the Kingdome ofp Aragon, in Spaine, their ancient Suparbiense Forum, their Justitia Aragoniæ, and Ricihomines (who are their principall Magistrates, Great Counsell of State, and Privie Counsellours to their King both in Warre and Peace; having power over their Kings themselves, to examine and censure all their Actions, and remove them if there be cause;) with all their Members, Knights, and Burgesses, of their Parliaments; (held formerly once a yeare, but now once every second yeare, by fixed Lawes;) anciently were and to this day are elected by the People, and not the King. Inq the Germane Empire, the Electorship,Chancellourship, and all great Offices of State, are hereditary and successive not chosen by the Emperor: and the greatest part of inferiour Magistrates, are elected in most Provinces and Cities by the people. Inr Hungary, the great Palatine, the chiefest Officer of that Kingdome, next to the King himselfe, who at home determineth and judgeth all differences betweene the King and Subjects, according to the Lawes of that Realme (est enim apud Pannonios in usu, Regem si quid contra Legem fecerit, legibus subijeia) and during the interregnum, hath right to summon Parliaments, and generall assemblies of the Estates; yea, the chiefe hand and power in electing a new King; and the Soveraigne command in the Warres, Ade out sontes punier, bene de republica meritis prmia discernere, fundos que qui 20. vel 30. agricolurum capaces sunt suris hreditary nomine conferre posit, (as Nicholaus Isthuanfus writes) is elected by the States and Parliament of Hungary, not the King.* And in this manner Bethrius was elected Palatine in a full assembly of the States, Senatus, Nobilitasque consensu, Anno Dom 1517. and the Vaynod: put by. In* Venice, the Senare and people chuse all the great publike Officers, not the Duke. In* Poland (where the King is elective) by the Law of Sigismond Augustus, all the Magistrates of every Country were to be chosen, by the particular States of every Government,* and so they are now. In Denmarke, and Sweden, and Bohemia the Kings themselves are Elective by the States and people, and most of their publike Officers too. Whent Rome and Italy were under the Gothic Kings, they still elected their publike Officers, as is evident by King Theodoricus' Letter of approbation of their Election, in these Words, Our consent,Reverend Fathers, doth accompany your judgement. Inu Scotland, Anno 1295. the Scots in King Iohn Bayliols Raigne, considering his simplicitie and unaptnesse elected them 12, Peeres, after the manner of France: (to wit) 4. Bishops, 4. Earles, and 4. Lords, by whose counsell the King ought to Governe the Realme, and by whose ordination all the affaires of the Kingdome should be directed; which was principally done in affront of King Edward the first, by whom this Iohn was made King of Scotland, in some sort against the Scots good liking; some of them secretly murmuring against it. In France it selfe, where the King (asx some thinke, and write, is as absolute Monarch,) the greatest publicke Officers anciently, have sometimes beene Elected by the Three Estates of Parliament.y Anno 1253. The States of France, Elected the Earle of Leycester their Grand Seneschall, and chiefe Counsellour of State to advise them, and their desolate estate, what to doe.z In the Yeare 1324. Arthur Duke of Britaine was chosen Constable of France, by the voice of all the Peeres, of the Great Counsell, and Parliament; and thereupon was admitted to that Grand Office.a In the Yeare 1357. the 7th. of King Iohn of France, the Archbishop of Roan, Chancellour of France, Sir Simon de Bury, chiefe Counsellour of the King and of the Parliament, Sir Robert de Lorize, Chamberlaine to the King, Sir Nicholas Brake, master of the Kings Pallace, Eguerrain, Burges of Paris, and Vnder-Treasurer of France, John Priest, Soveraigne-Master of the Money, and Master of the Accounts of the King, and Iohn Chauncon Treasurer of the Kings Warres, were all complained of by the Three Estates of France, assembled in Parliament, for misguiding the King and Realme, their goods consiscated to the King, themselves removed from these Offices, and others elected in their places by the States. Inb the Yeare 1408 by a Law made in the Parliament at Paris, it was Decreed, That the Officers of the High Court of Parliament should be made by the Parliaments Election, and those then vacant were so; which Law was againe revived by King Lewis the 11th. in the Yeare 1465. And after him in the time of Charles the 8th. not onely the Presidents, the Kings Counsellors and Advocates were made by election, but even the Kings Atturney Generall (the onely man of all the body of the Court, that oweth not Oath but to King onely) was chosen by the suffrages of the Court, in the Yeare 1496. though their Letters of Provision and confirmation of their Election then were, and yet are alwaies granted by the King. About thec Yeare 1380, the Earle of Flanders exacting new Customes and Taxes from his Subjects, contrary to their Liberties, they thereupon expelled him, with all his Family and Counsellors out of their Countrey, And refused upon any termes to submit to his Government, unlesse he would remove all his evill Counsellours from him, and deliver them into their hands to bee punished, Et recipere SOLVM VELIT CONSILIARIOS EX COMMUNIS VULGI DECRETO, and would receive such Counsellours onely as his people by common decree should assigne him; which he was constrained, sore against his will, to condescend too, ere they would restore him Since then the election of the Counsellours, Magistrates, Iudges, and Prime Officers of State in most other Kingdomes, have beene thus elected by the people and Parliaments without any enchroachments upon their Kings just Regalities; Why our Parliament now may not claime and enjoy the like Priviledge, without any impeachment of the Kings just Prerogative? Transcends my understanding to conceive.
Finally, our owne Parliaments in most Kings Raignes, have both claimed and enloyed this power of Electing Privie Counsellours, Chancellors, Treasurers, Iudges, and other great Officers of State, and created some new Officers of farre higher qualitie and power (to governe both King and Kingdome) then any the Parliament desires, or are in truth fitting for them to create unlesse in cases of absolute necessitie, to prevent the Kingdomes utter ruine. To give you some few principall instances of many. In thed Yeare 1214. the 16. Yeare of King Iohns raigne, in a Parliament held at Running-Meade, neare Windsor, for the setling and securing of Magna Charta, and other the Subjects Lawes and Liberties formerly granted by Henry the 1. it was a greed by King Iohn, and Enacted, That there should be 25. Barons chosen, such as the Lords would, who should to their uttermost power cause the same to be held and observed. And that if either the King or his Justiciar should trangresse in any Articles the Lawes, and the offences shewed, 4. Barons of the 25. should come to the King, or his absence out of the Kingdome, to the chiefe Iusticiar, and declare the excesse, requiring without delay, redresse for the same; which if not made within 40. daies after such declaration, those 4. Barons should referre the cause to the rest of the 25. who with the Commons of the Land, might distraine and inforce the King by all meanes they could (by seising upon his Castles, Lands, and Possessions, or other goods; his Person excepted and that of his Queene and Children,) till amends be made according to their Arbitration. And that whosoever would should take their Oath for the execution hereof, and obey to Commandement of the 25. Barons herein without prohibition. And if any of them disented, or could not assemble; the Major part, to have the same power of proceedings. Hereupon there are 25. Barons chosen to be Conservators of Magna Charta,and the Subjects Priviledges (whose names you may read in Mathew Paris) who by the Kings Consent, tooke an Oath upon their soules; that they would keepe these Charters with all diligence, and Compell the King, if he should chance to repent (as he did soone after) to observe them: Which done, all the rest of the Lords, then likewise tooke another Oath, to assist and obey the Commands of those five and twenty Barons. In the Yeare 1221.e Hugh de Burgh, was made the Protector, or Guardian of the Realme, by a Parliament, held at Oxford. In the Yeare 1222. I reade inf Methew Paris, and others, that Ralph Nevill Bishop of Chichester, was made Keeper of the Great Seale, and Chancellour of England,g by assent of the whole Kingdome (in Parliament.) to wit, in such sort, Ut non deponeretur ab ejusdem sigilli custodia, NISI TOTIVS REGNI ORDINANTE CONSENSV & CONSILIO, That he should not be deposed from the custody of the said Seale, but BY THE ORDINANCE, CONSENT AND COVNSELL OF THE WHOLE REALME. Loe here the greate Officer of the Realme, not onely elected, but confirmed by Parliament, so as not to be displaced but by the consent of the whole Realme, whose publicke Office he was. Hereupon King Henry afterward, taking some distaste against Ralfe (because the Monkes of Winchester elected him Bishop of that Sea against his good liking) tooke away the Seale from him, and delivered it to Geffrey of the Temple, in the 22. Yeare of his Raigne; but yet he held: his Chancellors place still, and tooke the profits of it during all his life; though he refused to take the Seale againe, when the King offered to restore it him, the 23. of his Reigne, Quod per Consilium prædicto Cancellario Commissum fuit TOTIUS REGNI.h After which he being restored to the seale by the Parliament. An 1236. this King removed Ralph the Steward of his Houshold with certaine other his Counsellors, and great Officers of his House, from his Counsell, and their Offices; and he likewise most instantly required his Seale from the Bishop of Chichester his Chancellour, who executed his Office unblameably, being pillar of truth in the Court But the Chancellor refused to deliver it, seeing the violence of the King to exceed the bounds of Modestie; and said, That he could by no meanes doe it, Cum illud COMMUNI CONSILIO REGNI SUSCEPISSET, since he had received it by the common Counsell of the Kingdome; wherefore he could not resigne it to any one WITHOVT THE COMMON COVNSEL OF THE REALME; to wit, the Parliament. In thex Yeare 1244. the 28. of Henry the 3d. his Raigne (the Bishop of Chiehester, that faithfull Stout Chancellour made by Parliament, dying and the place continuing void for a space) in a Parliament at London, the Lords and Commons complained, That for defect of a Chancellor, divers Writs were granted against Iustice, and they demanded that by THEIR ELECTION a Justiciar and Chancellour might bee made, by whom the State of the Kingdome might be setled, AS IT WAS ACCOVSTOMED. The King promised to reforme all things himselfe, lest hee might seeme thereto compelled by them: which they gave him a convenient time to effect, and so adjourned; promising to give him an ayde at their next meeting, if in the meane time, he redressed things amisse, according to promise: Which he failing to doe. At their next meeting, They demanded Magna Charta to be confirmed, which they had divers times dearely purchased, and a new Charter to bee made for that purpose, That all the infringers thereof should bee solemnly Excommunicated by the Bishops. And because the King had not hitherto observed the great Charter, notwithstanding his Oathes and promises, and Saint Edmonds Excommunication against him for infringing it, lest the like danger should happen in after times, and so the last errour be worse then the first, By Common ASSENT they Elected 4. of the most Politicke and discreetest men of all the Realme, Who Should Be Of The Kings Counsell, and sweare, that they would faithfully mannage the affaires of the King and Kingdome, and would administer Iustice to all men, without respect of persons: That these should alwayes follow the King; and if not all, yet two at the least, should be present with him, to heare every mans complaint, and speedily releeve such as suffered wrong. That the Kings Treasury should bee issued by their view and testimonie, and that the money specially granted by all, should be expended for the benefit of the King and Kingdome, in such sort, as should seeme best, and most profitable. And that these shall be Conservators of their Liberties. And that as they Are Chosen by the assent of all, so likewise not any of them should be removed, or deprived of his Office, without Common assent. That one of them being taken away, by the election and assent of the three, another should bee substituted within two moneths. Neither without them, but when there shall be necessitie, and at their Election, may all meet again. That the Writs impetrated against the Law and Customs of the Realme, should be utterly revoked and cancelled. That Sentence should be given against the Contradictors. That they should oblige one another to execute all this by a mutuall Oath. That the Iusticiar and Chancellor should be chosen by the generall Voices of all the States assembled: and because they ought to be frequently with the King, may be of the number of the Conservators. And if the King by any intervenient occasion shall take away his Seale from the Chancellor, whatsoever shall be sealed in the interim shal be reputed void and frustrate, till restitution of it be made to the Chancellour. That None be substituted Chancellor, or Iusticiar, but by the Vniversall assembly and free assent of all. That Two Iustices may be chosen of the Bench; Two Barons of the Exchequer ordained: And at least One Iustice of the lawes deputed That at this time All the said Officers should be Made and Constituted by the Common Vniversall and Free Election of All, That like as they were to handle the Businesses of All, , Sic etiam in eorum Electionem concurrat assensus singulorum; So likewise For their Election the Assent of all should Concur. And afterwards when there shall be need to substitute another in any of the foresaid Places, this Substitution shall be made by the Provision and Authority of the Foure Councillours aforesaid. That those hitherto suspected, and lesse necessary should be removed from the king’s side. But whiles these businesses, ever profitable to the Common-wealth, had beene diligently handled by the Lords for three weekes space; the enemie of mankinde, the disturber of peace, the raiser of sedition the devill (as Matthew Paris writes) unhappily hindred all these things by the Popes avarice, through the comming of Martin a new Legate, with a larger power then any ever had before to exact upon the state; the interposition of which businesse in Parliament, where it received a peremptory repulse, tooke up so much time, that the former could not be fully concluded during that Parliament. Whereupon after this, in the yeare 1248.h king Henry calling a generall Parliament at London, to take an effectuall course for the setling of the distractions and grievances of the Realme; & therein demanding an ayde; he was grievously reprehended for this, That he was not ashamed then to demand such an ayd, especially because when he last before demanded such an exaction (to which the Nobles in England would hardly assent) be granted by his Charter, that he would no more doe such an injury and grievance to his Nobles; they likewise blamed him for his profuse liberality to forraigners, on whom he wasted his Treasure; for marrying the Nobles of the land against their wills to strangers of base birth; for his base extortions on all sorts of people, his detaining the Lands of Bishops and Abbots long in his hands during vacancies, contrary to his coronation oath, &c. But the king was especially grievously blamed by all and every one; who complained not a little, for that Title, as his magnificent Predecessors Kings have had, Justiciarum nec Cancellarium habet, nec Thesaurariunt per commune consilium Regni provt deceret & expediret, he had neither a chiefe Iustice, nor Chancellor, nor Treasurer made, by the Common Councell of the kingdome as it was fitting and expedient; but such who followed his pleasure whatsoever it was, so it were gainefull to him, and such as sought not the promotion of the Common-wealth, but their owne, by collecting money, and procuring Wardships, and Rents, first of all to themselves; (A cleare evidence, that these Officers of the kingdome were usually of right created by the Parliament, in this kings and his Ancestors times:) When the king heard this he blushed, being confounded in himselfe, knowing all these things to be most true: he promised therefore most truely and certainely, that he would gladly reforme all these things, hoping by such a humiliation, though fained, more readily to incline the hearts of all to his request; To whom, taking councell together, and having beene oft ensnared by such promises; they all gave this answer: This will be seene, and in a short time it will manifestly appeare to all men; therefore we will yet patiently expect; and as the king will carry himselfe towards us, so we will obey him in all things: Whereupon all things were put off and adjourned till 15, dayes after Saint John Baptists feast; But the king in the meane time, obdurated either by his owne spirit, or by his Courtiers, who would not have his power weakned; and being more exasperated against his people, regarded not to make the least reformation in the foresayd excesses, according as he had promised to his leige people, but insteed thereof, when all the Nobles and Parliament met againe at the day prefixed, firmely beleeving that the king, according to promise, would reforme his errors, and follow wholesome councells, gave them this displeasing answer, by his ill Councellours: (from whom his Majesties evill advisers lately borrowed it.) You would, all Ye Primates of England, very uncivilly bind your Lord the king, to your will, and impose on him an over-servile condition, whiles you would impudently deny to him, that which is lawfull to every one of your selves. Verily it is lawfull to every one, to use whose and what councell he listeth. *Moreover it is lawfull to every housholder to preferre to, put by, or depose from this or that office any of his houshold, which yet you rashly presume to deny to, our Lord the king; especially when the servants ought not at all to judge their Lord, nor the vassalls their Prince; nor to restraine him with their conditions; Yea verily, who ever are reputed* inferiours, ought rather to be directed by the pleasure of their Lord, and to be regulated by his will; for the servant is not above his Lord, nor yet the Disciple above his Master. Therefore he should not be as your king, but as your servant, if he should be thus inclined to your will. Wherefore he will neither remove Chancellour, nor justice, nor Treasurer, as you have propounded to him to doe; neither will he substitute others in their places: He likewise gave a cavilling answer to the other Articles though wholsome enough to the king, & demanded an ayd to recover his right in forraigne parts. When the Barrons heard this answer, it appeared more cleere then the light, that these things sprung from those ill Councellours, whose weakened power would be utterly blowne up, if the Councell of all the Baronage should be harkened to; Wherefore they all gave this unanimous peremptory answer; That they would grant no ayde at all to impoverish themselves, and strengthen the enemies of the king and kingdome: and so the Parliament being dissolved with indignation, unusquisque spe fraudatus a Parliamento frustra diu expectato, nihil nisi sannas cum frivolis, amissis laboribus cum expensis, ut solent sapius, reportarunt. Which when the king had seene he was put into a vehement anger, and said to his Councellours; Behold by you the hearts of my Nobles are turned from me; Behold I am like to lose Gascoigne, Poyteirs is spoyled; and I am destitute of Treasure; What shall I do. Where upon to satisfie him they caused his Plate and Iewels to be sold, & invented sundry new projects to raise monies. The very* next yeare 1249. the Lords assembling againe at London at the end of Easter pressed the king with his promise made unto them, That the chiefe Iusticiar, Chauncellour, and Treasurer might BE CONSTITVTED BY THE GENERALL CONSENT OF THE KINGDOME; which they most certainely beleeved they should obtaine: but by reason of the absence of Richard Earle of Cornewal, which was thought to be of purpose, they returned frustrate of their desire for that time.* Anno 1254. in another Parliament summoned at London, in Easter Tearme, the Lords and Commons require and claime againe their former Rights in electing the Iusticiar, Chauncellor, and Treasurer, but after much debate the Parliament is proroged, and nothing concluded. But the Lords and Commons would not be thus deluded of their right, which to regaine, they strained their Iurisdiction to an higher Note than ever they had done before. For in the1 yeare 1258. the Barons seeing the Realme almost destroyed with Taxes, and exactions and Poictouines, to domineere, and rule all things in England, effectually to redresle these grievances, and reforme the State of the Realme, in a Parliament at Oxford, (to which they came very well armed) by advise of some Bishops; among other Articles, they demanded of the king, That such a one should be chiefe Iusticiar who would judge according to Right, &c. And that 24. (others write 12.) persons (whom Fabian stiles the Douze peeres) should there be chosen, to have the whole administration of the king and state (by reason of the kings former misgovernment) and the yearely appointing of all great Officers; reserving onely to the king the highest place at meetings, and salutations of honour in publike places. To which Articles the king, and his sonne Prince Edward, out of feare, not onely assented and subscribed, but likewise tooke a solemne oath to performe them; all the Lords and Bishops taking then the like oath, to hold and maintaine these Articles inviolably; and further they made all that would abide in the kingdome, to sweare also to them; the Archbishops and Bishops solemnely accursing all such as should Rebell against them Which Articles the king and his son labouring by force of Armes to annull, they were not with landing enforced to confirme in three or foure subsequent Parliaments. By vertue of these Articles enacted thus in Parliament, those Lords not onely removed old shiriffes of Counties appointed by the king, and put in new of their owne chusing; but likewise displaced Philip Lovell the kings Treasurer, with divers Officers of the Exchequer, and sundry of the kings meniall servants, setting others whom the, liked in their places; and made Hugh Bygod, Lord Chiefe Justice, who executed that Office valiantly and justly, nullatenus permittens jus Regni vacillare; creating likewise a new Chauncellour and removing the old.
After this in a Parliament at London, Anno 1160, they consulted about the electing of new Iustices, and of the Chancellour and Treasurer of England for the following yeare, (these places being made annuall by the former Parliament:) in pursuance whereof, Hugh Bigod his yeare expiring, Hugh Spenser was by the Lords and Paliament appointed to be his successor, and made Lord Chiefe Justice: and likewise Keeper of the Tower of London, by the consent of the King and Barons; and by authority of this Parliament the Abbot of Burgh, succeeded John de Crakedale in the Treasurership, and the Great Seale of England was by them committed to the custody of* Richard the Bishop of Ely. The very next yeare 1261. the Barons, with the consent of the selected Peeres, discharged Hugh Stenser of his chiefe Iusticeship, when his yeare was expired, and substituted Sir Philip Basset in his roome; In which yeere the King appointed Iustices of Eyre through England, without the Lords, contrary to the Provisions of the Parliament at Oxford: they comming to Hereford to keepe a Sessions there, and sommoning the County to appeare before them on Hockeday, divers chiefe men of those parts, who sided with the Barrons assembled together, and strictly commanded those Iudges not to presume to sit, against the Ordinances of Oxford; neither would any other of the people answere them in any thing: whereupon acquainting the King with this opposition, they departed thence without doing ought: and the King making this yeare new Shiriefs in every County, displacing those the Barons had made; the inhabitants of each County hereupon manfully repulsed them, and would not obey, nor regard, nor answere them in any thing; whereat the King was much vexed in minde: and upon a seeming shew of reconciliation to the Barons, going to Dover, and Rochester Castles (committed to the Barons custody for the Kingdomes safety) they permitted him to enter peaceably into them without any resistance: Vpon which, minding to breake his former oathes for the keeping of the Oxford Articles, he first seiseth upon these and other Castles, and then comming to Winchester Castle where he had free entrance permitted him by the Barons (who suspected no ill dealing) he tooke it into his owne custody; whether he called to him the Chiefe Justice and Chauncellor, not long before made that yeare, by the Barons; commanding them to deliver up the Seale and Iustices Roles unto him; who answered, that they could by no meanes doe it, without the Barons consent and pleasure concurring with the Kings: with which answere the King being moved, presently without consulting with the Baronage, made Walter Merton Chauncellour, and the Lord Philip Basset Chiefe Iustice to him and the Kingdome; removing those the Birons had appointed from those and other places. Which the Barons hearing of, considering that this was contrary to them and their promises, and fearing least if the King should thus presume, he would utterly subvert the statutes of Oxford; thereupon they posted to the King, guarded with armes and power, and charged him with the breach of his oath; forcing him at last to come to an agreement with them; which the King soone violating; the Barrons and he raised great Forces, met and fought a bloody battle at Lewes in Sussex; where after the losse of 20000 men, the King and his sonne Prince Edward, with sundry Lords of his party were taken and brought Prisoners to London: where all the Prelates, Earles, and Barons, meeting in Parliament (Anno 1265 as Matthew Westminster computes it) made new Ordinances for the Government of the Realme; appointing among other things, that 2 Earles, and one Bishop elected by the Commons should chuse 9 other persons, of which 3 should still assist the King, and by the Councell of those three and the other nine, all things should be ordered, as well in the Kings House as in the Kingdome, and that the King should have no power at all to doe any thing without their Councell and assent, or at least without the advise of 3. of them. To which Articles the King (by reason of menaces to him, to elect another King) and Prince Edward (for feare of perpetuall Imprisonment if they consented not) were enforced to assent; all the Bishops, Earles, and Barrons consenting to them, and setting their seales to the instrument wherein these Articles were conteined. After which the Earle of Leicester and his two sonnes, being 3. of the 12. divided all the Kings Castles and strong holds betweene them, and bestowed all the chiefe Offices in the Kings house, upon his Capitall enemies; which indiscreete disloyall carriage of theirs, much offended not onely the King and Prince, but the Earle of Glocester and other of the Barons; so that they fell off from the Earle to the King and Prince, and in a battle at Enshame slew the Earle, and most of his Partisans; after which victory the King calling a Parliament at Winchester, utterly repealed and vacated those former Ordinances: which had they onely demaunded the Nomination of great Officers, Counsellours, and ludges to the King, and not entrenched so farre upon his Prerogative, as to wrest all his Royall power out of his hands, not onely over his Kingdome, but household to; I doubt not but they had been willingly condescended to by the King and Prince as reasonable, and not have occasioned such bloody warres, to repeale them by force.
In King Edward the second his Reigne, the Lords and Commons by on Ordinance of Parliament, having banished out of Court and Kingdome Pierce Gaveston, his vicious favorite and pernicious grand Councellour) in a(c) Parliament held at Warwicke; nominated and constituted Hugh Spenser the sonne, to be the Kings Chamberlaine, and in that Parliament further enacted; that certaine Prelates and other Grandees of the Realme should remaine neere the King by turnes, at set seasons of the yeare, to counsell the King better, without whom, no great businesse ought to be done: challenging (writes Speed) by sundry Ordinances made by them in Parliament, not onely a power to reforme the Kings house and Councell, and TO PLACE AND DISPLACE ALL CREAT OFFICERS AT THEIR PLEASVRE, but even a joynt interest in the Regiment of the Kingdome. After which the Spensers engrossing the sole Regiment of the King and Kingdome to themselves, and excluding those Lords from the King, appointed by the Parliament to a advise him, nor suffering the King so much as to speake with them but in their presence; they were for this and other offences banished the Land by Act of Parliament. This King towards the end of his raigne, after the Queenes arrivall with her Armie, obscuring himselfe: and not appearing; by(f) alvice and consent of the Lords, the Duke of Aquitaine was made High Keeper of England, and they as to the Custors of the same did sweare him fealty and by them Robert Baldocke Lord Chancelloar was removed, the Bishop of Norwich made Chauncellour of the Realme, and the Bishop of Winchesten Lord Treasurer, without the Kings assent.
In the 15. yeare of King Edward the 3. chap. 3. 4. there was this excellent Law enacted. Because the points of the great Charter be blemished in divers manners, and lesse well holden then they ought to be, to the great perill and slaunder of the King, and dammage of the People; especially in as much as Clerkes, Peeres of the Land, and other freemen be arrested and imprisoned, and outed of their goods and Cattels, which were not appealed nor indighted, nor suite of the party against them, affirmed; It is accorded and assented, that henceforth such things shall not be done. And if any Minister of the Kings, or other person of what condition he be, do or come against any part of the great Charter or other statutes,* or the Lawes of the Land, he shall answere to the Parliament, as well as the suite of the King, as at the suite of the party, where no remedy nor punishment was ordained before this time, as farre forth WHERE IT WAS DONE BY COMMISSION OF THE KING, as of his owne Authority, notwithstanding the Ordinance made before this time at Northampton, which by assent of the King, the Prelates, Earles, and Barrons, and the Commonalty of the Land, in this present Parliament is repealed, and utterly disanulled. And that the Chauncellour, Treasurer, Barons and Chauncellor of the Eschequer, the Justices of the one Bench and of the other, Justices assigned in the County, Steward and Chamberlaine of the Kings house. Keeper of the Privie Seale, Treasurer of the Wardrobe, Controulers, and they that be chiefe deputed to abide nigh the Kings Sonne Duke of Cornewall, shall be now sworne in this Parliament, and so from henceforth at all times that they shall be put in Office, to keepe and maintaine the Priviledges and Franchises of holy Church, and the points of the great Charter and the Charter of the Forrest and all other Statutes, without breaking any point. Item is assented, that if ANY THE OFFICERS AFORESAID, or chiefe Clerke to the Common Bench, or the Kings Bench, by death or other cause be out of his Offices that our Soveraigne Lord the King BY THE ACCORD OF HIS GREAT MEN which shall be found most nighest in the County, which he shall take towards him, and by good Councell which he shall have about him, shall put another convenient into the sayd Office, which shall be sworne after the forme aforesayd. And that in every Parliament at the third day of the same Parliament, the King shall take to his hands the Offices of all the Ministers aforesayd; and so shall they abide 4 or 5. dayes, except the Offices of Iustices of the one place and the other, Iustices assigned, Barons on the Eschequer; so alwayes that they and all other Ministers be put to answer to every complaint. And if default be found in any of the sayd Ministers by complaint or other manner, and of that be attained in the Parliament, he shall be punished by judgement of his Peeres out of his Office, and other convenient set in his place. And upon the same, our sayd Soveraigne Lord the King shall doe to be pronounced to make execution without delay, according to the Judgement of the sayd Peeres in the Parliament. Loe here an expresse Act of Parliamentg ordained and established by King Edward the third, by assent of the Prelates, Earles, Barons, and other great men, and of all the Commonalty of the Realm, which this king did give and grant for him and his heires, firmely to be kept and holden for ever; that all great Officers, Barons, Iudges and Iustices of the kingdome, and chiefe attendants about the king and Prince, should not onely take the fore-mentioned Oath, but be elected alwayes by the accord of the great men, and good Councell neare and about the king, out of Parliament, and by the Peeres in Parliament, and the king bound to make execution according to their Iudgement. This Law (as I conceive) was never legally repealed by Parliament, but onely by this kingsh Proclamation, by the ill advice and forced consents of some few Lords and Councellours about him; upon pretence, that he never freely assented to it, but by dissimulation onely to obtaine his owne ends, that Parliament, which else would have miscarried and broken up in discontent had not this Law beene granted in manner aforesaid. Which consideration makes me confident, that the Parliament being so eager to obtaine this Law, would never so soone yeeld wholly to repeale it; and so for ought I know it stands yet in force, to justifie the present Parliaments claime in this particular. In 2. E. 3. c. 8. 14. E. 3. c. 5. 18. E. 3. Stat. 3. 20. E. 3. c. 1. 2. 3; divers notable Oathes are prescribed to Iudges, Iustices and other Officers, and that they shall not delay nor forbeare to doe right for the kings great or little Seale, or any letters from him or any other, but goe forth to doe the Law, notwithstanding them: In the yeare 1375. the 50. of Edward the 3. his raigne,n a Parliament, (commonly called the good Parliament by our Historians) being assembled, the king required a Subsidie by reason of his warres; to which the Commons answered; that they could no longer beare such charges, considering the manifold most grievous burdens they had from time to time borne before: and that they knew full well, that the king was rich enough to defend him and his land, if his Land and the Treasure were well guided and governed; but it had beene long evill ruled by evill Officers, so that the Land could not be plenteous neither with Merchandize, chaffer, nor riches. By reason whereof, and of their importunate charges the Commonalty was generally impoverished. Moreover, the Commons complained upon divers Officers that were the causers of this mis-order, whereof the Lord Latimer, then Lord Chamberlaine was principall, and Dame Alice Piers the kings concubine, (who would usually in most impudent manner come in person into all Courts of Iustice, and sitting by the Iudges and Doctors, perswade or disswade them to judge against the Law for her owne advantage, on that side for which she was engaged; to the great scandall and dishonour of the king, both in his own and other Realmes:) and Sir Richard Scurry Knight, by whose Councells and sinister meanes the king was mis-guided, and the government of the Land disordered. Wherefore they prayed by the mouth of their Speaker, Sir Piers de la Mare, that the said persons with others, might be removed from the king, and others to be set in authority about his person, as should serve for his honour and for the weale of his Realme. Which request of the Commons by meanes of the Noble Prince Edward was accepted; so that the said persons, with the Duke of Lancaster and others, were removed from the king; and other Lords by advise of the sayd Prince, and other wise Lords of the Realme; & per Parliamentum prædictum, writes Walsingham, were put in their places, such as the Prince and Peers thought fittest. Moreover in this Parliament, at the Perition of the Commons it was Ordained, that certaine Bishops, Earles, and other Lords should from thence forth governe both the king and kingdome (the king being then in his dotage unable to governe himselfe or the kingdome) because the king was growne old and wanted such governours. This passage is thus expressed in the Parliament Roll of 50. E. 3. numb. 10. Also the Commons considering the mischiefes of the Land shewed to King and Lords of the Parliament; that it shall be for the honour of the King and profit of all the Realme, which is now grieved in divers manners by many adversities, as well by the warres of France, Spaine, Ireland, Guyon, Beretaigne, and elsewhere, as likewise by the Officers who have beene accustomed to be about the King, who are not sufficient at all without other assistance for so great a government; wherefore they pray that the Councell of our Lord the King, be enforced (or made up) of the Lords of the Land, Prelates and others, to the number of 10. or 12. (which the King shall please) to remaine continually which the King in such manner, that no great businesse shall passe or be there decreed without all their assents and advise; and that other lesser businesses shall be ordered by the assent of 6. or 4. of them at least, according as the case shall require; so that at least 6. or 4. of such Counsellors shall be continually resident to councell the King And our Lord the King, considering the said request to be honourable and very profitable to him, and to all his Realme, hath thereto assented, provided alwayes that the Chancellour, Treasurer, or Keeper of the Privie seale, and all other Officers of the King, may execute, and dispatch the businesses belonging to their Offices, without the presence of the sayd Councellours, the which the King hath assigned, &c. But this Ordinance lasted scarce three moneths, for after the Commons had granted a subsidie of 4 pence the pole of all above 14 yeares old except beggers, Prince Edward dying, and the Parliament determining, these removed-ill-officers got into the Court, and their offices againe; and by the instance and power of Alice Piers the Speaker, De la Mare was adjudged to perpetuall prison in Notingham Castle, (an act without example in former times, and which did no good in this) where here mained prisoner two years space, though his friends very oft petitioned for his libertie: and(o) John a Gaunt Duke of Lancaster (made Regent of the Realme because of the Kings irrecoverable infermity) summoning a Parliament the yeare following, repealed the Statutes made in this good Parliament, to the Subjects great discontent, who were earnest suiters to the Duke for De la Mare his inlargement and legall triall, which being denyed, the Londoners upon this and other discontents tooke armes, assaulted the Duke, spoyled his house at the Savoy, and hung up his armes reversed, in signe of Treason in all the chiefe streetes of London. But in the first yeare of Richard the second, in ap Parliament at London, Peter De la Mare and almost all the Knights (which playd their parts so well in the good Parliament for the increase of their Countrey and benefit of the Realme) resuming their Petitions, caused Alice Piers (who contemning the Act of Parliament, and the oathes where with she had bound her selfe, presumed to enter the Kings Court, to perswade and impetrate from him whatsoever she pleased) to be bannished and all her movables and immovables to be confiscated to the King, notwithstanding she had corrupted with money, divers of the Lords and Lawyers of England, to speake not onely privately, but publickely in her behalfe.
*Anno Dom 1237. King Henry the 3d. sommoning a Parliament at London, because it seemed somewhat hard to sequester all his present Counsell from him sodenly, as reprobate, it was concluded, that the Earle Warran, William de Ferarius, and John Fitz-Geofrey should be added to his Privie Counsell; whom the King caused to sweare, That by no meanes neither through gifts, nor any other manner they should deviate from the way of truth, but should give good and wholesome councell both to the king himself and the Kingdome. Whereupon they granted him a Subsidie of the thirtieth part of their goods, upon condition; that from thence forth, and ever after for taking the Councell of strangers and all unnaturall ones (qui semper sui & non Regni amic est consueverunt & Regnbonad strahere, non aduna e) he should adhere to the counsell of his faithfull and naturall subjects. Et sic soluto consilio non sine interiori [Editor: illegible word] [Editor: illegible word] & [Editor: illegible word] [Editor: illegible word] ratione, eo quod cum difficul te tanta Regis [Editor: illegible word] ad [Editor: illegible word] consilium contorquerent; & consiliis eo um, a quibus omnem hono em [Editor: illegible word] [Editor: illegible word] obsecundarent, ad propria [Editor: illegible word] [Editor: illegible word] [Editor: illegible word] But this perfideous King, & Regni del [Editor: illegible word] as the Barons and Historians stile him, contrary to his solemne oath and promise would not be weaned from his evill Councellors but retained them still, till by force of Armes they were removed and banished.
qIn the 1. yeare of Richard the 2d, William Courtney Bishop of London, Edmond Mortymer Earle of March, and many others of whom the Common people had the best opinion, being good wise, and famous men, were by publicke consent appointed Councellours and Regents to the King, being but young: and this yeare Henry Piercie Earle of Northumberland resigning his Marshalls rod, Iohn de Arandel, was made Marshall in his place. In ther third yeare of Richard the second in a Parliament at London the Commons petitioned, that one of the Barons, who knew how to answer Forraigners wisely, and might be mature in manners, potent in workes, tractable and discreete, to be the kings protector, Electus est Ergo, COMMVNI SENTENTIA, &c. Hereupon Thomas Beauchamp Earle of Warwicke, WAS ELECTED BY COMMON CONSENT IN PARLIAMENT, Lord Protector, that he might continually abide with the King, and receive an honorable anuall stipend out of the Kings Exchequer for his paines and those Bishops, Earles, Barons, and Iudges assigned to be the Kings Counsell and Gardians the yeare before, were upon the Commons petition this Parliament removed, because they spent much of the Kings Treasure, & nullum aut modicum fructum protulerunt. In this Parliament Sir Richard Scrope, resigned his Office of Lord Chauncellour, and Simon de Sudbury, Archbishop of Canterbury (contrary to his degree and dignity, as many then cryed out) was substituted in his place. In a Parliament at London in the fifth yeare of King Richard the second, Sir Richard Scrope was againe made(s) Chauncellour, PETENTIEVS HOC MAGNATIBVS ET COMMINIBVS,t at the REQVEST OF THE LORDS AND COMMONS, as being a man who for his eminent knowledge and inflexible justice, had not his peere in England; and Hugh Segrave Knight, was then likewise made Lord Treasurer. Sed quid iuvant statuta Parliamentorum &c. (writes Walsingham of the Acts of this Parliament, andu Speed out of him.) But to what purpose are Acts of Parliament, when after they are past, they take no manner of effect, for the king with his Privie Counsell was wont to change and abolish all things, which by the Commons and Nobility had beene agreed upon in former Parliaments? For the very next* yeare the king deposed Scrope from his Chauncellourship, and tooke the Seale into his owne hands, sealing divers Grants, and Writings with it as he pleased, and at last delivered the Seale to Richard Braybrooke, which Walsingham thus relates.x Lord Richard Scrope Knight, qui PER REGNI COMMVNITATEM, ET ASSENSVM DOMINORVM ELECTVM IN REGNI CANCELLARIVM, was in those dayes put from his Office of Chancellor, which he had laudably, and prudently administred. The cause of his removall was, his peremptory resistance of the Kings Will, who desired to impoverish himselfe, to exalt strangers. For certaine Knights and Esquires of inferiour ranke, being the kings servants, begged of the king certaine lands, and the demeasnes of such as dyed, during such time as by the custome of the Kingdome, they ought to remaine in the Kings hands. The King being a child, without delay granted their requests, and sending them to the Chancellor, commanded him to grant them such Charters under the great Seale, as they desired: But the Chauncellor, who ardently desired the benefit of the Realme, and the Kings profit, plainely denyed their requests; alleaging that the King was much endebted, and that he had neede retaine such casualties to himselfe to helpe discharge his debts. That those who knew in what debts the king was obliged, were not faithfull to the King, whiles they minded more their owne avarice than the kings profit, preferring their private gaine before the publicke necessities. Wherefore they should desist from such requests, and be content with the Kings former gifts, which were sufficient for them. And that they should know for certaine, that he would neither make nor seale any such Charters of confirmation to them, of such donations of the king, who was not yet of full age, least hee should hereafter receive ill thankes from him. Whereupon these Petitioners returning from the Chancellour, inform the king; that the Chauncellors minde was obstinate, and that he would doe nothing at his Command, but rather contemne his Royall mandate; that the King ought with due severity, speedily to curbe such an unbrideled disobedience, or else it would quickly come to passe, that the kings honour would grow contemptible among his Subjects, and his command be of no value. The King therefore who understood as a childe, more regarding the false machinations of detractor, then the faithfull allegations of his Chauncellour, in a spirit of furie sends some to demand his seale of him, and to bring it to himselfe. And when the king had sent againe and againe by solemne messengers, that he should send the seale to him; the Chauncellour answered thus; I am ready to resigne the Seale, not to you, but to him who gave it me to keepe, neither shall there be a middle bearer betweene me and him, but I will restore it to his hands, who committed it to mine owne hands not to others. And so going to the king; He redelivered the seale, promising that he would (as he had hitherto) be faithfull to the king; yet denyed that he would hereafter be an Officer under him. And then the king receiving the Seale did for many dayes what he listed, untill Master Robert Braibrooke Bishop of London had undertaken the Office of Chancellour. When not onely the Nobility of the kingdome, but the Commonalty likewise heard, that the king contrary to the Custome of the Kingdome had captiously deposed the Chauncellour, whom All the Nobilitie of the Kingdome with the suffrage of all the Commons had chosen, they were exceedingly moved with indignation. Yet no man durst speake openly of the matter, by reason of the malice of those about the king, and the irrationall youth of the king himselfe: and so the benefits of the king and kingdome were trodden under foote by the countenance of the kings indiscretion, and the malice of those inhabiting with him. In the ninthy yeare of king Richard the second Michael de la Pole Earle of Suffolke for grosse abuses, bribery, and Treason, was put from his Chauncellourship, fined 20000. markes to the king and condemned to dye: Hæc autem omnia quanquam summè regi placuisse de buerant meximè displicebant, adeò fidebat infideli, adeocoluit nebulonem. Insomuch that the King and his familiars plotted to murther the Knights of the Parliament who most opposed the subsidie he demaunded, and the said Michael, together with the Duke of Glocester at a supper in London to which they should be invited; thinking by this meanes to obtaine their wills: But the Duke and they having timely notice thereof, and Richard Exton then Major of London, freely telling the king when he was called to assent to this villany, that he would never give his consent to the death of such innocents (though Sir Nicholas Bramber Major the yeare before had thereto assented) this wickednesse was prevented: and being made publicke to all the inhabitants in the City and parts adjoyning; from thenceforth the hatred of such counsellors, and love of the Duke and foresayd knights encreased among all men. And the Duke and Knights with greater constancie and courage opposed De la Pole; andz after many delayes, the king full sore against his will, WAS COMPELLED to give a commission of Oyer & terminer to the Duke of Glocester and Richard Earle of Arundell, to heare and determine the businesses and complaints against De la Pole, and all others which the Knights of the Parliament had accused, who gave judgement of death against them; and Thomas Arundell Bishop of Ely, was made Chauncellour by the Parliament, in De la Poles place, and the Bishop of Durham removed from his Lord Treasurership, with which he was much enamored, (taking much paines and being at great cost to procure it) and I Iohn Gilbert Bishop of Hereford (qui plus lingua qua quam side vigebat) was surrogated in his steed, But this Parliament ending, the king immediately received De la Pole, (whom *Walsingham stiles, Perfidiæ promptuarium, sentira avaritiæ, auriga proditionis, archa malitiæ, odii seminator, mendacii fabric tor susurro neqtussimus dolo prastantissimus artificiosus detractor, patriae delator consiliarius nequam, merito perfidus enomens spiritum in terra peregrina) together with the Duke of Ireland, and Alexander Nevell Archbishop of Yorke, into his Court and favour, who laboured night and day to incense the King against the Lords, and to annull the Acts of this Parliament; by which meanes the Kings hatred towards his Nobles and naturall faithfull people increased every day more and more; these ill Councellors whispering unto him, that he should not be a king in effect, but onely, in shadow, and that he should enjoy nothing of his owne, if the Lords should keepe their received power. The King therefore beleeving them, from thenceforth suspected all the Nobles, and suffered these ill Councellors and their confederates to wast his revenues and oppresse his people. Whereupon thea next yeare following, a Parliament being summoned, the Lords and Commons by reason of great and horrible mischeifes, and perils which had hapned to the King and the Realme aforetime, by reason of evill Councellors and governance about the Kings person by the foresaid Archbishop of Yorke, Robert de Vere Duke of Ireland, De la Pole, Robert Trisilian Lord Chiefe Iustice of England, Sir Nicholas Brambre and other their adherents, who wasted demished and destroyed the goods, treasure and substance of the Crowne, oppressed the people dayly with importable charges, neglecting the execution of the good Lawes and Customes of the Realme, so that no full right nor justice was done, &c. whereby the king and all his Realme were very nigh to have beene wholy undone and destroyed; for these causes, and the eschewing of such like perills and mischeiefes to the King and Realme for time to come, displaced and removed these ill Councellors; and at their request, a new Chauncellor, Treasurer, and Privie seale were ordained in Parliament, even such as were held good, sufficient and lawfull to the honour and profit of the King and his Realme. And by advise and assent of the Lords and Commons in Parliament in ayde of good governance of the Realme, for the due executions of good Lawes, and the reliefe of the Kings and his peoples states in time to come, a speciall Commission under the great seale of England (confirmed by the Statute of 10. R. 2 c. 1.) was granted to both Archbishops, the Dukes of Yorke and Glocester (the Kings Uncles) the Bishops of Worcester and Exetor, the Abbot of Waltham, the Earle of Arundle, the Lord Cobham, and others, to be of the Kings GREAT & CONTINVALL COVNSELL for one yeare then next following; to survey and examine with his sayd Chauncellor, Treasurer, and Keeper of the Privie seale, as well the estate and government of his house, as without all his Courts and places, as of all his Realme, and of all his Officers and Ministers of whatsoever estate as well within the house as without to inquire and take information of all rents, revenues, profits due to him in any manner within the Realme or without, and of all manner of gifts, grants alienations or confirmations made by him of any Land, Tenements, Rents, Anuities, Profits, Revenues, Wards, Marriages, (and infinite other particulars specified in theb Act) and of all kinde of oppressions, asseases and dammages whatsoever done to the King or his people; and them finally to heare and determine. And that no man should councell the king to repeale this Commission (though it tooke no effect) under paine of forfaiting all his goods and imprisonment during the kings pleasure.
No sooner was this Parliament dissolved, but this unhappie seduced King, by the instigation and advise of his former ill Councellors; endeavours to nullifie this Commission as derogatory to his royall power, and sending for his Iudges and Councell at Law to Nottingham Castle, caused them to subscribe to sundry Articles tending to the Totall subversion of Parliaments; causing the Duke of Glocester and other Lords who procured this Commission to be indighted of high Treason, to which Inditements the Iudges being over-awed with feare, set their hands and seales; for which illegall proceedings destructive to Parliaments, by 11. R. 2. c. 1, to 7. these ill pernicious Councellours and Iudges were attainted and condemned of High Treason, put from their Offices, their Lands confiscated, many of them executed, the residue banished, and above 20. other Knights, Gentlemen, and Clergie men who mis-councelled the King, imprisoned, condemned and banished the Court, as the Statutes at large in 11. & 21. R. 2. and our Historian in those yeares more copiously manifest.
dIn 12. R. 2. c. 2. There was this notable Law enacted (which* Sir Edward Cooke affirmes, is worthy to be writ in Letters of gold, and worthier to be put in due execution, For the Universall wealth of all the Realme, it is enacted; that the Chauncellor, Treasurer, Keeper of the Privie Seale, Steward of the Kings house, the Kings Chamberlaine, Clarke of the Rolls, the Iustices of the one Bench and other, Barons of the Exchequor, and all other that shall be called to ordaine, name, or make Iustices of peace (which whether the Lord Keeper alone can make or unmake without consent of all these, or put out of Commission without just cause and conviction, now commonly practised; is a considerable Question upon this and other statutes:) Sheriffes, Escheators, Customers, Controllers, OR ANY OTHER OFFICER or Minister of the King, shall be firmely sworne, that they shall not ordaine, name or make Iustices of peace, Sheriffe, Escheator, Customer, Controller or other Officer or Minister of the King, for any gift or brocage, favour or affection; nor that none which pursueth by him, or by other privily or apertly to be in any manner Office, shall be put in the same Office, or in any other. But that they make ALL SVCH OFFICERS and Ministers OF THE BEST & MOST LAWFVLL MEN & SVFFICIENT to their estimation and knowledge. Which most excellent Law (withe others of like nature) still in force, were it duly executed, there would not be so many corrupt Officers of all these sorts in the kingdome, as now swarme in every place. From which Act I shall onely make these 2. Inferences. First, that if so great a care ought to be had in the choyce of these under-Officers; then certainely farre more of the grand Officers and Iudges of the kingdome. Secondly, that if it be no disparagement to the Kings honour, or prerogative for these great Officers of the Realm to ordain name, and make Iustices of peace, Sheriffes, and other under Officers of the King, without the kings privitie, as oft times they doe; then by the same or greater reason, it can be no diminution of his honour or prerogative Royall, for the Parliament, (which is best able to judge of mens abilities and honesties) to have power onely to nominate or recommend to the King, such as they know to be the best, most lawfull and sufficient men, for the highest state Offices and places of Iudicature, when they become voyd.
Not to trouble you with any more Presidents in this Kings Raigne, recorded in Story; I shall close them up with one more upon record. In the Parliament of 3. R. 2. *The Chancellor having declared the causes of Summons and among others, the great straights the King was in for want of money; so that he had at that time nothing in his Treasury, but was greatly endebted &c. He prayed the Parliament to advise, how, and after what manner he might be relieved, not onely for his owne safety, but for the safetie of them all, and of the Realme. To which the Commons after they were advised of their said Charge returned this Answer to the King in Parliament by their Speaker, in name of the whole Commons. That the said Commons are of opinion, that if their Liege Soveraigne had beene well and reasonably governed in his Expences, spent within the Realme, and elsewhere, he now had had no neede of their aide by charging the said Comons, whom they imagined to be now more poore and indigent, then ever they were before. Wherefore they pray, That the Prelates, and other Lords of the Kings continuall Councell, who have a long time travelled in the said affaires, BE VTTERLY DISCHARGED, to their great ease, and in discharge of the King from their custodies; and that No such Counsellors should be retained about the King, in regard that our Lord the King is now of good discretion, and of a goodly Stature, having respect to his Age, which is now neare the age of his noble Grandfather, at the time of his Coronation; who had no other Counsellors at the beginning of his raigne, but ONELY the Five accustomed Principall Officers of HIS REALME. They further pray, that In this Parliament these Five Principall Officers may bee Elected and Chosen out of the most Sufficient Men within the Realme, who may be tractable, and who may best know, and execute their Offices; that is to say, The Chancellor, Treasurer, Keeper of the Privie Seale, Chiefe Chamberlaine, and Steward of the Kings House; and that these so chosen, (of whose Names and persons the Commons will be ascertained this Parliament) for their greater comfort and aide to execute the businesse of the King, shall have it therein declared, that they Shall not be Removed before the next Parliament, unlesse it be by reason of Death, Sicknesse, or other necessary cause. And they likewise pray for remedy of default of the said Government, if there be any on that party, that a sufficient and generall Commission may be made, the best that may be devised, to certaine Prelates, Lords, and others, of the most sufficient; lawfull, and wise men of the Realme, of England, diligently to Survey and examine in all the Courts and places of the King, as well within his owne house as elsewhere, the estate of the said House, and all expences and receits whatsoever made by any of the Ministers, or any Officers of the Realme, and of other his Seignories and Lands, as well on this side, as beyond the Seas, from the Kings Coronation till this present; so that if there be any default bee found by the said Examination in any manner, by negligence of Officers, or otherwise; the said Commissioners shall certifie them to our Lord the King, to have them amended and corrected, to the ende that our Lord the King may be honourably governed within his Realm, as belongeth to a King to be governed, and may be able with his owne revenues to support the charge of his Expences, and to defend the Realme on every part, and defray the other charges above named. Which Petition and Commission the King accordingly granted.
In the Parliament Rolls. of 1. H. 4. num. 106. The Commons Petitioned the King, that for the safety of himselfe, as likewise for the safety of all his Realme, and of his Lieges, BY ADVISE OF HIS SAGE COVNSELL, hee would ordaine SURE (or trusty) and SVFFICIENT CAPTAINES and GARDIANS OF HIS CASTLES and FORTRESSES as well in England as in Wales, to prevent all perills. (The very Petition in effect that this Parliament tendered to his Majestie touching the Militia,) To which the King readily gave this answer, Le Royle voet. The King wills it.
In the same Rol. Num. 97. The Commons likewise petitioned; That the Lords Spirituall and Temporall shall not be received in time to come, for to excuse them; to say; That they durst not to doe, nor speake the Law, nor what they thought for DOVBT of death, or that they are not free of themselves, because they are more bound under PAINE OF TREASON to keepe their Oath, then to feare death or any forfeiture. To which the King gave this answer. The King holds all his Lords and Iustices for good, sufficient and loyall; and that they will not give him other Counsell or Advise, but such as shall be Honest, Just, and Profitable for him, and the Realme, And if any will complaine of them in speciall, for the time to come, of the contrary; the King will reforme and amend it. Whereupon we finde they did afterwards complaine accordingly, and got new Privie Counsellors, chosen and approved in Parliament, in the 11th Yeare of this Kings Raigne, as we shall see anone.
And in the same Parliament, Num. 108. I finde this memorable Record to prove the King inferiour to, and not above his Laws to alter or infringe them. Item, Whereas at the request of Richard, late King of England, in a Parliament held at Winchester, the Commons of the said Parliament granted to him, that he should be in as good libertie, as his Progenitors before him were; by which grant the said King would say; that he might turne (or change) the Lawes at his pleasure, and caused them to be changed AGAINST HIS OATH; as is openly known in divers cases: And now in this present Parliament, the Commons thereof of their good assert and free will, confiding in the Nobility, high discretion, and gracious government of the King our Lord, have granted to him, That they will He should be in as great Royall Liberty as his noble Progenitors were before him; Whereupon our said Lord, of his Royall grace, AND TENDER CONSCIENCE, hath granted in full Parliament; That it is not at all his intent nor will, to change the Lawes, Statutes, nor good usages, nor to to take other advantage by the said graunt; but for to keepe the Ancient Lawes and Statutes ordained and used in the time of his Noble Progenitors,[Editor: illegible word] Nota. AND TO DOE RIGHT TO ALL PEOPLE IN MERCY AND TRVTH, ACCORDING TO HIS OATH: which he thus ratified with his Royall assent. Le Roy le voet. By which Record it is evidente First, that the Kings Royall Authority, and Prerogative is derived to him, and may be enlarged or abridged by the Commons, and Houses of Parliament, as they see just cause. Secondly, that King Richard the second, and Henry the fourth, tooke and received the free use and Libertie of their Prerogatives, from the grant of the Commons in Parliament; and that they were very subject to abuse this free grant of their Subjects to their oppression and prejudice. Thirdly, That the King by his Prerogative when it is most free by his Subjects grant in Parliament; hath yet no right nor power by vertue thereof to change or alter any Law or Statute; or to doe any thing at all against Law, or the Subjects Rights and Priviledges, enjoyed in the Raignes of ancient Kings: Therefore no power at all to deprive the Parliament it selfe, of this their ancient undubitable oft-enjoyed Right and Priviledge, to elect Lord Chancellors, Treasurers, Privie Seales, Chiefe Iustices, Privie Counsellors, Lord Lieutenants of Counties, Captaines of Castles and Fortresses, Sheriffes, and other publike Officers, when they see just cause to make use of this their right and interest for their owne and the Kingdomes safety, as now they doe; and have as much reason to doe, as any their Predecessors had in any age, When they behold so many Papists, Malignants up in Armes, both in England and Ireland, to ruine Parliaments, Religion, Lawes, Liberties, and make both them and their Posterities meere slaves and vassalls to Forraigne and Domesticke Enemies.
In the 11. yeare of King Henry the 4th Rot. Parl. numo. 14. Artic. 1. The Commons in Parliament petitioned this King: First, That it would please the King to ordaine and assigne in this Parliament, the most valiant, sage, and discretest Lords Spirituall and Temporall, of His Realme, TO BE OF HIS COVNSELL, in aide and supportation of the Good and substantiall Government, and for the weale of the King, and of the Realme; and the said Lords of the Counsell, and the Iustices of the King should be openly sworne in that present Parliament, to acquit themselves well and loyally in their counsels and actions, for the weale of the King, and of the Realme in all points, without doing favour to any maner of person for affection or affinity. And that it would please our Lord the King in presence of all the Estates in Parliament, to command the said Lords and Iustices upon the Faith and Allegiance they owe unto him, to doe full Iustice and equall right to every one without delay, as well as they may, without (or notwithstanding) any command, or charge of any person to the contrary. To which the King gave this answer, Le Roy le Voeth. After which the second day of May, the Commons came before the King and Lords in Parliament, and there prayed, to have connusance of the names of the Lords which shall be of the Kings continuall Counsell, to execute the good Constitutions and Ordinances made that Parliament. To which the King answered, that some of the Lords he had chosen and nominated to be of his said Counsell had excused themselves, for divers reasonable causes, for which he held them well excused; and as to the other Lords, whom hee had ordained to be of his said Counsell; Their Names were these: Mounsier the Prince, the Bishop of Winchester, the Bishop of Duresme, the Bishop of Bath, the Earle of Arundel,
the Earle of Westmerland, and the Lord Burnell. And hereupon the Prince in his owne name, and of the other forementioned Lords, prayed to be excused, in case they could not finde sufficient to support their necessary charges; And that notwithstanstanding any charge by them accepted in this Parliament, that they may be discharged in the end of the Parliament, in case nothing shall be granted to support their foresaid charges. And because the said Prince should not be sworne, by reason of the highnesse and excellency of his Honourable Person, the other Lords and Officers were sworne, and swore upon the condition aforesaid, to governe and acquit themselves in their counsell well and faithfully, according to the tenour of the first Article delivered among others by the said Commons; and likewise the Iustices of the one Bench and other, were sworne, and tooke an Oath to keepe the Lawes, and doe Iustice and equall right, according to the purport of the said first Article. iAnd on the 9. of May, being the last day of the Parliament; The Commons came before the King and the Lords, and then the Speaker, in the name of the said commons, prayed the King, to have full conusance of the names of the Lords of his Counsell; and because the Lords who were named before to be of the said Counsell had taken their Oathes upon certaine conditions as aforesaid, that the same Lords of the Counsell should now be newly charged and sworne without condition. And hereupon the Prince prayed the King, as well for himself, as for the other Lords of the Counsell; that forasmuch as the Bishop of Durham, and Earle of Westmorland, who are ordained to be of the same Counsell, cannot continually attent therein, as well for divers causes as are very likely to happen in the Marches of Scotland, as for the enforcement of the said Marches, that it would please the King to designe other Lords to bee of the same Counsell, with the Lords before assigned. And hereupon the King IN FULL PARLIAMENT assigned the Bishop of Saint Davids, and the Earle of Warwicke to be of his said Counsell, with the other forenamed Lords, and that they should bee charged in like manner as the other Lords without any condition.A notable President; where all the Kings Privy Counsell are nominated and elected by him in full Parliament; and their names particularly declared to the Commons before they are sworne, to the end that they might except against them, if there were just cause; who in their Petition and Articles to the King, expresse in generall, what persons the King should make choise of for his Counsellors, and Iudges, and what Oathes they should take in Parliament before they were admitted to their places. Which was as much or more, as this Parliament ever desired, and the King may now with as much Honour and Iustice grant, without any diminution of his Prerogative, as this Magnanimous, Victorious King Henry did then, without the least deniall or delay. In the fiftk Yeare of King Henry the fift, This King undertaking a warre with France, by Advise and consent of his Parliament; as honourable to the King, and profitable to the Kingdome; to Which war they liberally contributed: Iohn Duke of Bedford was in and by that Parliament made GOVERNOVR AND REGENT OF THE REALME, AND HEAD OF THE COMMON WEALTH; Which Office he should enjoy as long as the King was making Warre on the French Nation; the Summons of which Parliament issued out by this Duke in the Kings Name. See H. 1. c. 1.
In the Parliament of 13. R. 2. An. 1389.* John Duke of Lancaster, By ASSENT of all the Estates of Parliament, was created Duke of Aquitaine, for his life, by King Richard his Nephew; the words of whose Patent (Printed at large in Master Seldens Titles of Honour) runne thus. De ASSENSU Prælatorum, [Editor: illegible word] [Editor: illegible word], & aliorum Procerum, & Communitatis Regni nostri Angliæ, in instant Parliamento nostro apud Westmonasterium convocato [Editor: illegible word] [Editor: illegible word] Patrium nostrumin DVCEM AQVITANIÆ, cum Titulo, Stilo, & honore eidem debitis præfis mus, ac inde præsentiali er per [Editor: illegible word] [Editor: illegible word] tuo capiti, actraditionem Virgæ aureæ [Editor: illegible word] &c. toto tempore [Editor: illegible word] [Editor: illegible word] [Editor: illegible word] &c. Giving him power thereby, To Coine what Gold and Silver Money he pleased Nobili andi etiam personas ignobiles, Senescallos, Iudicer, [Editor: illegible word], Consules, Tibelliones publicos, Procuratores, Receptores, & quoscunque Officiarios, alios [Editor: illegible word] [Editor: illegible word] & ponendi, in singulis locis Ducatus prædicti, & quando opus erit, instituto [Editor: illegible word] positos Officiarios antedictos amovendi, & loco [Editor: illegible word] alios subrogandi, &c. Heere we see both the Title, honour of a Duke, and Dukedome in France, given by the King of England, as King of France, by assent and authority of a Parliament in England; with power for the Duke thus created in Parliament to make Iudges, Captaines, and all other Officers, within that Dukedome.
[Editor: illegible word]In the Parliament Rolls of 24. Hen. 6. I pars mem. 16. The King grants to John Duke of Exceter, the Office of Admirall of England, Ireland, and Aquitaine, which Grant is thus subscribed, per breve de privato Sigillo; AUCTORITATE PARLIAMENTI; So that hee enjoyed that Office by apointment and Authority of the Parliament; which was no set standing Office nor place of great Honour in former ages, when there were many Admiralls in England, designed to severall Quarters, and those for the most part annuall, or but of short continuance, not for life, as Sir Henry Spelman, shewes at large in his Glossarie: Title Admirallus, to whom I referre the Reader, and Title Herotochus; which Heretochs (elected by the people) had the command of the Militia of the Realme, by Sea and Land; and this word Heretoch in Saxon, signifying properly a Generall, Captaine, or Leader; as you may see there, and in Master Selden, Titles of Honour, Pag. 605. 606. And sometimes, though more rarely, an Earle, Count, or Noble man, Earlederman, or Prince. Hengist and Horsa being called Heretogan, in a Saxon Annall.
In(l) the 1. yeare of King Henry the 6. (being but 9. months old when the Crowne descended) the Parliament summoned by his Father Henry the 5. (as Walsingham writes) was continued; in which By ASSENT OF ALL THE STATES, Humfry Duke of Gloucester, WAS ELECTED AND ORDAINED DEFENDER AND PROTECTOR OF ENGLAND in the absence of his elder Brother the Duke of Bedford; and all the Offices and Benefices of the Realm were committed to his disposall. In this Parliament (a strange sight never before seen in England) this Infant King, sitting in his Queen mothers lap, passed in Majestick manner to Westminster, and there took state among all his Lords, before he could tell what English meant, to exercise the place of Soveraign direction in open Parliament then assembled, to establish the Crowne upon him. In the Parliament Rolls of the 1. yeare of this King, I find many notable Passages pertinent to the present Theme, of which (for their rarity) I shall give you the larger account. Numb. 1. There is a Commission in this Infant Kings name directed to his Uncle Humfrey Duke of Gloucester, to summon and hold this Parliament in the Kings Name and steed, and commanding all the Members of it, to attend the said Duke therein: Which Commission being first read; the Arch-bishop of Canterbury taking this Theame; The Princes of the People are assembled with God; declares, 4. Causes for which the Parliament was principally summoned. 1. For the good governance of the person of the most excellent Prince the King. 2. For the good conservation of the peace, and the due execution and accomplishment of the Lawes of the Land. 3. For the good and safe defence of the Realme Against Enemies. 4. To provide honourable and discreet persons of every Estate, for the good governance of the Realme, according to Iethro his Counsell given to Moses, &c. Which Speech ended, Numb. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. The receivers of all sorts of Petitions to the Parliament are designed, and the Speaker of the House of Commons presented, and accepted. Numb. 12. The Lords and Commons authorize, consent to, and confirme the Commission made to the Duke in the Infant Kings Name, to summon and hold this Parliament, (so that they authorize and confirme that very power by which they sate:) With other Commissions made under the Great Seale to Iustices, Sheriffes, Escheators, and other Officers, for the necessary execution of Iustice. Numb. 13. and 14. The Bishop of Durham, late Chancellour of England to Henry the 5 deceased; and the Bishop of London Chancellour of the Dutchy of Normandy, severally shew, that upon King Henry the 5. his decease they delivered up their severall Seales, after their homage and fealty first made, to King Henry the 6. in the presence of divers honourable persons (whom they name particularly) desiring the Lords to attest their surrender of the said Seales at the time and place specified, which they did; and thereupon they pray, that a speciall act and entry thereof may be made in the Parliament Rolls for their indemnity; which is granted and entred accordingly.
Numb. 15. It was enacted and provided by the said Lord Commissioner, Lords and Commons; that in as much as the Inheritance of the Kingdomes and Crowns of France, England, and Ireland, were now lawfully descended to the King, which title was not expressed in the Inscriptions of the Kings Seales, whereby great perill might accrue to the King, if the said inscriptions were not reformed according to his Title of Inheritance, that therfore in all the Kings Seals, as well in England as in Ireland, Guyen, and Wales, this new stile should be engraven, Henricus Dei Gratia, Rex Franciæ & Angliæ, & Dominus Hiberniæ, according to the effect of his inheritances; blotting out of them whatever was before in them superfluous or contrary to the said stile; and that command should be given to all the keepers of the said Seales of the King to reforme them without delay, according to the forme and effect of the new Seale aforesaid.
Numb. 16. Duke Humfrey the Kings Commissary, and the other spirituall and temporall Lords being sate in Parliament, certaine Knights sent by the Speaker and whole House of Commons came before them, and in the name and behalfe of the said Commonalty requested the said Duke, that by the advise of the said Spirituall and Temporall Lords, for the good government of the Realme of England, he would be pleased to certifie the said Commons, to their greater consolation, what persons it would please the King to cause to be ordained for the Offices of Chancellor and Treasurer of England, and Keeper of his Privie Seale: Upon which request so made, due consideration being had, and full advise taken; and the sufficiencie of those persons considered, which deceased King Henry the Kings Father now, had in his discretion assigned to those Offices as fitting enough: the King following his Fathers example and advise, by the assent of the Lord Duke his Commissary, and of all and every one of the Lords spirituall and temporall, hath nominated and ordained a new, the Reverend Father, Thomas Bishop of Durham to the Office of his Chancellour of England, William Kinwolmarsh Clerk to the Office of Treasurer of England, and Mr. Iohn Stafford to the Office of the Keeper of the Privy Seale. And hereupon the King our Lord willeth By THE ASSENT AND ADVISE aforesaid, that as well to the said Chancellor of England, as to the said Treasurer of England, and to the said Keeper of his Privy Seale for the exercise of the said Offices, severall letters patents should be made in this forme: Hinricus Dei gracia Rex Angliæ & Franciæ & Dominus Hiberniæ, omnibus ad quos præsenies literæ pervenerint salutem. Sciatus quod De AVISAMENTO ET ASSENSV TOTIUS CONSILII NOSTRI IN PRÆSENTI PARLIAMENTO NOSTRO EXISTENTES, constituimus venerabilem patrem Thomam Episcopum Dunelmensem, CANCELLARIVM nostrum ANGLIÆ; dantes & concedentes DE AVISAMENTO ET ASSENSV PRÆDICTIS, eidem Cancellario nostro, omnes & omnimodas auctoritatem & potestatem adomnia ea & singula quæ ad officium Cancellarii Angliæ, de iure siue consuetudine pertinent, seu quovis tempore pertinere consueverunt, &c. The like Patents verbatim, are in the same role (mutatis mutandis) made to the said Tresurer of England and keeper of the privy seale. After which, the said Duke, by advice and assent of the Lords spirituall and temporall sent the Arch-bishop of Cauterbury, the Bishops of Winchester and Worcester, the Duke of Excester, the Earle of Warwicke, the Lords of Ferrers and Talbot, to the Commons, then being in the Commons House, and notified to the Commonalty by the said Lords, these Officers to be nominated and ordained to the foresaid Offices in form aforesaid. Upon which notice so given THE SAID COMMONS WERE WELL CONTENTED with the nomination and ordination of the foresaid Officers so made, rendring many thanks for this cause to our Lord the King, and all the said Lords, as was reported by the said Lords in the behalfe of the Commons in the said Parliament.
Numb. 17. The Liberties; Annuities and Offices granted by King Henry the 5. and his Ancestors to Souldiers in forraigne parts, are confirmed by Parliament, and their grants ordered to be Sealed with the Kings new Seales without paying any Fine.
Numb. 18. Henry the 5. his last Will and the Legacies therein given, are confirmed by the Kings Letters Patents, with the assent of the Lords and Commons in Parliament.
Numb. 19. A subsidy is granted to be imployed for the defence of the Realme of England, to which end the Lord Protectour promiseth it shall be deligently imployed.
Numb. 22. and 23. The King by assent of all the Lords spirituall and temporall, wills and grants, that his deare Uncle the Duke of Gloucester shall have and enjoy the Office of the Chamberlaine of England, and of the Constableship of the Castle of Gloucester from the death of the Kings father, so long as it shall please the King, with all the fees, profits and wages thereunto belonging, in the same manner as they were granted to him by his Father.
Numb. 24. The 27. day of this Parliament, the tender age of the King being considered, that he could not personally attend in these dayes the defence and protection of his Kingdome of England, and the English Church; the same King fully confident of the circumspection and industry of his most deare Uncles, Iohn Duke of Bedford, and Humfrey Duke of Gloucester, By ASSENT AND ADVISE OF THE LORDS as well Spirituall as Temporall, and LIKEWISE OF THE COMMONS in this present Parliament, hath ordained and constituted his said uncle Duke of Bedford now being in forraigne parts, PROTECTOR and DEFENDER OF HIS KINGDOM, and of the Church of England, and PRINCIPALL COVNSELLOR of our Lord the King; and that he shall both be and called Protector and defendor of the Kingdom, and the Principal Councellor of the King himselfe after he shall come into England, and repaire into the Kings presence; from thenceforth, as longe as he shall stay in the Kingdom; and it shall please the King. And further our Lord the King BY THE FORESAID ASSENT and ADVICE, hath ordained and appointed in the absence of his said Uncle the D. of Bedford, his foresaid uncle the Duke of Glocester now being in the Realm of England, PROTECTOR of his said Realme and the Church of England, and PRINCIPAL COVNCELLOR of our said Lord the King; and that the said Duke shall be, and be called PROTECTOR and DEFENDOR OF THE SAID REALM AND CHVRCH OF ENGLAND; and that letters pattents of the Lord the King shall be made in this form following: Henricus Dei graci &c. Sciatatis quod adeo tenera ætate constituti sumus, quod circa Protectionem & Defensionem Regni nostri Angliæ & Ecclesiæ personaliter attendere non possumus in presenti- Nos de circumspectione & industria charissimi avunculi nostri Johannis Ducis Bedfordiæ, plenam fiduciam reportantes, DE ASSENSV ET AVISAMENTO TAM DOMINORVM, QVAM DE ASSENSV COMMVNITATIS DICTI REGNI ANGLIÆ IN INSTANTI PARLIAMENTO existentium, ordinavimus & constituimus ipsum avunculum nostrum, dicti Regni nostri Angliæ & Ecclesiæ Anglicanæ PROTECTOREM ET DEFENSOREM, ACCONSILIARIVM NOSTRVM PRINCIPALEM; & quod ipse dicti Regni nostri Angliæ & Ecclesiæ Anglicanæ Protector & Defensor, ac principalis consiliarius noster sit, & nominetur, in & juxta vim formam & effectum cujusdam articuli IN DICTO PARLIAMENTO die datus præsentium habiti ET CONCORDATI: Proviso semper, quod præfatus Avunculus noster, nullum habeat aut gerat vigore præsentium potestatem nec sicut præfatur nominetur nisi pro tempore quo præsens hic inregno nostro Angliæ fuerit, & PROVT IN PRÆDICTO ACTO CONTINETVR. Quodque carissimus Avunculus noster Dux Glocestria nobis in agendis dicti Regni negotiis post ipsum Avunculum nostrum Ducem Bedfordiæ PRINCIPALIS CONSILIARIVS EXISTAT ET NOMINETVR, quociens & quando præfatum Avunculum nostrum Ducem Bedfordiæ infra Regnum nostrum Angliæ morari contingat. Confidentes insuper ad plenum de circumspectione & industria prædicti Avunculi nostri Ducis Glocestriæ DE ASSENSU ET AVISAMENTO PRÆDICTIS, ordinavimus & constituimus ipsum Avunculum nostrum Ducem Glocestriæ, dicto Regno nostro Angliæjam præsentem, dicti Regni noctri Angliæ & Ecclesiæ Anglicanæ PROTECTOREM ET DEFENSOREM, necnon CONSILIARIUM NOSTRVM PRICIPALEM, quociens & quando dictum avunculum nostrum Ducem Bedfordiæ, extra Regnum nostrum Angliæ morari & abesse contingat. Et quod ipse avunculus noster Dux Glocestriæ Protector & Defensor Regni nostri Angliæ, & Ecclesiæ Anglicanæ, & Principalis Consiliarius noster SIT ET NOMINETVR, IVXT A VIM FORMAM & EFFECTVM ARTICVLI PRA. DICTI. Proviso semper, quod præfatus avunculus & Dux Glocest nullum gerat aut habeat vigore præsentium potestatem, vel ut præfertur nominetur, nisi pro tempore quo præsens hic in Regno nostro Angliæ fuerit in absentia dicti avunculi nostri Ducis Bedford. & prout in prædicto articulo continetur. Damus autem universis & singulis Archiepiscopis, Episcopis, Abbatibus, Prioribus, Ducibus, Comitibus, Baronibus, Militibus, & omnibus aliis nostris dicti Regni nostri Angliæ quorum interest, tenore præsentium firmiter in mandatis, quod tam præfato avunculo nostro Duci Bedford. quociens & quando protectionem & defensionem hujusmodi sic habuerit & occupaverit, quam præfato avunculo nostro Duci Glocestriæ, quociens & quando ipse consimiles Protectionem & Defensionem habuerit & occupaverit in præmissis faciendis, pareant obediant & intendant prout decet. In cujus reitestimonium &c. which Act and Commission thus made, and the tenour of them being recited before the said Duke of Gloster, and spirituall and temporall Lords; the said Duke having deliberated thereupon, undertook, at the request of the said Lords, the burthen and exercise of his occupation, to the honour of God, and profit of the King and Kingdome. Protesting notwithstanding, that this his assumption or consent in this part should not any wayes prejudice his foresaid Brother, but that his said Brother at his pleasure might assume his burthen of this kinde, and deliberate and advise himselfe.
Numb. 25. It is ordered by this Parliament, what under Offices and Benifices the Lords Protectors should conferre, and in what manner. Numb. 26. After the Lords and Commons in Parliament had set led and ordained the Protectors in forme aforesaid, AT THE REQUEST OF THE SAID COMMONS, there were, BY ADVISE AND ASSENT OF ALL THE LORDS certaine persons of estate, as well spirituall as temporall, NAMED AND ELECTED TO COUNSELL AND ASSIST THE GOVERNANCE; whose names written in a small scedule, and read openly, were these; the Duke of Glocester, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishops of London, Winchester, Norwich, Worcester; the Duke of Excester, the Earles of March, Warwick, Marshall, Northumberland, Westmerland; the Lord Fitz hugh, Mr Hugh Crumbwell, Mr Walter Hungerford, Mr Iohn Tiptoft, Mr Walter Beauchamp. Numb. 25 These persons thus NAMED and CHOSEN COVNSELLORS and ASSISTANTS, after this nomination and election, condiscended to take such assistance to the government in manner and forme contained in a paper scedule written in English, with their names thereto, containing five speciall articles, delivered in Parliament by the said persons chosen Counsellors assistants, of which scedule this is the tenure.
The Lords abovesaid, been condiscended to take it upon hem, in manner and forme that sueth: First, for as much as execution of Law and keeping of peace start much in Iustice of peace, Sheriffs and Escheators, the profits of the King, and revenues of the Realme been yearly encreased, and augmented by Customers, Controllers, prisers, Seachers, and all such other Offices; therefore the same Lords woll and desireth, that such Officers, and all other be made, by advise and denomination of the said Lords, saved alwayes and reserved to my Lords of Bedford, and of Glocester, all that longeth unto them, by a speciall Act made in Parliament; and to the Bishop of Winchester that he hath granted him by our Soveraigne Lord that last was, and by authority of Parliament confirmed.
Numb. 29. Item, that all manner Wards, Mariages, Farmes, and other casualties that longeth to the Crowne, when they fall, be letten, sold, and disposed by the said Lords of the Counsell; and that indifferently at dearest, without favour, or any manner partialitie or fraud.
Numb. 30. Item, that if anything should be enact done by Counsell, that six or foure at the least, without Officers, of the said Counsell be present; and in all great matters that shall passe by Counsell, that all be present, or else the more party. And if it be such matter as the King hath be accustomed to be counselled of, that then the said Lords proceed not therein without the advise of my Lord of Bedford, or of Glocester.
Numb. 31. Item, for as much as the two Chamberlaines of the Exchequer be ordained of old time to controule the receipts and payments in any manner wise maed; the Lordys desireth, that the Treasurer of England being for the time, and either of the Chamberlaines have a key of that that should come into the receipt, and that they be sworne to fore my Lord of Glocester, and all the Lords of the Counsell; that for no friendship they shall make no man privy, but the Lords of the Counsell, what the King hath in his Treasorie.
Numb. 32. Item, that the Clerk of the Counsell be charged and sworne to truly enact and write daily the names of all the Lords that shall be present from time to time, to see what, how, and by whom any thing passeth.
Numb. 33. And after that all the Lords aforesaid had read before them the said Articles in Parliament, and had well considered of them, and fully assented and accorded to them; the scedule of paper, by certaine of the Honourable Lords of Parliament on behalfe of the King and all the Lords in Parliament, was sent and delivered to the Commons to be ascertained of their intent: whereupon after the said Commons had advised, the said Lords repeated in the said Parliament, that the Commons thanked all the Lords, and that THEY WERE WELL CONTENTED with all there contained in the said scedule, WITH THIS, that to the first of the said Articles there should be added one clause of parveiu, which the said lords lords repeated on the behalfe of the said Commons, who delivered it to them in Parliament in one parchment scedule written in French, the tenour whereof ensueth.
Provided alwayes that the Lords, and other persons, and Officers, which have estate, and authority, some of inheritance, some for terme of life, and otherwise, to make and institute, by vertue of their offices, deputy Officers, and Ministers, which appertaine to them to make of right; and as annexed to them, and to their offices of ancient time accustomed and used; shall not be restrained nor prejudiced, of that which appertaines to them by colour of this Ordinance or appointment. To which parchment scedule, and the contents thereof, read before the Lords in Parliament, the said Lords well agreed, and fully consented.
Numb. 44. The Queen Mothers dower formerly agreed, appointed, and sworne to by all the three estates in Parliament in 9. H. 5. was now againe, upon her Petition, confirmed and setled by the Parliament, after her husbands decease. And Numb. 41. Pet. 2. The Commons petitioned that it might then be enacted, that no man nor woman should thenceforth be compelled, nor bound to answer before the Counsell or Chancery of the King, nor elsewhere, at the suit or complaint of any person for any matter; for which remedy by way of Action was provided by the Common law; and that no privy Seale, nor subpœna should issue thence, before a Bill were first there exhibited, and also fully allowed by two Iudges of the one Bench and other, that the complainant for matters and grievances in the said Bill could have no action, nor remedy at all by the common law, &c. A good Law to prevent the Arbitrary proceedings of these Courts which are now too frequent, in subvertion of the Common law. Lo here in this Parliament, we have a Lord Protector, Chancellor, Tresurer, Keeper of the privy Seale, Chamberlaine, Privy Counsellors, Constables of Castles, and most other Officers of the King elected by Parliament; yea, a Commission for calling and holding this Parliament, confirmed by this Parliament when met; the Kings owne publike seales altered and new made; a new stile conferred on the King, a Kings last will, and a Queens Dower, when fallen, confirmed by the Parliament, and the privy Councell, Court of Request, and Chancery limited by it, without any diminution of the Kings prerogative royall: what injury or disparagement then can it be to his Majesties royalties, to have his great Officers, Counsellers, and Judges, thus nominated and regulated in and by Parliament at this present? surely none at all.
In the Parliament Rolls of 4. H. 6. num. 8. I finde a Commission granted to Iohn Earle of Bedford, under the great seale (which was read in Parliament) to supply the Kings place, and power in this Parliament, and to doe all that the King himselfe, either might or ought to doe therein; because the King (by reason of his minority) could not there personally attend to doe it. Numb. 10. The Commons, by a Petition, lamentably complained of the great discords and divisions betweene certaine great Lords, and privy Counsellors of the Kingdome; and more especially, betweene the Duke of Glocester Lord Protector, and the Bishop of Winchester Lord Chancellor, by which divers inconveniences might happen to the Realme, if not speedily accommodated: desiring the Duke of Bedford, and other Lords to accord them; Vpon which the Lords tooke a solemne Oath to reconcile them, and made an accord betweene them; which you may read at large in(m) Hall,(n) Holinshed, and(o) other our Historians, and in the Parliament Rolls, Numb. 12. 13. On the 13. day of March, Numb. 14. The Bishop of Winchester, Lord Chancellor of England, for certaine causes declared before the Lords in Parliament, instantly desired to be discharged of his Office, which conses they considering of and allowing, he was by the Lords discharged from his said Office: and the same day in like manner the Bishop of Bathe, Treasurer of England, requested to be freed from his Office, which was that day done accordingly. Numb. 14. On the eighteenth day of March, Iohn Bishop of Bathe and Wells, late Treasurer of England, by vertue of a privy seale directed to him, brought the Kings great golden seale, sealed up in a leather Bagge, into the Parliament, and really delivered it to the Earle of Bedford, the Kings Commissary; who receiving it of the said Bishop, caused it to be taken out of the Bagge, and to be seene of all, and then to be put into the Bagge againe; who sealing the Bagge with his signet, he delivered it to be kept, to the Bishop of London, then CHANCELLOR OF ENGLAND, BY ADVISE and ASSENT of the Lords spirituall and temporall, in that Parliament. Numb. 18. The King by the advise of the Lords spirituall and temporall, and by the assent of the Commons in Parliament, makes an exchange of Lewes de Burbon, Earle of Vandosme taken prisoner at the battell of Agencourt, for the Earle of Huntingdon, taken prisoner by the French; releasing the said Earle Vandosme of his Ransome, and Oath. Numb. 19. The Duke of Bedford, Constable of the Castle of Berwick, petitioned, that the King, BY AVTHORITY OF PARLIAMENT (in regard of his absence from that charge, by reason of his continuall employments in the Kings service in France, and elsewhere) might license him, to make a Lievtenant under him to guard that Castle safely: Upon which Petition, the Lords spirituall and temporall granted him power to make a sufficient Lievtenant, such as the Kings Counsell should allow of; so as the said Lievtenant should finde such reasonable sureties for the safe keeping of the said Castle, as the Kings Counsell should approve, And in this Parliament,(p) BY ASSENT OF THE THREE ESTATES OF ENGLAND, Richard Beauchamp Earle of Warwick was ordained to be Governour of the young King, in like manner as the Noble Duke of Exceter was before appointed and designed; to execute which charge he was sent for out of France the yeare following. In the three and thirtieth yeare of this Kings reign* Richard Duke of York was made Protector of the Realme, the Earle of Salisbury was appointed to be Chancellor, and had the great seale delivered to him; and the Earle of Warwick was elected to the Captainship of Calice, and the territories of the same, in and BY THE PARLIAMENT: by which the rule and Regiment of the whole Realme consisted only in the heads, and orders of the Duke, and Chancellor; and all the warlike affaires and businesse rested principally in the Earle of Warwick. From which Offices the Duke and Earle of Salisbury being after displaced, by emulation, envy and jealousie of the Dukes of Somerset, Buckingham, and the Queene, a bloody civill warre thereupon ensued: after which(q) Anno 39. H. 6. this Duke, by a solemne award made in Parliament betweene Henry the sixth and him, was againe made PROTECTOR AND REGENT OF THE KINGDOM. By the Statutes of 25 H. 8. c. 22. 28. H. 3. c. 7. and 35. H. 8. c. 1. it is evident, that the power and Right of nominating a Protector and Regent, during the Kings minority, belongs to the Parliament and Kingdome; which by these Acts authorized Henry the eighth, by his last Will in writing, or Commission under his seale, to nominate a Lord Protector, in case he died, during the minority of his heire to the Crowne; and the(r) Duke of Somerset was made Lord Protector of the King and Realme, during King Edward the sixth his nonage, BY PARLIAMENT; And not to trouble you with any more examples of this kinde, Mr Lambard in his Archaion, p. 135. Cowell in his Interpreter, title Parliament, Sr Henry Spelman in his Glossarium, tit. Cancellarius (out of Matthew Westminster, An. 1260. 1265.) Francis Thin, and Holinshed, vol. 3. col. 1073. to 1080. 1275. to 1286. and Sir Edward Cooke in his Institutes on Magna Charta, f. 174. 175. 558. 559. 566. acknowledge and manifest, That the Lord Chancellor, Treasurer, Privy Seale, Lord chiefe Iustice,* Privy Counsellors, Heretochs, Sheriffs, with other Officers of the Kingdome of England, and Constables of Castles, were usually elected by the Parliament, to whom OF ANCIENT RIGHT THEIR ELECTION BELONGED: who being commonly stiled, Lord Chancellor, Treasurer, and chiefe Iustice, &c. OF ENGLAND, not of the King, were of right elected by the representative Body of the Realme of England, to whom they were accomptable for their misdemeanors. Seeing then it is most apparent by the premises, that the Parliaments of England have so frequently challenged and enjoyed this right and power of electing, nominating, recommending, or approving all publike Officers of the Kingdome in most former ages, when they saw just cause; and never denuded themselves wholly of this their interest by any negative Act of Parliament that can be produced: I humbly conceive, it can be no offence at all in them (considering our present dangers, and the manifold mischiefes the Kingdome hath of late yeares sustained by evill Counsellors, Chancellors, Treasurers, Iudges, Sheriffs, with other corrupt publike Officers) to make but a modest claime (by way of petition) of this their undoubted ancient right, nor any dishonour for his Majesty, nor disparagement to his royall prerogative, to condiscend to their request herein, it being both an honour, and benefit to the King to be furnished with such faithfull Counsellors, Officers, Iudges, who shall cordially promote the publike good, maintaine the Lawes, and subiects Liberties, and doe equall iustice unto all his people, according to their oathes and duties; unfaithfull and corrupt officers being dangerous, and dishonourable, as well to the King as Kingdom, as all now see and feele by wofull experience. In few words; If the(s) Chancellors, Iudges, and other Officers power to nominate three persons to be Sheriffe in every County annually (of which his Majesty by law is bound to pricke one, else the election is void, as all the(*) Iudges of England long since resolved) and their authority to appoint(t) Iustices of the Peace, Escheators, with other under Officers in each shire, be no impeachment at all of the Kings prerogative, as none ever reputed it; or if both Houses ancient priviledge, to(u) make publike Bills for the publike weale, without the Kings appointment, and when they have voted them for lawes, to tender them to the King for his royall assent, be no diminution to his Soveraignty: then by the selfesame reason, the Parliaments nomination, or recommendation of Counsellors, State-officers, and Iudges, to his Maiesty, with a liberty to disallow of them if there be iust cause assigned, can be no encroachment nor iniury at all to his Maiesties royalties; it being all one in effect, to recommend new lawes to the King for his royall assent, when there is need, as to nominate meet Officers, Counsellors, Iudges, to him, to see these Lawes put in due execution. So that upon the whole matter, the finall result will be; That the Parliaments claime of this their ancient right, is no just ground at all on his Maiesties part, to sever himselfe from his Parliament, or to be offended with them, much lesse to raise or continue a bloody warre against them.
That the King hath no absolute Negative voyce in the passing of Bills of Common Right and Iustice, for the publike good.
THe fourth great Objection or Complaint of the(x) King, Malignants, Royallists against the Parliament is; That they deny the King a negative Voyce in Parliament; affirming in(y) some Declarations; That the King by his Coronation Oath and duty, is bound to give his royall assent to such publike Bills of Right and Iustice, as both houses have voted necessary for the common wealth, or safety of the Realme, and ought not to reject them: Which is (say they) an absolute deniall of his royall Prerogative, not ever questioned or doubted of in former ages.
To this I answer first in generall. That in most proceedings and transactions of Parliament the King hath no casting, nor absolute negative voyce at all; as namely in(z) reversing erronious Iudgments given in inferiour Courts; damning illegall Pattents, Monopolies, Impositions, Exactions, redressing, removing all publike grievances or particular wrongs complained of; censuring or judging Delinquents of all sorts; punishing the Members of either house for offences against the Houses; declaring what is Law in cases of difficulty referred to the Parliament (of which there are(a) sundry presidents.) In these, and such like particulars, the King hath no swaying negative voice at all, but the houses may proceed and give Iudgement, not only without the Kings personall presence or assent) as the highest Court of Iustice, but even against his personall Negative vote or dissassent, in case he be present, as infinite examples of present and former times experimentally manifest beyond all contradiction. Nay, not only the Parliament, but Kings Bench, Common Pleas, Chancery, and every inferior Court of Iustice whatsoever, hath such a Priviledge by the Common law and(b) statutes of the Realm, that the King himself hath no negative voice at all so much as to stay, or delay for the smalest moment by his great or privy seale any legall proceedings in it, much lesse to countermand, controle, or reverse by word of mouth or proclamation, any resolution or judgement of the Iudges given in it: If then the King hath no absolute Negative overruling voice in any of his inferiour Courts; doubtlesse he hath none in the supremest greatest Court of all the Parliament; which otherwise should be of lesse authority, and in farre worse condition then every petty sessions, or Court Baron in the Kingdome.
The sole question then in debate must be; Whether the King hath any absolute Negative over-ruling voice in the passing of publike or private Bills?
For resolving which doubt, we must thus distinguish: That publike or private Bills are of two sorts. First, Bills only of meere grace and favour; not of common right: such are all generall pardons, Bills of naturalization, iudenization, confirmation, or concession of new Franchises, and Priviledges to Corporations, or private persons, and the like; in all which the King, no doubt, hath an absolute negative voice to passe or not to passe them; because they are acts of meere grace (which delights to be ever free and arbitrary,) because the king by his oath and duty, is no way obliged to assent thereto; neither can any subjects of justice or right require them at his hands, it being in the Kings free power, to dispence his favours freely when and where he pleaseth, and(c) contrary to the very nature of free grace, to be either merited or cõstrained. Secondly Bills of common right and justice, which the King by duty and oath is bound to administer to his whole Kingdome in generall, and every subject whatsoever in particular without denyall or delay: Such are all Bills for the preservation of the publike peace and safety of the Kingdome; the Liberties, Properties, and Priviledges of the Subject; the prevention, removeall, or punishment of all publike or private grievances mischiefes, wrongs, offences, frauds in persons or callings; the redresse of the defects or inconveniences of the Common Law; the advancing or regulating of all sorts of Trades; the speedy or better execution of Justice, the Reformation of Religion, and Ecclesiasticall abuses, with sundry other Lawes, enacted in every Parliament as occasion and necessity require. In all such Bills as these, which the whole state in Parliament shall hold expedient or necessary to be passed, I conceive it very cleare, that the King hath no absolute negative voyce at all, but is bound in point of Office, duty, Oath, Law, Justice, conscience, to give his royall assent unto them when they have passed both houses, unlesse he can render such substantiall reasons against the passing of them, as shall satisfie both Houses. This being the onely point in controversie, my reasons against the Kings absolute over-swaying negative Voyce to such kinde of Bills as these, are;
First, because being Bils of comon right and Justice to the Subjects, the denyal of the Royal assent unto them is directly contrary to the Law of God, which(d) commandeth Kings to be just, to doe judgement and justice to all their Subjects, especially to the oppressed, and not to deny them any just request for their reliefe, protection or wellfare.
Secondly, because it is point-blanke against the very letter of Magna Charta (the ancient fundamentall Law of the Realme, confirmed in at least 60. Parliaments) ch. 29. WE SHALL DENY, WE SHALL DEFERRE (both in the future tense) TO NO MAN (much lesse to the whole Parliament and Kingdome, in denying or deferring to passe such necessary publike Bills) JUSTICE OR RIGHT. A Law which in terminis takes cleane away, the Kings pretended absolute negative Voyce to these Bills we now dispute of.
Thirdly, Because such a disassenting Voyce to Bills of this nature, is inconsistent with the very(e) office duty of the King, and the end for which he was instituted: to wit, the equall and speedy administration of common right, justice, and assent to all good Lawes for protection, safety, ease, and benefit of his Subjects.
Fourthly, Because it is repugnant to the very Letter and meaning of the Kings Coronation Oath solemnly made to all his Subjects; TO GRANT, FULFILL, and Defend ALL RIGHTFULL LAWES which THE COMMONS OF THE REALME SHALL CHUSE, AND TO STRENGTHEN AND MAINTAINE THEM after his power. Which Clause of the Oath (as I formerly manifested at large, and the Lords and Commons in their Remonstrances of May 26. and(f) Nov. 2. prove most fully) extends only, or most principally to the Kings Royall assent to such new rightfull and necessary Lawes as the Lords and Commons in Parliament, (not the King himselfe) shall make choise of. This is infallibly evident, not onely by the practise of most of our Kings in all former Parliaments, (especially in King Edward the 1, 2, 3, 4, Rich. 2. Hen. 4, 5. and 6. reignes) whereof the first Act commonly in every Parliament was, the confirmation of Magna Charta, the Charter of the Forest, and all other former unrepealed Lawes; and then follow sundry new Acts which the Lords and Commons made choise of as there was occasion, and our Kings assented to, (confessing they were bound to doe it by their Coronation oath and duty, as I shall manifest presently:) but likewise by the words of the Coronation Oaths of our ancienter Kings, already cited in the first part of this Discourse; and of our Kings Oaths of latter times: The(g) Coronation Oaths of King Edward the 2. and 3. remaining of Record in French, are in the future tense. Sire, grantes vous a tenir et garder LES LEYS et les Constumes DROITURELES les quiels LA COMMVNANTE de vostre Royaume AUR ESLU, & les defenderer et afforcerer al honeur de Dieu a vostre pouve?
Respons. Je le FERAY, in the future, too.
The close Roll of An. 1. R. 2. M. 44. recites this clause of the Oath which King(h) Richard took in these words; Et etiam de tuendo & custodiendo JUST AS LEGES & consnetudines ecclesiæ, ac de saciendo per ipsum Dominum Regem, eas esse protegendas, & ad honorem Dei CORROBORAND AS quas VVLGVS JUSTE ET RATIONABILITER ELEGERIT juxta vires ejusdem Domini Regis, in the future tense. And Rot: Parliament, 1 H. 4. n. 17. expresseth the clause in King Henry his Oath, thus: Concedis JUST AS LEGES & consuetudines essetenendas, & promittisperte eas esse protegendas & ad honorem Dei CORROBORAND AS QU AS VULGUS ELEGER IT secundum vires tuas. Respondebit; Concedo & Promitto.
In the Booke of Claroncieux Hanley, who lived in King Henry the 8. his reigne, this clause of the Oath (which this King is said to take at his Coronation) is thus rendred in English: Will you GRANT, FULFILL, defend ALL RIGHTFULL LAWES and Customes, the which THE COMMONS OF TOUR REALME SHALL CHUSE (in the future, and where but in the Parliament House when and where they meet together to make good Lawe?) and shall strengthen and maintaine to the worship of God, after your power? The King shall answer, I grant and behete. But that which puts this past all doubt, is the Coronation Oath of King Edward the 6. thus altered by the Lord Protectour and Kings Counsell in word but not sence. Doe you grant to make NO NEW LAWES, but such as SHALL BE to the honour and glory of God, and to the good of the Common wealth, and that the same SHALL BE MADE BY CONSENT OF YOVR PEOPLE, AS HATH BEEN ACCVSTOMED? Where this clause of the Oath, referres wholly and onely to future new LAWES, to be chosen and made by the Peoples consent, not to Lawes formerly enacted. And certainly it must do so, else there would be much Tautology in this short solemne Oath, unsutable to the grave wisdome and judgement of an whole Kingdom to prescribe and continue for so many ages, and for our Kings in discretion to take: For the first clause of the Oath both in the Latin, French, and English Copies of ancient and present times, is this Sir will you grant and keep, and by your Oath confirme to the people of England; THE LAWES AND CVSTOMES GRANTED TO THEM BY ANCIENT KINGS OF ENGLAND, rightfull men, and devout to God; and namely the Lawes and Customes, and Franchises granted to the Clergy and to the people by the glorious King Edward, to your power? Which Clause relating to all Lawes and Customes granted by former Kings to the people; if this latter clause should be in the pretertence too, HATH CHOSEN (as the King and his mistaken Counsel object) it would be a meer Surplusage, or Battology, yea the same in substance with the first part of the Oath, and our Kings should be onely bound by their oathes to observe their Ancestors Lawes, not their owne as they now argue, (the reason perchance why the Petition of Right, and our other new Lawes are so ill observed) which is ridiculous to imagine. And whereas they obiect, that the word CVSTOMS joyned to lawes in the last clause, cannot be meant of such Customes as the people shall chuse after the Oath made, because all Customes are, and must be time out of minde The Answer is very easie; For Customes hereare not taken strictly for ancient usages time out of minde; but for Statutes, Franchises, just Liberties, or Taxes for the Kingdoms defence, chosen & freely, granted by the Commons or people, and to be confirmed by the King in Parliament; as appears by the first clause of the oath, the laws & customs granted to them by the ancient Kings of England. And by(i) Bracton himself, who expounds this clause of the oath to relate to future Laws, newly made by our Kings after their Coronations, in this observable passage. Hujusmodi vero leges Anglicanæ & CONSVETVDINES, regum authoritate jubent quandoque, quandog vetant, & quandoque vindicant, & puniunt transgressores; quas quidem cum FVERINT APPROBATÆ CONSENSV VTENTIVM ET SACRAMEN. TO REGVM CONFIRMATÆ, mutari non poterunt nec destrui, SINE COMMVNI CONSENSV EORVM OMNIVM, quorum CONSILIO ET CONSENSV FVERVNT PROMVLGATÆ. Now no Customes properly so called, can commence by way of grant, especially of the King alone; but only by the people and common usage for a good space of time (as the Customes of Gavelkinde, Burrough English, and such like, never granted nor commenced by Charter or Act of Parliament, did;) and if the King by Charter or Act of Parliament, should grant a new Custome, before it were a Custome in this sense, it would be utterly void in law, because there was no such custome then in being, and no grant or act can make or create a custome or prescription that had no former being. Therefore Custome in this oath, coupled with just and reasonable, must needs be meant only of such iust and reasonable statutes, liberties, privilidges, immunities, aides, taxes, or servises for the subjects case and benefit, and the publike service, as they upon emergent occasions shall make choice of in Parliament; of whose iustnesse and reasonablenesse not the King alone, but the grand Councell of the Kingdom (assembled in the Parliament, to this very end, to iudge of, make, and assent to iust and profitable Laws) are and ought to be the proper Iudges, as I have elswhere manifested; and the very words of the oath, QU AS VULGUS ELIGERIT; to which just as leges & consuetudines relates, resolve beyond contradiction. And King David and Achish both were of this opinion, 1 Chron. 13. 1. to 6. 2 Sam. 18. 2, 3, 4. 1 Sam. 29. 2. to 11: and King Hezekiah too 2 Chron. 30. 1. to 7. 23. yea God himselfe, and Samuel too: 1 Sam. 8. 4. to the end.
(k)(l)Fifthly, Because it is directly contrary to the preambles and recitals of sundry Acts of Parliament in most of our Kings reignes comprising the two last reasons. To instance in some few of many: the ancient statutes of* Marlbridge begin thus. The yeare of grace 1267. for the better estate of the Realme of England, and for the more speedy ministration of Iustice, AS BELONGETH TO THE OFFICE OF A KING, the more discreet men of the Realme being called together, as well of the higher as of the lower estate: It was provided, agreed, and ordained, that where as the Realme of late had beene disquieted with manifold troubles and distractions, for reformation whereof statutes and lawes BE RIGHT NECESSARY, whereby the peace and tranquilitie of the people may be conserved, wherein the King intending to devise convenient remedy, hath made these Acts underwritten. The statutes of 3 Edw. 1.* have this Prologue. These be the Acts of King Edward, &c. at his first Parliament generall after his Coronation. Because our Soveraigne Lord the King hath great zeal in desire to redresse the state of the Realm in such things AS REQVIRED AMENDMENT for the common profit of the holy Church, and of the Realme &c. the King hath ordained and established these Acts underwritten, which he intendeth TO BE NECESSARY AND PROFITABLE unto the whole Realme. And cap. 17. in the Marches of Wales, and elsewhere, where the Kings Writs be not currant, the King which is chiefe and soveraigne Lord there, SHALL DOE RIGHT THERE unto such as will complaine. And cap. 48. *The King hath ordained these things unto the honour of God, and holy Church, and for the commonwealth and for the remedy of such as be grieved; and for as much as it is great charity (which is oft times put for Iustice, as here) TO DOE RIGHT VNTO ALL MEN AT ALL TIMES WHEN NEED SHALL BE, by assent of all &c. it was provided. The statute of Glocester in the 6. year of King Edw. 1. is thus prefaced. For the great mischiefs and disinherisons that the people of the Realme of England have heretofore suffered, throught default of the law that failed in divers cases within the said Realm; our soveraign Lord the King for the amendment of the land; for the reliefe of his people, and to eschew much mischiefs, dammages and dis-inherisons, hath provided established these Acts underwritten, willing and commanding that from henceforth they be firmely kept within this Realme. The Statutes of Westminster, 2. in his 13. year begin thus: Whereas of late our soveraigne Lord the King. &c. calling his Counsell at Glocester, and considering that divers of this Realm were disherited, by reason that in many cases, where remedy should have been had, there was none provided by him nor his Predecessors, ordained certaine statutes, right necessary and profitable for his Realm, whereby the people of England and Ireland have obtained more speedy Iustice in their oppressions then they had before, and certaine cases (wherein the law failed) did remaine undetermined, and some remained to be enacted that were for the reformation of the oppressions of the people; our soveraigne Lord the King in his Parliament holden &c. the 13 year of his reign at Westm. caused many oppressions of the people, and defaults of the lawes, for the accomplishment of the said statutes of Glocest to be rehearsed, and thereupon did provide certaine Acts here following. The statute of Quo Warranto, An. 1278. (the 6. year of this King, made at Glocest.) hath this exordium. The King himself providing for the wealth of his Realm, and the more full administration of Iustice, AS TO THE OFFICE OF A KING BELONGETH; the more discreet men of the Realm, as well of high as of low degree being called thither, it was provided &c. The stat. of York 12 E. 2 hath this Prologue. Forasmuch as people of the Realm of England and Ireland have heretofore suffered many times great mischiefs, damage and disherison by reason that in divers cases where the law failed, no remedy was purveyed &c. our soveraign Lord the King desiring THAT RIGHT BE DONE TO HIS PEOPLE at his Parl. holden at York &c. hath made these Acts & statutes here following, the which he willeth to be straitly observed in his said Realm. In 9. Ed. 3. in a Parliament held at York.* the Commons desired the King in the said Parliament by their Petition, that for the profit and commodity of his Prelates, Earls, Barons, and Commons of his Realm, it may please him, WITHOVT FVRTHER DELAY, upon the said grievances and out rages to provide remedy: our soveraign L. the K. desiring the profit of his people by the assent of his Prelates &c. upon the said things disclosed to him, & found true, to the great hurt of the said Prelates &c. and oppression of his Commons, hath ordained and established &c. In 10. E. 3. stat. 1. there is this introduction. Because our Soveraigne Lord the King Edw. 3. WHICH SOVERAIGNLY DESIRETH the maintenance of his peace, and safeguard of his people, hath perceived at the complaint of the Prelates, Earls, Barons, and also at the shewing of the Knights of the shires, and the Commons in their Petition put in his Parliament &c. divers oppressions and grievances done to his people &c. COVETING to obvent the malice of such felons, and to see a covenable remedy, hath ordained &c. for the quietnesse & peace of his people that the articles underneath written be kept and maintained in all points 14. E. 3. stat. 1. To the honour of God &c. the King for peace and quietnesse of his people, as well great as small, doth grant and establish the things underwritten. The like we have in 15. E. 3. Stat 1. and in this Kings Proclamation for revoking it, there is this passage; Wee considering, how BY THE BOND OF OUR OATH WE BE BOUND TO THE OBSERVANCE AND DEFENCE OF THE LAWES AND CUSTOMES OF THE REALME, &c So in 20. E. 3. Because that by divers complaints made to us, we perceived that the Law of the land which WE BY OVR OATH BE BOVND TO MAINTAINE is the lesse well kept, and the execution of the same disturbed many times, &c. WE GREATLY MOVED OF CONSCIENCE IN THIS MATTER, and for this cause desiring as much for the pleasure of God and ease and quietnesse of our Subjects AS TO SAVE OUR CONSCIENCE AND TO KEEP OUR SAID OATH, by the assent of the great men and other wise men of our Counsell, we have ordained these things following. 23. E. 3. c. 8. That in no wise ye omit the same, as ye have us and the Common wealth of this Realme. 25. E. 3. stat. 2. Because that Statutes made and ordained before this time have not been holden and kept as they ought to be, the King willing to provide quietnesse and common profit of his people, by the assent, &c. hath ordained and established these things underwritten. The passage in the Statute of Provisors, 25. E. 3. Patham. 6. is notable, Whereupon the said Commons have prayed our Soveraigne Lord the King, that SITH THE RIGHT OF THE SAID OF ENGLAND, AND THE LAW OF THE SAID REALME IS SUCH, that upon the mischiefes and dammages which hapneth to his Realme, HE OUGHT AND IS BOUNDEN OF THE ACCORD OF HIS SAID PEOPLE IN PARLIAMENT THEREOF TO MAKE REMEDY, AND THE LAW OF VOIDING THE MISCHIEFS and dammages which thereof commeth, that it may please him thereupon to ordaine remedy. Our Soveraigne Lord the King seeing the mischiefs and dammages before named, and having regard to the Statute, made in the time of his Grand father, and to the cause contained in the same which statute alwayes holdeth his force, and was never defeated, not annulled in any point; and by so much AS HE IS BOUNDEN BY HIS OATH TO DOE THE SAME TO BE KEPT AS THE LAW OF THIS REALME though that by sufferance and negligence it hath been attempted to the contrary; also having regard to the grievous complaints made to him by his people in divers his Parliaments holden heretofore, willing to ordaine remedy for the great dammage and mischiefes which have hapned and daily doe happen to the Church of England by the said cause; By assent of the great men and Commonalty of the said Realme, to the honour of God and profit of the said Church of England, and of all his Realme, hath ordered and established, &c. 28. E. 3. The King for the common profit of him and his people, &c. hath ordained. 36. E. 3. To the honour and pleasure of God, and the amendment of the outragious grievances and oppressions done to the people, and in reliefe of their estate, King Edward, &c. granted for him and his Heires for ever these Articles underwritten. 1. R. 2. To the honour of God and reverence of holy Church, for to nourish peace, unity, and concord, in all the parts within our Realme of England, which we doe much desire; wee have ordained, &c. 2. R. 2. For the honour of God, and of holy Church, and for the common profit of the Realme of England, our Soveraigne Lord the King hath ordained, &c. for the quietnesse of his said people, the Statutes and Ordinances following, &c. cap. 2. (with 2. H. 4 c. 1.) Our soveraigne Lord the King greatly desiring the tranquility and quietnesse of is people, willeth and straitly commandeth, that the peace within his Realme of England be surely observed and kept, so that all his lawfull subiects may from henceforth safely and peaceably goe, come, and dwell after the Law and usage of the Realme, and that Iustice and right be indifferently ministred to every of his said subiects, as well to the poore as to the rich in his Courts. 1. H. 4. Henry by the Grace of God, &c. to the honour of God and reverence of holy Church, for to nourish peace, unity, and concord of all parties within the Realm of England, and for the reliefe and recovery of the said Realme, which now late hath been mischievously put to great ruine, mischiefe and disolation, of the assent, &c hath made and established, &c. 6 H. 4. c. 1. For the grievous complaints made to our soveraigne Lord the King by his Commons of the Parliament of the horrible mischiefs and damnable custome which is introduced of new, &c. Our soveraign Lord the King to the Honour of God, as well to eschew the dammage of this Realme, as the perils of their soules which are to be advanced to any Archbishoprickes or Bishopricks, &c. hath ordained. Divers such recitalls are frequent in most of our statutes in all Kings raignes, viz. 37. E. 3. c. 2, 3, 4, 5. 3. R. 2. c. 3. 5. R. 2. Stat. 1. 2. 6. R. 2. Stat. 1. 7. R. 2. 8. R. 2. (For the common profit of the said Realme and especially for the good and iust government and dse execution of the common Law, it is ordained, &c.) 10. R. 2. Prologue & c. 1. 11. R. 2. c. 1. 12 R. 13. R. 2. Prologue & c. 3. 5, 6. 14. R. 2. 21. R. 2. 1. H. 4. & 5. c. 7. 1. H. 6. 8. H. 6. Prologue & c. 25. 10 H. 6. c. 3. 12 H. 6, c. 12. 30. H. 6. Prologue 1. R. 3. c. 2. 6. 8. 3. H 7. c. 5 11. H. 7. c. 18. But I shall conclude with some more punctuall ones 38 E. stat. c. 1. 2. To nourish love, peace, and concord between holy Church and the Realme and to appease and cease the great hurt and perils and importable losses and grievances that have been done and happened in times past, and shall happen hereafter, if the thing from henceforth be suffered to passe &c. for which causes, and dispensing whereof, the ancient lawes, usages, customes, and franchises of the Realme, have beene and be greatly appaired, Hemeshed, and confounded, the Crown of the King blemished, and his person falsly defrauded, the treasure and riches of his Realme carried away, the inhabitants and subjects of the Realme impoverished, troubled &c the King at his Parliament, &c. having regard to the quietnesse of his people, which he chiefly desireth to sustaine in tranquility and peace, to governe according to the Lawes, Usages, and Franchises of this Land, as HE IS BOUND BY HIS OATH MADE AT HIS CORONATION; following the wayes of his Progenitors, which for their time made certaine good Ordinances and previsions against the said grievances &c. by the assent &c. hath approved, accepted, and confirmed &c. 2 R 2. c. 7 Because the King hath perceived, as well by many complaints made to him, as by the perfect knowledge of the thing &c. the King desiring soveraignly, the peace and quietnesse of his Realme, and his good Lawes and Customes of the same, and the Rights of his Crowne to be maintained and kept in all points; and the offenders duly to be chastised and punished, AS HE IS SWORNE AT HIS CORONATION, by the assent of all the Lords &c. hath defended &c. And moreover it is ordained and established &c. 3 R. 2. Rot. Parl. Num. 38. & 40. The Commons desiring a grant of new power to Iustices of Peace, to enquire into extortions; the Bishops conceiving it might extend to them, made their protestation against this new grant; yet protested, that if it were restrained only to what was law already, they would condiscend to it, but not if it gave any new or further power. The King answers, that notwithstanding their protestation, or any words conteined therein, he would not forbeare to passe this new grant, and that BY HIS OATH AT HIS CORONATION HE WAS OBLIGED TO DO IT. And 6 H. 6. c. 5. We, for as much as by reason of our Regality, WE BE BOVNDEN TO THE SAFEGVARD OF OVR REALM round about, willing in this behalfe convenient hasty remedy to be adhibite, have assigned, &c. By these, with infinite such like recitalls in our ancient and late statutes in the Kings owne Proclamations, Commissions, yea and in writs of law (wherein wee find these expressions;(a) Nos qui singulis de regno nostro in EXHIBITIONE IVSTITIÆ SVMVS DEBITORES; plænam & celerem justitiam exhiberifacias.(b) Nos volentes quoscunque legios nostros in curiis nostris &c. justitiam sibi &c. unllateness differri. Ad justitiam inde reddendam cum omni celeritate procedatis(c) Nos oppressiones, duritias, damna excessus, & gravamina prædicta nolentesrelinquere impunita; volentesque SALVATIONI & QVIETI POPVLI NOSTRI hac parte PROSPICERE VT TENEMVR; eidemceleris justitiæ complementum, & debitum & festinum iustitiæ complementum fierifacies,(d) Nos huiusmodi præindicio precavere volentes, prout ASTRINGIMVR IVRAMENTI VINCVLO. Quia iudicia in curia nostra cit or eddita insuisroboribus manuteneri volumus & defendi prout AD HOC IVRAMENTI VINCVLO ASTRINGIMVR & TENEMVR. &c, It is most apparent, that the Kings of England both by their oath, duty, and common right, even in point of justice and conscience, are bound to assent to all publike Acts as are really necessary for the peace, safety, care, weale, benefit, prevention of mischiefs and redresse of greivances of all, or any of their subjects, without any tergiversation, or unnecessary delayes, when they are passed and tendered to them by both Houses, and that in such acts as these they have no absolute Negative voice at all, but ought to give their speedy, free, and full consents thereto, unlesse they can give satisfactory reasons to the contrary.
Sixthly, All our ancient Kings of England, (as the premises, with all publike usefull statutes enacted in their reignes evidence) have alwayes usually given their free and full consents in Parliament to such publike acts as these, without deniall or protraction, conceiving they were bound by oath and duty so to doe; and if they ever denyed their royall assents to any Petitions or Bills of the Lords and Commons of this nature, they alwayes gave such good reasons for it as satisfied both Howses: witnes their answers to infinite Petitions yet extant among the Parliament records. Therefore the King now is as much obliged there to as they.
Seventhly, If the King in point of law, should have an absolute negative voice in denying his assent to publike Bills of meere right, and justice; then he should have power by law to deny justice and right, and to doe wrong and iniustice to his people; a prerogative which neither God himselfe, nor any lawfull Monarch ever yet chalenged; but renounced with greatest detestation. I read in* Plutarch that when a flatterer said to king Antigonus, that all things were honest and iust to Kings, he answered: only indeed to Kings of Barbarians but to us honest things are to be accounted for honest, only iust things for inust. And that* Acroiatus gave the like answer to his parent when they pested him to doe an uniust thing: Quoniam unius me optima agere, optimum autem est cum privato, tum multo et iam magus Principi id quod est justum, agam que unlus quæ viro dicitis detrectabo. Yea our law expresly denies the King any such uniust prerogative, by these unquestionable maximes:(f) the King neither can, nor ought by law to doe any wrong seeing he is Gods Vicar, and the fountaine of Iustice. Et hoc solum Rex non potest facere, quod non potest injuste agere: which our(g) law-books make no defect of power, but one of the highest branches of the Kings Prerogative: For confirmation whereof, I shall only cite one notable Record, 7. H. 4. Rot. Parl. Numb. 59. The Commons complained, that by the favour of Ordinaries, divers incumbents were outed of their benefices by superinstitutions upon presentations of the King, contrary to the statute in that case provided; and were denied a Scire facias, without a speciall license or command of the King first obtained, to the great offence of God, and against reason and law* BECAUSE SUCH AN ACT CANNOT BE ANY PREROGATIVE AT AL IN OUR LORD THE KING, WHICH IS DEROGATIVE TO THE EXECUTION OF RIGHT AND IVSTICE. Wherefore they petitioned the King, that he would be pleased to grant and command the Chancellor, to deliver a Writ of scire facias to every of his Lieges who are outed of their benefices or possessions by the foresaid title of the King, and that thenceforth the Chancellors shall bee bound to deliver by authority of their Offices this Writ of scire facias at the sute of the parties; and further, to doe right to the parties, without suing to the King, and without other warrant from him. To which the King gives this answer. The King wills, that the said statute be firmly held and kept; and farther willeth and granteth, that if he presents to any benefice which shall bee full of any Incumbent, that the Presentee of the King shall not bee received by the Ordinary to such a benefice, untill the King hath recovered his presentment by processe of Law in his owne Court: and if any Presentee of the King bee otherwise received, and the Incumbent outed without due Processe, as aforesaid, the said Incumbent may commence his sute within one yeare after the Induction of the Kings Presentee, or later. And further, the King wills, that no ratification granted for the Incumbent, after that the King hath presented and taken his sute, shall bee allowed pending the plea, nor after the judgement given for the King; but that such judgement shall bee fully executed, as reason demands. Loe here the Commons and Parliament affirme, and the King himselfe subscribes thereto: That the King neither hath, nor yet can have any Prerogative at all, which is derogative, or any impediment at all in the execution of Right and Justice; and disclaime a negative voyce, or power, in him, in granting a scire facias to particular Incumbents, unduly outed of their Living by a pretended prerogative power, against Reason and Law. Therefore a fortiori, the King, by his prerogative, neither hath, nor can have any absolute Negative voice at all to hinder the passing of publike Bills presented to him by both Houses, for the due execution of right and iustice, and the weale, peace, or safety of the whole Kingdome. That speech of(h) King Zedekiah to his Princes (though in a bad case) is an undoubted verity here: Behold hee is in your hands; FOR THE KING IS NOT HE THAT CAN DOE ANY THING AGAINST YOU: and likewise of King David to his people: 2 Sam. 18. 3. 4. WHAT SEEMETH TO YOU BEST I WILL DO. In one word, as it no impotency in God, but a part of his owne divine prerogative;(i) that he cannot possibly ly, that he cannot deny himself,(l) that he is immutable and changeth not, that he(m) cannot do injustice: And as it was the Apostles highest priviledge, 2 or 13. 8. We can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth. So it no note of impotency but of highest Soveraignty in our Kings, that in all Bills of publike Right and Common Iustice, they have no Negative voice or power at all to withstand or deny their passing; for then they should have a prerogative to deny common Right and Iustice, and so to doe publike injustice, which God himselfe (whose visegerents they are) is uncapable of, and never derived to them. I will close this reason with that memorable speech of that great heathen Emperour Julius Cæsar, which he somtimes used at Rome in the Councell-house;* Touching all other affaires that are to be taken in hand for your sake, I am both your Consul, and your Dictator; but as touching any wrong to be done to any man, I am as a private man without office.
(k)Eightly, Our Kings have ever claimed this as an absolute duty from their subjects in Parliament, to grant them such speedy, free, and competent ayds, subsidies, customes for the necessary defence of themselves, and the Kingdome, and support of their royall estates, as the urgency of their publike warres, and affaires required; and the subjects (though they have sometimes denied subsidies to their Princes upon reasonable causes, and excuses alleadged by them, expressed in our(n) Historians) yet have always held it their(o) BOUNDEN DUTY to grant such ayds in Parliament, when (and sometimes before) they have been required, and have really done it without refusall, when they saw just cause to grant them; as all the old and new Acts for the grant of Customes, Subsidies, Dismes, Quindismes, Tonnage and Poundage, Polemoney, with other such aides in all our Kings Reignes, abundantly evident. Therefore the King (who is as much obliged by oath and duty to aid his subjects, and provide for their common protection, weale, peace, ease, as they are to provide for His, and the Kingdomes safety) is by like reason as much obliged in duty not to deny them such publike Acts; as they are not to deny him publike aides.
Ninthly, Kingdomes and Commonweales were existent before Kings, for there must be a Kingdome, and society of men to governe (as(p) Aristotle,(q) Cicero,(r) Polsbius,(s) Augustine,(t) Fortescue, and all other Polititians accord) before there could be a King elected by them for to governe them: And those Kingdomes and societies of men had (for the most part) some common lawes of their owne free choice by which they were governed, before they had Kings; which lawes they(u) swore their Kings to observe before they would crowne or admit them to the government; and likewise gave them a further oath, to passe and confirme all such subsequent lawes as they should make choice of for their publike benefit and protection; as is evident by the Coronation oaths of all our own (yea of other Christian, and most Pagan Kings) continuing to this very day; and these words in the Kings oath QUAS VULGUS ELEGERIT (which intimates the choice of Lawes to be wholly and fully in the peoples free elections) prove beyond Contradiction: Yea those ancient law-givers(x) Solon, Seleuchus, Licurgus, Numa, with others, who tooke paines to compile Lawes for severall Kingdomes and Republikes, did only recommend them to the people, whose voluntary assent unto them made them binding. Which lawes they either altered or repealed as they saw cause. Besides, during Interrognums in forraigne elective Kingdomes, the Estates in Parliament have power to make new binding Lawes, repeale and after old, as they did in(y) Aragon after Sanchius his decease) before they dected a new King (whom they swore to observe the Lawes then made, before they would admit him) without any Kings assent at all who yet give their royall assent to Lawes made in their reignes: And in our owne and other successive Kingdomes during the Kings infancy, dotage, abseence, the Kingdomes and Parliaments have an absolute power (as I have already manifested) to create Regents or Lord-Protectors; to execute royall authority and give royall assents to publike acts in the Kings name and steads, without their actuall personall assents; which lawes being necessary for the Subject, shall be as firme and obligatory to King and Kingdome, as those to which they actually assent: Yea, if Kings chance to die without any heire, the Kingdome in such a case may assemble of themselves, and make binding necessary lawes without a King, and alter the very frame of government, by publike consent. Therefore the royall assent to just, necessary, publike Bills, is in truth but a formall Ceremony or complement (much like a Kings Coronation)(z) without which he may be, and is a lawfull King,) bestowed by the people upon Kings for their greater honour, with this limitation, that they must not deny it when they of right require it; not simply to make, but declare and confirme a law already made and passed by both houses (much like a Tenants(a) attornment to the grant of a Reversion) And therefore Kings may neither in law, nor conscience deny it when it is necessarily demanded to any just publike Bills, unlesse they can shew good reason to the contrary, so farre as to satisfie the people why such lawes should not passe.
Tenthly, Our very lawes in many cases deny the King an absolute negative voice or power, even in matters of Prerogative, because they are contrary to his oath, and mischeivous to the Republike. This appeares most clearly in matters of Pardons, the Statute of 2 E. 3. c. 2. 14 E. 3. c. 15. 13 R. 2. c. 1. 16 R. 2. c. 6. enact. That Charters of pardon shall not be granted for manslaughters, Roberies, Fellonies, and other Trespasse, but ONLY WHERE THE KING MAY DOE IT BY HIS OATH; that is to say, where a man slayeth another in his owne defence, or by misadventure,) or in case, where he may doe it KEEPING AND SAVING THE OATH OF HIS CROWNE. Soe the King(b) cannot pardon nor release the repairing of a Bridge or Highway, or any such like publike charges, or any publike Nusances or offences against penal Lawes pro bono publico, because it is contrary to the trust and confidence reposed in him for the publike good, because the republike hath an interest herein: and the pardoning of them would be mischeivous for the common good: In like manner the King(c) cannot deny, delay, nor deferre Iustice, nor stay the Judges from doing present right and justice to any of his Subjects by his Letters under his greator or privy seale, because it is contrary to his oath and duty: Neither(d) can he by his absolute Prerogative, impose any the least taxe or imposition on his subjects without their common consent in Parliament; nor(e) yet authorize any other to kill, beat, wound, imprison any mans person, or take away his goods, without due processe of law; Yea the very lawes and custome of the Realme deny the King any absolute negative voice even in the Parliament House in reversing erronious Iudgments, Charters, Patents, declaring what is law in difficult cases, or in proceedings and sentences against Delinquents, or in any one particular whatsoever which concernes the administration of right or common Iustice. Therefore by the selfesame reason, the very law denies him any such negative voice in refusing his royall assent to Bills of common right and Iustice; And as both Houses doe allwayes over-rule the King, not He both Houses in the one; so, by parity and congruity of reason, they ought to oversway him in the other; there being the same reason in both cases, and the one no greater an entrenchment upon his Prerogative then the other.
Eleventhly, This is infallibly proved by the usuall forme of our Kings answers to such Bills as they assent not to,(b) Le Roy soit a visera; The King will be advised, or take further consideration: which is no absolute denyall, but a craving of longer time to advise upon them, and thereupon to assent to them if he can see no iust cause to the contrary, or else to give satisfactory reasons why he cannot assent: Which answer were not proper, nor formall, had the King an absolute negative voyce to reject Bills, without rendring a sufficient reason of his refusall of them.
Twelfthly, Publike Bills for the Subjects common good, are formed for the most part, by the Lords and Commons themselves, who in truth (as I have elsewhere proved) are the chiefe Law makers, & who (as(c) Aristotle defines) know better what is good and necessary for their owne benefit, then the King, their publike Minister for their good; Itaque maiorum rerum potest as sure populo tribuitur, is Aristotles resolution. Therefore in passing such Bills, there is greater reason, that both Houses should over-rule the King, then the King them. It is usuall in all inferiour Counsels of State, Law, Warre, of the Kings owne choise, for the Counsell to over rule the King in matters of State, Law, Warre, unlesse the King can give better reasons against, then they doe for their conclusive advise; and Kings in such cases doe usually submit to their Counsels determinations, without contradiction; of which we have sundry Presidents, not onely in profane, but(d) Sacred Story. Physicians in points of Physicke, Lawyers of Law, Divines of Divinity, Souldiers of Warre, Pilots of Navigation; and so all Artists in their severall Arts, not only instruct, but over-sway their Princes, without finall contradiction: This being a knowne received Maxime in Law; Vnicuique in sua arte perito est credendum: And shall not then the Grand Counsell of the Realme in all publike State-affaires, & Bills of Consequence, much more over-rule the King, then his Privie-Counsell? Especially since in the Statutes of 1 H. 4. c. 6. 4. H, 4, c, 1, it is enacted to the end that the King may not be deceived in his Grants and Gifts, annuall or in fee, or in any offices by him to be made, given, or granted, HE WILL by the assent of the Lords Spirituall and temporall, and at the request of the Commons BE COUNSELLED BY THE WISE MEN OF HIS COUNSELL IN THINGS TOUCHING THE ESTATE OF HIM AND HIS REALME; and that he will make no such gifts nor grants, saving to such persons as the same deserveth, and as best shall seem to the King AND HIS COUNSELL. And sith it is THE DESIRE OF ALL THE ESTATES OF THE REALME, that nothing should be so demanded of the King; he wills that all those that make any such demand contrary to this Statute shall be punished by advise of him and his Counsell, and that he that maketh such demand, shall never have the thing so demanded. A law now meet to be put in execution.
Thirteenthly, If the King should have on absolute Negative: voyce, in refusing such publike Bills as are necessary and expedient for the common good and safety of his people, it would rest in the meere power and pleasure of a wilfull or misadvised King, seduced by evill Counsellours, to deprive the Kingdome of the principall use, benefit, and priviledges of Parliaments,(*) the making of good and wholsome lawes, for the good government of the Realme, the removall or prevention of emergent grievances or dangers, and execution of publike Justice on Delinquents; to the great perill, prejudice, if not ruine of the Realme. And our(f) Annuall or Trienniall Parliaments should serve then to no other purpose, but to supply the King with Subsedies, or keep the Wool sacks and Benches from growing mouldy, whilst the Lords and Commons sate upon the rather like so many Cyphers without a figure, then a Court of Parliament; if the Lawes of the Realme were in the Kings hand or breast alone, as Richard the 2. sometimes said they were (at(g) Article obiected against him at his deposing,) contrary to that approved resolution of(h) Aristotle whatsoever seemes good to the maior part of the Governours of the Common-wealth that is established for a Law; which holds good in the Kingdome of(i) Aragon at this day; where the King in making publike Lawes hath no absolute negative Voyce, nor yet in summoning of Parliaments, which are constantly held at their set times every yeare or two at furthest, whether the King will or not.
Fourtenthly, God himselfe (the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords) held this a principall part of his soveraigne divine Prerogative; to give his people from heaven (when they needed and required it) right Judgments, and Lawes of truth, good Statutes and Commandements for their good and wellfare: Neh. c. 14. Exod. c. 19. and 20 and 21. Deut. 4. 8. to 41. and chap. 5 throughout: Neither doth, will or can he deny any just or necessary suite, prayer or petition that his poor servants and creatures (though but dust and ashes) joyntly, or severally put up unto him; but most willingly grants without the least deniall, or unnecessary delay, what ever good and needfull things they require at his hands. And can or dare Kings then claime a greater, an higher Prerogatiue other their Kingdomes, and subjects, then God himselfe, the King of Kings, doth over his creatures? or arrogate to themselves an absolute Negative voice, where God himselfe (whose servants and vicegerents only Kings are) neither hath nor will have any, but utterly disclaimes it? God forbid, that any such arrogant thought should ever enter into the hearts of any christian Kings, who being in truth but servants to, not absolute Lords over their Kingdomes, in whom the soveraigne legislative power and authority resides, must, and ought by the Lawes of God and man, rather condescend to their Parliaments and Kingdomes just requests, in assenting to necessary wholsome iust Lawes, then their Parliaments and Kingdomes quietly submit to their unjust disassents unto them to the publike prejudice, as is clear by 2 Sam. 8. 4. to the end.
Finally, our Ancestours have been so farre from beleeving, that our Kings have an abslute negative voyce in such Bills as these, that they have not onely constrained our Kings by threats, yea force of Armes, to summon and continue Parliaments, but likewise compelled them to give their Royall Assents to Magna Charta, Charta de Foresta, Conformatio Chartarum, Articuli super Chartas; with sundry other publike Statutes of Right and Justice for the common good and Subjects safety, and to ratifie them with their hands, Seales, Oathes, Proclamations, the Bishops solemne excommunications, yea and the Popes leaden Bulls, against their will and liking, as I have plentifully manifested in the former part: Which forced assents have been held good in Law, to binde these Kings and their successours, with this distinction; where the Lawes to which this assent was forced are convenient, necessary, or essentiall for the Kingdoms welfare, the Subjects just Liberty, and such as the King by duty and oath is bound to assent to; there, if they compell the King to give his assent in case of wilful denyall the assent is binding, and shall not be avoided by Duresse, because the King doth no more then he is obliged by Law, Oath, and Duty to condiscend to: Upon which ground, a(l) Tenant inforced to attorne to a grant of a reversion by imprisonment, upon a Quid juris clamat, shall never avoid this attornment by Duresse; nor an(k) Obligation made by one taken in execution for payment of a just debt; nor the just judgment of a Judge given by menaces shall not be avoyded:) This is cleere by Magna Charta, and other Lawes gotten at first by(m) Duresse and Menaces from our Kings, and yet firme and binding when even thus assented to, because just and necessary; as King Henry the 3. Anno 1222 confessed;(n) Who when the Barons demanded of him the confirmation of the great Charter, and their Liberties according to his Oath upon the conclusion of the peace with Lewis; Will. Brewer, one of the Kings Counsell answering, that the Liberties they demanded must not be observed because they were violently extorted, and words hereupon growing between the Barons and him, and the Arch-bishop of Canterbury kindling at it; the young King prudently closed up the whole strife with this speech; All of us have sworne to these Liberties, and that which we have sworne ALL OF US ARE BOUND TO OBSERVE. But where the Acts to which the assent is gained, are unjust or illegall, such to which the King was not bound by Oath or duty to consent, but meerely out of necessity to avoid imminent danger of death, or other mischiefe, and where the whole Parliament was enforced as well as the King; there the acts may be avoided by Duresse, as is evident by the Statutes of 11. and 21. of R. 2. c. 12. by the Statute of 31 H. 6. c. 1, (which makes voyd all the Petitions granted by this King in a former Parliament the 29. of his Reigne, and all indictments made by Duresse, through the Rebellion, Tyranny, and Menaces of Iack Cade and his rebellious rout of Traytors) and by 39. H. 6. c. 1. 15. E. 3. stat. 2. and 17. E. 4. c. 7. Yet these enforced unjust Bills, being publike Acts, done in a legall forme, are not meerly void, but good in Law till they be repealed, and nullified by a subsequent Parliament; (as is evident by the next forecited Statutes;) even as a(o) Marriage, Bond, or deed made by Duresse or Menace, are good in Law, and not meerly void, but voidable only upon a Plea and Tryall. And if subsequent Parliaments refuse to repeal these forced Laws, and to declare the Royall assent thereto by coertion, void or illegall, the King cannot avoid them by Duresse (because his Royall assent is a judiciall Act in open Parliament, which his oath and duty obliged him to give, and the Lawes are rather the Parliaments Act which was not forced, then his owne,) but they remaine in full vigour as if he had freely assented to them; which is most evident by the Statutes made in 10. and 11. R. 2. which though extorted from the King by Duresse, against the will and liberty of the King, and right of his Crowne, as is pretended and declared in the Statute of 21. R. 2. c. 12. yet they continued in full strength for ten yeares space or more, (during which time there were no lesse then 8. Parliaments held under this King) because these Parliaments refused to reverse them upon this pretext of Duresse.
From all which promise I humbly conceive, I may infallibly conclude, That the King in passing the for-mentioned kinde of Bills, of Common Right and Iustice for the Kingdomes, and the Subjects weale and safety, hath no absolute negative voyce, but must and ought of common right and Justice, by vertue of his Royall oath and duty, to give his ready and free assent unto them without any tergiversation. And so the Parliament in their Declarations to this purpose, hath no wayes invaded nor injured his Majesties just Prerogative royall in this particular.
Nor those members in it eclipsed his Royall grace, who have upon occasion given affirmed, the Petition of Right, the Bills for Trieniall Parliaments (which before by Law were to be annuall at least;) the continuance of this Parliament without adjournment, for the Kingdomes necessary preservation; the acts against Shipmoney, Forest-Bounds &c. (illegall new invented grievances, and oppressions not heard of in former Kings Reigns) and the Statutes for the suppression of the Star-Chamber, High Commission, Knighthood, and Bishops votes, (lately growen intollerable grivances and mischeifes to the Realme; Especially since his Majesties Reigne;) to bee no acts of* most transcendent Grace, such as never any Prince before vouchsafed to his people, as they are daily cried up in Presse and Pulpet; but Bills of meere Common Right and Iustice, which the King by his Royall Office, Oath, Duty, in Law and Conscience ought to assent unto, and could not without apparent injustice deny to passe, when both Houses urged him thereunto; the unhappy fractions of all Parliaments, and Grievances of these Natures under his Majesties owne Reigne and Government, occasioned by his evill Councellers, being the sole grounds and just occasions of enacting these necessary Laws for the Subjects future security; if the sword now drawen to suppresse the Parliament, and cut these Gordians (or rather Cobwebs, as Diogenes once termed Laws), sunder, deprive them not of their benefit, before they scarce enjoy it.
I should now here proceed, to manifest the Parliaments taking up of defensive Armes against his Majesties Malignant Army of Prosessed Papists, Delinquents, and pillaging mutthering Cavaleers, (whose grand designe is onely to set up Popery and an absolute tyrannical Government over our consciences, bodies, estates) in defense of their own persons, priviledges, the Subjects Laws, Liberties, Properties, and our Protestant established Religion (devoted by Papists to eternall ruine, as we have cause to feare) to be just, lawfull, and no treason nor rebellion at all against the King, neither in point of Law nor conscience; And that the Parliaments assessing of men towards the maintenance of this necessary defensive warre, by an Ordinance of both Houses onely without the Kings assent, (now wilfully absent from, and in armes against his Parliament and People) with their distraining and imprisoning of such as refuse to pay it; and their confinement and securing of dangerous Malignants, to be justifiable by Law and ancient presidents. But this part being already growne some what large, and having lingred much longer at the Presse then I expected; I have thought it more convenient, to reserve the remainder for a future Treatise by it selfe, then to hinder the state of the present benefit, which it may receive by this, through Gods blessing, ere the other can bee compleated; which I hope will fully un-blindfold the hood winkt world, and either satisfie the consciences, or stop the mouthes of all who are not wilfully malicious against the Truth and Parliaments proceedings; and the Soveraigne Power of Parliaments and Kingdoms, over their Kings themselves.
Errata
Page, 5, l, 6. for unjust, r, out just. p. 15, l. 29. mans. p. 50. l. 2. ever over. l. 20. title, like. p. 52. l. 46. provisious. p. 48. l. 16. in the margin, Iames, Francis ome other presse errors are in some few copies: but corected in the most.
T.27 (8.16.) Anon., Briefe Collections out of Magna Charta (19 May, 1643).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date
OLL Thumbs TP Image

Local JPEG TP Image

Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.27 [1643.05.19] (8.15) Anon., Briefe Collections out of Magna Charta (19 May, 1643).
Full titleAnon., Briefe Collections OUT OF Magna Charta: OR, The Knowne good old LAWES OF ENGLAND. Which sheweth; That the Law is the highest Inheritance the King hath; and that if His Charter, Grant, or Pattent, be repugnant to the said Lawes, and Statutes, cannot be good, as is instanced in the Charter of Bridewell, London, and others. By which it appeares; That the King by His Charter may not alter the Nature of the Law, the Forme of a Court; nor Inheritance lineally to descend; nor that any Subject be protected from Arrests, Suites, &c.
Printed at London, for George Lindsey, and are to be sould at his Shop over against London-stone. 1643.
19 May, 1643.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 260; Thomason E. 102 (11.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
Collections out of MAGNA CHARTA: OR, The knowne good old Lawes of ENGLAND.
Magnalia Regni, 19. H. 6.INter Magnalia Regni; Amongst the greatest and most haughty things of this Kingdome; as it is affirmed in the 19. H. 6. Le ley est le pluis hault. Inheritance q. le Roy ad, &c. That is; the Law is the highest Inheritance that the King hath.
For by the Law both the King and all his Subjects are ruled and directed.
The Maximes to direct the King.The Maximes and Rules whereby the King is directed, are the ancient Maximes and Customes, and States of this Land.
The Maximes.The Maximes are the foundations of the Law, and the full and perfect Conclusions of reason.
The Customes of the Realm.The Customes of the Realme, are properly such things, as through much, often, and long vsage: either of simplicitie, or ignorance, getting once an Entrie; are entred and hardned by Succession, and after be defended as firme and stable Lawes.
The Statutes of the Realm.The Statutes of the Realme, are the resolute Decrees, and the absolute Judgements of the Parliament established by the King, with the common consent of the three Estates, who doe represent the whole and entire Body of the Realme of England.
To the purpose of this discourse, The law is: If any Charter bee graunted by the King, the which is repugnant to the Maximes, Customes, or Statutes of the Realme; Then is the Charter void, and it is either by Quo warranto, or by Scire facias (as learned men have left Presidents) to bee repealed. As in Anno. 19. Ed. 3.19. Ed. 3.
A Kings Grant repugnant to Satutes &c. not good.That a Kings Grant which is either repugnant to Law, Custome, or Statute, is not good nor pleadable in the Law; See what Presidents thereof have beene left by our wise Forefathers.
13. H. 6. H. 2.It is set downe in 13. H. 6. That King H. 2. had by his Charter granted to the Pryor and Monks of S. Bartholomews in London, that the Pryor and his Monks should be as free in their Church as the King was in his Crowne.
Yet by this grant was the Pryor and his Monks deemed and taken to be but as Subjects, and the aforesaid grant in that respect to be voide. For by the law the King may not any more disable himselfe of his regall superiority over his Subjects, then his subjects can renounce or avoide their subjection, against or towards their King or Superiour.
Stacyes, example.You know that Stacy would have renounced his loyalty and subjection to the Crowne of England, and would have adopted himself to have been a subject to King Philip of Spaine. But answer was made by the Court; That by the lawes of this Realme, neither may the King release or relinquish the subjection of his subject, neither may the subject revolt in his allegiance from the superiority of his Prince.
K. Ed. 3.There are two notable presidents in the time of King Edward 3. the which although they take place in someone respect; yet were they not adjudged of according to the minde of the King being the Grantor.
The L. Mountague.That is, the King granted unto the Lord William Mountague, the Isle of Wight, and that he should be crowned King of the same.
The Earle of Darby.And he also granted unto the Earle of Darby the Isle of Man, and that he should be crowned King of the same.
8. H. 4.Yet these two personages (notwithstanding the said grants) were subjects, and their Islands were under the dominion and subjection of the King, and in that respect were the grants voide.
31. H. 6.It was spoken in the 8. H. 4. Quod potestas Principis, non est inclusa legibus. That is, a Princes power is not bounded with rules or limits of the law: howsoever that sentence is so, the law agreed to the contrary.
The 31 H. 6. whereas it is agreed for law, That it is not in the Kings power to grant by his Charter, that a man seized of land in soe simple, may devise by his last Will and Testament the same lands to another, or that the youngest sonne by the custome of Burrough English, shall not inherit; or that lands being Frank see, should be of the nature of ancient demeasne.
34. H. 8. 39. Ass. 4. 8.Or that a new incorporated towne, that an assize of Fresh force should be used, or that they shall have toll, traverse, or through toll, or such like, &c. 37 H. 8. & 49. Ass. 4. 8.
See also a notable case agreed for law in 6. H. 7. where the Justices doe affirme the law to be, that Rape is made felony by statute, and that the same by the law is not inquirable but before Justices that have authority to heare and determine of the same.
In this case the King cannot by his Charter make the same offence to be enquired of in a Law day; nor the King cannot grant, that a Leet shall be of any other nature, then it is by the course of Common Law: So thereby it appeareth; that the King may not either alter the nature of the Law, the forme of a Court, or the manner or order of pleading.
Anno 8. H. 6.And in 8. H. 6. it is agreed for Law; That the King may not grant to I. S. That I. S. may be judge in his owne proper Cause; nor that I. S. shall be sued by an action at the Common Law, by any other person; nor that I. S. shall have a Market, a Faire, or a free Warrant in another mans soyle.
Hill Justice.And in the long Record by Hill the reverend Judge, it is said for Law; That whereas the King hath a prerogative, that Hee shall have the worship of the body of His Tenants (although he hold of the King but by posteriority) yet if the King grant over his Seigniory unto another with like prerogative (notwitstanding any Posteriority) the prerogative shall not passe: For (saith the Booke) the King by His Charter cannot change the Lawes.
The same Law is; That the King cannot grant unto another the prerogative of Nullum tempus occurrit Regi; nor that a Discent shall not take away an Entry; nor a Collaterall Warrant shall not bind; nor that Possessto Fratris shall not take place; nor that the wife shall not be endowed of her husbands lands; nor that Inheritance shall lineally descend; nor that any Subject shall be under protection from arrests, suits, and such like, &c. Yet doe not wee see daily in experience; That whatsoever can be procured under the Great Seale of England, is taken Quasi sanctim?
And although it be meerly against the Laws, Customes, and Statutes of this Realme; yet it is defended in such sort, that some have been called rebellious, for not allowing such voyd and unlawfull grants.
And an infinite number of such like presidents I could set downe to maintaine the aforesaid argument, but these few examples shall serve for this time.
The authority of the Governours of Bridewell.But now we have to see, if the said Charter granted to the Citie concerning the authoritie of the Governours of Bridewell, stand with the Lawes, Customes, and Statutes of this Realme or not.
The effect of which Charter in one place is; That the Governours have authority to search, enquire, and seek out idle Ruffians, Tavernehunters, Vagabonds, Beggars, and all persons of evill name and same, whatsoever they bee, men or women, and then to send and commit to Bridewell, or by any other wayes or meanes to punish or correct them, as shall seeme good to their discretions.
Here you see what the words of the said Charter are.
Now are wee to consider what the words of the Law be.
Magna Charta cap. 29.See Magna Charta of the Liberties of England cap. 29.
No Freeman shall be taken or Imprisoned, or be disseised of his Freehold, or Liberties, or free customes, or to be outlawed, or exiled, or any other wayes destroyed, Nor wee shall not passe upon him nor condemne him, but by lawfull Judgement of men of his degree, or by the Law of the land.
Now if we doe compare the said Charter of Bridewell with the great Charter of England both in matter, sense, and meaning, you shall finde them meerely repugnant.
In the said great Charter of England, in the last Chapter amongst other things, the King granteth for him and his heires, That neither he nor his heires shall procure or do any thing, whereby the Liberties in the said Charter contained, shall be infringed or broken.
And if any thing be procured or done by any person contrary to the premisses, it shall be had of no force or effect.Stat. of Malb. cap. 3.
Here must you note also, That the said great Charter of England is not onely confirmed by the Statute of &illegible; cap. 3. but also by many other Statutes made in the time of King Edw. 3. King R. 2. Hen. 4. Hen. 5.King Ed. 3. R. 2. H. 4. H. 5. H. 6. and Hen. 6. Amongst sundry of which Confirmations, I do note one above the rest. The which is An. 43. Edw. 3. cap. 1. The words are these viz.
Anno 43. E. 3. cap. 1.It is assented and accorded, That the great Charter of England, and the Charter of the Forrests, shall be kept in all points: and if any Statute be made to the contrary they shall bee holden for none.
Hitherto you see it very plainly, That procurement nor Act done either by the King or any other person, or any Act of Parliament, or other thing; may in any wayes alter or change any one point contained in the said great Charter of England.
But if you will note the words, sence, matter, and meaning of the said Charter of Bridewell, you shall finde it all meerly repugnant to the said great Charter of England.
I doe note one speciall Statute made in the said 43. yeere of King Ed. 3. the which if it be well compared to the said Charter of Bridewell, it will make an end of this contention.
The words are these, viz.
Item, at the request of the Commons, by the Petition put forth, in this Parliament, to eschew the mischiefes and damages done to divers of the Commons by false Accuserss which often times have made their Accusements, more for vengeance and singular profit, then for the profit of the King and his people; of which accused persons, some have been taken and caused to come, &c. against the Law.
It is assented and accorded for the Government of the Commons, That no man be put to answer without presentment before the Justices of the King upon Record by due processe, As by Writ originall, according to the old Law of the land, And if any thing from henceforth be done to the contrary, it shall be void in the Law, and holden for Errour.
As I said before, so say I still; If this Statute be in force, as I am sure it is; then is the Law cleare: That the proceedings in Bridewell upon the accusation of Whoors taken by the Governours of Bridewell aforesaid; are not sufficient to call any man to answer by any Warrant by them made, without Indictment or other matter of Record, according to the old Law of the land.
Such like Commissions as this of Bridewell is, were granted in the time of King Ed. 3. by especiall procurement, to enquire of speciall Articles, the which Commissioners did make their Inquiries in secret places, &c.
Anno 42. E. 3. cap. 4.It was therefore enacted, Anno 42. Ed. 3. cap. 4. That from henceforth in all Inquiries within the Realme, Commissions should bee made to some Justices of one Bench or other, or Justices of Affize, or Justices of the Peace, with other of the most worthy of the Countie, &c.
By this Statute we may learne, that Commissioners of Inquiries ought to sit in open Courts, and not in any close or secret place, and that their Inquirie ought to be by Juries, and by no discussion or examination.
Anno 1. H. 8. cap. 8.If you looke upon the Statute of Anno H. 8. cap. 8. you shall there perceive the very cause, why Empson, Sheffeild, and others, were quite overthrown, the which was (as by the Indictments especially appeareth) for executing Commissions against due course of the Common Law, and in that they did not proceed in Justice according to the Liberties of the great Charter of England, and of other Laws and Statutes provided for the due executing of Justice.
There was a Commission granted forth in the beginning of the Raigne of Queene Elizabeth of happie memory unto Sir Ambrose Cave, Sir Richard Sackvile, and others, for the examination of Felons, and of other lewd persons. It so fell out, that many men of good calling were impeached by the accusation of Felons. Some great men and Judges also carred into the validity of the Commission, And it was thought that the Commission was against the Law, and therefore did the Commissioners give over the Commission, as all men know.
And whereas the Examination is by the Commission referred to the wisedome and discretion of the Governours of Bridewell, As touching this point, I find that the examination of robberies done by Sanctuarie men, was appointed to the discretion of the Councell, or to four Justices of the Peace; But this was not by Commission, or by Grant, but by Act of Parliament, made Anno 22. H. 8. cap. 14.
Anno 22. H. 8. cap. 14.The Justices of both the Benches have used to examine the abilities and disabilites of Attourneys, and by their discretions to place or remove them upon their misdemeanours without any solemnitie of triall at the Common-Pleas or Law, And that is and have been done by the Treasurer and Barons of the Exchequer touching their Attourneys.
But if you search the cause thereof, you shall finde the cause to be done by the authoritie of Parliament. An. 4. H. 4. cap. 1.
Anno 4. H. 4. cap. 1.And whereas sundry men are arrested by Latitat, Capias, Attachments, and such like Processe whereof their corporall presence is required, yet upon infirmities and other maladies, the Justices (having examined the matter) may by their discretions admit them to make Attourneyes.
Anno 7. H. 4. cap. 13.But note you in this case, that all this is done by authority of Parliament. An. 7. H. 4. cap. 13.
The Commission of Bankrupts gives power to their Commissioners to take order by their discretions both with the body and goods of the Bankrupt, and set the Bankrupt out of his house, and him to imprison, and all this is referred to the discretion of the Commissioners; But this is by authority of Parliament.Anno 13. Eliz. cap. 7. An. 13. Eliz. cap. 7.
The punishment and examination of such as countefeit Letters of privie tokens, is referred to the discretion of the Justices of peace in every Countie; But this is by Parliament. Anno 33. H. 8. cap. 1.Anno 33. H. 8. cap. 1.
The examination of Riots, Routs, and such like misdemeanours in the Star-chamber, is referred to the discretion of the Iudges of the Court;Anno 3. H. 7. cap. 1. But this is by Parliament. An. 3. H. 7. cap. 1. & An. 2. H. 8. cap. 20.
Anno 2. H. 8. cap. 20.The examination of vnlawfull hunting in Parks, warrens, &c. is referred to the discretion of the Iustices of the Peace. And if the Offender deny his hunting, then it is felony. This is also by Parliament. Anno 1. H. 7. cap. 7.
Anno 1. H. 7. cap. 7.The Rate, Taxation and punishment of servants, labourers, &c. of their wages, is referred to the discretion of the Iustices of Peace in every County, and Citie; but this is by Parliament. Anno 5. Eliz. cap. 4.
Anno 5. Eliz. cap. 4.The examination of Rogues and Vagabonds with the forme of their punishment, is referred to the Iustices, but by Parliament.
The determination of all causes in Wales, is referred to bee ended by the Kings Councell there established, by their Wisdomes and discretions; but yet this is by Parliament.
The Grant of the Pluralities, Tot quots, Qualifications, Dispensations, Licences, and Tollerations, is referred to the discretion of the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury; but this is by Parliament.
The dealings and examinations of High Commissioners are authorized altogether by Parliament.
And to be short, you shall find in the great volume of the Statutes, neere the number of fortie Acts of Parliament, that doe refer the examination and punishment of Offenders to the wisdome and discretion of the Iustices.
Whereupon I doe note:
Nota.That if the King by Prerogative might have done all things by Commission, or by Charter; That it had been in vaine to have made so many Lawes in Parliament for the same.
And to make the Law more manifest in this question, In ann. 42. Ed. 3. lib.Ann. 42. E. 3. lib. Assiz. 11. 5. Assiz. 11. 5. A Commission was sent out of the Chancerie to one I. S. and others, to arrest the body and goods of A. B. and him to imprison; and the Iustices gave judgement, that this Commission was directly against the Law, to take any ones body without Indictment: and therefore they took the Commission from the Commissioners,Nota. to the intent to deliver the same to the Kings Councell, Quod nota.
Anno 24. E. 3.And I doe also find in the 24. yeere of King E. 3. this president, That a Commission was granted to certaine persons, to indict all those who were notoriously standered for any felonies, trespasses, or for any other misdemeinons, yea although they were indicted for the same.
And it was adjudged that this Commission was directly against the Law.
And thus I doe conclude upon the whole matter.
That the Commission of Bridewell would bee well considered of by the learned Councell of the citie: For I do not think to the contrary; but that there bee learned, that by their great knowledge in the Law, are well able either in a Quo warranto, or any other action brought to defend the same.
FINIS.
T.28 (8.16) Philip Hunton, A Treatise of Monarchy (24 May, 1643).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date
OLL Thumbs TP Image

Local JPEG TP Image

Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.28 [1643.05.24] (8.16) Philip Hunton, A Treatise of Monarchy (24 May, 1643).
Full titlePhilip Hunton, A Treatise of Monarchie, Containing two Parts: 1. Concerning Monarchy in generall. 2. Concerning this particular Monarchy. Wherein all the maine Questions occurrent in both, are stated, disputed, and determined: And in the close, the Contention now in being, is moderately debated, and the readiest meanes of Reconcilement proposed. Done by an earnest Desirer of his Countries Peace.
London, Printed for John Bellamy, and Ralph Smith, and are to be sold at the three golden Lions in Corn-hill, Anno Dom. 1643.
24 May, 1643.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 262; Thomason E. 103 (15.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
THE PREFACE:
I Write not this Discourse to soment or heighten the wofull dissention of the Kingdome; but if possible to cure, or at least to allay it: That former too many have done already, this latter, much too few.
When a Patient lies sicke under the destroying paroxismes of a Fever, every stander-by will be telling his Medicine, though he be no Physitian: O then let no Sonne of this State account it presumption in me, for putting in my judgement, and speaking that which I conceive might, if not remove, yet mitigate this fatall distemperature of our common Mother: at another time perhaps it might be censurable, but in this exigence laudable.
Something I was full of, which I conceited might doe good; here I have produced it. And now if any man can finde a better way to appeasement, for the sake of peace let him speedily declare it.
I intend not these ensuing Disputes to any highflowne judgements, who looke downe on all mens, but their owne, to censure, not to be informed, nor to any which hath designes of his owne, which on the opportunity of this Division hee meanes to follow; nor to any who is already possessed by an opinion, which hee resolves to make good: But to the calme and impartiall spirit of every judicious, peacefull man; Let him weigh my Assertions by my grounds on which I build them, and if he find them any where unsound, let him thew mee in what, and I will gladly and thankfully reforme my errour: For as I love not obstinacy in groundlesse opinions in others, so I would avoid it in my selfe.
I have not annexed my Name, not that I am ashamed to owne what I conceive to be the truth; but because I know who I am, and that my Name could adde no estimation to the Treatise: Nor do I desire it should: They who search for Truth must regard Things, not Persons: Give me therefore the now common Liberty to goe namelesse; many have taken it for worse ends. If any condemn me for any thing here, it must be for endevouring a thanklesse Moderation ’twixt two Extremes. But I will detaine you no longer at the doore.
The Contents of the ensuing Treatise.
- Part. 1. Of Monarchy in generall.
- Cap. 1. Of Politicall Government.
- ITs Originall: How farre forth is is from God? Sect. 1.
- Its end: whether the end of government be the peoples good? Sect. 2.
- Its division into severall sorts. Sect. 3.
- Cap. 2. Of the division of Monarchy into absolute and limited.
- Whether absolute Monarchy be a lawfull Government? Sect. 1.
- Of three degrees of absolutenes in Monarchy. Sect. 2.
- Whether Resistence be lawfull in absolute Monarchy? Sect. 3.
- What it is which constituteth a Monarchy limited? Sect. 4.
- How farre subjection is due in a limited Monarchy? Sect. 5.
- How farre resistence is lawfull in a limited Monarchy? Sect. 6.
- Who shall be Iudge of the excesses of a limited Monarch? Sect. 7.
- Cap. 3. Of the division of Monarchy into elective and successive.
- Elective and successive Monarchies, what they are? Sect. 1.
- Whether all Monarchy be originally from the peoples consent? Sect. 2.
- Of Monarchy by divine Institution. Sect. 3.
- Of Monarchy by prescription. Sect. 4.
- Of Monarchy by Conquest. Sect. 5.
- Whether Conquest can give a just Title? Sect. 5.
- Whether a successive Monarch may be also limited? Sect. 6.
- Cap. 4. Of the division of Monarchy into simple and mixed.
- Simple and mixed Monarchy what they are? Sect. 1.
- What it is which constituteth a Monarchy mixed? Sect. 2.
- How farre the Princes power extends in a mixed Monarchy? Sect. 3.
- Cap. 1. Of Politicall Government.
- Part 2. Of this particular Monarchy.
- Cap. 1. Whether the power wherewith our Kings be invested be an absolute or limited and moderated Power?
- The Question stated. Sect. 1.
- Proved radically limited. Sect. 2.
- Contrary Arguments answered. Sect. 3. & 4.
- Cap. 2. Wherein and how this Monarchy is limited and defined?
- Cap. 3. Whether it be of a simple or mixed constitution?
- It is proved to be fundamentall mixed. Sect. 1.
- The Arguments for the contrary are answered. Sect. 2.
- Whether the Authority of the two Houses be subordinate and derived from the Kings? Sect. 3.
- The Question resolved and cleared. Sect. 4.
- Cap. 4. How farre forth this Monarchy is mixed, and what part of the power is referred to a mixed subject?
- Cap. 5. How farre forth the two estates may oppose the Will and proceedings of the Monarch?
- The Question duly stated. Sect. 1, 2.
- Whether Resistence of Instruments of illegall Commands be lawfull? Sect. 3.
- Proved lawfull. Sect. 3.
- Contrary Arguments dissolved. Sect. 4.
- Cap. 6.
- In what cases the other Estates may assume the Armes of the Kingdome for resistence of Instruments of arbitrary Commands? Answered negatively. Sect. 1.
- Affirmatively. Sect. 2.
- Cap. 7.
- Where the legall power of finall Iudging of these cases doth reside, the three estates differing about them?
- The Question is stated and determined. Sect. 1.
- Arguments contrary are answered. Sect. 2.
- What to be done in such dissention. Sect. 3.
- Cap. 8.
- The former Truths brought home to the present contention. Sect. 1.
- A moderate debate concerning the present contention. Sect. 2.
- The speediest meanes of Reconcilement proposed. Sect. 3.
- Cap. 1. Whether the power wherewith our Kings be invested be an absolute or limited and moderated Power?
A TREATISE OF MONARCHIE.
Sect. 1.GOvernment and Subjection are Relatives, so that what is said of the One, may in proportion be said of the other: Which being so, it will be needlesse to treat of both: because it will be easie to apply what is spoken of one to the other. Government is Potestatis Exercitium, the exercise of a Morall Power. One of these is the Root and Measure of the other; which if it exceed, is exorbitant, is not Government, but a Transgression of it. This Power and Government is differenced with respect to the Governed to wit, a Family, which is called Oeconomicall: or a publike society, which is called Politicall, or Magistracie. Concerning this Magistracie we will treat 1. in generall. 2. Of the principall kind of it.
In generall concerning Magistracie. There are two things about which I find difficultie and difference, viz. the Originall and the End.
Authority, how farre from God, how farre from Men.First for the Originall: There seem to be two extremes in Opinion; while some amplifie the Divinitie thereof: Others speak so slightly of it, as if there were little els but Humane Institution in it. I will briefly lay down my apprehensions of the evident truth in this point: and it may be, things being clearly and distinctly set down, there will be no reall ground for contrariety in this matter. Three things herein must necessarily be distinguished, viz. 1. The Constitution of Power of Magistracie in generall. 2. The Limitation of it to this or that kind. 3. The Determination of it to this or that Individuall Person or Line.
For the first of these, 1. It is Gods expresse Ordinance that in the societies of Mankind, there should be a Magistracie or Government. At first when there were but two, God ordeyned it, Gen. 3. 16. St. Paul affirmes as much of the Powers that be, none excepted, Rom. 131. 2. This Power where ever placed ought to be respected as a participation of divine Soveraignty, Psal, 82. 1. 6. and every soule ought to be subject to it for the Lords sake 1 Pot. 2. 13. that is, for conscience sake of Gods Ordinance, Rom. 13. 5. and under penaltie of Damnation, v. 2. These are Truths against which there is no colour of opposition. Indeed this Power may be claymed by them who have it not; and where there is a limitation of this Power, subjection may be claymed in cases which are without those limits: But to this Ordinance of Power where it is and when it requires subjection, it must be given; as before.
For the second. 1. In some particular communities the Limitation of it to this or that kind, is an immediate Ordinance of God: so Kingly Power was appointed to the Jewes on their desire, 1 Sam. 8. 9. whether they had not a kind of Monarchicall Government before, I will not stand on it: but it is evident that then, on their earnest desire God himselfe condescended to an establishment of Regalitie in that state. 2. But for a generall binding Ordinance, God hath given no word, either to command or commend one kind above another: Men may according to their Relations to the forme they live under to their affections and judgements in divers respects, preferre this or that form above the rest; but we have no divine limitation: and it were an absurditie to think so; for then we should uncharitably condemne all the Communities which have not that form for violation of Gods Ordinance and pronounce those other Powers unlawfull. 3. This then must have another and lower fountain to flow from, which can be no other then Humane. The higher Power is Gods Ordinance: That it resideth in One, or more, in such or such a way is from humane designment: for when God leaves a matter indifferent, the restriction of this indifferencie is left to secondary causes. And I conceive this is St. Peters meaning, when he calls Magistracie α&illegible;νωπί η
&illegible;σος, Humano Creature; S. Paul calls it Gods Ordinance, because the Power is Gods: S. Peter calls it humane Ordinance, because the specification of it to this or that form, is from the societies of Mankind. I confesse it may be called a humane Creature, in regard of its subject, which is a Man, or Men: or its End which is to rule over Men for the good of Men, but the other seems more naturall: and it induces no disparagement to Authority, being so understood. But how ever you take that place, yet the thing affirmed stands good, that God by no word binds any people to this or that form, till they by their own Act bind themselves.
For the third: the same is to be said of it as of the second: some particular men we find whom God was pleased by his own immediate choise to invest with this his Ordinance of Authority: Moses, Saul, David, yea God by his immediate Ordinance determined the Government of that people to Davids posteritie and made it successive; so that that People after his appointment and word was made known to them, and the room voyd by Sauls death was as immediately bound by divine: Law to have David, and his Sonnes after him to be Magistrates, as to Magistracie it selfe. But God hath not done so for every people: ascriptumest cannot be alledged for the endowing this or that person or stock with Soveraignty over a community: They alone had the priviledge of an extraordinary Word. All others have the ordinary and mediate hand or God to enthrone them: They attaine this determination of Authority to their Persons by the tacite and virtuall, or else expresse and formall consent of that Society of men they governe, either in their owne persons, or the root of their succession, as I doubt not, in the sequele it will be made appeare. But let no man thinke that it is any lessening or weakning of Gods Ordinance in them to teach that it is annexed to their Persons by a humane Meane: for though it be not so full a title to come to it by the simple Providence of God, as by the expresse Precept of God: yet when by the disposing hand of Gods Providence a Right is conveyed to a person or family, by the meanes of a publique Fundamentall Oath. Contract and Agreement of a State, it is equivalent then to a Divine Word; and within the bounds of that publique Agreement the conveyed Power is as Obligatory, as if an immediate word had designed it. Thus it appears that they which say there is divinum quiddam in Soveraignes, and that they have their power from God, speake in some sence truth; As also they which say that originally Power is in the People, may in a sound sence be understood. And in these things we have Dr. Ferns consent in his late discourse upon this subject. Sect. 3.
Sect. 2.For the end of Magistracie; to set out that is no hard matter,Whether the end of Government be the peoples good? if we consider what was looked at when God ordeyned it. That was the Good of the society of men over which it is set: So Saint Paul, Rom. 13. 4. σοι ες τ
γαθ
ν. God aymed at it in the Institution of Government: and so do all men in the choice of it, where they may be choosers: such a Government, and such persons to sway it, as may most conduce to publique Weale. Also it is the measure of all the Acts of the Governour: and he is good or bad according as he uses his Power to the good of the State wherewith he is intrusted. That is the end: but not the sole end; The preservation of the Power and Honour of the Governour is an end too: but I thinke not co-ordinate, but subordinate to the other: because doubtles in the Constitution of Government, that is first thought on, and this in congruity to that; Also the reason why the Power and Honour of the Magistrate must be preserved, is for the publique societies sake because its welfare depends thereon: And if it fall out that one of them must suffer: every good Magistrate will descend something from his greatnes be it for the good of the Community: On the other side, though every subiect ought for the honour and good of the Magistrate to give up his private; yet none ought to advance the greatnes of his Soveraign with the publique detriment. Whence in my apprehension the end of Magistracie is the good of the whole Body, Head, and Members conjunctly: but if we speak division, then the good of the Society is the Ultime end: and next to that, as conducent to that, the Governours Greatnes and Prerogative. And herein also accordeth Dr. Fern with us. Sect. 3. Where he sayes, That the people are the end of the governing Power. There is another question of mainer concernment, here in our generall discourse of Authority fitly to be handled. viz. How farre subjection is due to it? but because it hath a great dependance on the kinds and States of Power, and cannot be so well conceived without the Precognition thereof: I will referre it to after opportunities.
Sect. 3.For the division of this Power of Magistracie. It cannot be well divided into several species; for it is one simple thing an indivisible beame of Divine Perfection;Division of Magistracie. yet for our more distinct conceaving thereof, Men have framed severall distinctions of it. So with respect of its measure, it is absolute or limited: In respect of its manner. It is, as St. Peter divides it, Supreame, or Subordinate. In respect of its Meane of acquiring, it is Elective, or successive; for I conceive that of Conquest, and Prescription of usuage are reducible to one of these, as will appeare afterwards. In respect of its degrees it is Nomotheticall or Architectonicall and Gubernative or Executive. And in respect of the subject of its residence there is an ancient and usuall distinction of it into Monarchicall, Aristocraticall and Democraticall. These either simple or mixt of two, or all three together, of which the Predominant gives the denomination. These are not accurate specificative, Divisions of Power, for it admits none such, but partitions of it according to divers respects. The course of my intention directs me to speak only of Monarchicall Power, which is the chiefe and most usuall forme of Government in the world; The other two being apt to resolve into this, but this not so apt to dissolve into them.
Sect. 1.NOW we must know that most of those distinctions which were applyed to Power in generall are appliable to Monarchy because the respects on which they arise are to be found in it. But I will insist on the three main divisions: for the handling of them will bring us to a cleare understanding of what is needfull to be known about Monarchicall Power.
First, of the distinction of Monarchy into Absolute and Limited. Absolute Monarchy is when the Soveraignty is so fully in one that it hath no Limits or Bounds under God, but his owne Will. It is when a people are absolutely resigned up or resigne up themselves to be governed by the will of one man. Such were the ancient Easterne Monarchies, and that of the Persian and Turke at this day, as farre as we know. This is a lawfull GovernmentWhether absolute Monarchy be a lawfull government. and therefore where men put themselves into this utmost degree of subjection by Oath and Contract, or are borne and brought unto it by Gods Providence it binds them and they must abide it because an Oath to a lawfull thing is Obligatory. This in Scripture is very evident as Ezek. 17. 16. 18. 19. Where Iudgement is denounced against the King of Iudab for breaking the Oath made to the King of Babylon; and it is called Gods Oath, yet doubtles this was an Oath of absolute subjection. And Rom. 13. the power which then was, was absolute; yet the Apostle not excluding it calls it Gods ordinance, and commands subjection to it: so Christ commands tribute to be paid, and payes it himselfe; yet it was an arbitrary taxe, the production of an absolute power. Also the soveraignty of masters over servants was absolute, and the same in Oeconomy as absolute Monarchy is in policie, yet the Apostle enjoynes not masters called to Christianity to renounce that title as too great and rigid to be kept but exhorts them to moderation in the exercise of it; and servants to remaine contented in the condition of their servitude. More might be said to legitimate this kinde of government, but it needs not in so plaine a case.
Sect. 2.This absolute Monarchy hath three degrees, yet all within the state of absolutenesse. The first, when the Monarch, whose will is the peoples Law,Three degrees of absolutenesse. doth set himselfe no stated Rule or Law to rule by, but by immediate Edicts and commands of his owne will governes them, as in his owne and Councels judgement he thinks fit. Secondly, when he sets downe a Rule and Law by which he will ordinarily govern, reserving to himselfe liberty to vary from it, wherein, and as oft as in his discretion he judges fit: and in this the Soveraigne is as free as the former, onely the people are at a more certainty what he expects from them in ordinary. Thirdly, when he not onely sets downe an expresse Rule and Law to governe by, but also promiseth and engages himself in many cases not to alter that rule: but this engagement is an after condescent and act of grace, not dissolving the absolute oath of subiection, which went before it, nor is intended to be the rule of his power, but of the exercise of it. This Ruler is not so absolute as the former in the use of his power, for he hath put a bond on that, which he cannot breake without breach of promise; that is, without sin: but he is as absolute in his power, if he will sinfully put it forth into act, it hath no politick bounds, for the people still owe him absolute subiection, that not being dissolved or lessened by an act of grace comming afterwards.
Sect. 3.Now in governments of this nature, How far obedience is due, and, Whether any resistance be lawfull, is a question which here must be decided. For the due effecting whereof, we must premise some needfull distinctions to avoid confusion. Obedience is twofold; first, Positive and active,Whether resistance be lawfull in absolute Monarchy. when in conscience of an authority we doe the thing commanded: secondly, Negative and passive, when though we answer not Authority by doing, yet we doe it by contented undergoing the penalty imposed. Proportionably resistance is twofold: first. Positive, by an opposing of force: secondly, Negative, when onely so much is done as may defend our selves from force, without returne of force against the Assailant. Now this negative resistance is also twofold: first, In inferiour and sufferable cases: secondly, or in the supreme case and last necessity of life and death: and then too it is first, either of particular person or persons; secondly, or of the whole community. And if of particular persons, then either under plea and pretence of equity assaulted; or else without any plea at all, meerly for will and pleasure sake; for to that degree of rage and cruelty sometimes the heart of man is given over. All these are very distinguishable cases, and will be of use either in this or the ensuing disputes.
Assert. 1.To the question I say. First, Positive obedience is absolutely due to the will and pleasure of an absolute Monarch, in all lawfull and indifferent things: because in such a State the will of the Prince is the supreme Law, so that it binds to obedience in every thing not prohibited by a superiour, that is. Divine Law: for it is in such case the higher power, and is Gods ordinance.
Assert. 2.Secondly, When the will of an absolute Monarch commands a thing forbidden to be done by Gods Law then it bindes not to active obedience; then is the Apostles rule undoubtedly true, It is better to obey God then men: For the Law of the inferiour gives place to the superiour. In things defined by God, it should be all one with us for the Magistrate to command us to transgresse that, as to command us an impossibility; and impossibilities fall under no Law. But on this ground no man must quarrell with Authoritie, or reject its commands as unlawfull, unlesse there be an open unlawfulnesse in the face of the act commanded. For if the unlawfulnesse be hidden in the ground or reason of the action, inferiours must not be curious to enquire into the grounds or reasons of the commands of superiours; for such licence of enquiry would often frustrate great undertakings, which much depend on speed and &illegible; of execution. I speak all this of absolute government, where the will and reason of the Monarch is made the higher power, and its expression the supreme Law of a State.
Assert. 3.Thirdly, suppose an absolute Monarch should so degenerate into Monstrous unnaturall Tyranny, as apparently to seeke the destruction of the whole community, subject to him in the lowest degree of vassallage, then such a community may negatively resist such subversion: yea, and if constrained to it by the last necessity, positively resist and defend themselves by force against any instruments whatsoever, imployed for the effecting thereof. 1. David did so in his particular case, when pursued by Soul: he made negative resistence by flight, and doubtlesse he intended positive resistence against any instrument, if the negative would not have served the turne: else why did he so strengthen himselfe by Forces? sure not to make positive resistance, and lay violent hands upon the Person of the Lords Anointed, as it appeared; yet for some reason he did it doubtlesse, which could be none other, but by that force of Armes to defend himselfe against the violence of any mis-imployed inferiour hands. If then he might doe it for his particular safety, much rather may it be done for the publike. 2. Such an act is without the compasse of any the most absolute Potentate; and therefore to resist in it can be to resist no power, nor the violation of any due of subjection. For, first, the most submisse subjection ever intended by any community, when they put themselves under anothers power, was the command of a reasonable will and power; but to will and command the destruction of the whole body over which a power is placed, were an act of will most unreasonable and &illegible; destructive, and so not the act of such a will, to which subjection was intended by any reasonable creatures. Secondly, the publike good and being is armed at in the &illegible; bond of subjection; for in the constitution of such unlimited soveraignty, though every particular mans good and being is subjected to the will of One supreme yet certainly the conservation of the whole Publike was intended by it; which being invaded; the intent of the constitution is overthrowne: and an act is done which can be supposed to be within the compasse of no politicall power: So that did Nero as it was reported of him in his immanity thirst for the destruction of whole Rome; and if he were truly what the Senate pronounced him to be, Humazi generos hostes, then it might justifie a negative resistance of his person; and a positive, of any Agent should be set on so inhumane a service. And the united Provinces are allowed in resisting &illegible; 2d. though he had bin their absolute Monarch, if he resolved the extirpation of the whole people, and the planting the countrey with Spaniards, as it is reported he did. And that assertion of some, that All resistance is against the Apostles prohibition. Resistance by power of Armes is utterly unlawfull, cannot be justified in such a latitude. But of this more will be spoken in the current of this discourse.
Assert. 4.Fourthly, suppose by such a power any particular person or persons life be invaded, without any plea of reason or cause for it, I suppose it hard to deny him liberty of negative resistance of power; yea, and positive, of any Agents, in such assault of murther: for though the case be not so cleare as the former yet it seemes to me justified by the fact of David, and the rescuing of Jonathan from the causlesse cruell intent of his Fathers putting him to death. As also such an act of will carrying no colour of reason with it, cannot be esteemed the act of a rationall will, and so no will intended to be the Law of Soveraignty. Not that I thinke a Monarch of such absolutenesse is bound to yeeld a reason why he commands any man to be put to death, before his command be obeyed; but I conceive the person so commanded to death may bee justified before God and men for protecting himselfe by escape, or otherwise, unlesse some reason or cause bee made knowne to him of such command.
Assert. 5.Fifthly, Persons subject to an unlimited dominion must without resistance subject their Estates, Liberties, Persons, to the will and pleasure of their Lord, so it carry any plea or shew of reason and equity. First, it seemes to me evident, 1 Pes. 2. 18, 19, 20. if well doing be mistaken by the reason and judgement of the power for ill doing, and we be punished for it, yet the Magistrate going according to his misguided reason, it is the command of a reasonable will, and so to be submitted to, because such a one suffers by Law, in a State where the Lords will is the Law. Secondly, In commands of the power where is the plea of reason and equity on the part of the commander, whether it be such indeed, some power must judge, but the constitution of absolute Monarchy resolves all judgement into the will of the Monarch, as the supreme Law: so that if his will judicially censure it just, it must be yeelded to as if it were just without repeale or redressement by any created power. And let none complaine of this as a hard condition, when they or their Ancestors have subjected themselves to such a power by oath, or politicall contract: If it be Gods ordinance to such, it must be subjected to and its exorbitances born, as he sayes in &illegible; as men beare famine, pestilence, and other effects of Gods displeasure.
Assert. 6.Sixthly in absolute Monarchy the person of the Monarch is above the reach of just force and positive resistance: for such a full resignation of mens selves to his will and power, by the irrevocable oath and bond of politicall contract, doth make the person as sacred as the Unction of Saul or David. In such a State all lawful power is below him, so that he is uncapable of any penall hand, which must be from a superiour, or it is uniust. I have bin the longer on this absolute Monarchy, because though it doth not concerne us, yet it will give light to the stating of doubts in governments of a more restrained nature: for what is true here in the full extent of power, is there also as true within the compasse of their power.
Sect. 4.In moderate or limited Monarchy it is an enquiry of some weight to know,What make a Monarchy limited? What it is which constitutes it in the state of alimitted Monarchy.
Assert. 1.First, A Monarchy may be stinted in the exercise of its power, and yet be an absolute Monarchy, as appeared before in our distinction of absolute Monarchy: If that bounds be a subsequent act, and proceeding from free will and grace in the Monarch; for it is not the exercise, but the nature and measure of power, wherewith he is radically invested, which deneminates him a free, or conditionate Monarch.
Assert. 2.Secondly, I take it, that a limited Monarch must have his bounds of power ab excerno, not from the free determination of his owne will. And now Kings have not divine words and binding Lawes to constitute them in their Soveraignty, but derive it from ordinary providence, the sole meane hereof is the consent and fundamentall contract of a Nation of men, which consent puts them in their power, which can be no more nor other then is conveyed to them by such contract of subiection. This is the root of all soveraignty individuated and existent in this or that person or family; till this come and lift him up he is a private man, not differing in state from the rest of his brethren; but then he becomes another man, his person is sacred by that soveraignty conveyed to it, which is Gods ordinance and image. The truth hereof will be more fully discovered, when we come to speake of Elective and Successive Monarchy.
Assert. 3.Thirdly, He is then a limited Monarch, who hath a Law beside his owne will for the measure of his power. First, the supreme power of the State must be in him, so that his power must not be limited by any power above his; for then hee were not a Monarch, but a subordinate magistrate. Secondly, this supreme power must be restrained by some Law, according to which this &illegible; was given, and by direction of which this power must act; else he were not a limited Monarch, that is, a liege Soveraigne, or legall King. Now a Soveraignty comes thus to be legall, or defined to a rule of Law, either by originall constitution, or by after-condescent. By originall constitution, when the society publike conferres on one man a power by limited contract, resigning themselves to his government by such a Law, reserving to themselves such immunities: In this case, they which at first had power over themselves, had power to set their owne termes of subiection; and hee which hath no title of power over them but by their act, can de jure have no greater then what is put over to him by that act By after-condescent, viz. when a Lord, who by conquest, or other right, hath an absolute arbitrary power; but not liking to hold by such a right, doth either formally or virtually desert it, and take a new legall right as judging it more safe for him to hold by, and desirable of the people to be governed by. This is equivalent to that by originall constitution; yea, is all one with it: for this is in that respect a secondary originall constitution. But if it be objected, that this being a voluntary condescent is an act of grace, and so doth not derogate from his former absolutenesse, as was said before of an absolute Monarch, who confines himselfe to governe by one rule; I answer. This differs essentially from that: for there, a free Lord, of grace yeelds to rule by such a Law, reserving the fulnesse of power, and still requiring of the people a bond and oath of utmost indefinite subjection; so that it amounts not to a limitation of radicall power: whereas here is a change of title, and a resolution to be subiected to, in no other way, then according to such a frame of government; and accordingly no other bond or oath of allegeance is required, or taken, then according to such a Law: this amounts to a limitation of radicall power. And therefore they speak too generally, who affirme of all acts of grace proceeding from Princes to people, as if they did not limit absolutenesse: ’Tis true of acts of grace of that first kinde; but yet you see, an act of grace may be such a one, as may amount to a resignation of that absolutenesse, into a more milde and moderate power, unlesse we should hold it out of the power of an absolute Lord to be other; or that by free condescent, and act of grace, a man cannot as well part with, or exchange his right and title to a thing, as define himselfe in the use and exercue; which I thinke none will affirme.
Sect. 5.In all Governments of this allay and legall Constitution there are three Questions of speciall moment to be considered.
How farre subiection is due in a limited Monarchy?First, How farre subjection is due? As farre as they are Gods Ordinance, as farre as they are a power and they are a power as farre as the Contract fundamentall from which under God their authority is derived, doth extend. As absolute Lords must be obeyed as farre as their Will enjoynes, because their Will is the measure of their Power, and their subjects Law: so these in the utmost extent of the Law of the Land, which is the measure of their power, and their subjects duty of obedience. I say so farre, but I doe not say no further: for I believe, though on our former grounds it clearely followes that such Authority transcends its bounds. if it command beyond the Law: and the Subject legally is not bound to subjection in such case, yet in Conscience a Subject is bound to yeeld to the Magistrate, even when he cannot de jure, challenge obedience, to prevent scandall or any occasion of slighting the power which may sometimes grow, even upon a just refusall: I say, for these causes a subject ought not to use his liberty, but more us gerere, if it be in a thing in which he can possibly without subversion, and in which his act may not be made a leading case, and so bring on a prescription against publique Liberty.
Sect. 6.Secondly, how farre it is lawfull to resist the exorbitant Illegal Commands of such a Monarch? 1. As before in lighter cases, in which it may be done, for the reasons alledged, and for the sake of publique peace,How farre it is Lawfull to resist we ought to submit, and make no resistance at all, but de jure receaere.
Pos. 1.2. In cases of higher nature Passive resistance, viz. By appeale to Law, by Concealment, by Flight, is lawfull to be made, because such a Command is politically powerles,Pos. 2. it proceeds not from Gods Ordinance in him: and so we sin not against Gods Ordinance in such Non-submission, or Negative resistance.
Pos. 3.3.For instruments or Agents in such commands, if the streight be such, and a man be surprized, that no place is left for an appeale nor evasion by Negative resistance; I conceive, against such Positive resistence may be made: because authority failing or this Act in the Supreame Power, the Agent or instrument can have none derived to him; and so is but in the nature of a private person, and his Act as an offer of private violence, and so comes under the same rules for opposition.
Pos. 4.4. For the person of the Soveraigne, I conceive it, aswell above any Positive Resistence, as the Person of an absolute Monarch; Yea, though by the whole Community, (except there be an expresse reservation of Power in the body of the State, or any deputed Persons or Court, to use in case of intolerable exorbitance. Positive Resistence, which, if there be, then such a Governour is no Monarch, for that Fundamentall Reservation destroyes it’s being a Monarchy, in asmuch as the Supreame Power is not in one.) For where ever there is a Soveraigne Politique Power constituted, the person or persons who are invested with it are Sacred, and out of the reach of Positive Resistance or Violence: which, as I said, if just, must be from no inferior or subordinate hand. But it will be objected, that sith every Monarch hath his power from the consent of the whole body, that consent of the whole Body hath a Power above the Power of the Monarch, and so the resistance which is done by it, is not by an inferior power and to this purpose is brought that Axiome. Quiequia efficit tale est magia tale. I answer, That rule even in naturall causes is lyable to abundance of restrictions: And in the particular in hand it holds not. Where the cause doth bereave himselfe of that perfection by which it works, in the very act of causing, and convey it to that effect, It doth not remain more such then the effect, but much lesse, and below it, as if I convey an estate of Land to another, it doth not hold that after such conveyance I have a better Estate remayning in me then that other, but rather the contrary; because what was in one is passed to the other: The Servant who at the year of Iubile would not go out free, but have his eare boared, and given his Master a full Lordship over him: can we argue, that he had afterward more power over himselfe then his Master, because he gave his Master that power over him, by that act of Oeconomicall Contract. Thus the Community whose consent establishes a Power over them cannot be said universally to have an eminencie of Power above that which they constitute; sometimes they have, sometimes they have not: and to judge when they have when not respect must be had to the Origiginall Contract and Fundamentall Constitution of that State, if they have constituted a Monarchy, that is invested one man with the Soveraignty of Power; and subjected all the rest to him; Then it were unreasonable to say, they yet have it in them selves; Or have a power of recalling that Supremacie which by Oath and Contract they themselves transferred on another: unles we make this Oath and Contract lesse binding then private ones, dissoluble at pleasure, and so all Monarchs Tenants at will from their people. But if they in such Constitution reserve a power in the body to oppose and displace the Magistrate for exorbitancies, and reserve to themselves a Tribunall to trie him in, that man is not a Monarch but the Officer and Substitute of him or them to whom such Power over him is reserved or conferred. The Issue is this, If he be a Monarch he hath the Apex or Culmen Potestatis, and all his Subjects divesim and conjunctions, are below him: They have devested themselves of all superiority and no Power left for a Positive Opposition of the Person of him whom they have invested.
Sect. 7.Thirdly, Who shall be the Iudge of the Excesses of the Soveraigne Lord in Monarchies of this composure? I answer, A frame of Government cannot be imagined of that perfection but that some inconveniencies there will be possible for which there can be provided no remedie:Who shall be the Iudge of the excesses of the Monarch? Many miseries to which a people under an absolute Monarchie are lyable are prevented by this Legall Allay and definement of Power. But this is exposed to one defect from which that is tree, that is an impossibility of &illegible; a Judge to determine this last controversie, viz. the Soveraignes transgressing his fundamentall limits. This Judge must be either some Forraigner, and then &illegible; lose the freedome of the State, by subjecting it to an externall power in the greatest case: or else within the body: If so than neither the Monarch himselfe, and then you destroy the frame of the State, and make it absolute; for to define a Power to a Law, and then to make him Judge of his Deviations from that Law, is to absolve him from all Law Or else the Community and their Deputies must have this power: and then, as before, you put the apex Potastants, the &illegible;
χ&illegible;ς in the whole body, or a part of it, and destroy the being of Monarchy: The Ruler not being Gods immediate Minister but of that Power, be it where it will to which he is &illegible; for his actions. So that I conceive, in a limited legall Monarchy, there can be no stated internall Judge of the Monarchs actions, if there grow a fundamentall Variance betwixt him and the Community. But you will say, It is all one way to absolutenesse to assigne him no Judge as to make him his own Judge. Answ. I say not simple in this case there is no Judge: But that there can be no Judg legall and constituted within that frame of Government: but it is a transcendent case beyond the provision of that Government, and must have an extraordinary Judge, and way of devision.
In this great and difficult case, I will deliver my apprehensions freely and clearly, submining them to the centure of betten Iudgements. Suppose the controversie to happen in a Government fundamentally legall, and the people no further subjected then to Government by such a Law.Pos. 1.
1. If the act in which the exorbitance and transgression is supposed to be, be of lesser moment, and not striking at the very being of that Government it ought to be borne by publique patience, rather then to endanger the being of the State be a contention betwixt the head and body Politique.
2. If it be mortall and such as suffered, dissolves the frame and life of the Government and publique liberty.Pos. 2. Then the illegality and destructive nature is to be set open, and redresment sought by Petition; which if failing, Prevention by resistance ought to be. But first that it is such must be made apparent; and if it be apparent, and an Appeale made ad &illegible; generu humans, especially of these of that Community, then the fundamentall Lawes of that Monarchy must iudge and pronounce the sentence in every mans conscience; and every man (as farre as concernes him) must follow the evidence of Truth in his owne soule, to oppose, or not oppose, according as he can in conscience acquit or condemne the act of carriage of the Governour. For I conceive in a Case which transcends the frame and provision of the Government they are bound to. People are unbound, and in state as if they had no Government; and the superiour Law of Reason and Conscience must be Judge: wherein every one must procced with the utmost advice and impartiality: For if hee erre in iudgement hee either resists Gods Ordinance, or puts his hand to the subversion of the State and Policy he lives in.
And this power of judging argues not a superiority in those who Judge, over him who is Judged: for it is not Authoritative and Civill, but morall, residing in reasonable Creatures and lawfull for them to execute, because never devested and put off by any act in the constitution of a legall Government, but rather the reservation of it intended: For when they define the Superiour to a Law, and constitute no Power to Judge of his Excesses from that Law it is evident they reserve to themselves, not a Formall Authoritative Power, but a morall Power, such as they had originally before the Constitution of the Government; which must needs remaine, being not conveyed away in the Constitution.
Sect. 1.THe second division of Monarchy, which I intend to treat of, is that of Elective or Successive. Elective Monarchy is that, whereby the fundamentall constitution of the State the supreme power is conveyed but to the person of him whom they take for their Prince;Elective and Successive Monarchy what they are? the people reserving to themselves power, by men deputed by the same constitution to elect a new person on the decease of the former. Successive is, where by the fundamentall constitution of the State, the Soveraignty is conferred on one Prince; and in that one, as a root and beginning to his heires, after a forme and line of succession, constituted also by the fundamentals of that Government. In the first, the Peoples oath and contract of subiection extends but to one person: In the other, to the whole Race and Line of Successors; which continuing, the bond of subjection continues; or which failing, the people returne to their first liberty, of choosing a new person, or succession to be invested with Soveraignty.
Sect. 2.I doe conceive that in the first originall all Monarchy, yea any individuall frame of Government whatsoever, is elective: that is, is constituted, and drawes its force and right from the consent and choice of that Community over which it swayeth. And that triple distinction of Monarchy into that which is gotten by Conquest.All Monarchy whether originally from consent? Prescription, or Choice is, not of distinct parts unlesse by Choice be meant full and formall Choice: my reason is, because man being a voluntary agent and subiection being a morall act it doth essentially depend on consent so that a man may by force and extremity be brought under the power of another, as unreasonable creatures are, to be disposed of, and trampled on, whether they will or no: But a bond of subjection cannot be put on him, nor a right to claime Obedience and Service acquired, unlesse a man become bound by some act of his owne Will. For, suppose another, from whom I am originally free, be stronger then I, and so bring mee under his mercy doe I therefore sin if I doe not what he commands me? or can that act of violence passe into a morall title, without a morall principle?
Sect. 3.But this will be more manifest, if by induction I shew how other titles resolve into this. I will begin with that of divine institution. Saul and David were by the Secrament of anointing designed to the Kingdome, as it were by Gods owne hand;Monarchy by divine institution. which notwithstanding, they were not actually Kings till the Peoples consent established them therein: That unction was a manifestation of the appointment of God, and when it was made knowne to the People, I thinke it had the power of Precept to restraine the Peoples choice to that person; which if they had not done, they had resisted Gods ordinance. Yet they were not thereby actually endowed with Kingly power, but remained as private men, till the Peoples choice put them in actuall possession of that Power, which in Doves was not till after many yeares.
Sect. 4.Then for that of Usuage or Prescription; if any such did ever constitute a Monarchie, it was by vertue of an Universall consent by that Usuage and Prescription proved and implyed:Monarchy by prescription. For in a Popular state, where one Man in the Communitie, by reason of great estate, Wisdome, or other Perfection is in the eye of all the rest, all reverence him and his advice they follow: and the respect continues from the People to the house and family, for divers generations. In this case, subjection at first is arbitrary in the people; and if in time it become necessary, it is because their Custome is their Law; and its long continuance is equivalent to a formall Election: so that this Tenure and Right, if it be good and more then at pleasure, as it was at first, the considerate must needs ascribe it to a consent, and implicite choyce of the People.
Sect. 5.But the mayn Question is concerning Monarchy archieved by Conquest; where at first fight the Right seems gotten by the Sword, without the consent and Choyce of the People, yea against it. Conquest is either 1. Totall where a full Conquest is made, by a totall subduing a people to the Will of the Victor: or 2. Partiall,Monarchy by conquest. where an entrance is made by the Sword: But the People either because of the Right claymed by the Invader; or their unwillingnesse to suffer the Miseries of Warre, or their apparent inability to stand out in a way of Resistance, or some other consideration, submit to a composition and contract of subjection to the Invader. In this latter it is evident, the Soveraignes Power is from the Peoples consent; and the Government is such as the Contract and fundamentall agreement makes it to be, if it be the first Agreement, and the pretender hath no former Title which remaines in force, for then this latter is invalid, if it include not and amount to a relinquishing and disanulling of the Old. But the difficulty is concerning a full and meere Conquest; and of this I will speak my mind clearly. Such a Warre and Invasion of a People, which ends in a Conquest, 1. it is either upon the pretence or claim of a Title of Soveraignty over the People invaded: and then, if the pretender prevaile, it is properly no Conquest, but the vindication of a Title by force of Armes. And the Government is not Originall, but such as the Title is by which he claymes it. 2. Or it is by One who hath no challenge of Right descending to him to justifie his claim and Invasion of a People: Then if he subdue, he may properly be said to come to his Government by Conquest.
Whether conquest give a iust title?And there be who wholly condemne this title of Conquest as unlawfull, and take it for nothing else but a Nationall and publike robbery: so one of the Answerers to Doctor Ferne, saies in his p. 10. Conquest may give such a right as Plunderers use to take in houses they can waster.—— It is inhumane to talke of right of Conquest in a Civill, in a Christian State. But I cannot allow of so indefinite a Censure: rather I think the right of Conquest is such as the precedent Warre was: if that were lawfull, so is the Conquest: For a Prince may be invaded, or so farre injured by a neighbour People, or they may be set on such a pernicious enmitie against him and his people, that the safety of himselfe and people may compell to such a Warre, which warre if it end in Conquest, who can judge such Title unlawfull? Suppose then Conquest may be a lawfull way of acquisition: yet an immediate cause of right of Soveraignty; that is, of a Civill power of Government to which obedience is due, it cannot be: I say, an immediate cause, for a remote impulsive cause it oft is, but not an immediate formall cause; for that must ever be the consent of the people, whereby they accept of, and resigne up themselves to a Government, and then their Persons are morally bound, and not before. Thus far the force of conquest may goe; it may give a man title over, and power to possesse and dispose of the Countrey and Goods of the Conquered; yea, the Bodies and lives of the Conquered are at the Will and Pleasure of the Conquerour: But it still is at the Peoples choice to come into a morall condition of subiection or not. When they are thus at the mercy of the Victor, if to save life they consent to a condition of servitude or subiection, then that consent, oath, or covenant, which they in that extremity make, being in re licita, bindes them, and they owe morall Duty. But if they would rather suffer the utmost violence of the Conquerour, and will consent to no termes of subjection as Numantia in Spaine, and many other People have resolved; they die or remaine a free People. Be they captived or possessed at pleasure, they owe no duty, neither doe they sin in not obeying; nor doe they resist Gods ordinance, if at any time of advantage they use force to free themselves from such a violent possession: yea perhaps, if before by contract they were bound to another, they should sin if to avoid death or bondage they should sweare or covenant fralty to a Conquerour, and it were more noble and &illegible; to die in the service, and for the faith to their naturall Soveraigne. Thus I am perswaded it will appeare an uncontrolable truth in Policie, that the consent of the People, either by themselves or their Ancestors is the only mean in ordinary providence by which soveraignty is conferred on any Person or Family: neither can Gods ordinance be conveyed and People engaged in conscience by any other means.
Sect. 6.It hath been affirmed by some, that mixture and limitation is inconsistent to successive Monarchy; as if where ever Soveraignty is entailed to a succession, it must needs be absolute: But I must professe I cannot see how it can stand with truth: Rather I thinke, that both Elective and Hereditary Monarchy are indifferently capable of absolutenesse or limitation.Whether a Monarch by succission may not be limited? If a free, and not pre-ingaged People to any Government, by publike compact yeeld up themselves to a Person, to be commanded by his Will as their supreme Law, during his naturall life, and no longer, can it be denied but that he is an absolute, and yet Elective Monarch? unlesse you will say, he is not absolute, because he cannot by his Will, as by a Law, bind them to elect his sonne to succeed him, and change their Government into hereditary. But his being limited in this Clause doth not disparage his Soveraignty, or make his power of Government limited, because this belongs not to present Government, but is a meere provision for the future. Againe, if the power of Ruling according to a Law, be by consent conveyed to one Person, and his heires to succeed after him, how this should come to be absolute and the entailement should overthrow the constitution, I cannot imagine: If the whole latitude of power may be by a People made hereditary sure a proportion may as well; unlesse the limitation be such as includes a repugnancy to be perpetuall. Indeed this enstating of a succession makes that power irrevocable, during the continuance of that succession but it makes it neither greater nor lesse in the Successor then was in his Progenitors, from whom hee derives it.
Sect. 7.In a successive Monarchy the Successor holds by the originall Right of him who is the root of succession; and is de jure King the immediate instant after his Predecestors decease: Also the people are bound to him, though they never take any Oath to his person. For as he commands in vertue of the originall Right, so they are bound to obey by vertue of the originall Covenant, and nationall Contract of Subjection: the new oath taken either by King or People, is but a reviving of the old; that the Conscience of it by renewing might be the more fresh and vigorous: it neither gives any new power, nor addes or detracts from the old, unlesse by common agreement an alteration be made; and so the foundation in that clause is new, which cannot be without the content of both parties.
Sect. 1.THe third division is into Simple and Mixed. Simple is when the Government absolute or limited is so intrusted in the hands of one, that all the rest is by deputation from him; so that there is no authority in the whole Body but his,Simple and mixed Monarchy, what? or derived from him: And that One is either individually one Person, and then it is a simple Monarchy: Or one associate Body, chosen either out of the Nobility, whence the Government is called a simple Aristocracy: or out of the Community, without respect of birth or state, which is termed a simple Democracy. The supreme authority residing exclusively in one of these three, denominates the Government simple which over it be.
Now experience teaching People, that severall inconveniences are in each of those, which is avoided by the other: as aptnesse to Tyranny in simple Monarchy: aptnesse to destructive Factions in an Aristocracy: and aptnesse to Confusion and Tumult in a Democracy. As on the contrary, each of them hath some good which the others want, viz. Unity and strength in a Monarchy; Counsell and Wisedome in an Aristocracy; Liberty and respect of Common good in a Democracy. Hence the wisedome of men deeply seene in State matters guided them to frame a mixture of all three, uniting them into one Forme, that so the good of all might be enjoyed, and the evill of them avoyded. And this mixture is either equall, when the highest command in a State by the first Constitution of it is equally seated in all three; and then (if firme Union can be in a mixture of Equality) it can be called by the name of neither of them but by the generall stile of a Mixed State: or if there be priority of Order in one of the three, (as I thinke there must be or else there can be no Unity it may take the name of that which hath the precedency. But the firmer Union is, where one of the three is predominant and in that regard gives the denomination to the whole: So we call it a Mixed Monarchy, where the primity of share in the supreme power is in one.
Sect. 2.Now I conceive to the constituting of Mixed Monarchy (and so proportionately it may be said of the other.)What it is which constitutes a mixed Monarchy?
1. The Soveraigne power must be originally in all three, viz. If the composition be of all three so that one must not hold his power from the other,Pos. 1. but all equally from the fundamentall Constitution: for if the power of one be originall, and the other Derivative, it is no mixture, for such a Derivation of power to others is in the most simple Monarchy: Againe, the end of mixture could not be obteyned; for why is this mixture framed, but that they might confine each other from exorbitance, which cannot be done by a derivate power, it being unnaturall that a derived power should turne back, and set bounds to its owne beginning.
Pos. 2.2. A full equality must not be in the three estates, though they are all sharers in the Supreame power; for if it were so, it could not have any ground in it to denominate it a Monarchie, more then an Aristocracie or Democracie.
Pos. 3.3. A power then must be sought wherewith the Monarch must be invested, which is not so great as to destroy the mixture; nor so titular as to destroy the Monarchy; which I conceive may be in these particulars.
1. If he be the head and Fountaine of the power which governs and executes the established Lawes, so that both the other States as well conjunction as division, be his sworne subjects, and owe obedience to his commands, which are according to established Lawes.
2. If he hath a sole or chiefe power in capacitating and putting those persons or societies in such States and conditions, as whereunto such Supreme power by the foundations of the Government doth belong, and is annexed: so that though the Aristocratical and Democraticall power which is conjoyned to his, be not from him: yet the definement and determination of it to such persons is from him, by a necessary consecution.
3. If the power of convocating or causing to be put in existence, and dissolving such a Court or Meeting of the two other estates as is authoritative, be in him.
4. If his authority be the last and greatest though not the sole, which must establish and adde a consummatum to every Act. I say these or any of these put into one person makes that State Monarchicall, because the other, though they depend not on him quoad essentians et act as formales, but on the prime constitution of the Government, yet quoad existentiam et determinationem ad subject a, they doe.
The Supreme power being either the Legislative or the Gubernative. In a mixed Monarchy sometimes the mixture is the seate of the Legislative power, which is the chiefe of the two: The power of constituting officers for governing by those Lawes being left to the Monarch: Or else the Primacie of both these powers is jointly in all three: For if the Legislative be in one, then the Monarchy is not mixed but simple, for that is the Superiour, if that be in one, all else must needs be so too: By Legislative, I meane the power of making new Lawes, if any new be needfull to be added to the foundation: and the Authentick power of interpreting the old; For I take it, this is a branch of the Legislative and is as great, and in effect the same power.
Sect. 3.Every mixed Monarchy is limited: but it is not necessary that every limited should be mixed: For the Prince in a mixed Monarchy, were there no definement of him to a Law but onely this: that his Legislative acts have no validity without the allowance and joint authority of the other: this is enough to denominate it exactly a limited Monarchy: and so much it must have, if it be mixed. On the other side, if in the foundations of his Government he be restrained to to any Law besides his own Will, he is a limited Monarch, though that both the Legislative and Gubernative power (provided he exceed not those Lawes) be left in his owne hands: But then the Government is not mixed.
Sect. 4.Now concerning the extent of the Princes power, and the subjects duty in a mixed Monarchy, almost the same is to be said, which was before in a limited:How far the Princes power extends in a mixed Monarchy? for it is a generall rule in this matter: such as the Constitution of Government is, such is the Ordinance of God: such as the Ordinance is, such must our duty of subjection be. No Power can challenge an obedience beyond its owne measure; for if it might, we should destroy all Rules and differences of Government, and make all absolute and at pleasure. In every mixed Principality.
Assert. 1.First, Looke what Power is solely entrusted and committed to the Prince by the fundamentall Constitution of the State, in the due execution thereof all owe full subjection to him, even the other Estates, being but societies of his subjects bound to him by Oath of Allegeance as to their liege Lord.
Assert. 2.Secondly, those acts belonging to the power which is stated in a mixed Principle if either part of that Principle, or two of the three undertake to doe them it is invalid it is no binding Act; for in this case all three have a free Negative voice: and take away the priviledge of a Negative Voice, so that in case of refusall the rest have power to doe it without the third, then you destroy that Third, and make him but a Looker on: So that in every mixed Government, I take it, there must be a necessity of concurrence of all three Estates in the production of Acts belonging to that power, which is committed in common to them: Else suppose those Acts valid which are done by any major part, that is, any two of the three, then you put it in the power of any two, by a confederacy at pleasure to disanull the third, or suspend all its Acts, and make it a bare Cypher in Government.
Assert. 3.Thirdly, in such a composed State, if the Monarch invade the power of the other two, or run in any course tending to the dissolving of the constituted frame, they ought to employ their power in this case to preserve the State from ruine; yea that is the very end and fundamentall aime in constituting all mixed Policies: not that they by crossing and jarring should hinder the publike good; but that, if one exorbitate, the power of restraint and providing for the publike safety should be in the rest: and the power is put into divers hands, that one should counterpoize and keep even the other: so that for such other Estates, it is not onely lawfull to deny obedience and submission to illegall proceedings, as private men may, but it is their duty, and by the foundations of the Government they are bound to prevent dissolution of the established Frame.
Assert. 4.Fourthly, the Person of the Monarch, even in these mixed Formes, (as I said before in the limited) ought to be above the reach of violence in his utmost exorbitances: For when a People have sworne allegeance, and invested a Person or Line with Supremacy, they have made it sacred, and no abuse can devest him of that power, irrevocably communicated. And while he hath power in a mixed Monarchy, he is the Universall Soveraigne, even of the other limiting States: so that being above them, he is de jure exempt from any penall hand.
Assert. 5.Fifthly, that one inconvenience must necessarily be in all mixed Governments, which I shewed to be in limited Governments, there can be no Constituted, Legall, Authoritative Judge of the fundamentall Controversies arising betwixt the three Estates. If such doe arise, it is the fatall disease of these Governments, for which no salve can be prescribed; For the established being of such authority, would ipso facto overthrow the Frame, and turne it into absolutenesse: So that if one of these, or two, say their power is invaded, and the Government assaulted by the other, the Accused denying it, it doth become a controversie: of this question there is no legall Judge, it is a case beyond the possible provision of such a Government. The Accusing side must make it evident to every mans Conscience. In this case, which is beyond the Government, the Appeale must be to the Community, as if there were no Government; and as by Evidence mens Consciences are convinced, they are bound to give their utmost assistance. For the intention of the Frame in such States, justifies the exercise of any power, conducing to the safety of the Universality and Government established.
Sect. 1.HAving thus far proceeded in generall, before we can bring home this to a stating of the great controversie, which now our sins, Gods displeasure, and evill turbulent men have raised up in our lately most flourishing but now most unhappy Kingdome. Wee must first looke into the Frame and Composure of our Monarchy; for till we fully are resolved of that, we cannot apply the former generall Truths, nor on them ground the Resolution of this ruining contention.
Concerning the Essentiall Composure of this Government, that it is Monarchicall, is by none to be questioned: but the enquiry must be about the Frame of it. And so there are seven great questions to be prosecuted.
Quest. 1. stated.First, whether it be a Limited Monarchy, or Absolute? Here the question is not concerning Power in the Exercise, but the Root and being of it: for none will deny but that the way of Government used, and to be used in this Realme, is a designed way: Onely some speake as if this Definement were an act of Grace from the Monarchs themselves, being pleased at the suit, and for the good of the People, to let their power run into act through such a course and current of Law: whereas, if they at any time shall thinke fit on great causes to vary from that way, and use the full extent of their power, none ought to contradict, or refuse to obey. Neither is it the question, Whether they sin against God if they abuse their power, and run out into acts of injury at pleasure, and violate those Lawes which they have by Publike Faith and Oath promised to observe; for none will deny this to be true, even in the most absolute Monarch in the world. But the point controverted is punctually this, Whether the Authority which is inherent in our Kings be boundlesse and absolute, or limited and determined, so that the acts which they doe, or command to be done without that compasse and bounds, be not onely sinfull in themselves, but invalid and non-authoritative to others?
Sect. 2.Now for the determining hereof, I conceive and am in my Judgement perswaded, that the Soveraignty of our Kings is radically and fundamentally limited,Assert. and not onely in the Use and Exercise of it: And am perswaded so on these grounds and Reasons.
First, Because the Kings Majesty himselfe,Reas. 1. who best knowes by his Councell the nature of his own power, sayes, thata the Law is the measure of his power: which is as full a concession of the thing as words can expresse. If it be the measure of it, then his power is limited by it; for the measure is the limits and bounds of the thing limited. And in his Answer to both the Houses concerning the Militia, speaking of the men named to him, sayes, If more power shall be thought sit to be granted to them, then by Law is in the Crowne it selfe, His Maiesty holds it reasonable, that the same be by some Law first vested in him, with power to transferre it to these persons, &c. In which passage it is granted that the Powers of the Crown are by Law, and that the King hath no more then are vested in him by Law.
Reas. 2.Secondly, because it is in the very Constitution of it mixed, as I shall afterwards make it appeare, then it is radically limited; for as I shewed before, every mixed Monarchy is limited, though not on the contrary: for the necessary connexion of other power to it, is one of the greatest limitations. A subordination of Causes doth not ever prove the supreme Cause of limited virtue; a co-ordination doth alwayes.
Reas. 3.Thirdly, I prove it from the ancient, ordinary, and received denominaitons; for the Kings Majesty is called our Liege, that is, Legall Soveraigne; and we his Liege that is his Legall Subjects: what doe these names argue, but that his Soveraignty and our subjection is legall that is, restrained by Law?
Reas. 4.Fourthly, had we no other proofe, yet that of Prescription were sufficient: In all ages, beyond record the Lawes and Customes of the Kingdome have been the Rule of Government: Liberties have been stood upon, and Grants thereof, with limitations of Royall power, made and acknowledged by Magna Charta, and other publike and solemne acts; and no Obedience acknowledged to be due but that which is according to Law, nor claimed but under some pretext and title of Law.
Reas. 5.Fifthly, the very Being of our Common and Statute Lawes, and our Kings acknowledging themselves bound to governe by them, doth prove and prescribe them Limited: for those Lawes are not of their sole composing nor were they established by their sole Authority, but by the concurrence of the other two Estates: so that to be confined to that which is not meerly their owne, is to be in a limited condition.
Pleaders for defensive armes Sect. 2. & 4.Some there be which have lately written on this subject, who take another way to prove our Government limited by Law, viz. by denying all absolute Government to be lawfull; affirming that Absolute Monarchy is not at all Gods Ordinance, and so no lawfull power secured from resistance. What is their ground for this? God allowes no man to rule as he lift, nor puts mens lives in the pleasure of the Monarch: It is a power arbitrary and injurious. But I desire those Authors to confider, that in absolute Monarchy there is not a resignation of men to any Will or lift, but to the reasonable Will of the Monarch, which having the Law of reason to direct it, is kept from injurious acts. But see for defence of this Government, Part 1. cap. 2.
Sect. 3.Having set downe those Reasons on which my Judgement is setled on this side, I will confider the maine Reasons wherby some have endeavoured to prove this Government to be of an absolute nature, and will shew their invalidity. Many Divines perhaps inconfiderately, perhaps wittingly for self ends, have beene of late yeares strong Pleaders for Absolutenesse of Monarchicall Power in this Land; and pressed Obedience on the Consciences of People in the utmost extremity, which can be due in the most absolute Monarchy in the world; but I seldome or never heard or read them make any difference of Powers but usually bring their proofes from those Scriptures, where subjection is commanded to the higher Powers, and all resistence of them forbidden and from Examples taken out of the manner of the government of Israel and Judah: as if any were so impious to contradict those truths, and they were not as well obeyed in Limited Government as in Absolute; or as if Examples taken out of one Government do alwayes hold in another, unlesse their aime were to deny all distinction of Governments, and to hold all absolute, who have any where the supreme power conveyed to them.
Among these, I wonder most at that late discourse of Dr. Ferne, who in my Judgement avoucheth things inconsistent, and evidently contradictory one to the other: For in his Preface he acknowledges our Obedience to be limited and circumscribed by the Lawes of the Land, and accordingly to be yeelded or denied to the higher Power; and that he is at much against an absolute Power in the King and to raise him to an arbitrary way of Government, as against resistence on the Subject’s part: also, that his power is limited by Law, Sect. 5. Yet on the other side he affirmes, That the King holds his Crown by conquest; that it is descended to him by three Conquests, Sect. 2. that we even our Senate of Parliament hath not so much plea for resistence as the ancient Romane Senate had under the Romane Emperours, whose power we know was absolute, Sect, 2. that in Monarchy the judgement of many is reduced to one: that Monarchy settles the chief power and finall Judgment in one, Sect. 5. what is this but to confesse him limited: and yet to maintain him absolute?
Arguments on the contrary dissolved.But let us come to the Arguments. First, say they, our Kings came to their right by Conquest; yea, saies the Dr. by three Conquests: He meanes the Saxons, Danes, and Normans, as appears afterwards: Therefore their right is absolute. Here, that they may advance themselves, they care not though it be on the ruine of publique liberty, by bringing a whole Nation into the condition of conquered slaves: But to the Argument. 1. Suppose the Antecedent true, the Consequution is not alwaies true; for as is evident before in the first Part. All Conquest doth not put the Conqueror into an absolute right. He may come to a right by Conquest: but not sole Conquest; but a partiall, occasioning a Right by finall Agreement; and then the right is specificated by that fundamentall agreement: Also he may by sword prosecute a claime of another nature: and in his war intend only an acquiring of that claimed right, and after conquest rest in that: Yea farther, he may win a Kingdome meerly by the Sword and enter on it by right of Conquest: yet considering that right of conquest hath too much of force in it to be safe and permanent; he may thinke conquest the best meane of getting a Kingdome, but not of holding, and in wisdome for himselfe and posterity, gaine the affections of the people by deserting that Title, and taking a new by Politique agreement, or descend from that right by fundamentall grants of liberties to the people, and limitations to his own power: but these things I said in effect before, in the first part, only here I have recalled them, to shew what a non sequitur there is in the Argument. But that which I chiefly intend, is to shew the infirmity or falsehood of the Antecedent: it is an Assertion most untrue in it selfe; and pernitious to the State: Our Princes professe no other way of comming to the Crown, but by right of succession to rule free subjects in a legall Monarchy. All the little shew of proofe these Assertors have, is from the root of succession: So William commonly called the Conquerour. For that of the Saxons was an expulsion not a Conquest, for as our Histories record, They comming into the Kingdome drove out the Britaines, and by degrees planted themselves under their Commanders; and no doubt continued the freedome they had in Germany: unles we should thinke that by conquering they lost their own Liberties to the Kings for whom they conquered and expelled the British into Wales. Rather I conceive, the Originall of the subjects libertie was by those our fore-fathers brought out of Germany: Where, as Tacitus reports,Tacit. de Morib. German. Sect. 3. & 5. nec Regibus infinita aut libera potestas: Their Kings had no absolute but limited power: and all weighty matters were dispatched by generall meetings of all the Estates. Who sees not here the antiquity of our Liberties and frame of Government? so they were governed in Germany, and so here to this day, for by transplanting themselves they changed their soyl; not their manners and Government: Then, that of the Danes was indeed a violent Conquest; and, as all violent rules, it lasted not long; when the English expelled them they recovered their Countrey and Liberties together. Thus it is clear, the English Libertie remained to them till the Norman Invasion, notwithstanding that Danish interruption. Now for Duke William, I know nothing they have in him but the barestile of Conqueror, which seems to make for them: The very truth is, and everie intelligent reader of the Historie of those times will attest it, that Duke William pretended the grant and gift of King Edward who died without children: and he came with forces into this Kingdome, not to Conquer but make good his Title against his enemies: his end of entring the Land was not to gaine a new absolute Title but to vindicate the old limited one whereby the English Saxon: Kings his Predecessors held this Kingdome. Though his Title was not so good as it should be,&illegible; Britan. Norma. yet it was better then Harolds, who was onely the Sonne of Goodwyn, Steward of King Edwards house; Whereas William was Cousen to Emma mother to the said King Edward; by whom he was adopted; and by solemne promise of King Edward was to succeed him: Of which promise Harola himselfe became surety, and bound by oath to see it performed: Here was a faire Title, especially Edgar Atholing the right Heire being of tender age, and dis-affected by the people. Neither did he proceed to a full Conquest, but after Harola who usurped the Crown was slain in battle, and none to succeed him, the Throne being void, the people chose rather to submit to William and his Title, then endure the hazzard of ruining war, by opposing him, to set up a new King: It is not to be imagined, that such a Realme as England could be conquered by so few, in such a space, if the peoples voluntary acceptance of him and his claime had not facilitated and shortned his undertaking. Thus we have it related in Mr. &illegible; that before Harola usurped the Crown, most men thought it the wisest Policie to set the Crown on Williams head, that by performing the Oath and promise, a Warre might be prevented: And that Harola by assuming the Crown, provoked the whole Clergy and Ecclesiasticall State against him: and we know how potent in those daies the Clergy were in State affaires. Also that after one battle fought wherein Harola was slain, he went to London, was received by the Londoners, and solemnly inaugurated King as unto whom by his own saying the Kingdome was by Gods Providence appointed, and by vertue of a gift from his Lord and Cousen King Edward, the glorious, granted: so that after that battell the remainder of the war was dispatched by English forces and Leaders. But suppose he did come in a Conqueror, yet he did not establish the Kingdome on those termes, but on the old Lawes, which he reteyned and authorized for himselfe and his Successors to governe by. Indeed after his settlement in the Kingdome, some Norman Customes he brought in, and to gratify his souldiers dispossessed many English of their estates, dealing in it too much like a Conqueror: but the triall by twelve men, and other fundamentalls of Government, wherein the English freedome consists, he left untouched, which have remained till this day. On the same Title he claimed and was inaugurated, was he King which was a title of rightfull succession to Edward: therfore he was indeed King not as Conqueror, but as Edwards Successor, and on the same right as he and his Predecessors held the Crowne. As also by the grant of the former Lawes and forme of Government, he did equivalently put himselfe and successors into the State of legall Monarchs, and in that Tenure have all the Kings of this Land held the Crown till this day, when these men would take up, and put a Title of Conquest upon them, which never was claimed or made use of by him who is the first root of their succession.
Sect. 4.Another reason which they produce is the successive nature of this Monarchy: for with them, to be elective and limited, and to be successive and absolute, are equipollent: They conceive it impossible that a Government should be Hereditary and not absolute: But I have enough made it appear, Part 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 6. That succession doth not prove a Monarchie absolute from limitation, though it proves it absolution from interruption and discontinuance, during the being of that succession to which it is defined. And that which they object that our Kings are actually so before they take the Oath of governing by Law, and so they would be, did they never take that Oath; wherefore it is no Limitation of their royall power, is there also answered in the next Sect. and that so fully, that no more need be said. The same Law which gives the King his Crown immediatly upon the decease of his Predecessor, conveyes it to him with the same Determinations and Prerogatives annexed, with which his Progeintors enjoyed it, so that he entring on that Originall Right, his subjects are bound to yeild obedience, before they take any Oath: And he is bound to the Lawes of the Monarchy, before he actually renewes the bond by any Personall Oath. There is yet another argument usually brought to this purpose, taken from the Oath of Allegiance: but of that I shall have occasion to speake hereafter.
Pos. 1.I Conceive it fundamentally limited in five particulars. First, in the whole latitude of the Nomotheticall power; so that their power extends not to establish any Act, which hath the Being and state of a Law of the Land: nor give an authenticke sense to any Law of doubtfull and controverted meaning, solely and by themselves, but together with the concurrent Authority of the two other Estates in Parliament.
Pos. 2.Secondly, in the Governing Power, there is a confinement to the Fundamentall Common Lawes, and to the superstructive Statute Lawes, by the former concurrence of Powers enacted, as to the Rule of all their Acts and Executions.
Pos. 3.Thirdly, in the power of constituting Officers, and meanes of governing; not in the choice of Persons for that is intrusted to his Judgement, for ought I know, but in the constitution of Courts of Judicature: For as hee cannot Judge by himselfe or Officers, but in Courts of Justice; so those Cours of Justice must have a constitution by a concurrence of the three Estates: They must have the same power to constitute them, as the Lawes which are dispensed in them.
Pos. 4.Fourthly, in the very succession; for though succession hath been brought as a Medium to prove the Absolutenesse of this Government yet if it be more throughly considered, it is rather a proofe of the contrary; and every one who is a successive Monarch is so far limited in his power, that he cannot leave it to whom he pleases, but to whom the Fundamentall Law concerning that Succession hath designed it. And herein though our Monarchy be not so far limited as that of France is said to be, where the King cannot leave it to his Daughter, but to his Heire male, yet restrained it is; so that should he affect another more, or judge another fitter to succeed, yet he cannot please himselfe in this, but is limited to the next Heire borne, not adopted or denominated: which was the case ’twixt Queene Mary and the Lady Jane.
Pos. 5.Lastly, in point of Revenue wherein their Power extendeth not to their Subjects Estates; by Taxes and Impositions to make their owne what they please, as hath been acknowledged by Magna Charta, and lately by the Petition of Right, the case of Ship-money, Conduct-money, &c. Nor, as I conceive, to make an Alienation of any Lands, or other Revenues annexed by Law to the Crowne. I meddle not with personall limitations, whereby Kings, as well as private men, may limit themselves by Promise and Covenant, which being particular, bind onely themselves; but of those which are radicall, and have continued during the whole current of succession from unknowne times. Other limitations, it is likely, may be produced by those who are skilfull in the Lawes: but I beleeve they will be such as are reducible to some of these, which I take to be the principall and most apparent limitations of this Monarchy, and are a most convincing induction to prove my Assertion in the former Chapter, That this Monarchy, in the very Mold and Frame of it, is of limited constitution.
Sect. 1.WHen the Government is simple, when mixed: also where the mixture must be, which denominates a mixed Government, is explained Part 1. Cap. 3. Now I conceive it a cleare and undoubted Truth, that the Authority of this Land is of a compounded and mixed nature in the very root and constitution thereof. And my judgement is established on these grounds.
Reas. 1.First, It is acknowledged to be a Monarchy mixed with Aristocracy in the house of Peeres, and Democracy in the house of Commons.Answer to the 19. Proposit. Now (as before was made appeare in the first Part) it is no mixture which is not in the Root and Supremacy of Power: for though it have a subordination of inferiour Officers, and though the Powers inferiour be seated in a mixed subject, yet that makes it not a mixed Government; for it is compatible to the simplest in the world, to have subordinate mixtures.
Reas. 2.Secondly, that Monarchy where the legislative power is in all three, is in the very Root and Essence of it compounded and mixed of those three; for that is the height of power, to which the other parts are subsequent and subservient: so that where this resideth in a mixed subject that is in three distinct concurrent Estates, the consent and concourse of all most free, and none depending on the will of the other, that Monarchy is in the most proper sense and in the very modell of it of a mixed constitution: but such is the state of this Monarchy, as appeares in the former question, and is self-apparent.
Reas. 3.Thirdly, that Monarchy, in which three Estates are constituted, to the end that the power of one should moderate and restrain from excesse the power of the other, is mixed in the root and essence of it: but such is this, as is confessed in the answere to the said Propositions. The truth of the major will appeare, if we consider how many wayes provision may be made in a Politicall Frame to remedy and restraine the excesses of Monarchy. I can imagine but three wayes. First, by constituting a legall power above it, that it may be regulated thereby, as by an over-ruling power: Thus wee must not conceive of our two houses of Parliament, as if they could remedy the exorbitances of the Prince by an Authority superiour to his, for this were to subordinate him to the two Houses, to set a superiour above the Soveraigne, that is, to destroy the being of his Monarchicall power. Secondly, by an originall conveyance to him of a limited and legall power so that beyond it he can doe no potestative act; yet constituting no formall legall power to refraine or redresse his possible exorbitances; here is limitation without mixture of another constituted power: As the former of these overthrowes the power of the Soveraigne, so this makes no provision for the iudemnity of the people. Thirdly, now the never enough to be admired wisedome of the Architects and Contrivers of the frame of Government in this Realme (who ever they were) have found a third way, by which they have conserved the Soveraignty of the Prince; and also made an excellent provision for the Peoples freedome, by constituting two Estates of men, who are for their condition Subjects, and yet have that interest in the Government, that they can both moderate and redresse the excesses and illegalities of the Royall power, which (I say) cannot be done, but by a mixture, that is, by putting into their hands a power to meddle in acts of the highest function of Government; a power not depending on his will, but radically their owne, and so sufficient to moderate the Soveraignes power.
Sect. 2.Now what can reasonably be said in opposition to these grounds, proving a fundamentall mixture, I cannot devise. Neither indeed is a mixture in the Government denied by the greatest Patrons of irresistibility; onely such a mixture they would faine make it, which might have no power of positive resistence. I will therefore set down what they probably may or do object to this purpose, and will shew the invalidity thereof.
Object. 1.First, this mixture seems not to be of distinct powers but of a Power & a Councell; authority in the Prince to give power to Acts, and counsell in the two Houses to advise and propose wholesom Acts; as if the royall power alone did give life to the Law: onely he is defined in this power, that he cannot animate any Act to the being of a Law, but such as is proposed unto him by this great and Legislative Councell of Parliament. Sol, This were probable, supposing the Parliament were onely in the nature of a Counsell; but we know it is also a Court, the High Court of Parliament: Now it is evident that a Court is the seat and subject of Authority and power, and not barely of counsell and advice.
Object. 2.Secondly, the two Houses together with the King, are the supreme Court of the Kingdome; but taken divisely from the King, it is no Court, and consequently hath no power. Sol. Suppose them no entire Court divided from the King, yet they are two Estates of the three which make up the supreme Court; so that they have a power and authority, though not complete and sufficing to perfect an Act, without the concourse of the third: For it appeares by the Acts of that Court, that every of the three Estates hath a Legislative power in it; every Act being enacted by the Kings most excellent Majesty, and by the Authority of the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament.
Sect. 3.Thirdly, they have an authority, but in subordination to the King and derived from him, as his Parliament. Indeed this is a maine Question, and hath very weighty Arguments on both sides, viz. Whether the authority of both the Houses be a subordinate authority,Object. 3. and derived from the King as its originall? Three Reasons seeme strong for the affirmative: First, because it is his Parliament, so called and acknowledged: If his Court, then the power whereby they are a Court is his power,Whether the authority of the two Houses be derived from the King? derived from him, as the power of other Courts is. Secondly, because he hath the power of calling and dissolving it. Thirdly, because he is acknowledged in the Oaths of Allegeance and Supremacy to be the Head, and of supreme authority in the Kingdome, and all subject to him.
Treatise entitituled, A fuller Answer to Dr. Ferne.And whereas some make answere that he is Singulis major, but &illegible; minor, so the Answerer to Doctor &illegible;, I wonder that the Proposition of the Observator, that the King is &illegible; minor, should be so much exploded. Every member &illegible; is a subject, but all &illegible; in their houses are not: And hee sayes simply, the Houses are co-ordinate to the King, nor subordinate; that the Lords &illegible; Comites, or Peeres, implies in Parliament a co-ordinative society with his Majesty in the Government. I conceive this Answerer to avoid one extreme falls on another; for this is a very overthrow of all Monarchy, and to reduce all Government to Democracy; For looke where the apex &illegible; in there is the Government. Also it is against Common Reason: For the King, is he not King of the Kingdome? and what is the Kingdome but all united? all the particulars knit together in one body politick? so that if he be King of the Kingdome, he is &illegible; major too; for the King is major, and the Kingdome is the united universe of the People. Thus those expressions are some of them false, some though secundum quid true; yet spoken simply, and in that manner, are scandalous and incompatible to Monarchy. Thus you see what may be said on the one side, to prove the King to be the originall of all power, even of that which is in the Houses of Parliament assembled.
On the other side are as weighty Arguments to prove the contrary, viz. That the two Houses authority is not dependent, nor derived from the Royall power. First, the authority of the Houses being Legislative, is the supreme, and so cannot bee derived. Three concurrent Powers producing one supreme act, as con-cause, joint causes of the same highest effect cannot have a subordination among themselves in respect of that casualty; it not being imaginable how a power can cause the supreme effect, and yet be a subordinate and derived power. Secondly, the end of constituting these two Estates being the limiting and preventing the excesses of the third, their power must not be totally dependent and derived from the third, for then it were unsuitable for the end for which it was ordained: For to limit an Agent by a power subordinate and depending on himself, is all one as to leave him at large without any limitation at all. Thirdly, that which hath beene spoken of a mixed Monarchy doth fully prove that the two other powers which concurre with the Monarch, to constitute the mixture, must not be altogether subordinate to it, and derived from it. I must professe these Reasons to prevaile with me, that I cannot conceive how the authority of the two Houses can in the whole being of it, be a dependent and derived power.
Sect. 4.That we may find out the truth amidst this potent contradiction of both sides, recourse must be had to the Architecture of this Government, whereof I must declare my self to be so great an Admirer, that what ever more then humane wisedom had the contriving of it, whether done at once, or by degrees found out and perfected, I conceive it unparalleld for exactnesse of true policy in the whole world;Resolution of the Question. such a care for the Soveraignty of the Monarch, such a provision for the liberty of the People, and that one may bee justly allayed, and yet consist without impeachment of the other, that I wonder how our Forefathers in those rude unpolished times could attain such an accurate composure. First then suppose a people, either compelled to it by conquest, or agreeing to it by free consent, Nobles and Commons set over themselves by publike compact one Soveraigne, and resigne up themselves to him and his heires, to be governed by such and such Fundamentall Lawes: there’s a supremacy of power set up, though limited to one course of exercise. Secondly, then because in all Governments after cases will come, it requiring an addition of Lawes, suppose them covenanting with their Soveraigne, that if cause be to constitute any other Lawes, hee shall not by his sole power doe that worke, but they reserve at first, or afterwards it is granted them (which is all one) a hand of concurrence therein, that they will be bound by no Lawes, but what they joyne with him in the making of. Thirdly, because though the Nobles may personally convene, yet the Commons (being so many) cannot well come together by themselves to the doing of such a worke, it be also agreed, that every Corporation of the Commons shall have power to depute one or more to be for the whole in this publike legislative businesse; that so the Nobles by themselves, the Commons by their Deputies assembling, there may be representatively the whole body, having Commission to execute that reserved authority for establishing new Lawes. Fourthly, because the occasion and need of making new Lawes, and authentick expounding the old, would not be constant and perpetuall, and it would carry an appearance of a Government in which were three Heads and chiefe Powers, they did not establish these Estates to be constantly existent, but occasionally, as the causes for which they were ordained should emerge and happen to be. Fifthly, because a Monarchy was intended and therefore a Supremacy of power (as farre as possible) must be reserved for one, it was concluded that these two Estates should be Assemblies of his Subjects, sworne to him, and all former Lawes; the new, which by agreement of Powers should be enacted, were to be his Lawes, and they bound to obey him in them as soone as established: And being supposed that he who was to governe by the Lawes, and for the furtherance of whose Government the new Lawes were to be made, should best understand when there was need, and the assembling and dissolving the two Estates meeting, was a power of great priviledge, it was put into the Princes hand by writ to convocate and bring to existence, and to adjourne and dismisse such meetings Sixthly, in processe of time Princes not caring much to have their Government looked into, or to have any power in act but their own, took advantage of this power of convocating those Estates, and did more seldome then need required make use of it; whereon provision was made, and a time set within which an Assembly of Parliament was to be had. Now when you have made these suppositions in your minde, you have the very modell and platforme of this Monarchy, and we shall easily find what to answer to the arguments before produced on either side. For first it is his Parliament, because an assembly of his subjects, convocated by his Writ, to be his Councell, to assist him in making Lawes for him to govern by: yet not his, as other Courts are altogether deriving their whole authority from the fulnesse which is in him. Also his power of assembling and dissolving proves him thus far above them, because in their existence they depend on him; but their power and authority quoad specificationem, the being and kind of it, is from originall constitution: for they expect no Commission and authority from him, more then for their meeting and reducing into existence; but existing they worke according to the priviledges of their constitution, their acts proceeding from their conjunct authority with the Kings, not from its subordination to the Kings. The oath of Allegeance binds them, and respects them as his subjects, to obey him, governing according to established Lawes: it supposes and is built upon the foundations of this Government, and must not be interpreted to overthrow then; he is thereby acknowledged to be supreme so far as to rule them by Lawes already made; not so far as to make Lawes without them, so that it is no derogation to their power; and I beleeve of these things none can make any question. Therein consists the accurate Judgement of the Contrivers of this Forme they have given so much into the hands of the soveraign as to make him truly a Monarch; and they have reserved so much in the hands of the two Estates, as to enable them to preserve their owne liberty.
I Shall be the briefer in this, because an answer to it may be easily collected out of the precedent Questions: for he who knowes how farre this Government is limited, will soon discerne how farre it is mixed, for the Limitation is mostly affected by the mixture:Three points of mixture. but distinctly, I conceive that there are three parts of the power referred to the joint concourse of all three Estates: So that either of them not consenting or suspending its influence the rest cannot reduce that power ordinarily and legally into act.
1.The first is the Nomotheticall power, understanding by it the power of making, and authentick expounding Lawes, so that I believe an act cannot have the nature and forme of a Law of the Land, if it proceed from any one, or two of these, without the positive concurrence of the third.
2.Secondly, The power of imposing taxes and payments on mens estates: that the King by himself cannot assume mens properties by requiring impositions not granted him by Law, is often contested: And that the other Estates cannot doe it by themselves, I conceive it as unquestionable: For it were strange to give that to the secondary and assisting Powers, which is denied to the Soveraigne and principall. It it be objected that every Corporation electing Deputes, and authorizing them to be vice totius Communitatis, do thereby grant them power, and entrust them as to make laws to bind them, so to dispose of any part of their estate, either by rate or payment for the publique good: I answer, that they are by that deputation enabled as for one, so for the other; that is, according to the fundamentall usage of the Kingdome, that is, by the joint consent of the other estates, for though the house of Commons is chosen by the people, and they represent the people, yet the representation doth not give them a power which was not in the people. Now the people have no power to doe an act which either directly, or by consequence doth put it in the will and pleasure of any one or two of the Estates, to overthrow the other. But this power of opening and shutting the Purse of the Kingdome is such a power, that if it be in one or two of the Estates, without the third, then they by that power might necessitate that other to doe any act, or disable it from its owne defence. This and the Legislative power have such a neernesse, that they cannot be divided, but must be in the same subject: this is so great a power, that put it absolutely in any Estate single, you make that Estate in effect absolute, making the rest dependent and beholding to it for their subsistence.
3.Thirdly, the power of dispatching the affaires of the Kingdome which are of greatest difficulty and weight, the ardua regni, which the Writ for convocating the other Estates doth mention, supposing thereby that such difficulties are not to be dispatched by the power of one alone; for if they were, why then are the two other convocated to be assisting? I acknowledge many matters of great moment may be done by the Regall power, and in such case it may be said, that the other Estates are gathered ad &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; that the advise and sense of the Community may be for direction. But I conceive there be two sorts of affaires, which ought not to be transacted without the concurrence of all three. First, such as concerne the publike safety and weale, so far as stable detriment or advantage comes to the whole body by the well or ill carriage thereof; for then there is the same reason as in making new Lawes: For why was not the power of making any new Lawes left in the hands of one, but reserved for the concurrence of all three? save because the end of the Architects was, that no new thing which was of so much concernment as the stable good and dammage of the Kingdome, should be introduced without the consent and advice of the whole: so that if any businesse be of that moment, that it is equipollent to a Law in the publike interest, it should be managed by such an authority and way as that is. Secondly, such as introduce a necessity of publike charge, be it matter of War or else, if to the effecting of it the Purse of the Kingdome be required, it is evident that it ought to be done by the concurrence of all, because they onely jointly (as appeares before) have power to impose a publike charge on the estates of men. And it were all one to put the power of our estates in the hands of one, as to put the power of such undertakings in his sole hands, which of necessity bring after them an engagement of publike expence.
Sect. 1.THis Question is in the generall already handled in the first Part, so that it will be easie to draw those Answers there to this particular here: Therefore conformably to what I then affirmed, I will answere this Question by divers Positions.
Pos. 1.First, the Monarch working according to his power not exceeding the Authority which God and the Lawes have conferred on him, is no way to be opposed either by any or all his Subjects, but in conscience to Gods ordinance obeyed. This is granted on all sides.
Pos. 2.Secondly, if the will and command of the Monarch exceed the limits of the Law, it ought for the avoidance of scandall and offence be submitted to, so it be not contrary to Gods Law, nor bring with it such an evill to our selves, or the publike, that we cannot be accessary to it by obeying. This also will find no opposition. Disobedience in light cases, in which we are not bound, makes an appearance of slighting the power, and is a disrespect to the person of the Magistrate. Therefore Christ, to avoyd such offense, would pay tribute, though he tells Peter, He was free, and need not have done it.
Pos. 3.Thirdly, if hee command a thing which the Law gives him no authority to command, and it be such as would bee inconvenient to obey, in this case obedience may lawfully be denied: This also findes allowance from them which stand most for royall power. Doctor Ferne in his Preface acknowledges obedience to be limited and circumscribed by the established Lawes of the Land, and accordingly to bee yeelded or denied. And Sect. 1. sayes he, 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. Here he sayes more then we say; yea more then should be said, as appeares in the second Position: it is not universally true, that we ought.
Pos. 4.Fourthly, if he exceed the limits of the Law. and proceed in courses illegall, meanes there are which it is agreed upon the Subjects may use to reduce him to legall Government; so much Doctor Ferne allowes Sect. 4. Cries to God, Petition to the Prince, Deniall of Obedience, Deniall of Subsidie, &c.
Pos. 5.Fifthly but the point in controversie is about positive and forcible resistance, the lawfulnesse of which some doe utterly deny and others doe as confidently maintaine: but yet this point might be brought to a narrower state then in the confused handling of it, it usually is: by distinguishing twix’t forceable resistence used against the Kings own person, or against inferiour Officers and Instruments advising to, or executing the illegall commands.
Sect. 2.For the first, as I have before expressed my selfe, force ought not to be used against the person of the Soveraigne, on any pretence whatever, by any or all his subjects; even in limited and mixed Monarchies: for if they be truly Monarchs, they are irrevocably invested with Soveraignty, which sets their persons above all lawfull power and force. Also the Soveraign power being so conferred on that person: The person and power cannot be really sundred, but the force which is used to the one, must also violate the other: for power is not in the Soveraigne as it is in inferiour Officers: as water is otherwise in the spring then in the channells, and pipes deriving it: It is not inseperably in them, and therfore they offending force may be used against them without violation of the Ordinance of Authority. These Arguments prove it unlawfull in any: That which the Dr. brings, I approve as strong against all private force, where he allowes defence against the person of the Prince himselfe, so farre as to ward his blowes, but not to returne blowes, no though for naturall defence: because the Common-Wealth is concerned in his person, Sect. 2. And to divert a private evill by inducing a publique, is unjust and unlawfull: so that for this point of force against the person of the Prince: I thinke there ought to be no contention. If any have bin so rash to hold it lawfull on these grounds, that the whole Kingdome is above him because they make him King, and that by miscarriage he may make a forfeiture, and so lay himselfe open to force: I do iudge these grounds very insufficient: unles the Kingdome reserve a superiority to it self, or there be a fundamentall clause of forfeiture on specified causes; and then it is not properly a Monarchy: but all this hath been already handled in the generall Part.
Secondly, for Instruments of oppression of publique liberty if the wrong be destructive, and no other meanes of prevention, but force, be left; I am perswaded it may be used, and positive resistence made against them; And if I find any contradiction from the most rigid Patrones of Royalty, it must be only in this point. And here I must complaine of the indistinct dealing of that Doctor in this matter; who mingleth both these points together: and scarce speakes any thing to resolve mens consciences in this: But speakes either in generall, or else of force against the Princes owne person: Whereas I thinke, the case which sticks most on the conscience at this time, is this latter: Of opposing, mis-leading and mis-imployed subjects, which he speaks very little to. Nay, he seems to me, after all his disclaiming of resistence, to come home to us, and though sparingly, yet to assent to lawfullnes of resistence in this point. For Sect. 2. speaking of Devids guard of armed men: He saies. It was to secure his person against the cut-throats of Saul, if sent to take away his life: He meanes to secure it by force, for Souldiers are for force: He meanes no negative securing by flight, for that may be done even against Saul himselfe: but he speaks of such a securing, which might only be against cut-throats. So then he grants securing by force against these: But they went on Sauls command, and mostly with his presence. Againe, in the instance of Elisha, he seemes to acknowledge lawfullnesse of personall defence against the sudden and illegall assaults of Messengers, he means by force, for he speaks of such which he will not allow in publique, which can be understood of none, but by force: But it appears the Doctor in his whole discourse hath avoided this point of resistence of mis-imployed subjects; which yet is the alone point which would have given satisfaction: for before it appeares, we agree in all the rest, and in this too for ought I know, he having not distinctly said any thing against it.
Sect. 3.Now concerning this case of forceable resistence of inferiour persons mis-imployed to serve the illegall destructive commands of the Prince. I will doe two things.Whether resistence of Instruments of will be lawfull? 1. I will maintaine my Assertion by convincing Arguments. 2. I will shew the invalidity of what is said against it.
Assert. 1.This then is my Assertion: The two Estates in Parliament may lawfully by force of Armes resist any persons or number of persons advising or assisting the King in the performance of a command illegall and destructive to themselves, or the publique.
Arg. 1.1. Because that force is lawfull to be used for the publique conservation which is no resistence of the Ordinance of God; for that is the reason condemning the resistence of the Powers: Now this is no resistence of Gods Ordinance: For by it neither the person of the Soveraigne is resisted, nor his power: Not his person, for we speak of Agents imployed, not of his own person: Nor his power; For the measure of that, in our Government, is acknowledged to be the Law: And therefore he cannot confer Authority to any beyond Law: so that those Agents deriving no Authority from him: are meere Instruments of his Will: Unauthorized persons; in their assaults Robbers, and, as Dr. Ferne calls them, Cut-throats. If the case be put, What if the Soveraigne himselfe in person be present with such Assaylants, joining his personall assistence in the execution of his Commands? It is much to be lamented, that the will of the Prince should be so impetuous in any subverting Act, as to hazzard his own person in the prosecution of it. Yet supposing such a case, all councells and courses must be taken, that no violence be offered to his person, and Profession of none intended: But no reason the presence of his person should priviledge ruining Instruments from suppression, and give them an immunity to spoil and destroy subjects, better themselves; His person being secured from wrong; His power cannot be violated in such an Act, in which none of it can be conferred on the Agents And sure David, though he avoided laying hands or using any violence against the person of Saul, and on no extremity would have done it: Yet for the Cut-throats about him, if no other means would have secured him, he would have rescued himselfe by force from their outrage: Though Saul was in their company: Else what intended he by all that force of Souldiers: And his enquiry of God at Keilah: by which it is plain, He had an intent to have kept the place by force, if the people would have stuck to him: Neither is it to the purpose which the Dr. saies, Sect. 2. That his example was extraordinary, because he was anointed and designed to succeed Saul, for that being but a designation, did not exempt him from the duty of subjection for the present, or lessen it, as is plain by the great conscience he made of not touching Saul: But he knew it was one thing to violate Sauls Person and Power, and another to resist those Instruments of Tyranny, the Cut-throats which were about him.
Arg. 2.Secondly, Because without such power of resistence in the hands of subjects, all distinction and limitation of Government is vain: and all formes resolve into absolute and arbitrary; for that is so, which is unlimited; and that is unlimited, not onely which hath no limits set: but also which hath no sufficient Limits, for to be restrained from doing what I will, by a power which can restrain me no longer nor otherwise then I will, is all one, as if I were left at my own Will. I take this to be cleare: Now it is as cleare, that without this forceable resistence of Instruments of usurped power be lawfull, no sufficient limits can be to the Princes Will, and all Lawes bounding him are to no purpose. This appeares by enumerating the other meanes, Prayer to God: Petition to the Prince: Deniall of obedience: Deniall of Subsidie: a moderate use of the power of denying as Doctor Ferne calls it: These are all: but what are these to hinder, if a Prince be minded to overthrow all, and bring the whole Government to his own Will? For Prayer, and Petition, these are put in to fill up the number: They are no limitations, they may be used in the most absolute Monarchy; for deniall of obedience, that may keep me from being an Instrument of publique servitude; but Princes Wills never want them which will yeild obedience, if I deny it; Yea enough to destroy all the rest, if nothing be left them but to suffer: Then for deniall of Subsidie, if he may be thousands of Instruments take all, or what he, or they please, and I must not resist: what need he care whether the people deny or grant: If a Prince be taught, that he may do it: cases and reasons will soon be brought to perswade him; that in them he may lawfully doe it; as late experiences have given us too much Testimonie: Thus it is apparent, that the deniall of this Power of Resistence of Instruments overthrowes and makes invalid all Government, but that which is absolute: and reduces the whole world de jure to an absolute subjection, that is, servitude: for the end of all constitution of moderated forms is not that the supreme power might not lawfully exorbitate, but that it might have no power to exorbitate.
The Dr. is conscious hereof; and therefore tells us in his Sect. 5. This is the very reason which is made for the Popes power of curbing and deposing Kings in case of heresie: because else the Church, saies the Papist, hath no meanes for the maintenance of the Catholique Faith, and its own safety: But who sees not the vast difference ’twixt these two? and that the same reason may be concluding here, which is apparently non concluding there; For 1. They thereby would draw to the Pope an authoritative power: we no such superiour power: but only a power of resistence for self-conservation which nature and the Law of reason gives to every one; and may stand with the condition of subjection and inferiority. 2. They on this reason give the Pope a Power over the very person of the King; we only of resisting of unauthorized invading destroyers, comming under the colour of an authority which is not in the Soveraigne to be derived. 3. They prove a civill right for spirituall reasons, we onely for civill reasons. 4. The Church and the faith are constituted in their very formall being from Christ himselfe, who is the head and great Shepheard immediately in his owne person: and as it is his owne family; so he keeps the power of preserving it in his owne hands; having made direct and particular promises to assure us of their upholding against all subvertion, by his own power: so that here is assurance enough, without visible meanes of force for a spirituall body, which lives by faith. But in a civill State there is no such assurance, nor supporting promises: power onely in the undefined being of it, being Gods immediate Ordinance, and not in this specificated or determinate being: wherefore it hath no such immediate provision made for its preservation no promise of a divine power for its standing: but as it is left by God to mens wisdome to contrive the frame, so to their providence to establish meanes of preservation. As the body is outward and Civill, so the upholding meanes must be such; spirituall and infallibly assuring a Formed State hath not, as the Church and Faith have; if there be none of outward force and power neither, then none at all it hath, and is in all case indeed. But there is an art full of venome, when a truth can not bee beaten downe by just reasoning, then to make it odious by hatefull comparisons: so in this case aspersions are cast, as if the Patrons of Resistence did borrow the Popish and Jesuiticall grounds, and their Positions as dangerous to Kings, as the Jesuites hell-bred and bloudy Principles: whereas it appeares by all this discourse, and I am perswaded is written in Capitall Letters in the very Conscience of them which despitefully object it, that there is no congruity at all ’twixt their Doctrines, no more then ’twixt Light and Darknesse.
Arg. 3.Thirdly, because such power is due to a publike State for its preservation, as is due to a particular person: But every particular person may lawfully by force resist illegall destructive Ministers, though sent by the command of a legall Soveraigne, provided no other meanes of selfe-preservation be enough. This Assumption the Doctor seemes to grant; he denies it to be lawfull against the Person of the Prince, but in effect yeelds it against subordinate persons: But the main is against the Proposition, and the Doctor is so heavie a friend to the State that he thinkes it not fit to allow it that liberty he gives every private man. But whose Judgement will concurre with his herein, I cannot imagine; for sure the Reason is greater, the publike safety being far more precious, and able to satisfie the dammages of a publike resistence, then one particular mans is of a private. But of this more in answer to his Reasons.
Arg. 4.Fourthly, because it is a power put into the two Estates by the very reason of their Institution; and therefore they not onely may, but also ought to use it for publike safety: yea they should betray the very trust reposed in them by the Fundamentals of the Kingdome if they should not. An authority Legislative they have: Now to make Lawes and to preserve Lawes are acts of the same power; yea, if three powers jointly have interest in making of Lawes, surely either of these severally have, and ought to use that power in preserving them. Also that the authority which the Houses have is as well given them for preserving the government by established lawes as for establishment of lawes to govern by is a truth proved by the constant use of their power to that end, in correcting the exorbitance of inferiour Courts questioning delinquent Judges and Officers of State for violations, and much is done in this kinde by the sole authority of the Houses without the concurrence or expectance of Royall power: so then, supposing they have such an authority for safety of publike Government, to question and censure inferiour Officers for transgressions, though pretending the Kings authority, can it be denied but that their authority will beare them out to use forcible resistence against such, be they more or fewer.
Arg. 5.Fifthly, the Kings Warrant under his hand exempts not a Malefactor from the censure of a Court of Justice, nor punishment imposed by Law, but the Judge must proceed against him according to Law: for the Law is the Kings publike and authoritative Will; but a private Warrant to doe an unlawfull act, is his private and unauthoritative Will: wherefore the Judge ought to take no notice of such Warrant, but to deale with the Offendor as no other then a private man. This proves that such Instruments thus illegally warranted, are not authorized; and therefore their violence may be by force resisted, as the assaults of private men, by any; and then much rather by the Houses of Parliament: which, supposing them divided from the King to have no complete authority, yet sure they have two parts of the greatest Legislative authority. But I feare I shall seeme superfluous, in producing Arguments to prove so cleare a truth: Is it credible that any one will maintaine so abject an esteeme of their authority, that it will not extend to resistence of private men, who should endevour the subversion of the whole frame of Government, on no other Warrant then the Kings Will and Pleasure? Must they be meerly passive? Is patience, and the deniall of their Votes to a subversion, all the opposition they must use, if a King (which God forbid) should on his Royall pleasure send Cut-throats to destroy them as they fit in their Houses? Is all their authority (if the King desert them or worse) no more then to Petition, and suffer; and by a moderate use of their power of denying, dissent from being willing to be destroyed? If power of resisting by force of subverters armed by the Kings Will (for by his Authority they cannot) be unlawfull for them, all these absurdities must follow: yea, the vilest Instrument of Oppression, shewing but a Warrant from the King to beare him out, may range and rage all his dayes through a Kingdome, to waste and spoile, taxe and distraine, and at utmost of his insolence must have no more done to him by the Parliament it selfe, then to stay his hand, as the basest Servant may his Masters, or the meanest Subject the Kings owne hand; by the Doctors own confession. Consider then and admire, if any men of learning will deny this power of forcible resistence of Ministers, of subverting commands to be lawfull. I have thus far confirmed my assertion, not that I finde any openly opposing it, but because the Doctor and some other seeme to have a mind that way, and doe strike at it, though not professedly and in open dispute.
For the severall proofes brought in behalfe of Resistence, some of them prove as much as is here asserted; others are not to the purpose. Particularly, that of the Peoples rescuing Jonathan from his Fathers bloudy resolution proves lawfulnesse of hindering unreasonable self-destructive purposes, even in absolute Monarchies, if it prove any thing. That of Vzziah thrusting out by the Priests, is not to the purpose: but Davids raising and keeping Forces about him, and his purpose at Keilah, proves the point directly viz. Lawfulnesse of forcible resistance of Cut-throats even though Saul himselfe were in presence: This the Doctor sees plainly, and therefore &illegible; it off, by saying, His example is extraordinary; as if he were not a present Subject, because he was designed by Gods revealed counsell to be a future King. And he confesses Etisha’s example of shutting the doore against the Kings messenger proves personall defense against sudden illegall assaults of messengers, which is the thing in Question.
Sect 4.Let us now view the strength of what is said against resistence whether any thing comes home against this Assertion. The Doctors proofes from the old Testament: come not to the matter: Moses, and afterwards the Kings, were of Gods particular designation, setting them absolutely over the people, on no condition or limitation; so that did they prove any thing, yet they concerne not us, respecting a Government of another nature.The following marginalia text is unreadable and Liberty Fund has made no effort to partially transcribe it. But particularly, that of Corah and the Princes rebelling against Moses, is not to the matter; it was a resistence of Moses owne Person and Office; and doubtlesse penury of other proofes caused this and the rest here to be alledged: For that 1 Sam. 8 18. how inconsequent is it, to say, the people should cry unto the Lord, therefore they had no other meanes to helpe them but cries to God; though (I confesse) in that Monarchy they had not. That speech 1 Sam. 26 9. was most true there, and is as true here, but not to the purpose, being spoken of the Kings owne Person. But the maine authority brought against resistence is that Rom. 13. and on that Doctor Ferne builds his whole discourse: Let us therefore something more largely consider what is deduced out of that Text. First, he supposes the King to be the Supreme in Saint Peter, and the Higher power in Saint Paul. Secondly, hee collects All persons, every soule is forbidden to resist. Thirdly, that then was a standing Senate, which not long before had the supreme Power in the Romane State: It is confessed; but that they could challenge more at that time when Saint Paul writ then our great Councell will or can, I deny: For that State devolving into Monarchy by Conquest, they were brought under an Absolute Monarchy, the Senate it selfe swearing full subjection to the Prince; his Edicts and Acts of Will were Lawes, and the Senates consent onely pro forma, and at pleasure required. He who reads Tacitus cannot but see the Senate brought to a condition of basest servitude, and all Lawes and Lives depending on the will of the Prince: I wonder then the Doctor should make such a parallel. Indeed the Senate had been far more then ever our Parliaments were or ought to be: but now that was far lesse then our Parliament hath been, or (I hope) ever will be: They were become the sworne Vassals of an absolute Emperour, ours the sworne Subjects of a Liege or Legall Prince. Fourthly, he sayes, then was more cause of Resistence, when Kings were Enemies to Religion, and had overthrown Lawes and Liberties. I answere, There were no causes for Resistence: Not their enmity to Religion, had they but a legall power, because Religion then was no part of the Laws and so its violation no subversion of established government. And for the overthrow of Lawes and Liberties, that was past and done, and the government new, the Senate and all the rest actually sworne to absolute Principality: Now an Ordinance of absolute Monarchy was constituted, the sacred bond of an Oath had made it inviolate. But what would he inferre hence, all being granted him? Sure this he doth intend, That every soule among us, severall, and conjoyned in a Senate, must be subject for conscience, must not resist, under paine of Damnation: All this, and what ever besides he can justly infer out of that Text, we readily grant: But can any living man hence collect, that therefore no resistence may be made to fellow-subjects: executing destructive illegall acts of the Princes will in a legall Monarchy? Will he affirme that the Ordinance of God is resisted, and Damnation incurred thereby? Gods Ordinance is the Power, and the Person invested with that power; but here force is offered to neither as before I have made it appeare. And herein we have B. &illegible; consenting, where he sayes,&illegible; of &illegible; p. 94, & 280. that the superiour power here forbidden to be resisted, is not the Princes will against his Lawes but agreeing with his Lawes. I thinke the day it selfe is not more cleare then this satisfaction, to all that can bee concluded out of that Text: so the foundation of all that discourse is taken from it, if his intent were thence to prove unlawfulnesse of Resistence of Instruments of Arbitrarinesse in this Kingdome.
Let us also consider the force of his Reasons, whether they impugne this point in hand. He sayes, such power of resistence would be no fit meanes of safety to a State, but prove a remedy worse then the diseases. His Reasons, first, because it doth tend to the overthrow of that order, which is the life of a Common-wealth; it would open a way to People, upon the like pretences, to resist and even overthrow power duly administred. 2. It may proceed to a change of government. 3. It is accompanied with the evills of Civill-Warre. 4. On the same ground the two Houses proceed against the King, may the people proceed to resistence against them; accusing them not to discharge their trust. Lastly, seeing some must be trusted in every State. It is reason the highest and small trust, should be in the highest power. These are his main reasons on which he builds his conclusion against resistence.
To his first, I say it were strange if resistence of distructive disorder should tend to the overthrow of Order: It may for the time disturbe, as Physick while it is in working disturbes the naturall bodie, if the peccant humors make strong opposition: but sure it tends to health, and so doth this resistence of disorder to Order. Neither would it open a way for the people to violate the Powers; for doing right can open no way to the doing of wrong. If any wicked seditious spirits should make use of the Vail of Justice to cover unnaturall Rebellion: Shall a peoples right and liberty be taken from them to prevent such possible abuse? Rather let the foulnesse of such pretences discover it selfe, so God and good men will abhorre them: such Cloakes of Rebellion have in former ages been taken off, and the Authors brought to just confusion, without the expence of the liberties of this Kingdome.
To the second; must not Instruments be resisted, which actually intend, and seeked a chang of Government: because such resistence may proceed to a chang of Government? Is not an unlikely possibility of change to be hazarded, rather then a certaine one suffered? But I say, It cannot proceed to a chang of Government, unles it exceed the measure of lawfull resistence: yea it is impossible, that resistence of Instruments should ever proceed to a change of Government; for that includeth the greatest resistence and violation of the person and power of the Monarch, the lawfullnesse of which I utterly disclaime.
Thirdly, it is not ever accompanied with the evills of Civill Warre: But when the Princes Will findes enough Instruments of their Countreys ruine to raise it. And then the mischife of that war must light on those which raise it: But suppose it may ensue, yet a temporary evill of war is to be chosen rather then a perpetuall losse of liberty, and subversion of the established frame of a Government.
In the fourth, I deny the parity of reason: for the two Houses are bodies constituted and endowed with legislative authority, and trust of preservation of the frame, by the Fundamentalls of the Kingdome: which the people out of those Houses are not. Againe the Government being composed of a threefold consenting power, one to restraine the exorbitance of another: All three together are absolute and equivalent to the power of the most absolute Monarch: The concurrent Will of all three, makes a Law, and so it is the Kingdomes Law.
To the last, I answer, In every State some must be trusted, and the highest trust is in him who hath the Supreame power: These two the Supreame Trust, and the Supreame Power are inseperable: And such as the power is, such is the trust: An absolute power supposes an absolute trust: A Power allayed with the annexion of another power as here it is, supposeth a trust of the same nature. A joynt trust, yet saving the supremacie of the Monarch, so far forth as it may be saved, and not be absolute and the others authority nullified. It may be further argued:How farre forth the sword is in the hand of the Monarch? that it being the Prerogative Royall to have the managing of the sword, that is, legall force, in the Kingdome; none can, on any pretence whatever use lawfull force, either against him, or any, but by his Will: for it is committed to him by law, and to none but whom he assignes it to: so that the Lawes of the Kingdome putting all power of force and Armes into his trust, have placed him, and all those who serve him, in a state of irresistiblenes in respect of any lawfull force. This is a point much stood on and on this ground, the Parliament now assuming the disposing of the Militia by an Ordinance, it is complained on, as a usurping of what the Law hath committed to the King as his Prerogative; The opposing of which Ordinance by a Commission of Array, was the beginning of this miserable Civill-Warre. I will distinctly lay down my Answer hereto, submitting it to every impartiall judgement.
Pos. 1.1. The power of the Sword being for defence of the Lawes, by punishing violators, and protecting subjects, it is subservient to Government, and must needs belong to him who is entrusted with the Government, as a necessarie requisite without which he cannot performe his trust.
Pos. 2.2. As it is an appendix to the power of Government, and goes along with it, so it goes under the same termes: belonging to the Prince, as the other doth: sc. absolutely, to use at will, where the Monarchie is absolute; or with limitation, to use according to Law, where the Monarchy is limited: so that, in this Government the Armes and sword of the Kingdome is the Kings, to a defined use committed to him; viz. For defence of the Lawes and Frame of Government established, and not for arbitrary purposes, or to enable Ministers to execute commands of meer Will.
Pos. 3.3. The two Houses in virtue of the Legislative authority, in part residing in them, are interested in the preservation of Lawes and Government, as well as the King: And in case, the King should misimploy that power of Arms to strengthen subverting Instruments: Or in case the Lawes and government be in apparent danger, the King refusing to use the sword to that end of preservation for which it was committed to him: I say, in this case, the two Estates may by extraordinary and temporary Ordinance assume those Armes, wherewith the King is entrusted, and performe the Kings trust: And though such Ordinance of theirs is not formally legall, yet it is eminently legall, justified by the very intent of the Architects of the Government, when for these uses they committed the Armes to the King. And no doubt they may command the strength of the Kingdome to save the being of the Kingdome: for none can reasonably imagine the Architectonicall Powers, vvhen they committed the power of government and Armes to one to preserve the Frame they had composed, did thereby intend to disable any, much lesse the two Estates, from preserving it, in case the King should faile to doe it in this last need. And thus doing the Kings Worke, it ought to be interpreted as done by his Will: because as the Law is his Will, so that the Law should be preserved is his Will, which he expressed when he undertooke the government: Tis his deliberate Will, and ought to be done, though at any time he oppose by an after-Will, for that is his sudden Will, as Doctor Ferne himselfe Sect. 1. doth teach us to distinguish.
Sect. 1.WHo ever were the Authors of that Booke lately published, stiled, Scripture and Reason pleaded for defensive Armes, have laid new and over-large grounds for resistence. Two Assertions they endevour to maintaine: First, those Governours (whether supreme or others) who under pretence of authority from Gods Ordinance, disturb the quiet and peaceable life in Godlinesse and Honesty, are farre from being Gods Ordinance in so doing,Whether it be lawfull to take up armes agonist the Magistrate, perverting his power to a wrong end? Sect. 3. Secondly, This Tyranny not being Gods Ordinance, they which resist it even with Armes, resist not the Ordinance of God. Hereon, Sect. 4. they free Christians, even in the Apostles time, and so under the Romane Emperours, or any other Government, from necessity of passive subjection in case of persecution; affirming that the Christians in those first Persecutions, had they been strong enough, might have used Armes for defence against the Tyranny of their Emperours. Their ground is from the Reasons used by the Apostle Rom. 13. where he commands subjection, & forbids resistence to the higher power, because they are Gods ordinance, his Ministers for praise to west-doers, for terrour to evill doers. But I must professe my self to dissent from them in this opinion, conceiving that the Apostle in urging those Reasons drawne from the due ends of Power, doth intend to presse them to subjection by shewing them what benefit comes to men by authority in its due use; and not to shew them how far they are bound to be subject, and in what cases they may resist: For had he such a meaning at that time, when the Governours did altogether crosse those ends of their Ordination, he had taught them rather a Doctrine of Resistence then Subjection: shall we conceive that hee would presse subjection to Powers in the hands of Heathens and Persecutors, if he had not intended they should passively be subject unto them, even under those Persecutions? Rather I approve the received Doctrine of the Saints in ancient and moderne times, who could never finde this licence in that place of the Apostle: and doe concurre with Master Burroughs,Answ. to Dr. Ferne Sect. 2. professing against resistence of authority, though abused: if those (saies he) who have power to make Lawes, make sinfull Lawes, and so give authority to any to force obedience we say here there must be either flying, or passive Obedience. And againe, We acknowledge we must not resist for Religion, if the Lawes of the land be against it. But what doe they say against this? In making such Lawes against Religion the Magistrates are not Gods ordinance; and therefore to resist is not to resist Gods ordinance: As an inferiour Magistrate, who hath a Commission of Power for such ends, is resistible if hee exceed his Commission, and abuse his Power for other ends; so Princes being Gods Ministers, and having a deputed Commission from him to such ends, viz. the promotion of godlinesse, Peace, Justice, if they pervert their power to contrary ends, may be resisted without violation of Gods ordinance. That I may give a satisfactory answere to this, which is the summe of their long discourse, I must lay it downe in severall Assertions.
Assert. 1.First, I acknowledge Gods ordinance is not onely Power, but Power for such ends, sc. the good of the People.
Assert. 2.Secondly, it is also Gods ordinance, that there should be in men, by publike consent called thereto, and invested therein, a power to choose the meanes, the Lawes, and Rules of government conducing to that end: and a power of Judging in relation to those Lawes, who be the well doers which ought to be praised, and who the evill doers who ought to be punished. This is as fully Gods ordinance as the former; for without this the other cannot be performed.
Assert. 3.Thirdly, when they who have this finall civill Judicature shall centure good men as evill doers; or establish iniquity by a Law, to the encouragement of evill doers; in this case, if it be a subordinate Magistrate doth it, appeale must bee made (as Saint Paul did) to the supreme; if it be the supreme, which through mistake or corruption doth mis-censure, from whom there lyes no Civill Appeale, then without resistence of that Judgement wee must passively submit: And he who in his owne knowledge of innocency or goodnesse of his cause shall by force resist that man erects a Tribunal in his owne heart against the Magistrates Tribunal; cleares himselfe by a private Judgement against a publike, and executes his owne sentence by force against the Magistrates sentence, which hee hath repealed and made void in his owne heart. In unjust Censures by the highest Magistrate, from whom there is no Appeale but to God, the sentence cannot be opposed till God reverse it to whom we have appealed: In the meane time vvee must suffer, as Christ did, notwithstanding his Appeale, 1 Pet. 2. 23. and so must wee notwithstanding our Appeale, 1 Pet. 4. 19. for he did so for our example. If an Appeale to God, or a censure in the Judgement of the condemned might give him power of resistence, none would be guilty, or submit to the Magistrates censure any further then they please. I desire those Authors, before they settle their judgement in such grounds (which I feare will bring too much scandall) to weigh these particulars. First, their opinion takes away from the Magistrate the chiefe part of Gods ordinance, sc. povver of definitive judgement of Lawes and Persons, who are the good, and who the bad, to be held so in Civill proceedings. Secondly, they justifie the Conscience of Papists, Heretickes, and grossest Malefactors to resist the Magistrate, in case they be perswaded their cause is good. Thirdly, they draw men off from the commands of Patience under persecution, and conforming to Christ and his Apostles, in their patient enduring without verball or reall opposition, though Christ could not have wanted power to have done it, as he tells Peter. Fourthly, they deprive the Primitive and Moderne Martyrs of the glory of suffering, imputing it either to their ignorance or disability. Fifthly, it is a wonder, that sith in Christs and his Apostles time there was so much use of this power of resistence, they would by no expresse word shew the Christians this liberty, but condemne resistence so severely. Sixthly, there is in the case of the Parliament now taking up Armes no need of these offensive grounds; Religion being now a part of our Nationall Law, and cannot suffer but the Law must suffer with it.
Sect. 2.Now to the proposed Question I answere first Negatively, sc. 1. It ought not to be done against all illegall proceedings, but such which are subversive and unsufferable. Secondly, not publike resistence, but in excesses inducing publike evils: for to repell private injuries of highest nature with publike hazzard and disturbance, will not quit cost, unlesse in a private cafe the common Liberty be strooke at.1. When arms &illegible; not to be &illegible; Thirdly, not when the government is actually subverted, and a new forme (though never so injuriously) set up, and the People already engaged in an Oath of absolute subjection: for the remedy comes too late and the establishment of the new makes the former irrevocable by any justifiable power, within the compasse of that Oath of God: This was the case of the Senate of Rome in Saint Pauls time.2. When they may be &illegible; Secondly, affirmatively: I conceive three cases when the other Estates may lawfully assume the force of the Kingdome, the King not joyning, or dissenting, though the same be by Law committed to him. First, when there is invasion actually made, or imminently feared by a forraigne Power. Secondly, when by an intestine Faction the Lawes and Frame of government are secretly undermined, or openly assaulted: In both these cases the Being of the Government being endangered, their trust binds, as to assist the King in securing, so to secure it by themselves, the King refusing. In extreme necessities the liberty of Voices cannot take place, neither ought a Negative Voice to hinder in this exigence, there being no freedome of deliberation and choice, when the Question is about the last end: Their assuming the sword in these cases is for the King, whose Being (as King) depends on the Being of the Kingdome; and being interpretatively his act, is no disparagement of his Prerogative. Thirdly, in case the Fundamentall Rights of either of the three Estates bee invaded by one or both the rest, the wronged may lawfully assume force for its owne defence; because else it were not free, but dependent on the pleasure of the other. Also the suppression of either of them, or the diminishing of their Fundamentall Rights, carries with it the dissolution of the Government: And therefore those grounds which justifie force to preserve its Being, allowes this case, which is a direct innovation of its Being and Frame.
Sect. 1.IN this Question (for our more distinct proceeding) some things are necessarily to be observed. First, that we meddle not here with the &illegible; of Questions of inferiour nature; viz. such as are ’twixt subject and subject, or the King and a subject, in matter of particular right,The Question stated. which may be decided other way, without detriment of the publike Frame, or diminution of the priviledges of either of the three Estates. Secondly difference is to be made even in the Questions of utmost danger: First, for it may be alledged to be either from without, by invasion of forrain Enemies; or by a confederacy of intestine subverters, in which neither of the three Estates are alledged to be interessed, and so the case may be judged without relation to either of them, or detriment to their priviledges. Here I conceive a greater latitude of power may be given to some to judge without the other; for it inferres not a subordinating of any of the three to the other. Secondly, or else it may be alledged by one or two of the Estates against the other, that not contenting it selfe with the Powers allowed to it by the Lawes of the Government, it seekes to swallow up, or entrench on the priviledges of the other, either by immediate endevours, or else by protecting and interesting it selfe in the subversive plots of other men. Thirdly, in this case wee must also distinguish betwixt, first, authority of raising Forces for defense against such subversion, being knowne and evident: secondly and authority of judging and finall determining, that the accused Estate is guilty of such designe and endevour of subversion, when it is denied and protested against. This last is the particular in this Question to be considered; not whether the People are bound to obey the authority of two, or one of the Legislative Estates in resisting the subversive assaies of the other, being apparent and self-evident; which I take in this Treatise to be cleare. But when such plea of subversion is more obscure and questionable, which of the three Estates hath the power of ultime and supreme judicature by Vote or sentence to determine it against the other; so that the People are bound to rest in that determination, and accordingly to give their assistance, eo nomine, because it is by such Power so noted and declared?
Determination of the Question.For my part in so great a cause if my earnest desire of publique good, and peace, may justifie me to deliver my minde, I will prescribe to the uery Question: for it includes a solecisme in government of a mixt temperature: To demand which Estate may challenge this power of finall determination of Fundamentall controversies arising betwixt them, is to demand which of them shall be absolute: For I conceive that in the first part hereof, I have made it good, that this finall utmost controversie arising betwixt the three Legislative Estates, can have no legall. constituted Judge in a mixed government: for in such difference, he who affirmes that the people are bound to follow the Judgement of the King against that of the Parliament, destroyes the mixture into absolutenesse: And he who affirmes that they are bound to cleave to the Judgement of the two Houses against that of the King resolves the Monarchie into an Aristocracie, or Democracie, according as he places this finall Judgement. Whereas I take it to be an evident truth, that in a mixed government no power is to be attributed to either Estate, which directly, or by necessary consequence, destroyes the liberty of the other.
Sect. 2.Yet it is strange to see, how in this Epidemicall division of the Kingdome, the Abectors of both parts claime this unconcessible Judgement. But let us leave both sides, pleading for that which we can grant neither, and weigh the strength of their Arguments.
Dissolution of Arguments placing it in the King.First, Dr. Ferne layes downe two reasons, why this finall Judgement should belong to the King. 1. Monarchie, saies he, Sect. 5. settles the chiefe power and finall Judgement in one. This Position of his can be absolutely true no where but in absolute Monarchies: and in effect, his book knowes no other then absolute government. 2. Seeing some one must be trusted in every State, It is reason, saies he, Sect. 5. the highest and finall trust, should be in the higher and Supreame power. I presume by finall trust, he meanes the trust of determining these Supreame and finall disagreements; and accordingly I answer; It is not necessary that any one be trusted with a binding power of Judicature in these cases; for by the foundations of this government, none is, yea, none can be trusted with it: for to intend a mixed government, and yet to settle the last resolution of all judgement in one, is to contradict their very intention. Neither in a constituted government must we dispose of powers according to the guesse of our reason; for mens apprehensions are various; The Dr. thinkes this power fittest for the King: His answerers judge it fittest for the two Houses, and give their reasons for it too. Powers must there reside, where they are de facto by the Architects of a government placed: he who can bring a fundamentall Act stating this power in any, saies something to the matter: but to give our conjectures, where it should be, it but to provide fuell for contention.
Dissolution of the Arguments placing it in the two Houses.On the contrary, The Author of that which is called A Fuller Answer to that Dr. hath two maine Assertions placing this Judgement in the two Houses.
1. The finall and casting result of this States Judgement concerning what these Lawes, dangers, and meanes of prevention are, resides in the two Houses of Parliament, saies he, p. 10.
2. In this finall resolution of the States Judgement, the people are to rest, ibidem, pag. 14. Good Lord! What extream opposition is between these two sorts of men? If the maintenance of these extremes be the ground of this warre, then our Kingdome is miserable, and our Government lost which side soever overcome: for I have, more then once, made it good, that these Assertions are destructive on both sides: But I am rather perswaded, that these Officious Propugners overdoe their worke, and give more to them whose cause they plead, then they ever intended to assume: Nay, rather give to every one their due: give no power to one of these three to crush and undoe the other at pleasure: But why doth this Answer give all that to the two Houses which ere while they would not suffer when the Judges in the case of Ship-money had given it to the King? sure, when they denied it to him they did not intend it to themselves. 1. Hee tells us In them resides the reason of the State: And that the same reason and Judgement of the State which first gave this government its being, and constitution; therefore all the people are to be led by it and submit to it as their publique reason and Judgement.
I answer, if by state, he meane the whole Kingdome: I say, the reason of the two Houses divided from the King, is not the reason of the Kingdome, for it is not the Kings reason, who is the head and chiefe in the Kingdome. If by state be meant the people, then it must be granted, that as farre forth as they represent them, their reason is to be accounted the reason of the Kingdome: and doth binde so farre forth as the publique reason of the Kingdome can binde after they have restrained their reason and will to a condition of subjection: so that put case it be the reason of the state, yet not the same which first gave this Government its being: for then it was the reason of a State, yet free and to use their reason and Judgement in ordaining a Government: but now the reason of a State bound by Oath to a Government, and not at liberty to resolve againe: Or to assume a supreme power of judging, distructive to the frame of Government they have established, and restrained themselves unto. Their reason is ours, so farre as they are an ordained representative body: But I have before demonstrated, that in this frame, the Houses could not be ordained a legall Tribunall to passe Judgement in this last case: for then the Architects by giving them that Judicature, had subordinated the King to them, and so had constituted no Monarchie. 2. He argues, the Parliament being the Court of supreme Judicature and the Kings great and highest Councell, therefore that is not to be denied to it, which inferiour Courts ordinarily have power to do, viz. To judge matters of right betweene the King and Subject: Yea, in the highest case of all: The Kings power to tax the subject in case of danger, and his being sole Judge of that danger, was brought to cognizance, and passed by the Judges in the Exchequor. I answer, 1. There is not the same reason betwixt the Parliament & other courts. In these the King is Judge, the Judges being deputed by him, and judging by his authority; so that if any of his Rights be tried before them, it is his owne Judgement, and he judges himselfe; and therefore it is fit he should be bound by his owne sentence: But in Parliament the King and People are Judges, and that not by an authority derived from him, but originally invested in themselves. So that when the two Estates judge without him in any case not prejudged by him, it cannot be called his Judgement, (as that of the other Courts, being done by his authority) and if he be bound by any Judgment of the two Estates without him, he is bound by an externall power which is not his owne; that is, he is subordinated to another power in the State where he is supreme; which is contradictory. Secondly, in other Courts, if any case of right be judged ’twixt him and the subject, they are cases of particular Rights which diminish not Royalty if determined against him. Or if they passe cases of generall right, (as they did in that of Ship-money) it is but declaratively to shew what is by Law due to one and the other: yet their Judgement is revocable, and liable to a repeale by a superiour Court, as that was by Parliament. But if the Kings Prerogatives should be subjected to the Judgement of the two Estates, the King dissenting, then he should be subject to a sentence in the highest Court, and so irremediable; a Judicatory should be set up to determine of his highest Rights without him, from which he could have no remedy. Thus maine causes may bee alledged, why, though other Courts doe judge his Rights, yet the two Estates in Parliament (without him) cannot: and it is from no defect in their power, but rather from the eminency of it, that they cannot. If one deputed by common consent of three, doth by the power they have given them determine controversies betweene those three, it is not for either of them to challenge right to judge those cases, because one who is inferiour to them doth it. Indeed if the power of the two Houses were a deputed power, as the power of other Courts is, this Argument were of good strength: but they being concurrents in a supreme Court by a power originaliy their owne, I conceive it hard to put the power of finall Judgement in all controversies ’twixt Him and them exclusively, or solely into their hands.
Sect. 3.If it be demanded then, how this cause can be decided? and which way must the People turne in such a contention? I answere, If the non-decision be tolerable, it must remaine undecided, whiles the Principle of legall decision is thus divided, and by that division each suspends the others power. If it be such as is destructive, and necessitates a determination,&illegible; to be done in such a Contention? this must be made evident; and then every Person must aide that Part, which in his best Reason and Judgement stands for publike good, against the destructive. And the Lawes and Government which he stands for, and is sworne to justifies and beares him out in it, yea; bindes him to it. If any wonder I should justifie a power in the two Houses to resist, and command aide against any Agents of destructive commands of the King, and yet not allow them power of judging when those Agents or commands are destructive. I answere, I doe not simply deny them power of judging and declaring this; but I deny them to be a legall Court ordained to judge of this case authoritatively, so as to bind all People to receive and rest in their judgement for conscience of its authority, and because they have Voted it: ’Tis the evidence, not the power of their Votes, must bind our Reason and Practice in this case: We ought to conceive their Votes the Discoveries made by the best eyes of the Kingdome and which in likelihood should see most: But when they Vote a thing against the proceedings of the Third and supreme Estate, our Consciences must have evidence of Truth to guide them, and not the sole authority of Votes; and that for the Reason so oft alledged.
Sect. 1.THus have I (for my owne satisfaction, and the Conscience of every moderate and impartiall man who will peruse the same) set downe what I verily conceive to be the truth concerning those high matters, first of Monarchy in generall, and then of this of England, and have given my determination concerning all the weighty Questions which arise considerable in the course of handling both: Now nothing remaines, but to resolve the Conscience by this precedent light what to judge of the unhappy contention, which now is broken out into open warre, betweene the King and the two Houses. But this depending on matter of fact, is more fitly referred to every mans owne memory and Judgement; and nothing is to be done, but to acquaint himselfe with the certaine truth of those matters of fact, and then to judge therof according to the former Rules. To this issue the whole controversie is brought, That the two Houses may lawfully resist by force of Armes, all counsells and attempts of what men soever, tending to the subversion of the established Frame of Government, or themselves and their Fundamentall Priviledges; which is equivalent to the other; yea, though they are warranted by the commands and personall presence of the King himselfe: And that clearly, this is no resistence of the higher power in our Government (so no force be intended or used against the Kings owne Person) nor doth it come within the censure of Saint Paul Rom. 13. nor any other Scripture, nor right Reason grounded thereon: so that the Conscience assured hereof, hath nothing else to doe but to enquire whether the truth of Factlyes either in the Affirmative of the two Houses; That the Kingdome was in imminent danger, the King refusing to joyne with them for prevention of it, when they assumed the Militia for defence: Or else in the Kings Negative. Much hath beene said on both sides, to draw the Consciences of men to adherence; and many (no doubt) have judged according to their pre ingaged affections: Many Papers have I seene running out on both sides to unjustifiable extremes, and have much &illegible; on the contention, by making the breach wider: yea, I have read more said for them then (I am perswaded, notwithstanding the heat of the contention) either will say for themselves,Sect. 2. or can without the subversion of the other.
A debate upon the contention.Now for a man to resolve his Conscience about the lawfulnesse or unlawfulnesse of this Warre, the course is not to cry it downe indefinitely, as a Resistence of Gods ordinance, nor of the higher Power: Nor to justifie it, because the cause stood for is Religion, and expurgation of in-crept corruptions in Church and State: For all standing for Religion and Reformation is not a justifiable cause to take up Armes; we having proved it before, that in this Kingdome nothing can warrant it, but apparent danger from destructive Counsellours and Instruments. Neither is it enough to demand, as Doctor Ferne doth Sect 6. Who were first in Armes? for the other part will by their Almanack finde Armes and Forces gathered and employed before those in Hull:Declar. of the Lords and Commons of Apr. 3. 1642. but that is not the resolving enquiry; it may fall out the defensive part may be first in Armes, to prevent the ruine of counsells and Plots which are apparently contrived, but not executed. The resolving enquiry (I thinke) must be, Whether at the Parliaments taking up of Armes, the Common-wealth, Frame of established Government, or (which is all one) the Being and radicali Powers of Parliament were in apparent danger of subversion? For if so, then the Armes and Force used against the Counsellours or Agents thereof is proved lawfull by all the precedent discourse.
His Majesties &illegible;. to the &illegible;. of the &illegible; Much 26. 1642.Now it will be alledged, and is in part acknowledged, that there was a grand intention and plot of altering the Government of this Kingdome and reducing it to an arbitrary way. They will not say his Majestie was conscious of it; but it was aimed at by many about him, and in power with him, whom it concerned to have him absolute: By these men he was told that such things were Law: which if they had bin so, then he had bin absolute by law. They will instance in the long and purposed diluse of Parliaments: The arbitrary Taxes and Impositions on most of the Commodities of the Kingdome: The encroachment of the Arbitrary Courts upon the Legall: The imposition of Ship-money: And the Judges opinion that the King had power to tax the subject in times of danger, and that he is the sole Judge of that danger: The raising an Army, and forcing the subject to furnish the same with Coat and Conduct-money. The intention of bringing up the Army, to subvert, or at best, to awe and confine the Parliament to bounds of proceeding of their owne setting. All this before or upon the beginning of the Parliament. Then the evidences and proofes against the Earle of Sirafford, This Majesties comming with the terror of such an attendance into the House of Commons to demand such a number of Members. Here is a succession of designes, all before the least show of resistence: for his Majesties comming to the House was Iannuary 4. 1641. And the first Petition to his Majestie about the Militia was not till the 26. of the same: And their resolution to settle it by themselves, His Majesties refusing was not till March 1. And among all these there is not one but tends to destroy the frame of Government. Not that every one who had a hand in them did aime at such a destruction; but looking on the designe it selfe (and we must judge of mens intentions by the nature of their Counsells and enterprizes,) every one of them strikes at the foundation of this legall frame, and tends to the introduction of Absolutenesse and Arbitrarinesse in the Soveraigne.
I acknowledge, that since that time, there is a Plea on both sides of danger of subversion: The King withdrew from London: and oft affirmes that He was driven therce, and could no longer remaine in safety: And the two Houses on the former designes plead a danger of subversion from evill Counsellours. Both sides now complaine of danger, and have taken up Armes to repell that danger: but these complaints of danger and taking up of Armes by both sides, was all since the succession of those fore recited plots. I know what hath been intended or done since the taking of Armes may be all affirmed to be for defense against danger; the withdrawment of so many Members of both Houses, the acts of hostility on both sides, the taxing, spoyling, and undoing of thousands of innocent people all must be excused by necessity of Warre, and self-defense. But what can be said for all those Plots and Essaies, which were the Parliaments first grounds of Feares and Forces? Were they removed before they tooke up Armes, and so their assuming them made causlesse and inexcusable? You will say, Those were the Plots of men in grace and authority about His Majesty, and that the illegality of those proceedings being made knowne to him. He disclaimes them professing solemnly he hath no intent but to governe by Law; and acknowledges that the Law is the measure of his power. But they doe tell you, That they object nothing against his Majesty, they impute nothing to Him, nor use force against Him but those destructive Counsellours, and their Abbettors which are about Him; because their danger is not from His intentions, but from theirs. It is answered, that His Majesty offers to secure them the Lawes, Liberties, and Religion, by any Acts they shall devise to that purpose.Parlian. Remonstrance May 19. 1642 They will tell you, Their danger is not from want of Laws to secure them for they are secured by Law already; their danger is from Men, and their Plots and Designes to overthrow Law; and a danger of subversion of Law cannot bee secured by Law; succeeding Lawes can be no better nor stronger then former Lawes: so that where those men and their counsels are in power, whose aime hath been the subversion of Parliaments, Liberties, and Lawes; and those Doctrines remaine affirmed and maintained by the Clergie of that side, which subvert all limitations of Monarchy, make all Lawes Acts of grace, and revocable Immunities granted to Subjects; condemning for Rebellion all force used even by the Parliament it selfe, against the meanest Instruments of violence employed by the Princes Will; making the Princes Will and Gods Ordinance one and the same thing, of the same latitude; so that resistence of one is resistence of the other: such Counsellours and such Doctrines are (they say) the ground of publike danger, from which no Lawes but Justice can secure us. Publike Liberty and Power of forcible resistence of Instruments of servitude are so conjoyned, that if you make it unlawfull simply to use such power of resistence, you make it unlawfull for a People to be free.
Sect. 3.What course then can be sufficient to answere their Demands of safety, if Lawes cannot doe it? Though I incurre the censure of high Presumption yet I will be so bold to afford my opinion herein, submitting it to the censure of every Judicious Reader;Meanes of reconcilement proposed. wishing it were worthy to be scanned by those, in whose hands it is to heale our divisions. What honest heart doth not bleed to see the ruine of this late flourishing Kingdome goe on so fast? Who can doe other then speake his minde, who conceives hee thinkes of any thing which may conduce to Peace and the re-uniting of this divided Body? Suffer mee therefore to disclose my heart in a case, in which every good man hath a deep interest. Thus then I could heartily desire.
Petit. 1.First, that the Parliament would desire and seeke in this unusuall way of Force no more then what makes necessarily for their, and the publike security: for none can justifie force in them any further then for security of their Priviledges, Lawes, and frame of Government.
Petit. 2.Secondly, that His Majesty would be pleased (according to his gracious Resolution, viz. To deny onely those things, the granting whereof would alter the Fundamentall Lawes, and endanger the foundation on which publike happinesse is built:) to condescend to all Acts of safety, both by establishing of Lawes tending to it;Answ. to the Petitions of Commons lan. 28. 1641. and removall of Persons of destructive counsells and Judgements because the danger alledged is from such.
Petit. 3.Thirdly, that because their maine feare hath been, that while his Majesty is swayed by such Persons, whose Judgement and endevours have been for Absolutenesse, the Militia of the Kingdome may be by them (making use of his Majesties Authority) employed in bringing to passe their long fomented and not yet deserted designe; His Majesty would be pleased (for this present) to authorize such over the Militia whom the Houses shall approve of, not thereby disparaging his power over the Militia, which by Law is invested in him; but satisfying by a condescent of grace their Feares from apprehensions of present danger.
Petit. 4.Fourthly, that the two Houses (in their wisedom) would put a difference between those Persons who were the ancient Dilinquents, Contrivers and principall Agents in the former designes of Arbitrarinesse; and those Members of both Houses; who since the Kings with-drawment and their assuming the Militia, have gone from the Houses to serve and adhere to his Majesty: For since the time that both parts have declared themselves to be in danger, many good subjects and Patriots have followed the parts, from conscience and perswasion of the truth of Allegations on either side, as their care and opinion of either Part hath lead them; (not that I can acquit them, who on any mis-leading assist the destructive party, from guilt, as Accessaries and Instruments of so unnaturall a designe) but that I cannot see how the authority and freedome of either of the three Estates can choose but undergoe a shew of disparagement, if its adherents and propugners (when it cries out of danger of subversion from the other, and calls and requires their assistance) should be proceeded against and punished as Delinquents, when they professe their aime hath beene no more then to preserve the just rights of any of the fundamentall Estates of the Kingdom, without impairment of the other.
Petit. 5.Fifthly that if possible, all those might be re-admitted into their severall Houses which are not guilty of the former designes for Absolutenesse, and have nothing alledged against them but their adherence to the King in this division, and might fit and act securely there, according to the due freedome of their Houses.
Petit. 6.Sixthly, that his Majesty (for the sake of Peace, and present necessity of composing this distemperature) would be pleased to put himselfe upon the Judgment and Affection of the two Estates so assembled in their full Bodies and suspend the use of his Negative voice, resolving to give his royall assent to what shall passe by the major part of both Houses freely voting concerning all matters of grievance and difference now depending in the two Houses. I am confident, if ever this War be transacted without the ruine of one side, which will endanger, if not undoe the whole, it must be by some such way of remission of rigour on both sides as I have now described: Which the God of Peace, in whose hands are the hearts and counsels of men, speedily and graciously effect for his Name sake.
FINIS.
T.29 (8.17) Anon., The Subject of Supremacie (14 June, 1643).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date
OLL Thumbs TP Image

Local JPEG TP Image

Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.29 [1643.06.14] (8.17) Anon., The Subject of Supremacie (14 June, 1643).
Full titleAnon., The Subject of Supremacie. The Right of Caesar. Resolution of Conscience. Wherein are three Questions handled: Viz.
1. Whether the King without the Parliament may take up Armes, and in the time of it fight with friends or Foes, as having the Law of Armes in his owne Power, and no Law else?
2. Whether the Parliament without the King may take up Armes to defend themselves, and Kingdome, against Delinquents, Invaders, and Forces raised in, or out of the Kingdome?
3. Whether the People by Command of either to assist the one, and resist the other be Rebells?
And may serve as a Replication to the Reply of Dr. Ferne, concerning free Subjects; a Faithfull Councell, a Royall King, and Loyall People; placed by this Auhtor as slaves, a Faction, a Tyrnat, Rebells, in his Ignorance of Jurisdiction, Legall, and naturall Preservation.
Psal. 120. 7. My soule it hath much dwelt with him that hateth Peace; I am for Peace, and when I speake, they are for Warre.
London, Printed for Ben. Allen, and are to be sold at his Shop on Popes-head Alley, 1643.
Estimated date of publication14 June, 1643.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 267; Thomason E. 106. (1.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
The Subject of SUPREMACIE.
THE fedler Answer, as the Author sayes, cost not many houres, and the Dr. saies the discourse was ready to another purpose of the Parliaments Power: now the Dr. disclaimes that, and sayes he meant no such matter as to deny the Militia to the Parliament, but whether the People might take up Armes against the King to resist his Commission of array? The Question will never bee stated right, or the Drs. Reason kept from Rebellion on the one side. He alwayes had, and still hath affection enough to Parliaments; I dare say none to this by his Rules of Conscience, for both in the science of the King, and conscience of the Fact, he reades the Law amisse; for Conscience is either the Lecture of the Law to the heart, or reades it to the same out of the just sentence it gives, so that I cannot tell whether Conscience reads the Law, or hath is read unto it. However, it is certaine the Law must be in it, even the Law of the &illegible; and not in the will of the King, but the Lawgiver; and that in England is the Parliament. In Israel God gave it for some Nations, and conscience had good warrant from Gods word, to fight when and where hee commanded him: but in Warre permitted upon Rules of reason without Revelation: the King might never fight without the Advice of his great Councell, and when Cæsar did it without the consent of the Senate, they recalled him, and were resolved for satisfaction to the Enemie, he should be delivered into their hands; and we know how justly upon this Rule, our Parliaments have pleaded their right, but now they have none, and if the people by their Command take up Armes, they are Rebells, yet not the Parliament, when the Law is, plus peccat Author, quam Actor. God help the Parliaments Armies commanded by them, they are all Traitors, and yet no Treason in them that command it. We must set downe three Questions more clearely than the Doctor hath done.
- 1. Whether the King without the Parliament may take up Armes, and in the time of it fight with friends or Foes, as having the Law of Armes in his owne Power, and no Law else?
- 2. Whether the Parliament without the King may take up Armes to defend themselves, and Kingdome, against Delinquents, Invaders, and Forces raised in or out of the Kingdome?
- 3. Whether the People by Command of either to assist the one, and resist the other be Rebelis? these are plaine Questions, and will keep the Dr. from shifting, and conscience to the Law.
I shall briefly answer them. The first, the Legislative Power being in the Parliament for all Lawes, the King can have no Power to fight without the advise of his Parliament except he may fight without a Law, and the King in alledging the Commission of Array, proves he must doe it by Law: and the Dr. saies he may without it, and so doe all that pen his papers, make the Militia inherent in his Person and himselfe the sole Judge. For the second I answer it affirmatively, and my reason is this. The people petition the Parliament, the Parliament the King, and his Answer is, he will be sole Judge of the time when, the cause why, and the manner how. This is a flat denyall of their power, and an assuming to himselfe an Arbitrary power to doe what he last, and that without necessitie: yet necessitie there is of the Militia to preserve the Kingdome, and the two Houses are Judges, and may command, the Militia for that necessary end. To the third I answer distinctly, that all that follow the King in his Warres without law, are Rebells and Traitors; and it is confessed by all the legislative power in the Parliament, and that the will, of the King against it is no Law. For the second part the people that assist the Parliament for the preservation of the Kingdome are good Subjects, and all that fight against the Kings Armies are neither Traitors, nor Rebells. If the King should set out a thousand Declarations, and send forth as many Proclamations, they are no more then the Popes excommunications against the Turkes, which the great Turke returned him, praying him he would call in his Epigrams, and to satisfie the King, I dare say by all the Books of Law, for law is the best reason, and what I have seene in the best, makes me say of all, that jurisdiction is either ordinary, or extraordinary, Bract. Rex est fous justifie, &c. but how? habet ordinariam jurisdictionem, &c. not to make or expound lawes, but see they be made and expounded in all Courts. From which words I firmely conclude, first, that from the King by his sworne Judges to his people, he as an head is to performe all ordinary jurisdiction; but secondly this flowes from an higher Fountaine, as lawes doe from God, and that’s the Parliament or legislative power, and so from it by the King Justice comes to people, and the Parliament is the head of all Jurisdiction: now if the King when he hath need to flye to that, flyes from it, it must execute Justice, or the people perish; and so I have said enough to satisfie all consciences, if I should not adde one word more: yet for the Arguments sake, and being requested to doe it, so many Malignants admiring the Drs. Booke, I have put pen unto paper, and expedited the worke in foure dayes, not to glory in the worke so suddenly done, but in humility to beg pardon if any thing amisse hath passed my pen, my heart went along with my hand, and my head in weakenesse may have done worse than I wished, but willingly I have done it, that Cæsar may have his due, in the Supremacy of ordinary Iurisdiction, and that no private man may presume to administer Justice without his VVarrant; but as for the Parliament, I must place in it an higher Jurisdiction to direct the King, which I may call an extraordinary jurisdiction, and the Writ expresseth it in these words, Mandamus quod consideratis dictorum negotiarum ardultate, & periculis imminentibus, cessante excusatione quacunque, dictis die & loco personaliter intersitis nobiscum. The first word sheweth the Kings ordinary jurisdiction in the Administration of Justice, He commands the Court to meet, propounds the difficulties and dangers, that no other Court can determine, and ties them to &illegible; and place, but being met the busines goes by consent, and no man is excused to be absent without licence, and the liberty some have taken is as much as in them lieth, the prodition of their Country, and perdition of the people, you shall see a Doctor determine desperately against all I have said, if I have not said enough or too much blame me not, for I blush at his impudence and Ignorance in the Cause.
The Parable of the VVidow, 2 Sam. 14. and her two Sonnes may set forth a distressed Kingdome with the Cause, but who is wise enough to make our &illegible; know it. Her Sonnes are in the Field, and fill it with bloud, and the Kings Throne is guiltlesse, and who may say he is faultie? The whole Family is risen and sayes deliver the Delinquents, and David promiseth no wrong shall be done to a VVidow; if at home she will be quiet: but that will not serve, she seeks Remedy before she depart, and laies all the wrong upon herselfe, and cleares the Kings Throne, which he promiseth shall preserve her. This makes her Petition the more strongly, and in the name of God, that the Revengers of bloud destroy no more. The King sweares they shall not. Then the woman followes it home, and layes the fault upon the King, that the banished are not brought back, and she goes againe to God with mans misery, and his mercy using meanes that his owne be not expelled from him, when he punisheth the wicked in the common Calamitie. Death is necessary to all, and as water &illegible; we are hopelesse in the grave, and therefore she speeds her request for present dispatch before all be lost. Now would the word of my Lord be comfortable, now as an Angell be might help me, and consider the good and the bad. She hath moved the King to aske her a Question, and the motion mindes him some courtier is in it, and he suspect loah, and she confesseth it; and who put the words into her mouth, to setch about such a forme of Speech? and she commends it to the King the second time, as an Angell for wisedome to know what was done, and it falls out happily for loah, and he thankes the King for it, and consesseth it as a favour, and speedily brings Absalom to Ierusalem, but he must be confined to his owne house, and in two yeares he sees not the Kings face, and cannot endure it, but sends for Ioah, who would not come at him, and hee setcheth him with a witnesse, setting fire on his corne, and at length he obtaines his Fathers kiffe, and by curtesies wins the hearts of the people from his Father, and by Ambition and Treachery revengeth himselfe for his hard use, and God knowes what will become of the contraversie, and when Conscience will be satisfied, which is the Title of the Drs. Book, and hee begins with a dangerous and perverse way, and gives it a check by the cleare light of Law Divine, and Humane, but hee meets with an implicite Faith, contrary to Conscience, which the blinder it is, the stronger it proves to be prevailed withall, and the more prevalent it is, that five Answerers for one Treatise trouble the Truth, which he is confident is on his side. Two trouble him more then the rest, Mr. Bridges, and the Fuller Answer. The one appeares with Licence and pleaseth the vulgar, the other with Learning and takes with the more intelligent Party: But the depth in this is as stained waters, not transparent for darknesse and colour. He feares not a full Margent against him of Greek and Latine, he dare trust his Readers with it, so they will be ware of the Text against Tyrants, which he means to defend, and requires a direct and positive Warrant for resistance. Tyrants are of two sorts with Tittle, and without it. With Tittle from God, and so he defen is all Tyrants for he cares not for compact a Conquest is Title enough. The people have no power to choose their Kings, their power is from God, and by Kings God derives all power to men, and without it they are all private, and want jurisdiction; that God meant to make Governments by Kings, and approved of none made without them, is the Drs. desperate Doctrine, teaching Kings Tyranny to doe what they list, and God to be the Author of it. All the Power that is of God is for good, and Pilate when hee said to our Saviour thou couldst have no Power but of God, hee meanes it not of civill power, as if God allowed Pilate to doe what hee list, but of power in generall; and the reason why hee resisted not, was that his Kingdome was not of that kinde, Iohn 18 36. if it had his Servants might have done it. But you will say that belongs to a King. True legally, not tyrannically; but if he tyrannize who may tame him? you have two Answers, the jurisdiction of the Kingdome, and thats legall: the naturall preservation of it, which being done orderly without tumult to defend a mans selfe maintaine Peace, preserve Life, resist Violence against Law, breach of Peace, parsuance of Felons. Traitours &c. But you will say the Law warrants all this, and from the petty Counstable to the Constables of Hundreds, and from them to the Sheriffes of Countyes and their combinations of the Insurrections, and Invasions bee too strong. I know the Objection will be the King commands it. I say no the Law is the Rule, and it began first at the People who choose their Officers to doe this, and Kings as Generalls have had the Ordering of all Armes, not by their wills, but knowne Lawes made in Councells of Kingdomes. VVords cause strife, and their multitude confusion, and I have observed these used and abused by the Dr. First powers. Secondly, Ordination. Thirdly Co-ordination Fourthly, Subordination. Fiftly, Supply, Sixtly, Reservation. Seventhly, Preservation. Eightly, Resolution. Ninethly, Conscience. 10. Subjection. 11. Resistance. 12. Damnation, a full Jury to condemne the Truth before a corrupt Judge, if not ignorant of what he sayes: for the Dr. having many Answerers to his &illegible; layes about him as in &illegible; to breake out with revenge, and Conscience in one conviction, as if that &illegible; for him as it does in the Ignorant, Malignant, repugnant, doubtfull, fearefull, and desperate. He speakes of a multitude of &illegible; persons with an implicite Faith, and blind Devotion, lead on by such Guides as they have chosen as are summoned by their Soveraigne, de grantoribus, & discretioribus &illegible; and his Majesty did ill to send to such as had no eyes to see whom they sent, and now being open behold what they have done, and the Senate being separated, and not dissolved, will not follow them that have deserted it, and the Divine as an Heretick, observed by Tertullien, does prius suadere, &illegible; docere, use his Rhethorick before his reason, and like &illegible; the Oratour begins with pastirut fellowes movers of Sedition, King-leaders of Sects. Act. 24. 1. I know not what Houses of Consultation he meanes to direct us to these evills, which he wonders they are not broken downe by divine vengeance; and the Churches should stand where so many blasphemous prayers, and preachings have been to blesse the Counsellours of such mischiefe. I professe freely what I see in the Ignorant, that have quiet, but no good consciences, they will not understand, or alter their opinion when they can say nothing for it, but their Consciences will not suffer them. The Malignant lead on by knowne Lawes against the Parliament, and the will of the King to declare them; as for example, hee declares the Papists are not to be disarmed but armed as his pleasure, and the Militia is wholly in his hands. He declares Delinquents are not to be punished that follow him in his Wars, because it is so enacted then be like the Parliament may declare who shall follow him in his VVarres, and not hee may make what Warres he will and because he cannot by a Vote dissolve the Parliament, he will doe it by violence, and that shall bee declared to bee Law. The Parliament can make no new Lawes without Him, therefore hee will make one, they shall doe nothing; and what they doe Hee hath power to make it void in Law. Thus reason the Malignants, and will have quiet consciences, but not good, least reason should convince them what they are; the plague of the Kingdome, to place all power in the King for no other end, but to serve theirs. Repugnant consciences. I pity and passe them by, we see evills, and dare not speake, would faine attend the Parliament but cannot for some service to their Soveraigne. Conscience is scarce good that waites in the Campe of the King by a private call, against a publique Summons by his VVrit to wait on him in his greatest Court, and what contentment can hee take in an Army that obeyes the King against his Kingdome, and grant that nothing shall be done by him in ordinary jurisdiction to crosse his great Councell, to doe what extra-ordinary occasions call them all unto; and if reason might render the law constant, ordinary jurisdiction is subordinate to Supreme, and though the King be a Supreme person in ordinary jurisdiction, yet his Supremacie is to be a Minister, Rom. 23. 4. to God and his People, and in the 3 Estates, to administer no Justice without them, nor to trust any to doe it disliked by them, Potesta, sitajuris est non injuriæ, Bract. Cok. Lex franum est regispotentiæ, and if that bee true of the Barons alone, debent regi frænum imponere in comitatu, as they are in his Traine, even of armed men, much more in consilio where the whole Kingdome is, but the Dr. would learne us that the Lawyer mends his fault, when he speakes not in favour of the Barons against Hen. 3. but Lawyer-like, Rex non habet superiorem. &c. the Dr. is at a nonplus, for his first words savour more of Law then his last, for in them he speaks of a Court, and then of a King, and gives them both their due of Supremacy, the Barons of a Councell the King of a Soveraigne; Par in parem non habet potestatem, multo fortius non habet superi rem. Well noted Dr, to your praise, that can find nodum in junco, a knot in a rush, and bid the skillfull in law, judge how well you have Answered Bracton with Bracton, he saies the King hath no equall in his Kingdome, that is no one man, but you say, Majestas cum suprema petestate con &illegible; est, and if Majestie be personall so is power. And yet you adde, Majestas &illegible; Romani, the popular Majestie of Rome, and you would give it the Parliament if they would have it; but such honour is for the King and the two Houses are ashamed of it or you rather ought to blush to make them Houses apart from the King, the King cannot do it though he would. They have him with them, would God in his Shining Royalty, as he is in his shadowed power I say so, because his body cast his shadow in no other place; there is Daniels Tree, Dan. 4. 12. wee must dwell under it, and are you the Watcher to cut it downe and leave us the dead stump.
To erect a Tyranny you destroy Royaltie and Loyalty. The Royall Office setled by Parliament is ministeriall, and the principall part of it is to order the Militia, not determine it. No States allow their Generalls such a power, and as the Senate doalt with Cæsar; so should he with them, not destroy them by the sword they have given him. Doubtfull soules are like to be ill resolved by you if you judge thus, and many are fearefull of the Kings anger, if his desperate followers should prevaile; and I am perswaded hew downe the Tree of our safety as you doe and no man that desires to be peaceable shall bee secure. I now come to the Verdul you bring in with your 12 Words. Powers you pervert, and make one all, for if God give the King all, and others have what he pleaseth, you make the Apostle speake vainly. Powers are Naturall, or Nationall, Naturall, universall or humane. Naturall in all Creatures, as Dragons and Beasts, and take heed you make not Kings so, for so saies Truth, they are when Men degenerate into them, and so are all your Monarchies figured, even that of the Episcopacie, Dan. 7. 2, 3. 24, 25. Rev. 12. 3. & 12. 1. 11. The two Episcopall Hornes are taken from the Lambe, and the Crownes and Thrones he hath given them. Rev. 4. 4. are fellow Cousens with Kings, and as a Councell or Synod may restrain the one, so may the Parliament and Senate of State moderate both. Nationall power is politicall or personall. The politicall flowes from that humane power we have forgotten, which is Paternall by creation, or fraternall by Birth, and from both flowes the Eldershpip, and from this the power that is personall, and so from the Senate you have these personall powers. First, an Emperour or Generall for the Warre. Secondly, a King for the Jewes. Thirdly, a Ethnarch for Name, for when Herod the King was dead, Mat. 2. 22. Archelaus reigned in his stead, which lost the name of his Father, and Cæsar called him an Ethnarch, for the Senate was jealous of Soveraignty; and as Cæsar durst not call himselfe what he was, so when he made &illegible; his governour, hee altered his Name to an Ethnarch, but both studied Supremacy against the Senate. Fourthly, they had presidents of provinces, and when they divided them they set up a fifth personall power, called the Tetrarch, because he governed the fourth part of a Province, and the Tetrarchle being divided againe, he that had any part of that was called a Toparch, and now good Dr. for shame be convinced that the great Councell of an Empire or Kingdome may dispose of all Officers; and beware you of the forth booke lest his Testimonies prove dangerous to your King, which you labour to make a Tyrant, that all tongues praise for a pious Prince, and such hearts have his Subjects to him that they stand amazed to thinke who hath bewitched him to doe as he doth, Sorcerie is in Papists by the Text, Rev. 9. 2. and will you teach it. We hope our Fasting and prayer will cast out this ill spirit of Malignants, and restore us againe our mercifull Prince, for I have heard hee hath earely in the morning made his Chaplins rise to goe to prayers with him, and I hope our Monica or mother shall be answered, as Ambrose answered for dustin, silius tantarion lachrymarum et precum, &c. the sonne of so great prayers and teares shall not be taken from us. Ordination of all powers are from God, for what wisdome is seen in the Governments of Men. The very plowman is instructed to discretion by God, Esa. 28. 26. and therefore Magistrates much more. God ordaines the powers mediately by men, which the Dr. denies, and some he ordaines by himselfe, as all the Patriarkes, Iudges, and two first Kings, and that may be the reason why David feared to kill Soul, as having no Commission to cut off him God had set over him and for my part I shall hold the same of Kings set up by men, which the Dr. feares, and by a false Title would secure him, but the truth is he is better secured by his Parliament then proud Prelates, that by divine right, would give too much to themselves, and to save them the King must hazzard his life and Crowne. Co-ordination of states startles the Dr. but stands firme, and though three be equall, yet all persons are not. That the Commons should be Comites, and Peeres, with Princes is a pretty jeere of a witty &illegible; but it wants something in sense, and to say soberly, the Commons are a third Estate, and the King stands no more above them then he does the Lords; but I have forgotten my selfe, the lower House of Parliament is the Kings &illegible; and he may set his Throne upon them, but the Dr. would have him set his foot upon their Necks, and then like the Pope, Aspidem et lconem &illegible; Psal. 91. 13. His contempt of the Commons cast them not so low, as they would goe to right the King in any thing, so they may &illegible; wrong the State they resemble. It is not honour they seeke for, but feare the hurt of the Kingdome, the date whereof is in their hand, and Forteseur speakes of them alone, with as much honour as of the Senate of Rome, which had but an hundred Senatours, this above 300. Subordination is as much abused by him as any other thing; for in sending Governours, 1 Pet. 2. 14. hee boldly applies it to the King, and that nothing without him may be done by them, when from God all Governours are charged alike, and to advance, the Kings authority makes it divine immediatly, and all others to have no more then he will give them: and for supply of Government, the people shall have no more by their Governours then they can get from him. Reservation they have none, and the plaine English is contrary to what is cast upon the Parliament against the King that he hath nothing. He can doe us no wrong, because the people are not capable to receive it, and that we have nothing to lose, because we had nothing of our owne; we are his by conquest, and it is he that grants us our lives, liberties, and lawes. Resolution is not finall without the King, they may determine nothing for Law that hee gaine-saies, and being deserted by him, they can doe nothing usefull for the Kingdome, be the necessities never so pressing. Conscience can bee resolved of no resistance by armes that he forbids, whosoever robs us of our right. Subjection must be to all the King commands, by the Text, either Active to doe it, or Pessive to suffer the penalty, but neither without a law made, or to be made: & seeing the law is not in his power, but the Parliament. And the Parliament saies there is none, to what then must I subject? The will of the King? Where does any Text say so? But I may not resist his will, and why so, seeing it is no law? And lastly, for damnation what need I care for that, when the Law condemnes me not? If cases of Conscience may thus be satisfied, the Dr. should not need to write, the knowne law is the will of the King.
An Answer to DOCTOR FERNE Vpon the case of Conscience.
Pray for us, for we are assured we have a good Conscience, willing in all things to walke honestly, Hebr. 13. 18.
ARguments are the Subject of invention: Invention the first part of reason, and Reason the Resolution of all things. To resolve Conselence and satisfie it, he is one of a thousand that does it, Iob. 33. 23. An Interpreter must deale like a good physitian, seele the pulse, to know how the heart beats, Conscientia est scientia &illegible; deo. The heart is more deceitfull to it selfe then the Devill, and so desperately wicked, that the Dr. cannot find it out in himself, for all his confidence in his cause: I will put him in mind of the doubts hee hath not determined, or defined in the proposition, and without that the assumption of a good conscience will saile him. The Subject of Supremacy, right of Cesar, and resolution of Conscience, are scattered notes that stare the Reader in the &illegible; with damnation. God hath said it, Rom. 13. 2. and the sinne is Resistance opposite to subjection, which is for the object bound to powers, for the cause to God for the effect to the punishment of both, for the matter to good workes, for the form, care to doe them well for the end praise of the action, which being good in the rule, will bear out the doer to God Man, and his own Conscience. Tyranny is no Ordinance of God, and he that commands us to obey a King, does no where subject us to a Tyrant. Not to bee afraid of power is to doe well, and yet so to doe is the greatest feare. Rulers are no terror to good works, and therefore no Tyrants and Divines teach amisse that by resistance, restraine men from good, Did God by the terror of Senacherih restraine Hezekiah from Rebellion, 2 Knig. 18. 7. He told him his heart should meditate terror, Isa. 33. 18. and that his feare should be his treasure, vers. 6. the dssyrians as vermine, ver. 4. who having used violence as Caterpillars, should bee gathered as Wormes, and the Caldeans leape in upon them as Lecusts.
The DOCTOR talkes much of Conquest, and contracts with the People: for power to rule he holds needlesse, as being from God, and to be obeyed whatsoever he does. Such a Title had Seuacherib, and if the Dr. be serious, hee shall see how he hath mistaken Cæsar, and the Senate, and for the Subject of Supremacy, and Conscience of subjection hee hath wildly wandered out of the way in all his Texts, Rom. 1. 13. speakes of powers 1 Pet. 2. 13. Speakes of Kings as super-emminent, and the proper word for supreme, is, Act. 19. 38. ν
υ
ατος, and yet but Cæsars deputy. There be six words descendent in the Romane Dignities and Dominions, Emperor, King, Ethnarch, President, Tetrarch, Toparch. All under the People and Senate of Rome. The Emperour was dugustus; Herod the King: Pilate President of Iudea; Philip the Brother of Herod Tetrarch of Iturta; Names usuall in the Scripture, and all of them granted by the People of Rome. Herod was made King by them before they had an Emperour; for Antonie craved that honour for Herod, and Cæsar had his afterwards, in the Sonate, where he made a long Oration, not tedious, for it took so with the people, that he having bin their Generall in the Wars, and conquered all the Nations to their hands, their hearts were so taken with joy, that they cryed a Cæsar, and set him above all their Lawes, which he modestly denyed, and deposited all his honours at their feete, and they like fooles forgetting they had expessed their Kings, will have a Cesar to rule above al law, and deifie him as a God, and so ever after who but Cesar, and to him they made all their appeases: and Paul being borne a Romme, by his priviledge appeales unto Cesar, and to this day our lawes &illegible; all in the Name of Cesar: yet the Apostle tells us of a βίμα besides Cesar, Act. 25. 10. a judgement seat which he had in Iudea, but Paul prudently avoids it, and takes the benefit of the Law, I stand not to Festus the President, nor Agryppa the King, I am a Romane, and to Rome will I goe, and be tryed by Cæsars Tribunall. It may be by the Peoples promise it was above the Senate, yet wee have expresse Testimonies after Augustus, that the Senate stood for their right, and was ever held above Cesar, Peter makes the King Supreme as Paul does, that we may appeale to his publique Judgement, and when the Law saies we appeale to the King; the meaning is not we stand to his Person or private Judgement, but his Publique and Politique, in his Courts of Justice; and the Parliament is the last in all appeales, and therefore the proper subject of Supremacy, and the King properly is Supreme in no other sence but the sore is this binds him to his Parliament and People, and makes them Soveraignes with him; and so questionlesse were the Senate and people of Rome, and all grants, went, Senatus populusque Romanus concestit. After Cæsar had the dignitie, the stile went, as now it doth with us, Concestimus, we grant because we doe it with our Senate; and this word the Scripture confirmes to be the most ancient Government, for what else is Senate but Eldership, and it comes from the Fathers of Families, and Elder Brothers in them, and this, and not Kings was appointed by God from the beginning; and God saies to discontented Cain, are not thou by birth thy Brothers Ruler, Gen. 4. 7. The Dr. shall see his answerers swerve not from truth as he does; and yet give Cæsar his right, if he will not take more then his due from the Eldership, from whom he hath all, and yet we keep to Cæsar and the Senate, and give Cæsar the Supremacy of Persons, and sole jurisdiction over all; yeilding all Freemen selfe preservation, and the Senate Supreme Jurisdiction. But you will say, how can two Supremacies agree? Very well by that distinction in Law, the King hath all ordinary jurisdiction, and in that all persons are private, that have not warrant from him, and Rebell if they practise any resistance to the Law. But we are to know the Kingdome hath an extra-ordinary jurisdiction in extra-ordinary times, extra-ordinary matters, and extra-ordinary dangers, and then the Kings ordinary jurisdiction ceaseth, and he may doe nothing without his great Councell, and if he refuse to operate with them, then they without him may use jurisdiction, and all the people their selfe preservation, so they doe nothing without the jurisdiction of the King or his Councell; and if the King will oppose his ordinary jurisdiction to that which is extraordinary, all hee does is void in Law, and the People with good Conscience may oppose him to preserve themselves, when the Parliament Orders it: And for the King to aske them by what Law they doe it; they have answered sufficiently by the fundamentall Lawes of all Nations, founded upon nature and the Eldership, which is the Senate. The Dr. is very angry, and calls to the Conscientious Readers, to see how Conscious he is, and culpable of blame for passion without compassion, and spoiles his owne Conscience by madnesse: For I never read such a Preface of a Booke to Conscience, See St. Pauls preface, pray for us Brethren, that we may the sooner be delivered out of Prison. This is humility which would have graced a Grave Dr. and not have set his Mortar on work to have pounded Assa fectida for fragrant Spices. His Mortar stinks abominably, and the smell will never out of his Booke; and we shall bray him to better purpose or breake him in pieces. From prayer I would carry him to assurance with the Apostle and from that to his obedience in a good Conscience, which is marked with 4 Characters. First a willing obedience to be Ruled by the Truth. Secondly, Vniversall to receive it in all things, and not with aliquid in a generall Proposition, that is true κ&illegible;τ
πά&illegible;τος. Thirdly, constant to walke in the truth Fourthly &illegible;&illegible;λ
ς, præclave, as honestly as he will, and then I conclude with him, Read, Consider, and carefully observe what is written, and the Lord give us patience and understanding in all things.
ACTIVE and PASSIVE Obedience to all Lawes, and their Penalties.
IUst Lawes have just punishments, and the penalties that are unjust, proceed from the pleasures of men, and their Tyranny over others. The Question is right stated for these times but scanned diversly. I propound the doubt as it is made by all. Whether if a Magistrate will not discharge his trust, but destroy Religion, Lawes, Liberties, and Lives, Subjects may not resist them? The Magistrate is mistaken, Rom. 13. 1. and he that reads one power for all powers, or gives the Epithite [Super-emminent] to Kings, abuseth the Scripture that gives it to Governours, 1 Tim. 2. 2. and when Kings have it by distribution, 1 Pet. 2. 13. it is doubtfull in the sence, whether the other Member bee meant of Subjects, vers. 14. The word sent considered with the end referres to GOD in praise and punishment, and he may wel be the author that appoints the end, and for his sake that sends Governours for the praise of the good and punishment of evill doers, we are to obey them, and so all Texts enjoine subjection to all powers in the abstract, and all Rulers in the Concrete, and to obey them further then they are of God, and for the good of men is to wring blood not Milke out of the Word, and so that Booke published by divers Divines, with approbatition in Parliament, passeth currant against the Dr. resolving conscience against truth, and yet he aimes at a Truth all men doe not heed of a Supremacy to be stated in some subject irresistible, or we shall never have the end of Government, 1 &illegible; 2. 2. in peace and quietnesse.
Worthy Hooker in his Preface to his policy, pleads with his Brethren to remove the scandall that yet remaines upon us, demands of them what judgement they will stand unto, their owne, or some other? The Scripture is the sure and silent Judge infallible to all, and in that supreme, but the peace and quiet of all States depends upon some Supremacie, not so infallible, yet as unavoydable, and that he sayes is neither King nor Bishop: but such Councells as both are subject unto, and that by the word of God directing and determining, Deut. 17. Act. 15. If in a Kingdome hard matters happen, that inferiour Courts cannot determine, the highest must, and all must subject unto it, even the King himselfe, whose judgement is not above, but under that judgement that determines all: and God never left his people to the will and determination of one man: and when Moses told them the judgement, it was not his owne, but Gods; and when hee speakes by one man the Law is supreme and infallible, when by many in a Councell it is supreme but not infallible; and for peace we cannot goe higher than the supreme Iudges: The word in the Acts translated Deputies, Act. 19. 38. comes of a word that signifies Supremacy more properly than that in Peter, for that sets forth a supereminent being not in the Superlative degree, but if words that admit comparison may be admitted for Arguments the Supremacy is in that word and yet the Translatour makes bold to render it a Deputy to the Romane Senate, or Cæsar, which is said by DIO to be above all, solutus Legibus loose from Lawes as wee would be in our opinions to hold what we list, and lawlesse men need a Parliament, a Senate, or a Synod to set them right if not in judgement, yet in peace to hold their hands and tongues to the good behaviour. It is well knowne that Augustus Cæsar pleased the people with a long Oration to lay downe his power in policy, and willed the people to free him of the burden, which they would not, and though they created not a King, yet they consented to an Emperour, and the fixt Dynastie they understood not, as Gratian did when he yeilded up the Priesthood, that the Pope might succeed him in the seventh head of the Beast. Tyberlus the Successour of Augustus askes in the Senate a part of the Empire, and a Senatour answers him what part he had a minde unto, knowing he meant the whole: but how ever the Cæsars played with the people, yet the Senate stood to their right, and if Supremacy be not in the highest Councell, all Lawes of God and men are subverted.
For proofe of this we goe to God and nature, Nations and the Families that have made them, of Elders comes Eldership, and it by Creation or Generation. Creation gives it to our Parents. Generation to the elder Brother, Gen. 4. 7. Cain is the Ruler of his brother by his Birth, and God in these two rankes placeth Kings for Rule and affection, Exod. 20. 12. Deut. 17. 15. Marke the words of Election in Israel, it is Gods, contrary to Creation, Saul and David were of his Election, and the one objected his Familie, 1 San. 9. 21. Honourable for his Mother, but meane for the sinne and suffering of his Tribe. He came of Rachell, and was of the Tribe of Benjamin, and now in contempt for that horrible crime of conspiracie with the Sonnes of &illegible; Iudges 20. &illegible; and yet God free from all Lawes makes choyce of the meanest Family, and Saul is the first man he fixeth upon for a King, and yet with consent of the people; and the words are emphaticall, in placing thou shalt place, and it shall be of thy Brethren. In the Election of David the Law of Nature is not followed neither did Abner observe the Law, &illegible; Sam. 2. 9. nor David in Solomon, after whom it went by Succession, and Soveraignty was not naturall, nor paternall, nor fraternall, but positive and popular. God gave the Law for his people, and willed them to follow it, but never appointed for all Nations any forme of Government: and that which is most naturall, and best approved of God in Church and State is an Eldership, Num. 11. 16. Rev. 4. 4. The one is a Senate of seventie with Moses, and the other a Presbytery of many with one Angell. They have both one Nation, and I take it from the Heathen to shew natures direction to a supreme Demosthenes for the Grecians, and Cicero in Cato, for the Latines shew us the true Subject of Supremacy to be the Senate. Apud Lacedæmontos, qui &illegible; Magistratum gerunt, ut &illegible; sic etiam appillantur, Senes, among the Lacedæmonians, which bore the chiefe Magistrate, as they are, so also they are called Elder-men. Ratio & prudentia nisi essent in senibus, non summum consilium majores nostri appellassens Senatum, if reason and prudence were not in old men, our Ancestours had never called the highest Councell a Senate, and this was Gods wisedome in the Nation he chose, and made it the patterne of all Nations, Deut. 32. 8. He divided them as his owne Sonnes, and they were no more in number than the soules he sent into Egypt; and when Moses had brought them from that place, and was weary of their burden, God erected the Senate of seventy, and makes the judgement of it the highest in Israel, Deut. 17. for direction v. 9. Observation, v. 10. Limitation, v. 11. Death, v. 12. Example, v. 13. And it is well knowne that such Warres as God commanded not, were permitted by this Councell, and the King without it might not attempt any. The ruine of Cæsar is the advancement of Antichrist, and in succession both are Enemies to Christ. The one under the notion of a Dragon, Rev. 12. 3. The other of a Beast, Rev. 13. 11. and this Beast rules another that receives the Crownes of the Dragon. The Dragon had seven, the Beast ten, Rev. 13. 1. The Mystery manifest to us, as having seen them all. 7. Dynasties of the Romanes. They began with a King, and for Tyranny tooke him away, and being troubled with other formes of Government, fall to Monarchy againe, and the Cæsars end in Antichrist, 2. Thess. 2. 7. He is taken away, and the man of sinne advanceth, and as a false Prophet moulds Kings to his mind, and the combination is a confederacie against Christ: and I dare make it a generall Doctrine from the Prophet, Isay 8. 9. that Idolatrous Associations shall bee broken. They are two in the Text, Samaria, and Syria, against Syon. Iudah and Assyria against them. The King of Assyria as a River shall fill all channells, and runne over the bankes, and so overflow in Iudah till he come to the neck, and then God will choake him, and save Syon, for those that say no confederacy with sinners, but sanctifie the Lord in their hearts, and make him their Sanctuary, when the rest stumble as Houses that harbour Idolaters. Such are all at this present as rejoyce in Papists, the greatest Idolaters that ever were, Rev. 13. 6. for as yet never Nation came to that height of horrible blasphemy. First, in the name of God. Secondly, his Tabernacle, Thirdly, his Saluts. The Name of God is blasphemed in Images. First, when they give his name unto them. Secondly, his prayse, for they give them divine VVorship, as Latris &illegible; all the Images of the Trinity, Dulia to all the pictures of the Saints, and hyperdulia to the blessed Virgin. The Tabernacle of the Divine nature of Christ is mans Humane nature, Iohn 1. 14. Hebr. 8. 2. and 9. 11. This they presume to make, offer, adore, which being not in the power of man they blasphemously undertake to doe, contrary to the Texts, and that, Hebr. 9. 14. where not man, but the eternall Spirit offers what is made without hands.
As the Divine and Humane natures in Christ are foulely abused, so the best of Saints that dwell in Heaven, change Thrones with Christ, and from his Trone to his Fathers Throne are set in Office of Intercession, Rev. 3. 21. a thing the Apostle expresseth, 1 Tim. 3. 16. for what is the glory of Christ in his Ascension, but Mediation for the redeemed, which the Gentiles beleeved and by Apostasie grant to the dead. 1 Tim. 4. 1. To know the time nothing is taught more plainely than by Cæsar, and Antichrist. I wonder not that Augustus was a Monarch and Dynast of a divine Prophesie, not to shew how God delighted in such Dominions, for we are told of Crownes and Diadems removed from the Tribe of Iudab, Ezech 21. 26. 27. when Christ came Herod had the Crowne, and the People of Rome gave it him, and Cæsar to oppose him and Christ, was called by the Jewes their King, but not so allowed by the Senate; and yet he was no lesse by the peoples inconstancy, but the Senate gave him no such power, for when Tyberius would have had them create Christ a God, they refused it, telling him that not he but they had the power to delare the approbation of any God; and to Nero they shewed such power as to resist his Tyranny by Armes; and I dare conclude that the proper Subject of Supremacy, is the supreme Councell of any Kingdome, and it slowes from the Fathers of Families, and under them to their eldest Sonnes, and at this day in French, Italian, and Spanish, the word Signor, out of which comes, Seignourie, signifies Lordship and Dominion, and no wayes defaceth Monarchy, for as Seneca sayes, potestas ad Cæsarem pertinet, proprietas ad singulos, Power may bee given the Emperour, and yet every man may possesse his owne, and have remedie and right against Cæsar by the Senate, and to subdue either was Tyranny, which it seemes the people choose, as Israel did, 1 Sam. 8. 5. The thing protected against &illegible; 9. and declared in five words to bee a sore judgement. First, &illegible; he shall take from you. Secondly, disponee sibi, he shall dispose of it to his owne will. Thirdly, dabit aulicis, hee shall give it his Courtiers. Fourthly, clamabitis, yee shall cry. Fiftly, non exaudiam, I will not heare. There is another judgement different from this, 1 Sam. 10. 25. called the Kingdome; judgement, and it belongs to the supreme Court, Deut. 17. 8. It handles all hard matters, and sheweth the judgement to all Inferiour Courts, commands obedience, inflicts death and is for all to heare, feare and doe no more so presumptuously. Hence we learne a two fold Supremacy; the one personall, the other Politique; the one of the King, and the other of the Kingdome; both arbitrary, but not equally righteous. The Royall Supremacy is seldome without Tyranny, and in it we may observe two things: the peoples Petition and Gods Concession. In the peoples Petition is the rejection of &illegible; or a Divine Dynastie in the happy Government of the Church, and a sullen resolution for a Monarchy, to be ruled as the Nations. Gods concession is with a solemne Protestation against it, and a just provocation for it, to punish his people pleased with Tyranny. The people heare the hard conditions, 1 Sam. 8. 19. and refuse to obey Samuel, and are bound to their King, be he never so bad, and there is no remedie but in the judgement of the Kingdome that cannot be dissolved, for the Lord had constituted that before ever he granted them a King, and because they had suffered this to decay; for we never heare of it till good Iehoshaphat restored it, 2. Chron. 19. 8. In this King were two great faults: Affinitte with Ahab, 2 Chron. 18. 1. and the help, and love of Idolaters, 2 Chron. 19. 2. These caused wrath to his Posterity, and the good things in him to reforme Religion, and repaire the Courts of Justice, stayed Gods anger: but the errour followed, and his Sonne sinned as Tyrants used to doe, and judgement failed till judgement brought captivitie, and captivity from the Crowne to the Diademe, and from brethren to strangers, the whole Government was devolved, and Herod and Cæsar set up by the Senate ruled them, which had the like changes that the great Councell in Israel had. Paul was asked if he would be judged by his owne Nation, and he appeales unto Cæsar, whose Tribunall Calvine thinks to bee a corruption of the Senate, but then we know it had Dominion over Cæsar, and deposed Nero, but after Nerva it was ruled by the Sword: but by right the rule was in it, and an Eldership is the most naturall Government, both in the Church, and Common-wealth.
I shall now deale with sixe Bookes of Supremacy. Five of them are against Doctor Ferne, who fights under the Royall Standard against the Parliament, and begins his Book to the Conscientious Readers, whom he resolves by the cleare light of the Law of God, and the Land, and complaines of foure Answerers with such anger, that he brayes them in a mortar, to beate out of their brains pretences that hood-winck, and blinde Devotion, contrary to Conscience desirous of Information. Letting passe his passions, I shall with the same compassion examine his Principles, and answer punctually such passages, as may resolve the doubts of the discourses of all the six Authors. We shall never state the Question as the case is, unresolved of the Subject of Supremacy; wheresoever it is the Government will be Arbitrary, and Irresistable. Arbitrary for Law, and irresistable by Armes. In the Judgement of the King bee may doe what he will with slaves. Seignourie saith (saies Seneca) is either potestas & impertum, or proprietas & Dominum. To the first a Subject is a correlative, and where there is power and Command, Subjection is necessary. To the other the opposite is to be a slave, who hath nothing but what the will of his Master will allow him: But where there is propriety or Mastership, he that takes ought from the owner without his consent, makes him his Vassall, and though Sonnes and Servants be not slaves, yet the one is owner of nothing, and the other hath not the freedome of a Sonne. Iohn 8. 35. Servants may be turned out of their Masters Houses, and Sonnes that abide as Heires, have such portions as their Fathers will allow them, Doctor Ferne tells us of naturall obedience, and so much is in 24. H. 8. c. 12. a Law not so naturall as to cast us upon the King, to stand to his good will what he will give us, for in Kingdomes Children lay up for their Father, and recompence his care, and receive not their Portions from him, but have them by the same Freedome hee hath his Kingdome, but the Doctor would faine from the Family, fixe the Fathers full power upon the King to rule his Subjects, and it is the Argument the Pope useth, to exempt himselfe from Kings, he is the Father of the Church, begets his children, hires his Servants, and shall Sonne or slave cast him out of his owne house? As for Kings, they come in by the consent of the People, and may againe by them be cast out of their Kingdomes. The Doctor deales just so for his Soveraigne, he sets him up as a Father, and all his Subjects, for such Sonnes and Servants as must abide his good will and pleasure: wee may grant him his power, and such a Seignourie as his Sonnes must owne with him, nay, be the owners and be their Feoffee in trust. But we have not yet stated the Subject of our Supremacy, the King is no such Soveraigne with us, as he may doe with us what he list. We have a proprietie in our Goods and Lives, and are not at the Arbitrary disposition of the King, we have given him no such consent, as the people did, 1 Sam. 8. 19. 20. to be over us, judge us, and fight for us as he pleaseth. No such Arbitrary power is in him, we have left that in the judgement of the Kingdome, 1 Sam. 10. 25. The Kings of Israel by Gods direction might fight with such Nations as God had given them: but to fight with their owne people, or any other he had not directed them unto, might not be done without the judgement of his Kingdome. This present Parliament is so farre from devesting the King of the Militia, that they desire to give him a power to command the whole Militia in the Kingdome, in such an orderly and effectuall way, as legally he had not before, and that all those might obey him to whom it was committed by consent, and that they might assist him in the protection of all his good Subjects in their persons and Estates according to Law, not against it, by keeping Delinquents from summons, and proceedings of his highest Court, and that he himselfe will be the sole Judge of all the necessities and dangers of the Kingdome, and that his great Councell may not, judge with him, of the time when, the cause why, the meanes by which, the manner how, or the end for which he makes Warre. Truely if the Subject of Supremacy be stated, we shall neither Arme with the judgement of it, or resist it by Armes, neither will wee seeke for knowne Lawes further than the Legislative power in it.
I know the Bookes I have mentioned follow (I will not say sancy with the the Doctor) but some variety of opinion. I must needs dislike him &illegible; at holds the Deposition of Kings, and next him wee are to thinke seriously of the resistence of the Supremacy, lest Subjects rise up in Armes, and rebell: but when they are commanded by the Supremacy, to count that Rebellion in the Subjects, is the Doctors dangerous determination. Plus peccat &illegible; quam Actor, and it beseemes not a Divine to dash them with &illegible; that are Instruments to the Supreme Powers, and are justified by their Commands. He will finde the Arbitrary power to be in the Parliament from the Legislative power, to make and interprete all the Lawes of the Kingdome; and being a Court of Justice, it is never deprived of this power without a dissolution, and if the King will not concurre with his owne judgement, he cannot deny it in the ends for the which he hath called it, which are two. First, Questions upon doubts of Lawes, which are never resolved by the King in any Court, but his Judges; for as they are above Him in the skill, so they are below him in the prosecution, and judged voyd in Law; for where the Subject hath no remedy, there he can have no right, as against the Person of the King, and so there shall be wrong done by the King, and no Law to right the oppressed, and punish the wrong doer. He therefore of all Persons is so farre (solutus Legibus) loose from lawes that as injury cannot be done to him, so neither may he doe it to any others. For the second end it is to heare complaints of injuries, and the Parliament may redresse them though the King will not consent. He calls them to consider of the hardest matters, and dangers that are instant and extant, and they may exercise their power to prevent them, or restraine them. Be it Tyranny in the Monarchy, for as they may moderate it in the meanes, so they may master it in extremitie, and to thinke of the Parliament, as a power lesse being, and that all Actions are voyde, the King denies is to leave all Justice to the will of one man, and injurie to bee done without remedie. The King will have it so, is never asked, but to new Bills. The two Houses need not Petition the King to declare Law, resolve such doubts as are brought them, and right wrongs, done to the Subjects, and in case of necessaie provide for the Kingdomes safety. And now let us see the Sections.
I Will note the Materialls, and letting the supposition goe, the Position is full of pindust, and the Doctor blowes it in his owne eyes to blind his first Section with Subjects for Parliament, King for Rebells, and the case without the Cause. He will not charge the Parliament, but the People with the Warre, not the Supremacy of the Kingdome, but the Subjects against it. The VVarre must be against the King, and not against Rebells. The Case must be the Kings trust, as if that were the cause of the VVarre, because hee will not discharge it. Subjects may take up Armes, Subjects may resist. Some thinke so, and the Doctor hath not seene the Book that proves it, saying, resistance is onely forbidden to just and Legall Commands, and he that does so deserves damnation: but the subversion of Religion, Lawes, and Liberties is so farre from any power of God, that it is rather as Braston saies, a power of the Divell. Rex Vicarius Des est dum facit justitiam, minister autem Diabole, dum declinet ad injurtans, and he that is forbidden to resist God may resist the Divell, and the Dragon his instrument. Rev. 12. 7. Constantine and Theodosius fought with the Dragon, and both against Emperours. The one against Maxentius at the request of the people, and the other with &illegible; in the behalfe of Christians, and there be more examples of fighting with Tyrants than the Doctor will ever be able to answer. But I need not arme the Subjects against Supremacy, they are armed by it against Rebells, and not against the King, and if the Sheriffe of the Shire may preserve the peace, pursue Rebells by the Lawes, shall not the Law-makers doe it much more? They send Serjeants at Armes for Delinquents, and if they will arme against them, and raise Armies, the Parliaments power by the people may master them. As for the Kings trust, we have better rules then compulsion to force him to it, or repulsion to restraine his will from his own actions. The rule is, Quod nostrion est, sine nostro consensu, facto vel defecta à nobis tolli, amitti, sen in alios transferri, non potest. The Parliament hath here claime enough to the Kings trust. First, it is common to them both in the same Supremacy. Secondly, hee hath consented to trust them with his owne trust. Thirdly, the Mis-user of any publike trust may forfeit it to the Parliament. Fourthly, the Non-user of his trust deserves to loose it to them that have power to use it better. Fiftly, desertours of both Houses cannot deprive them of their right to remedie things amisse. Sixtly, every mans talent is for publique good, and he may loose it that will not so use it, or have it taken from him if he abuse it. Lastly, that which is neither grantable, nor forfeitable, may be in the use transferred to others. It’s true, the Crowne of the King is neither grantable nor forfeitable to any person. King Iohn granted his Crowne to the Pope, and it was voyde in Law, and so are all Prerogatives Royall: as for example, 20. Hen. 7. fo. 8. a, a grant of power to pardon Felons by the King to another, it not good in Law, for that it is a prerogative annexed to the Crowne, and cannot bee severed from it. We say of the Parliament, that it is totus populus, totion Regnum, and therefore what the King cannot grant to any person, may be granted to the Parliament, as the King hath granted to this Parliament a power to dissolve it, and the Parliament once in three yeares may be called without the King, which he could not grant by his personall prerogative, but with the consent of both Houses any thing may be done, that the whole may doe. The State then of the Question truely put, the Parliament may arme the People against the personall Commands of the King, to resist them that seduce him, and subvert Religion, Lawes and Liberties; and let the Doctor answer this and his owne Conscience to defend the contrary.
THe Doctors conceptions are confusions, and for due Order he destroyes the Testimony of a Father, and Philosopher, which the University will hisse him out of the Schooles for the one, and the Pulpit for me other. Aug. de civ. Dei cap. 23. pepidui est aetus Lominum juris consensu & utilitatis communione sociatus, the people are a company of men associated together by the consent of Law, and communion of profit. We must conceive this for the first foundation passing from Families. Fathers and Elders: yet being all body and no head, are called, &illegible; an headlesse multitude; and therefore Aristotle makes up the Argument, quandocunque ex pluribus constituitur unum inter illa, unum erit Regens, & alia erunt recta, whensoever of many Members one is constituted amongst them, one part shall rule, and the rest shall be ruled. Marke the Originall in the coalition where it begins by consent, and that is mutuall, inter illa, a mongst them. We say the heart is the first thing that liveth, and the lost tha dieth, and such is the intention of the people in their constitution, then they thinke of some Head, and Lawes as Ligaments to knit them together, and all for common good. The Doctor may read this lesson at leisure, and the fuller answer needs not blush to looke upon either Parliament or people. The Supremacy of the two Houses include the King, as all Courts of Justice doe, where he is fons justillæ, a Fountaine of Justice filled, and filling. He receives his influence from the people juris consensu, and nothing is Law without their consent. The very Election is theirs, and there they begin, and are deposited in the head, as vitall Spirits that warme the animall, and incite them like lightning to shine and dart thorough the sinewes, to set sense and Motion on worke, and keepe the watch in the Tower for the safety of all that dwell in the City. In manu Regis suit omnia jura, he is the hand to dispense to all, and every one right and equall Justice. As he is in the Inferiour Orbes, so he must turne without the Supreme, and the Supremacy is made of three Estaies, as glorious Starres that shine together: and why it should shame the Honourable Houses to bee thrice Honourable in the highest Sphære, as the fuller Answer hath placed them, let the Doctors eyes dazle him that envies the Sun to shine the more brightly in the midst of the Starres, which know how to stoupe to their Soveraigne as Subjects, when they in the Supremacy of the Legislative power, are co-ordinate with him, and the Subjects may thanke them, too that the Arbitrary power is past Tyranny in so well tempered a State, and duly poysed a Parliament. Conscience complaines of Reasons, conviction in the Doctor, that would have one against Law to governe them that make it, for how knowes he the King chalengeth no obedience due to him, that hee would teach with the Emperour to say, quod ego volo pro Canone sit, when indeed his Commands with both Houses are Law, and without them none at all. It’s well his skill is yoked with the affirmative, and how shall Conscience bee sure he affirmes any thing that may satisfie it. His Negative is to tell conscience the King hath not this or that power, and yet the people must obey it, and as for the Parliament he may conclude without offence, their power is but begged for them by an ill Advocate, yet he will grant them something for pity, lest they prove poore, and so the two Houses are co-ordinate with the King, ad aliquid, to some Acts of Supreme power, and what is that? in a word, in that power which containes all the power in the Kingdome; for so I am sure the Legislative power doth, which the Philosopher calls Architeitonicall, at the Arch-builder with the line and measure like him, Rev. 11. 1. The Disciple receives the Reed like a Rod and it measures all that opposeth the moneths of Apostasie; and surely the rule in Parliament passeth for the judgement of the whole Kingdome, and what the Kings judgement is above it, besides it, without it, or against it, let the Dr. teach it that dreames of other mens fancies, and not draw Conscience from the subjection of the Higher powers, which so frequently he translates, Rom. 13. 1. the Higher power, and in his former Book, but once mentioneth powers.
COnscience is put to an hard taske, and contrary to the Apostles direction in doubtfull Disputations, Rom. 14. 1. If the Dr. in this Section had kept his Faith to himselfe, but he will shew his Learning Lawyer-like, and begin with Cadmus and Orpheus for matter and Melodie, and bring men together as wild fruits spring out of the Earth, but Providence gives the patterne, and from paternall power, duitu naturæ, by natures leading, we come to Monarchy, before ever the people associated themselves, and so they had an Head before they were a Body, and yet by the Father and the Philosopher; we see the people agreed upon an association, and came together before they thought upon an head. We know Families made Villages, and had wells and wayes common, and so Vuus seems to be of via & Pagas a π&illegible;&illegible;υ&illegible;. From such small beginning of wayes and wels they came to wals, and called their habitations oppida ab opibus, for riches, or opponendo, because they walled their towns against oppressours. And so Vibs ab Vibe, from the plough laying the surrow for the circle and compasse of the Citie, and this word Civitas in the abstract of Civit, in the concret, of Coivit, comming together, and all this while without Kings; though Cam and Nimrod were the Gyants of the World, and builded Cities to save themselves from destruction, which they brought upon others, and fell at the length into it themselves, Prov. 21. 16. in cætu Gigantum. The Rephaims of the old World Gen. 6. 4. were men of renowne and the mighty men that rebelled against God, and Hell received them. Fortescue is found faulty by this Dr. and he denies the Governing power to be from the people, and his Reason is, because it is from God, and who contradicts that, yet how is that contrary to the people in their consent? Doe they not associate juris consensu, and constitute one Body amongst themselves, and agree of their Rulers? It’s plaine the first Fathers were Kings, so plaine as the Booke of God no where sayes it, and his Reason from Noahs Senors is raised upon the sand, and sinkes in the seventy Nations, for who was their King? Moses tells us of their number, Gen. 32. 8. and how God divided them: but nothing is said who had the Dominion, neither doe we read how God appointed them Kings. We read of Tidal King of Nations, Gen. 14. 9. and of Nimrod a mighty hunter. Gen. 10. 9. but who gave them the honour? we heare the Dr. say it, and doubt of the doctrine and Conscience is poorely convinced to yeild to a King as such a Father, as may rule his Children at his will, that they may neither choose him, nor their Laws to live under. I should weary the Reader to shew him how certaine this man is. Sometimes it is plain by the Book of God, hence it appeares Monarchy, &c. It was likely &illegible; the &illegible; the people choose theirs Rulers and the irregular war went with Chain, and declined paternall right. When the Royall line failed by naturall descent, the people being fore they gave not the power, but still the King is chosen as a Father, and yet naturall Children choose not their Father: and the distracted Dr. saies he knowes not what, but as in a Trance travailes of a Birth, and it proves wind, and words of no worth. Having roved up and down the World, he walkes at length home againe, and cals Conscience to contrived Coalitions of most needlesse disputes, and ends in a Statute, That this Realme of England has been accepted for an Empire, governed by one Supreme head, unto whom a body Politique, compait of all sorts and degrees of people, of the spiritualty, and temporalty, are bound to beare, next to God a naturall obedience. Matrimonie is by contract, and the King is, sponsus regni, 2 Sam. 5. 1. we are thy bone and thy flesh, and David made a League with them, ver. 3. and they apointed him King over Israel. A faire contract, and naturall obedience will not conclude a naturall Father, with whom the naturall Children may not condition: but these may, and the King is bound to keepe his Covenant, if he will oblige Conscience to consent. Mr. Skeene in his booke de Exposidone verborum, makes Legeance a mutuall and reiciprocal bond and obligation betwixt King and Subjects, and if the Dr. will by the Oath of dilegiance parswade subjection, let him now with the King perswade him to protection. Fleta lib. 1. Cap. 27. sayes an out-Lawed Man hath caput &illegible; a Wolles head, and any man might kill him, as out of the Kings protection. I dare not say, if the King will not protect, I may deny duty, though Bookes say so much, and Bracton makes a Tyrant no King, and saies obedience is due to a King, not to a Tyrant, and relation saies, pretectio trahit subjectionem, and Subjectio protectionem and so e contra. All I wish that Kings may not be flattered by false friends, nor his best friends, destroyed by partiall doctrines. His Exposition of Bracton from Sir Edward Cooke, of Earles and Barons, and their honour, helpes not the effluxe of power from the People, because the Sword and Robe is not theirs.
Reges &illegible; sibi &illegible; Barones ordinantes cos in magna honore. I do not well understand he Doctors drift, what he drives at by these words. I conceive he meanes the people have no reserved power in Parliament, seeing the creation of the Lords is not before the King, for hee is the cause of their honour. What then? hinders this the effluxe of power from the People, seeing the Lords have their honour from the King? The grant of grace is more then is borne with that family, yet Noble Families may be before Kings, and Kings by them may be chosen by consent, with the free multitude and both may concurre to make a King. All the Elders that meere to make David a King, might be the chiefe of the people, and at each Coronation the people are asked their consent, shewing in succession the first Institution to have beene by Election; for the Paramount power in Peeres more will be said anon. For his Conclusion of a supposed contrivement and reservation Conscience needs not that which hee counts groundlesse, for the resistance made by Parliament is warrant enough to the people, both for selfe peservation, sincere protestation against Papists, and Malignants both to King and Kingdome. His overthrow of the Co-ordination in all things to make one Supremacy, and the Supply of it by desertion of persons, who cannot remove their powers, for the persons in the House of Commons, may be contracted to fourty, and the Lords to fewer, and yet in those the Supply is sufficient and for the person of the King; His consent to the Act of continuance is enough to keepe his power to Co-ordinate with both Houses, to yeild them the Supremacy of the Kingdome and the Arbitrary government that goes along with is and the fiction is his own that gives the King any Supremacy above the 3 Estates: which are either all in the Parliament, or by discontinuance any one whole Estate may dissolve it, and if the whole King be out of it, it is no Court, for where the King is not, their Justice cannot be administred. All appeales are to Cæsar, that is, to his Iudgement Seat, not his person, and if Cæsar be not in his Parliament, how can it reverse the judgment of any other Court; or how may any man appeale to the Parliament for Justice, if Cæsar be not in it by the Doctors Divinity, and if hee bee in any higher Tribunall let the Malignants make use of it; if they cannot, let them consider what enemies they are unto Cæsar, that cast down his Tribunall; and let the Dr. resolve me by his learning, act. 25. 10. what is meant by βήμα, if hee say the Senate, then Cæsar is in it or Paul cannot Appeale unto him. If with &illegible; some other Tribunall appointed by Nero, let him tell us what it is in England, for certainely the Doctor would make the King contrary to his nature a Nero, to hold a judgement seate above the Parliament, which hee must appeale unto, or his hopes in the two Houses will &illegible; him, if ever he appeare there, for this second Booke bids him beare his owne burden, for being so busie with his betters.
VVEE shall justifie the Co-ordinatour for no Contriver, and though Monarchy have but one Monarch, yet it may bee mixt and moderate, and no meere Empire. Co-ordinata ad omnia in the Legislative power, and that is the whole power of Parliament, and the great Supremacy of the Kingdom. The Parliament does all by the Nomotheticall power, which is to make and expound Lawes, and punish their breach in all great Officers of the Kingdome, that have been a plague to the people. A power Architectonicall is Supreme, and what is Supreme supplies all wants, and is the highest wee can goe. It’s most true, the King is onely Supreme head and Governour in the Apostles sence, when he appeales to Cæsar, and all Lawyers teach mee that all appeales must be from Cæsar to Cæsar and he must administer Justice in all places. So Bracton treating of Jurisdiction saies, sciendum est, we must know that the King onely and no other, if he alone may suffice, to bound by his oath and office to doe all: Sed si Rex &c. But if the King alone cannot suffice to determine all Causes; ut sevior sit illi labor, &c. that his labour may be the lighter, he may appoint Iustices, to whom, as well deaths in Law may bee referred; as complaints, upon injuries, &c. Now if Cæsar doe wrong in one Court, Cæsar may right it in another, and hee suffers his Subjects to seeke remedy from wrongs and injuries in all Courts, till they come at the highest, and still his Oath is after the remedie of mischiefes and inconveniences in Parliament, &illegible; let there be added to the &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; what things shall be past: by meanes whereof if Cæsar doe wrong in one Parliament, he may be appealed unto in another. He is the only Supreme Governour to goe to, but not in his person but in his policy: If his person transgresse, his policy must supply the defect, and the Dr. does nothing in this Section but play with his wit. He would have calling and dissolving to be a Supremacy, and the beginning of every statute, and the Parliaments Petition to passe the Bill, &c. He would same make shift to say something to the Co-ordinatour, but he is curbed by Cæsar and his Judgment Seat; and hee would saine set him a stoole to sit downe by himselfe, and in all likelihood will sooner give his Majestie a fall, then establish his Throne in righteousnesse. He gathers up scattered proofes, and speakes parables, that not Monarchy but Government is mixt. Hee told us before our English Government was a Monarchy, and now it is none, but the Monarchy is meere and absolute, and the Government mixt and conditionate. Hee hath a predominancy in the supremacy, yet not arbitrary in his Majestie, and to say a Monarchy is compounded of 3. Estates is absurd, either it is mixt of three, or purely one, and then absolute and Arbitrary, and the King may doe what hee list. I might touch many notes to make the Dr. notorious in his distinctions without differences, and dancing up and downe to get out of his owne nets. His Native and Dative Lords doe him little service in Parliament, except he would teach the King to imitate the Pope in the Councell of Trent, and create such dearlings as &illegible; the Bishop of 5. Churches speakes of, that matters in the Councell came to passe by hungry Bishops of honour, that king upon the Popes sleeve, and were created on the sudden by the Pope for the purpose, that that Councell seemed to be an assembly, not of Bishops, but Hobgoblins, not of men, but of Images moved like the statues of &illegible; by the sinewes of others. Borne Counsellors to the State, or created, may be said to have a native Nobility because they are not chosen as the Commons, but come as right Heires of that honour to Vote in Parliament, and freely to promote the utility of their Countrey. &illegible; in &illegible; or Peers in the County, Co-ordinate not with the King, nor yet saies he have the Relation to the Parliament in those words of &illegible; Rex habet curiam superiorem, that is, the Court of Barons without Commons, who were as a bridle to curbe Hen. 3. It may be the Dr. is right, and the Barons wronged the King, but the Parliament I am &illegible; hath a great power to chastise corrupt Counsellors to the King, for it is over them we place the Supremacy, and not the King. Majestas popul Romani, is matter of no moment, neither doe I thinke his multitude of words worth any longer worke in this Section.
COnscience will never bee resolved by Equivocation of words, and mentall reservations are worse. I believe the Dr. is an honest man, and of a sound heart, and meanes to delude neither King nor Kingdome, Parliament, or people, and yet he equivocates in 7. things, Names, Number, Nature, Order, Office, Action, and End. I said we are Gods in name and to some purpose, but to pull downe your pride, you shall die like Men. Good Kings would doe as God bids them, and beware as men in the common condition how they die; for their death is as sure as others, but most damnable if they depart Tyrants, and Christian princes most of all should be warned by the word of the Text, Psal. 82. 7. fall like one of the Princes: that is, his owne Judges in Israel should no more be spared then Pagans. Here we have Gods in name ad &illegible; to some purposes, but the name will not change them from men: But the Names in Parliament that expresse it, as, Ordines, potestates, status, sunt ad omnia, they agree in all things. They are Orders to the same purpose. Powers to the same performances; States to the same establishment of the Kingdom. Our Saviour for the &illegible; satisfies the Iows of his actions, that they are answerable to truth Ioh. 5. 19. equall with God was the peoples mistake & yet his mind and meaning was so, and he proves it by his works, not confounding the order of persons: So I say all the Orders powers, States, work the same thing in Parliament without confusion. The King is the first in Order, but not in Power, and it may be so in the presbytery, Rev. 4. 4. the Bishop is the first in order, but not in power to doe what he will, but what all will doe, and here I might regulate Votes in Parliament as in all Councells, Quod major pars curiæ effect, pro vato babetur &illegible; omnes &illegible; what the greater part of the Court shall doe, that is ratified, or to stand for they Judgment of the Court, is if all bad done the same, Dig. lib. 50. leg. 19. And again, &illegible; ad &illegible; quod publice fit per majorem partem that is accounted the act of all, which is publikely done by the greater part, Dig. lib. 5. Tit. 17. de Reg. Juris 160. Vpon the equity of this rule the Councell of Chalcedon, when ten Bishops dissented from the rest. Act. 4. p. 90. b. said, honest justum decem audiri, ten must not be heard against a thousand and two hundred, and so proceeded the fifth generall Councell, Col. 6. p. 576. &illegible; Maximus, &illegible; and the Legates of Leo, were no hindrance to the Fathers to make that hereticall which they had made Orthodoxall. I confesse our great Councell sitting in two Houses raiseth many equivocations to disturbe the truth: wee must looks at the right constitution of them into a Councell, and so they must all come together, and their division topicall should not be tropicall, figurative fashioned to every fancy. Many having made the Court forsake it; and say, they are driven away by others, when the fault is their owne, and by the end they shew their action. Their end is to dissolve the Councell but they cannot by the Act of continuance, and I thinke the necessity of the Estate is such that any one order may supply the whole, by that rule in the Law illud quod ali is licitum non est, necessit is facil &illegible; et necessitas in &illegible; privilegion, quod jure privatur, In case of necessity by discretion, any part may doe that which the whole cannot doe. The King departs his Councell, and yet it remaines in being of all the Parts for without 3. Orders it is not constituted, and the Orders remaine virtually from the time of their actuall meeting and the Parliament being now no Equivocall body, but &illegible; and Estentiall, we must take it as it is and the Votes are vigorous in vertue, and Cæsar is there or no where to be obeyed, for hee can erect no other Tribunall in his Kingdome, neither can we appeale to any other, and so the fifth Section of Supply, is not fancied upon the Co-ordination, nor necessary Conservation of the Kingdome. From Names I come to Numbers and consider them in the Constitution or Co-alition as absolutely necessary for presence. Our Saviour having set his Apostles in the forme of Government, Mat. 28. 20. promiseth presence to the end of the World, and as long as the Church &illegible; it is not left void of power in the change of persons, and so the Parliament remaines in power, though many persons be absent, which are visible, and as they make a visible body must be present, but the three Members being powers are not seene but as abstracts in their concretes, which are not fancies, but virtues in the Councell. We looke not upon the bare bones, but invisible powers in them that worke as Co-ordinates, which supply and do not supplant one another, as the Persons &illegible; Our number is certaine, and it is either such at this present, or we have no Parliament and if the number be compleat, wee may say Cæsar wills what the Parliament does, and what the Parliament does not Cæsar cannot doe, or we appeale unto it, and the Nature of the thing answers the number, and so will they Orders, Offices, Actions and ends. The Orders have but one Office, one Trust, one Action, one End. His Majestie hath a Regall Office, but not righteous to withdraw it from his Parliament, and his trust is not, as he is made to say in his prayers of his Oath, which shewed his Office in Parliament most to be suspected, for his Lords and Commons that sweare to him, sweare not to the Kingdome, which trusts them without an Oath, as being impossible they should bee unfaithfull unto it, more then themselves; for they are more the Kingdome then the King. Kings seduced may wrong the common-wealth, but Parliaments cannot. His Majestie is made thus to speake of his Oath, That it cannot be meant that the King should thereby hee obliged to devest himselfe of his power to protect his Subjects, which is the great businesse of that Oath. Hee will not be bound up in Parliaments from his owne will, for he is made to say in another place, that hee is not bound to renounce his owne understanding, or contradict his owne conscience for any Counsellors sake whatsoever. It’s granted to a sole and competent judge so to doe, but His Majestie is neither in Parliament and though against the light of nature, and the evidence of fact no Man may contradict his owne Judgement, yet it is not his owne in both Houses, and Cæsar is then himselfe when he Judges with his two Houses, and not by himselfe, and &illegible; come to the Section.
THe King by the Doctors Confession acknowledgeth he can make no Laws without His two Houses, but they in their Supremacy will doe it without him, as if they were without him, as he is without them, doing his owne will, which is no Law, yet must be obeyed, and not resisted. It had beene happy the Dr. had seen the fifth Booke, which teacheth him that resistance is limited by law, and not the subversion of it, and if Cæsar will subvert himselfe, Cæsar may save himselfe, and the Dr. will never answer the 5th Book, that takes his words truly, that the subversun of Religion, Lawsand Liberties, may be resisted by arme and by Cesar if Cesar will not, for I equivocate with the Dr. out of no ill intention: Cesar in Paul’s sense is not the man, but the judgement seate, Act. 25. 10. and so Cesar may resist Cesar, and the Parliament the King, which is more then ever I said, or yet can thinke without Charitie that the Person is sacred, and to be redeemed with my life, and thousands more, but Religion, Lawes, Liberties, are worth more than a King, and better he than they perish, if no other Remedie be to be had, and the Doctor does ill to value his Majesty at such a rate, as rather to lose them, than his Soveraigne, no good charity, and I feare himselfe to be a man that had rather save his owne credit, then sacrifice it to his Nation, which seekes not the life of the King, but theirs that are Rebells to both, and if such Ordinances and Supplies be his sorrowes, I could wish him a better judgement.
The Militia is the Kings trust: and is it not the Parliaments? speake Doctor, and doubt not, and if it bee they supply his trust better then his Cavaliers. But the Dr. is very wise, and warme in his apprehension, for no sooner is the word out of his mouth, take notue that the King by Law is to call a Parliament, but the Eccho is, and by the way take notice he is the sole Iudge, and why then needs he call a Councell, when he may judge alone, indeed the Dr. adviseth him not to bee too hasty, I had thought he meant in his owne judgement, but it is the judgement of the Parliament he precipitates, and is sory they should seize on the Militia, and we are sory for the Commission of Array to be a knowne Law, as wee now know it, and that the Parliament may not judge it to be none against the Cavaliers. But the Parliament may not judge the Kings Intentions, and the imminent dangers have beene for the most part as invisible as they. Horrible imminent dangers, a jeere no jest, for in good earnest are the Kings intentious, as bad as the dangers, and have they broken out together? The Dr. hath done the King the wrong to breake his head, that no plaister will cure, for actions follow intentions, and the Parliament judged of them too truly, and time hath revealed, what now is hid to no body, though the Drs. braines conceive no such thing, feares follow, and the King had as much cause to feare as the Parliament. His Majesty withholds the Militia, for the same reasons the Parliament moved him to grant it, and both reasons of State, save the King must bee no part of it, and truely He is not out of Parliament, for wee have no other States but in &illegible; and yet this man will finde one out of it to be the whole, and so Cæsar is but not in his sense. We would same see the Law with the Dr. 25. H. 8 21. your Royall Majesty, and &illegible; Lords and Commont represent the whole Realme. VVell said Dr. and is not this Parliament so? say what you thinke, Casar is gone, and Casar cannot goe, whether will you follow. Your Booke comes from Oxford from Leonard Lichfield, but not from Cæsars Tribunall, will you have it judged there by both Houses? They will tell you they restraine not the State to them, further then they finde it to have no other Tribunall. Tell us where the State is else seated; shooting at Rovers may hit voted Enemies, and his Majesty were happy if he had none about Him. The Dr. findes but five or sixe sled over Sea, and returned as he sayes now in an Army. To posse by this, let us see what is materiall. And is this matter of no moment? But he addes, the time was not to provoke the Parliament powerfull with the People, which now are potent with the King. But whats the reason we are not in safety? He seemes to lay it on the Kings Army, and the good pleasure of God, that hath raised such an assistance unto him, that he is able to make resistance to the pretended Army of the Parliament. We may now judge of the Drs. determination for Cæsar to maintaine the quarrell against his owne Tribunall. Blowes are given, and Cæsar must beare them, but how, let all judge that reade the Resolution. Delinquents are in danger, and to deliver Friends from the Justice of Parliament, the King must pardon them. But the breach is made by Delinquents in Parliament, denyed the King to try them, what from his owne Tribunall? must not that consider how men may bee delivered up to Cæsar, from Court to Court? but the Campe makes a short tryall, and the Sword is a sharp Judge, and his Majesty will have the Militia at his owne pleasure, and that’s our woe. From pretences he comes to Reasons of co-ordination, and denies them by distinctions, not Dr. like, for the definition that is true may not be denyed, and supply is reciprocall with co-ordination, and to all purposes, both in respect of the end and meanes. Qui tollit medium, tollit quoque finem, co-ordinates have the same end, and may use the same meanes. There needs no expression, and the end will direct the meanes. The end is knowne to be safety, the King refuseth to worke for this end by such meanes as his Councell advise him, and will thinke of no other meanes but his owne will. The Militia is his, and he will use it without his two Houses. Let the Dr. answer, are the two Houses co-ordinate with the King? then they may supply the meanes of safety when he refuseth, and he refuseth against the contrivement, when being co-ordinate: he will subordinate them to his will. The Dr. doates about time, for it matters not when the constitution began so the condition be plain in the co-ordination as now it is, and to fetch about is foolish, and the fancy of him that formes it for others. But to the safety of the Kingdome in this supply, he addes the security of the co-ordinates one against another; and makes it a power of denying. Miserable man, such Denyalls are the death of the Kingdome. No question is made of the security of the parts, but the safety of the whole. Three Estates represent the whole Realme, and they are for it, and not it for them, and will the Dr. talke of the Kings security against the Kingdomes safety? Let them seeke that, and they will all be safe. The two Houses might secure themselves by forsaking their trust, as some doe by departing the Kingdome, others by departing the Parliament, but both destroy the whole and out of that their security is senselesse, as it is for the King to leave his Counsell for worse advise. The Dr. is a Dunce, pardon mee, I doe not thinke so, but in this owne thing, the two Houses are co-ordinate with the King ad consentiendum, not at all, for they are free in that to vote one against another, but they are co-ordinate to preserve the Kingdome, and in that they have no freedome. His objection is idle of Command, for they command not, but when He will not command, and he forceth them to doe that which truly he ought to doe, the Lawes by them being left in his hands, which when he rejects both Bills and Empire they are necessitated to execute without him. But this is further then Law will give them leave: Grant it, yet necessitie is their Law, and Supremacy their Arbitrary way. But what shall become of the Subjects property, if the King may not prevent the two Houses of an Ordinance to take all: Nay, I say what shall become of it, if the King and the Cavaliers may take all? no feare of the Parliament to be in fault this way, for no man will rob himselfe, and the two Houses represent the whole Realme, which the King out of them cannot doe, and as he is in his Campe rends the heart out of his owne body. But the Parliament makes the King &illegible; Stone in the foundation: would God he had never made himselfe so by removing his Person from his power, and born as much as in him lieth from his Parliament. But presence and absence is nothing, the vote is all, the King will not. Good Doctrine for a Doctour. I made too bold to call him a Dunce: but now I must say he is desperate. The King denies, and wee are undone. The two Houses must come home, or hold on, and like Nero see the Citie and State fired but with better affections, mourne and make it a Fast day, and pray, Lord have mercy upon us, whiles too many like those Rev. 11. 10. make merry. I know they are the Papists by their habitation, and witnesses they persecute. The Commons refuse the supply: Suppose it as impossible, we grant him his inference, and say the Dr. is in a vaine conceit further Commons (to use his owne word) is the substrata materia of the whole Kingdom, and if the King and Lords were without them, the whole Realme would represent nothing, and as they beare all there will need no question for their owne benefit, they will never forsake the Kingdome, and if it come to a &illegible; to be formelesse and voyde of Inhabitants, if Colonies come into it, the propagation will be as of old without Kings save since Tyrants thrived the people never prospered. We must examine the shift that shakes off conscience, which as it saves not the one from guilt, so neither will it the other from violence, and if the King die can He be at Westminster? worthy Sir, you should have done well prosessing to resolve conscience, which I can free from guilt where you say it, by our Logick wherein your Learning cannot forget the distinction of Causes, whereof one is this, causa per se, he kills the King that intends it, causa per accident, hee kills him not, where the efficients Scope is to doe no such things. Hee that puts the King into a desperate way, & delivers him not out of it, is the cause of his death, whosoever kills him. And therefore looke you to it as a Doctour, and doe your duty, the Parliament does, and so doe all good people, and who can help him they cannot hinder, Religion, Lawes, Liberties are dearer then all mens lives, or else they were mad men that venture to die for nothing. I could tell you something of these Warres, Rev. 7. 7. and beware you of the Beast, especially with two hornes, he may be a Lambe by his hornes, but his mouth is black and soule, and many are filled with such speaking. I hope you use the Keyes better, and the King might save some of your doctrine better delivered, and Divinitie taught him to doe him more good than the Universities have done of late, whose Learning to lift up Monarchy and Episcopacy may cast downe both.
The Conclusion of this Section is sick of the Staggers, it reeles too and fro, and from voted ones to begin the violence, brings in thousands to maintaine it, honourably he sayes, such as holy Wars were to destroy Kings and Kingdomes to raise the Pope, and being now up, some must defend him, and he deludes Kings, and good ones too, have taken parts with the ungodly, and the union of Beast and his Image, Beast and false Prophet is not without a mystery, as plain as the Drs. rules are for conscience, which he intricates in contrivements, and by Cesars Person overthrowes his power, not placing it in the Parliament, but against the two Houses as a third Estate, when he is either in the one of them, or no where as he ought. But to shew him the businesse of bloud, let him call to minde where the last persecution of the ten ended, and where the Street ends, Rev. 11. 8. It is but one, and that a long ones and England ends it, and so did it the ten persecutions, and raised up the first meanes of deliverance. Æra Martyrum, and Æra Disclesiana are one in History and the Altar is as much, Rev. 6. 9. and the red Dragon ends with the Earth-quake, v. 12. and the Beast followes, and hath an Image, that followes him as a shadow does the body, and this Beast is the false Prophet, and he brings in another Beast deceived by him, and the Keyes does it, and Crownes are lead by them, and make Warre for him they understand not. Plainely our case is that of &illegible; 2 Chron. 19. 2. the King wants but a Seer, the Dr. might doe well to open this Text, and shew him who the ungodly are. Idolaters, Haters of God, they that Worship him with Baal and Balaam, Rev. 2. 14. is the Pope, Antipas his enemy: Balac seduced Kings, and good ones may be in affinity with them, 2 Chron. 18. 1. and should they help the ungodly Papists: say not they are pious, their devotion is worse then Israels, should they love them that hate God, They hate him that know him, as Ahab did, yet halted and halvod in his Service.
The Parliament is bent to Reforme, and reduce the Nation from Romane Superstitions, and that stirres up a popish faction against them and it is but turning the phrase, should the Noble and honest thousands with the King be helped by the ungodly, and love them better then both Houses that hate Gods true Religion? But the Dr. sates the King is not carried away by the perswosion or enemies to himselfe, or Kingdome; he is forced to this just and necessary defence, and by his Army is more safe then in his two &illegible; and by the Doctors owne words, I object two things to satisfie Conscience. First let him shew one Text of Scripture that allowes assrnity with Idolaters and to help them, or be helped by them to love the haters of God, or desire to bee loved by them. Secondly, let him declare his last words to bee true, that the King is safer every way by his owne Army, then that which pretends to preserve him in his politique. I must tell him, and I am sure of it, that his Royall or Regall power is unrighteous against his politiques and having raised an Army be that against his other just right, he hath no remedy of Law to free it from Rebellion, and if they will follow the advise of him that ended our Civill warres, and peaceably hath derived unto him the Crowne, which he received from Richard the third an usurper, and to take away all dubious termes from all followers of the Kings in their Warres, he procured their security by Parliament, not by his owne power, and if the policy of Parliament will not protect them, the pretended Doctrine of this Dr. may endanger all he perswades to cleave to the King in his wars upon his own words.
THe Dr. is almost out of breath, and we have runne him past resolution, and a meane Reader may wind him out of all, but we shall give him wind at will, if he can gaine ought by his end or finall sate in the two Houses to which Henry the seventh repaired for safety of all his Subjects, the Civill Warre ended, and so must King Charles, or we shall never end our controversie. In this Section the Dr. is at his share, and saies it is not enough for finall resolution, except the King be a Cypher, and the Houses have all. This whole stickes upon his stomack, and he would faine divine, and give the King a part, and good reason. But he meanes all, at least in the Militia, and it is most true out of Bracton, ea quæ sunt lustitiæ, &c. ea quæ pacis sunt, &c. ea quæ Belli sunt, &c. All ordinary Jurisdiction belongs to the King, and cannot bee severed from his Crowne, for that makes it, nec potest a privata persona possiders, no private person possesseth any jurisdiction, and every Subject is a private person: but so are not the 3 Estates, and yet they are all compounded of naturall men, and may be immortall in Mortalls, and the King dies no more then any other order, as in the, 7. Rep. 12. a. Calvins c. the King is a Body Politique, lest there should be inter-regnum; for that a Body Politique never dieth. The King therefore is no Cypher, but the whole summe, set him right in his place. In ordinary Jurisdiction none but he, and to him all are sworne to execute his legall will, or to obey it: But Parliaments are not sworn to the King, but the King to them, and the Dr. teacheth him perjury thorough his whole Booke, and because hee is a Cipher as he sets him, he shares nothing with the two Houses if he refuse them, and he is but a Cipher to all his Army, and his Houses warre against it for rebellion, for by ordinary jurisdiction they are not his Judges, and as many as they kill they are by Law Murtherers, and by the 3. Estates Rebells to the whole Kingdome, and if the King will not follow them, both Houses may. The Dr. may ease himselfe of his earnest Argument with his Answerer, and his first constitution, for what hath Conscience to doe with more then to obey for the present. Conquests take not away the force of resistance, but States may resist, and so the powers in the Senate resisted Nero, but the Apostle did not, but appealed to him. Act. 25. 11. and God delivered him from the mouth of the I. &illegible; 2 Tim. 4. 17. Momenta temporum is well observed, and I have told him of one now, let him beware providence plague not him for an Enemy to the will of God, when he raiseth his Witnesses with the ruine of Rome, when the Almighty hath Translated the Crown seven times, and the Popes that hold it shall not long enjoy it, and happy Princes and Priests that pull downe that principalitie and priesthood. Concessiones, we have granted. What then? Jurisdiction is the Kings, and it beseemes him to grant, and by oath he is bound unto it, and if of Grace be grant more, let it adde to his praise, which the Dr. will soon wipe out, if he write as he does. Passions punish the Dr. exceedingly, for he begins his Booke with servent rash anger, and followes his Argument with the lesse wit, by his stubborne will never yeelding to reason: The King hath his Crowne by succession, therefore not by election: I dare say by the Coronation oath election began that succession, and the consent asked, sheweth the King had his Crowne by the election of him and his heires, and if the line be out the right returnes to them, for the Kings Heires receive in trust, and not heires in property, to dispose of what they have as they list. But the King claimes from a Conquerour, and yet hath not a free Title, but limited by Law, and who made it, if the people might choose it? He suspects the Parliament will depose the King, but he may be suspected more justly to teach the King to depose them, and dispose of all they have by conquest, if the Parliament doe not stand unto them. He puts the case of division, and gives it a bad determination, first, by reproach, that the Parliament watcheth opportunities to prevaile by faction; secondly, to command the Militia without the King: which concoction of coleworts is so stale that we will stand no longer upon this Section, but see another to surfeit us.
I Might take just exception, that the two Houses and the three Estates are not divided, but we will patiently heare him out. Saint Augustine answeres for the beginning of Arbitrary Government, when he defines a people to bee a company of men associated by the consent of Law, and communion of profit: was it not in this society to consent? and did they consent without their wills, and had the wills against their owne good. It’s true Rome consented to an Emperour, as we may see in Augustus, who hide his ambition when hee denied what hee desired; and Tiberius was jeered for his request, and the Senate reserved the supreme power still, as is plaine in the reigne of Tiberius: And because the Doctor may doubt of it out of Dio, saying Augustus was absolved from all Lawes, I shall satisfie him out of Rusebius Eccl. hist. lib. 2. cap. 2. Vetus decretum est, ne Deus ab Imperatore consecraretur, nisi à Senata probaretur: The Emperour was an high Priest, and might neither by his priesthood nor Principality doe any thing the Senate allowed him not to doe. And Tertul. in Apolog. takes notice of this before Easebibtus related it, Niss homini Deus platuerit, Deus non erit, home jam Deo propitius esse debebit. I hope the Doctor will not say of our King, that he is solutus legibus: that the three Estates stand for the subject of supremacy, in extraordinary jurisdiction I beleeve it, that our State should be popular, and our king no more then the Duke of Venice I conceive it not, neither in ordinary nor extraordinary jurisdiction, for in the one the king is the sole person, and all powers come from him, and neither Lord nor Levite, person or Potentate may exercise a jurisdiction without him: In the other he is the first in honour, and they all together (as our bookes say) are a Court of thrice great honour and justice, of which, none ought to imagine a dishonourable thing, 9. Rep. 106. b. 107. a. 6. Rep. 27. b. 28. pl. com. fo. 398. Fortesc. cap. 18. A Court that can doe no wrong, the proper Judges of doubts, dangers, injuries: and for the Commons, the writ directs the people to the &illegible; and most discreet men, and one sayes they exceed the Romane Senate in number, and are like them for sage and judicious men.
The Dr. &illegible; them all with dirt not content to make the King supreme in ordinary juridiction: but in all to give him predominancy, and in warre to &illegible; all to his will, and out of all Courts to doe as he pleaseth without residence, when the law is, Extra Territorian &illegible; dicenti, non paretur impure, he that obeyes the command of any power, out of its jurisdiction, shall be punished &illegible; &illegible; what &illegible; saies this Dr. to the Kings Cavaliets, in what jurisdiction does the King command them? sure I am they are punishable by the three Estates for Tyranny. The King will not consent to their punishment, and the Doctor sayes they must be spared, though they spoile the whole Kingdome. &illegible; &illegible; Doctor, such pitty spoiles the City: His boldnesse who can beare it, that speakes of an unanimous consent so grosly, as not to follow the &illegible; part present, but stay till it may be tried by all, or such a number as will come at their leisure, and then lash out at them that watch for opportunities, which argues duty not danger, though he expound it in an other sense to please the King, and sway him to aside: and surely it would not have lost it, if the vigilant Houses had not prevented their plots. Dictates of two Houses are great &illegible; but the last Dictate must be left to the King, and nothing done without it: This he makes the consequent of his owne understanding; and must it be the judgement of the whole Kingdome? It may be sufficient for his owne conscience, but it bindes no mans else; and yet if both houses judge the judgement is not private, but legall in our obedience, and inevitable. I am weary of this Section, not for want of answeres, but their multitude so often repeated, which a few lines might have satisfied the subject, if the subject of supremacie in the three Estates were not contradicted by him by shifting, and if the King would have shared with his two houses in the Militia the matter had beene ended peaceably for the Parliament, never required more then to proceed with the King; but if he refuse them, and resolve as the Doctor does, we are resolved where the right is for the supply, and conscience convinced the Divine is in an &illegible;
THe Doctor deales with many Divines, and all of them have diversity of Divinity and he contradicts them all, not like an asse by negation, but affirmatively as a wise man knowing what he hath to say to every man, bee it &illegible; of &illegible; conscience must be resolved by him. To the fuller Answer we have had his determination, and now he is upon the backe of Master Bridge, and &illegible; passeth over him without drowning; and as with the former distinction of Co-ordination and Sub-ordination he got over the water, so he now wades over the shallow Ford of preservation and jurisdiction, and douseth Conscience in both over head and eares without understanding. The Author saies well in all his Propositions, and the Dr deales with them as the King does with Delinquents, lets them alone, and onely saies to the first, a legall Tryall is just and necessary, so it be in a legall way in the highest Court with the Kings consent, but to do it with an Army is an Argument the Militia is not the Kings as an Act of selfe preservation, but an act of Jurisdiction over the King, as if to punish Delinquents were against the Jurisdiction of the King. But how is it Legall? I Answer, by a Court of Justice, wherein is extraordinary Jurisdiction to punish those that the King by his ordinary jurisdiction will not punish, and though he have not done the wrong, yet his ordinary Justices have done it, and now being brought to his extraordinary Judges he himselfe must hinder them against the preservation of the Kingdome, the trust whereof is in the Parliament, and the right in the People, who cannot doe it disorderly, as long as they are directed unto it by so great a Court.
But a great Delinquent was kept by that from Tryall at the instance of the King, and good Reason; for they that may reverse the judgement of ordinary jurisdiction, may judge extraordinarily of the matter of Hull, where the great Delinquent seized the Militia without violence to the King, begging his grace to remit such a space of time, as the Parliament might judge of his fact, and then his firme saith should appeare to his Liege Lord, as a Liege Subject; that is legall, and if the Parliament may not declare that, then the Royall power may hang and draw whom it pleaseth, and it shall be righteous. For invasion of enemies, and the insurrection of Papists, the worst of enemies, the worthy Dr. puts it to conscience to say, have the Subjects cause to seare? And I say he hath no Conscience nor compassion of Ireland, and England that will not say it, arme and resist, and he will never answer the fifth Booke, that affirmes it, for Religion, Lawes and Liberties, all men are bound to resist, and damnation is not for that, but resistance by Armes, and Arguments against Rulers that are for the praise of the good, and punishment of the wicked, and to say the powers are from God that doe otherwise is without Text: and when God speakes of Tyrants, as his servants, it is for such service as is said by the Apostle, and so Cyrus was for the praise of the Iewes, and the punishment of the Caldeans, and though Religion teach not Rebellion; yet Lawes and Liberties, where they are teach men to defend them, and Paul by Cæsar resisted Cæsar. He would not be tryed by his Deputies, but his owne Tribunall, and a freeman, like Paul, Act. 22. 28. may check wrong in Officers, and challenge his freedome, and defend it to the utmost power of Cæsar, which is not in his person, but seat of Judgement. The Co-ordinatour contradicts not Mr. Bridge, as the Dr. brags, for selfe preservation is in the Subject by the Law of nature, which no positive Law can infringe which puts trust in the Parliament, as well as the King, and neither is against the welfare of a community, and that having the Jurisdiction of the Parliament is strengthened by it. The Dr. is driven out of his wits, and wants Hellebore to help him by a strong purgation. Positive Laws restraine not the Law of nature, neither does trust destroy selfe preservation. Whither will the Dr. run to recover his wits but to repentance, and God grant him pardon, and open his eyes to see his errors. Pretences of selfe preservation may be seditious. What then? Men may drink till they be drunke; therefore starve nature to prevent the abuse. Wildly hath Mr. Bridge wandered, to 1 Chron. 12. 19. and I will not weigh it with him, yet David was no Hypocrite, and his helpers in warre is something more then a wild note, Rom. 13. 1. It’s well assumed for the Parliament, and subjection is due, but how must it be done? If the King will carry with them, and keepe them company. But he divides them, and sayes they declare Law without him, and supposeth the Dr. not to doubt of it; and he sayes to satisfic, they judge the fundamentalls that may build upon them. He addes new Lawes, and then is sure the Parliament is silent if the King will say nothing, and except he say it, we may not obey them, and so all is at an end, be the evills never so many. We are bidden heare and feare, and doe no more presumptuously, Deut. 17. 13. Its meant of the great judgment of many when there was no King. But Moses made it good, and was there no time when Moses was not, or any single judge, and yet the Elders were to be heard, and Israel was happy while it had them, serving the Lord, Iudg. 2. 7. Hard hap to light on Saul, David, and Solomon, who had their power from GOD, and not from the people. We answer from both. But how doe the people give that which they have not? I hope the Dr. knowes the people are said to make their Kings, as the wife makes her Husband. The Dr. must goe to schoole to learne the Argument of Relation, where Relatives are mutuall causes and effects, and the people make a King when they consent unto him, and God never gave them any to make them their owne by Conquest, being free borne people, otherwise might and money make slaves, and he that sells himselfe to the King, let him naile him to his doore, or if he will not yeild for money, let Prince Rupert tie him with Ropes, and carry him in triumph to the King, and such Subjects we must be if the Dr. may determine. An excellent Collection, 1 Chron. 13. 1. 2. for the Euller Answer to fall upon the Collector, and though he will say with neither, yet this he will say, David meerely designed his owne Deputies, and the people did nothing. What then is meant by the Congregation of Israel, if Israel had no power? Did not the Elders come for all, 2 Sam. 5. 3. and made the League? Voluntiers and listed Souldiers, are a sport to the Dr. and lie spares not the Parliament in sending them, and by Sheriffes of Shires sheweth that the King and not the Parliament maketh them. We know Constables of Townes, called petty Officers made by the People, and chiefe Constables made by the hundreds and I may adde Sheriffes by their Counties and Corporations, and for ought I know Sergeants at Armes are at the command of the Parliament, and they may use them all to execute their decrees; and raise Armies too for ought the Dr. hath said, and I see he is not well seen in the Iewes Synedrion, that all the Kings had no power to make Warre, but such as is permitted by them or expresly commanded by God, as with the seven Nations, Amaleck, &c. He hath by the Co-ordinatour been driven to confesse a Supremacy in three Estates, and I am sure a Supremacy may doe any thing for the good of all that are under them, and have an Arbitrary, necessary, and happy way to supply all wants. Arbitrary in Votes, necessary in Supplyes, happy in Consent: which last clause if it cannot be had by the Votes of all, necessity makes Supply, and so both Houses in the Arbitrary Supremacy may use the Militia, or else it belongs not to their Supremacy, and who hath a greater. The King may have it granted him in ordinary jurisdiction, and no private person; that is, no Subject at all may use it: but in that high, and extraordinary jurisdiction, the States of the Kingdome may doe as Mr. Bridge said in his three grounds more foundly then the Dr. hath done in contradicting it. His lamentation of sorrowful parents followes upon such arguments as he makes, and Armes had never bin taken up, if such Doctors had not dazled mens eyes, with the maze of Rebellion, that none can cleere but the two Houses dishonoured by him, as in the next Objection. If the power of the Prince be from the people, they may take it away when they will, and depose him, when he abuseth it. He saies the deniall of this is cold, and the point paves a way into it, and preachers seditiously set it on to the prejudice of the Prince, to consent to all the Parliament pleaseth, All that understand any thing, may know the Dr. finds fault with himself, for that he layes upon others, for godly preachers settle the Supremacy where it is both for powers and person, and he by the person would pull downe the powers, when as they hold up one another, so should all that love them rightly maintaine them together, and not pull them a pieces by Court preaching, where the King heares nothing but of his owne power, and the advancement of it. The Homilies we honour more then the Bishops have done, who in th point of Idolatry have made strange constructions of them. They are right downe that Images cannot be in Churches without perill of Idolatry, and how have late have they been placed in Churches, and Cheapside Crosse which the Parliament pulling downe, doubtlesse will have the Doctors determination against it, but we are glad he urgeth the Homilies, and we shall Answer them better then the Bishops have done, and confesse it is not lawfull for Subjects to take up Armes, but may not the Parliament? No, if they be Subjects But how are the three Estates Subjects? Not as powers, and for persons, as farre as the Supremacy is over them, let them all obey, and let the personall Act of the King be cleared rom the breach of his owne Supremacy. A finall Judgement Negative and not conclusive is &illegible; for a finall judgement concludeth whether given affirmatively or negatively, and it is binding in a Magistrate; and his Majestie makes it so in his greatest Court denying them to doe any thing without him, and commanding all to obey him, upon his high displeasure, and punisheth it with that rigor, as never were any Lawes, before his Edicts, omnes ordines consentientes is not in their generall Votes, as if all persons were to consent, but that the three powers doe it, and the Kings consent to a Court is enough to proceed, though it be not to every act, for many are just by refusall; as for example, the act of continuance hath an end of action, and to continue a Court to doe nothing is idle. The King opens a way of Justice, the Judges are set, the people attend, and must waite till the word come from the King, heare this man, hang that, handle such a Cause, bee carefull to say nothing in another; see ye serve my will and not the Law; Let Sir Iohn Hotham suffer; and set at liberty my followers. An Arbitrary Court indeed that must doe nothing but what the Head will, and shall the body be against it? I would same the Doctour would informe mee what Head is meant, 1 Cor. 12. &illegible; Not Christ, for be needs no Members to supply his wants. A visible Head it must be in a visible body. Surely, we have found the Pope, and the Fathers of that body, say, Kings are the Feet; we will not make him so low, and yet they that love him best, if they be the Papists, will place him no higher; for if he will not goe for them, they will make him as low as the body they have put under him, his despised Parliament, no better then Feet, that must blindly be lead by no other light than the Dr. allowes them: but the Apostle will &illegible; us by the Text applyed, v. 28. who are first in this body, and if first, Heads, and of them Peter might be the first in Order, and will that satisfie the King in the Supremacy of many; for so it was in the Apostles, and so must it be in the three Estates, they are but one Head of the Kingdome, for it is true as the Person is but one, so the Powers are three, and to place them under one person is the Doctours errour, and makes good those words, Rex est universis minor, and if hee mind the words, 25. H. 8. 21. will prove it, the whole Realme being represented in the Parliament, his Majesty being one of the Members, and therefore lesse then the whole, and the whle Kingdome cannot be severd from the Parliament, and they are strange men that will not be in it operative to defend it, but like the Dr. dally with words of head and body in opposition, as body against Head, and part against part: when he knowes not what Head means and if they be first in the Church that rule it, and heads in the Apostles sense, I may say as much of the Members that they make one Supremacy, and the Doctor strives as the Papists doe, nothing can be done without the Pope, and so he, nothing without the King, and if Paul and Peter had so striven, Gal. 2. 11. what had become of the Faith of the Church.
Peter was blame-worthy for his errour, but not his supremacy, which hee yeelded to his fellow Apostle for the preservation of the truth; and so would it be here, if Divines did not delude his Majesty with maintenance of sole supremacy of power to yeeld the Parliament no part of it. His conclusion of this Section is false, for the Senate and People were not enslaved as the Christians were, but resisted, and so did Christians, Tyrants, when they had power; as with Constantine and Theodosius: and Saint Peter calls not the Emperour supreme, as a Tyrant but a King, which Bracton sayes is to be obeyed, and not a Tyrant; and the fifth booke hath invincibly proved it against him, and the worst that he can say against it, the point is dangerous to deliver Armes into the hands of the people; and is it not as dangerous for a Tyrant to take them out of their hands, and use them as the &illegible; did, 1 Sam. 13. 19. Obedience is due to a King, and not to a Tyrant, for if a Tyrant be no King, no Scripture bids me obey him, and if the supremacy of the three Estates bids mee arme, and the King himselfe say, that legally is placed in both Houses, more then a sufficient power to &illegible; and restraine the power of Tyranny, and when it is bent to destroy Religion, Lawes, Liberties, there will be reason enough for the resolution of Conscience, except wee make conscience to obey men more then God.
I shall begin strangely with the Doctor, from the maine institution of Kings in the office of Rule, Iudgement, and Warre. Wee will have a King over us, and who commanded it? They refused to be commanded, and followed their owne will by the worst rule, We will be like the Nations planted by God, Deut. 32. 8. but was he pleased to place Kings over them? did they not make their owne choice, and submit to be judged by them, and use them as their Generalls in their warres? we are informed by our Lawes, that such was our contrivement at the first: and Bodin in his Common-wealth l. 1. c. 10. p. 162. 163. 164. l. 3. c. 1. confirmes us by many examples of the power of the people in making their great and grand Commanders, and especially the Romane State, both under their Kings and Emperours, the chiefe power of denouncing war, and concluding peace, rested in the People and Senate, and our Statutes and Stories tell us as much of our kingdome. Cato &illegible; in the Senate said of Cæsar, that he should be called out of France, because hee made warre upon that Nation without the command of the Senate and People, and propounded for his punishment so presuming, that he should be delivered to the enemy: and the Doctor cannot be ignorant that our Parliaments have done the same; and for resistance read Neh. 4. 2. The Army in Samaria was ready to ruine the Religion of Ierusalem, and the care of Nehemiah to sence the City with walls to secure Gods worship, and he made ready with Armes to resist them. Ionathan &illegible; rescued, and the Doctor will have it done by prayers and teares; but I am sure they sware it and Said durst not execute his oath. Davids defence was with Armes, and the Doctor dallies that nothing was done, and yet David disarmes the King, though he attempted not his death; and hee playes further with his wit. the example was extra-ordinary, and yet neither Scripture, nor any circumstance to say it. Ebad killed the Tyrant as a Judge, and that sheweth his calling. The Parliament petitioned for a Guard, therefore they could not raise it when the King refused: How proves he that? we may not credit all he saves in the Chaire of his owne infallibility. Desperate shifts to make simulation Scripture, 1 Chron. 12. 19. 1 Sam. 29. 8. and grounds of conscience. Either David had no conscience, or he meant to sight against his Lords Enemies, and would have done it if the King would have permitted it, and divine providence have suffered it. His madnesse was a sinne of infirmity; his inrode upon the South was true, and Achish askes no more. Vzziah is resisted by home reproofe, and forced too to forsake the Temple. Moses appointed the Trumpets to be made, and the Priests to blow them with whole and broken sounds: The Alarme was to warre and weeping, the whole found was to peace and rest; and it were well the Doctor would so sound his Trumpet in Gods name, and resist the King, till he as Moses blesse his people, with Returne O Lord to the many thousands of England, and that the Arke of God might so march before him, that God might arise and scatter his enemies the Papists. Numb. 10. 35, 36. and that hee would remember the promised cloud of protection, vers. 34. Rev. 11, 12. &illegible; commanded resistance, and to hold fast the Messenger of his Masters mischiefe. The remedy of crying will not be heard for them that will not heare God, but such as pray Lord helpe them, may helpe themselves, when no Law is against them, and the Doctor cannot shew that a Tyrant may not bee resisted. The Doctor denies not a man to shut his owne doores for his security; and may not a City shut their gates to save themselves? David no doubt would have done it, if the men of Keilah would not have contradicted it. Let him looke from common wayes and wells, to walled Cities, and see if oppida bee not ab opponendo, or opibus, when theeves would breake in and steale. The Apostles prohibition of resistence is without limitation: His fifth Answerer will tell him, nay, and the Text limits it on all sides, or he hath lost his senses. The Doctour concludes this Section with enough, and I say more than enough for the loosenesse of his discourse, and I am sorry I have been so long.
I have nothing to say to this Section, but the sense of words. All men know the common use of puting the abstract for the concrete, powers for Potentates. That Monarchs were mens inventions, appeares by the Nations that had Kings before Gods people, and are equally mans invention with other formes of Government, and we are ill guided by the Dr. to derive Monarchy from God immediately, because supreme and next him immediately, then from him to them that are sent by him, which were something, if all Governours were from Kings, but where Kings are not, from whom are they then? from the People, and then they from God to set them up, and that’s the truth, a People are first Gods, and then by them and their consent he placeth his Ministers amongst them, and so hee dealt with his owne people, first choose them for his Church, and then gave them Kings, and the first words in the Kings oath are, servabis Ecclesiæ Dei, cleroque & populo pacem ex integro, & concordiam in Deo secundum vives tuas. If it had not been for the Church, God would never have cared for Kings, and therefore this care should bee chiefest for that, and so it is for a part of it, ill deserving at this time I meane the Clergy, and of them the Bishops, which I condemne of two horrible crimes in the Kings Oath detraction and addition. They have stolne out of the Oath the principle verb, for the peoples and Parliaments Election of Lawes, and have put in another Verbe, the Lawes and customes which they have not a word of Election. The addition is a long admonition to pardon and protect the Bishops, which the King must repeate word for word, which he does in no other part of the oath, and this in it had never being till King Iames took it, and his Majesties words are worth the penning? The Parliament hath not deals faithfully in the making use of a Latine Record, when it might as well have sit forth the forme of the Kings Oath in English, even of that very Oath which he took at his Coronation, which is said to be found in the Records of the Exchequor. They were ashamed to say in the Memorialls &illegible; Lambeth, for there it is, and I thinke no where else, and in all probability the Bishops did it, for the Regall & Episcopall Monarchies. King Iames made an end of the Militia by Parliament, by a repeale in the 21-year of his reign, and ever after used it in his owne person, and the people cryed out of the oppression, and now roare under a Commissions of Array to hinder the Parliament of their wonted Militia, yea, and of all their Lawes, for if the two Houses had not looked into the true Copies of the Kings Oath, they had been defeated of their power to elect Lawes, and the Bishops by another framed Oath, called the abominable &c. had made sure not onely of the Kings pardon and protection, but the oppression and Tyranny of their Monarchy. God open the Kings eyes to see with better eyes then such blind Doctours, as have deluded him.
I shall soone discharge this Section. The Dr. sayes none of his Adversaries have bitten at the edge of his answer of Government began in Armes. We shall not bite at it, but burst it in pieces, a King 18. 7. The Lord was with Hezekiah, and he prospered whether soever he went forth; and be rebelled against the King of Assyria, and served him not. His Father began the Service, and his Sonne served after him, and payed tribute, the signe of a Conquest, what say you, was not Senacherib the Conquerour, and consent given to serve him, and yet Hezekiah served him not, and it is called Rebellion, and prospered of God. Put the case the King holds us by Conquest, and I will conclude wee may rebell, and that is resistance, and deposition of Him that will without consent rule over a People. That the King cannot forfeit his power to the Kingdome, you say it is shame makes us say so, and will it not be a shame to you, if you cannot prove it. I know his Crown is a personall Right, and so it is neither grantable, nor forfeitable to any Person, but take heed of the Kingdome, for good Drs. say, the Kingdome in Parliament may doe any thing, and I shall tell you my opinion, that the Office of the King may be forfeited three wayes. First, by ablatton for violence, and so I thinke the Kingdomes needs not take away the Crowne. Secondly, by Amission, when he looseth his right in Law, and that I dislike too, because the third way is the surest, and does no wrong Thirdly, by transmission, which is done three wayes. First, by consent, and his Majesty should remember he hath forfeited that to both Houses, and they may use it for him seeing he will not. Secondly, by omission, default, or defect, when he will not use his trust. Thirdly, by Commission, soule fact, or an evill Act, as a misuser of his trust, and so by transmission the two Houses may doe without him, what he should doe with them. I will say no more to this Section, and suddenly set my Reader out of the Stocks, to stand rectus in Curia for conscience.
Mendacia non dio fallant. | { 1. Monarchy is not absolute. } | Mendacem oportet esse memorem. |
{ 2. Monarchy is not of the people. } | ||
{ 3. Monarchy is onely from God. } | ||
{ 4. Monarchy is the first power. } | ||
{ 5. All humane powers are from it. } |
THe &illegible; answer angers the Dr. and he argues strangely against him for absolute Monarchy in a &illegible; Dynastie in the Church and so it hath bin from Adam to this day, in families, in a Nation, in all Nations. In Families, the ten Patriarkes before the Flood were such Monarchs as used to God guide his Church, Heb. 1. 1. and they were the Prophets to all families against Cain, and the &illegible; Gen. 6, 1, 2. Mens daughters and Gods sonnes couple together in spirituall corruption. After the Flood ten Patriarkes more to Moses propagate true Religion and yet cursed &illegible; corrupts them and Abraham is drawn from Idolaters, and with much adoe &illegible; himselfe from Idols. All these taught the truth by Tradition, or divine revelation as God spake unto them by infallible dreames and Visions, and Abraham is supposed to have the first Vision of God and of Jesus Christ. Moses was the man God spake unto, as he had never done to any Man before him, and he governed a Nation, and was the first that ever brought Truth into writing, and now the Booke of God becomes the Peoples direction, and from Moses to Saul is the time of the Judges, Act 13. 20. Note that God, and not Man gave them. After the Iudges the people desired a King, ver. 21. and God gave them Saul who with Samuel Reigned Divinely but that was but two yeares all the rest he lived a Tyrant, and was not of God, who removed him, and made David his faithfull Servant a Man after his own heart, and the patterne for all Princes. &illegible; succeded him and excelled all Princes, and in the end turned Tyrant by Idolatry. God ends giving with David, and leaves all to succession, &illegible; David passeth by his eldest Sonne, and sets up &illegible; to succeed him and there ends Monarchy as a &illegible; or &illegible; dynastie, and now begans distraction, and &illegible; rends ten parts from &illegible; and in Israel was never a good King that departed from his Tyranny, especially in Idolatry, and few were good in Iudah. The Dr. may now see his error in the &illegible; &illegible; that divine Monarchy was absolute from the Creation; as for humane Monarchies they were of men, as their Lawes were, and the people reformed their right; and rebelled one against another, and made no bones to kill Tyrants and good Kings smarted sometimes by such outrages, and David was kept from Saul because he was so anointed of God, as was &illegible; any King after David, and therefore next to him is Christ in the Apostles Narration, and of his seed came Christ, when the people of Rome had made Herod the Tetrarch of Galilce the King of the Jews, and the Dr. may learne how the World was ruled at this time after the &illegible; of the people and Senate of Rome. Antons begged of them the honour for Herod to end the Civill Warre, and game peace, which Christ the King of peace brought them; though they understood it not, for the Evangelists take notice of the time, and persons ruling, that the divine Ruler might be knowne for the Monarch to his Church, Luk. 2. 1, 2. and 3. 1, 2. The Emperour, the King the Ethnarch, President, Tetrarch, Toparch, are the six severall formes, the Majestie of the people of Rome, used to set forth their glory, and the Dr. might learne that the Fuller Answer was right in his absolute Monarchy meaning it of a Thearchy, whereof God is the sole Author, and such is not the Monarchy of King Charles, nor yet by conquest, but compact with his people, and if he will not so hold it by good doctrine, the Dr. will undoe him, for if he fly to his Sword, he will lose his Kingdomes, if to divinity he will deceive himselfe in his Title, hee had best hold himselfe to his Parliament and people, and reject the Dr. and his complices.
Monarchy is not of the people. In this he contradicts his other Answerers that say it is, and so does he: for if it be not absolutely of God, but as all humane powers are, Peter must be expounded to meane by humane Creation, that worldly policies are Mens creatures, and the formes of Government have bin found out by them, and all of them save divine orders direct us to the Politicians and people of this World, and because his last Section is of Bishops as the best; nay, with an Emphasis, simply best, and if so best be with the King, for none but he makes them, and if the people may doe as much for them, as they may for Kings, then the Parliament may consider of them for the people, and if they bee not jure divine they are gone, and they deserve it as having done all the mischiefe to his Majestie. Episcopacy asserted, I like it well, he wades a rationall way; and I would bolt out something for the Bishops, beginning at Deacons, for of them the Apostles made the first Bishops, as being their Ministers in three things, as they were of Christ. First, to Baptize those they converted, Ioh. 4. 2; Secondly, distribute the money they received, Ioh, 4. 8. and 13. 29. 1 Cor. 1. 17. Thirdly, to preach, when and where they pleased, Luk. 9. 2 & 10. 1. The Apostles and seventy were Disciples to Christ and the Apostles were provided of Deacons to minister under them, and the first were Hebrewes, the second Hellenists &illegible; Jewes. The Hebrewes displeased the Hellenists, Act, 61. The Reason why the Apostles used the Hebrewes was because they were the Richer, and the Church received most from them and by them the Apostles disposed of their treasures being trusted with a greater worke to preach the Gospell, and Paid sayes of that as all the Apostles did that the Ministration of Baptisine and money might be by others, and the Deacons did both, and in the dispersion were disposed of by the Apostles to goe before them, or with them to that worke. The word Deacon is not in the Text, we have that by tradition, that these were Deacons. Marke is made the Minister of Paid and &illegible; Afterwards Paid take &illegible; Titus, Timethy, &illegible; Clemens, &c. and our Ancients call these Deacons, and of them were made Bishops, as the gravest, and greatly experienced persons in Church policy, and might well be called the Angels of the Churches, and their order is divinely expressed, Rev. 4. 4. called a Presbytery, 1 Tim. 4. 14. and by Cornelius and Cyprian we may cleare it, against the faction of Fortunatus and Novatian. Downe with Episcopacy as a Tyranny maintaining Monarchy for no other end, but to depresse the Parliament, as some of them said they would make boyes of it, and whip them by a Regall rod. God make them all righteous under the divine rod to heare it. The Doctors charity in prayer is to adde to that side that is set against the King, pardon for pretended love, that wounds his person and power, our peace and prosperity. We shall soone have done with the Dr. and tell him his charity is nothing against the truth. Monarchy is onely from God, what word teacheth him so to &illegible; and shall conscience believe a lie to love the King more then other powers; the fifth Commandement will teach me no such thing, nor Rom. 13. 1. &illegible; the King will be great over his Subjects more then in them, the Dr. may load them with power, but the Parliament will get the love of the people that seeke to preserve them as themselves, and love is more naturall to our selves, then such as seeke to master us by their wills. Monarchy is the first power, and followes not the people, but divine providence, and flows through the Veines of nature in our parents, who beget Monarchs as naturally as they doe Children; O blessed birth they bring us unto, we shall all be Kings, and so we are by our Mother the Church, and our heavenly Father hath Mansions enough for us, God send us to them out of our smoaky Cottages, for we cannot abide in them, but we are fired out of them, by a lawlesse resistence of our liberties. All humane Powers are from Monarchy, and if the Parliament and People will prevaile without, they must perish. I hope some States have power without Monarchy, and I thinke ours hath none, without the Parliament, and the Dr. sayes so too, so the King be in it, and why will hee not? Because he will be without it, for the Dr. saies the Militia is his without it, and is not the Militia under law? and who may make that? The King without the Parliament, and so by the Doctors dispute he may doe all things by the Law of his owne will; for what he affirmes is Law, and what hee denies shall be none: And so good Night Dr. we are like to see no day, if that be your doctrine, God blesse us from it.
FINIS
THE SECOND PART AGAINST DOCTOR FERNE.
Rom. 14. 1. Him that is weak in the faith receive you, but not to doubtfull disputations.
IN a mixt Argument Divines may be deceived, and determine amisse. We admire what peace can come with an errour in the Proposition, with a greater evill in the assumption, and a mischief in the conclusion. Bracton of Jurisdiction saies it is wholly in the King for justice as the rule, for war as the means, for peace as the end, & it is most true a private person may administer none of them: and if the King were sufficient for them all, he alone should do them all: But being not able, he appoints his Ministers, & no private man presumes till legally he be called to his administration, and so all publique offices, and Courts of Justice are set up by the King, and then they become powers with him, and such ordinances of God, as no man may resist them; and here comes in the Divine, and if he deales before, God warrants him in his Art, he argues folly and presumption. Let the Lawyer first speak on his theame. Ea quæ sunt Jurisdictionis à privata persona non possunt possideri ea quæ sunt paris, ea quæ sunt belli, ea quæ sunt justitiæ, ad Coronam pertinent, neque ab ipsæ separari possunt, quia faciunt ipsam Coronam. Hence in Law the King hath nothing grantable from his person. It was in vaine for King John to give his Crowne to the Pope, for pious Edward the sixth to bequeath his Crown to his younger Sister, and for King Charles to sell away the Crown Jewels, or give away ought that is the Kingdoms from his own custodie, seeing he alone is trusted with all. To pardon Felons, a grant from himself is invalide, and as he hath power to grant nothing, so neither can he forfeit any thing he hath. This is true in personals, the Kingdom trusts none but himself, but it is not true in politiques, for there the Parliament is trusted with him, and hath power to grant more then the King can grant, and to it he may forfeit his trust, and in the mis-use or none-use of his Crowne, though they have determined they will not take it from him, yet it is more then ever Parliament declared before, and as a Divine I praise them for it, having Davids conscience to guide them; and for my part I shall hold the rule good, Praxis sanctorum est interpres præceptorum; But if we leave this evidence, Law will not readily be found to deliver a Tyrant from death and deposition. The Doctor in his Reply musters up the men he encounters, and chiefly he directs it against Mr. Bridges booke, framed for vulgar capacities, and licenced by Authority. To him he joynes the Fuller Answer, cryed up by the intelligent. The other two he sleights for little or too much learning; and the man with the Margent, he dare boldly leave to the trust of his Readers, so they will promise him one thing, said against Tyrants; and another, not to proceed without positive and direct warrant for Conscience to rest upon. In the 12. Section, he saies something to this deposer of Tyrants, and when he hath done that, he must say some thing to another, published by divers Divines, and printed by authoritie, who fully takes from him all his Scriptures and Reasons, and proves it lawfull to resist Tyrants, though it be not warrantable to depose them. I professe the comfort cannot come to the Kings conscience for ought he hath said upon his supposition. If he command legally, he needs no such succour from the Doctor, if against Law the Doctor wrongs him in his way, as being fitter to teach him repentance, then obduration in his sin, to punish an whole Kingdom with inevitable perdition.
Aristotle for Reason is said to be reason it self, and his undeniable principles presse the Doctor, and the first thing he saith of Sparta ruling Kings by the Ephors holds in our Parliament. For the treason it is not his, but the Parliaments that have deposed Kings, and it hath been done by Barons and Bishops, but now it is treason if the Lords and Commons will do it, which they professe they will not, not from the Law, for where is it? but their consciences from a good example against Papists the destroyers of powers, that would save the King to destroy the Parliament, which must be their last bite if he rise not with the Beast out of the bottomlesse pit, Rev. 11. 7. God preserve him, for the Papists have brought him to this last warre, consider it good King, and let not your Consort draw you into it: Read the text, for the time is come to fulfill it. The impertinences with which the Doctor ends his 12. Section I mind not but say plainly, if the Militia be the Kings to use it as he list, so will all jurisdiction be, and the Parliament shall have nothing to do with any kind of Justice, to the which doubtlesse peace, and warre are Appendixes. If your Majestie will have the Militia grantable to whom you please grant all from your Parliament, for Bracton makes your power alike in all for ordinary jurisdiction in the execution, but in the legislative power, and jurisdiction of Parliament it is not so, you must have others to joyne with you in all you do, and the Doctor teacheth you tyranny to do it alone, and then would quiet the people to do nothing but pray, and the Parliament count their fingers before they fight.
MAlignants look upon you as Hypocrites, and sinners in Sion, Isa. 33. 14. But you upon the everlasting Burnings, which the Doctor cals damnation, and to bring it upon you the Caviliers bid God damne them if they send you not to hell, out of which they are ascended, Rev. 11. 7. But you know your charge, to discharge your selves to send them back again to their own pit, and that is in the next verse, Isa. 33. 15. Walke righteously, speake uprightly, despise the gain of oppressions, shake hands with holding of bribes, stop your eares from hearing the cry of blood against you, and shut your eyes from seeing evill with delight. Remember the words of our Saviour, Matth. 10. 34. let the Sword be drawn to divide you from his enemies, Pacem habere debet voluntas, Bellum necessitas, love peace, and let necessitie force you to warre. Divines are become unfavorie, and Cajetan, a Papist, may teach them to speak. We the Prelates of Rome, do find Christs words true, Matth. 5. 13. we are become a scorne and prey not to Infidels but Christians, and why? Evanuimus, ac ad nihilum utiles, nisi ad externas ceremonlas, externoque bona. Rites and revenues are all we have regarded, and we and our Citie as salt that hath lost its savour, are trodden on by the French, that abuse us with all manner of violence. David de Augusta, Biblioth. patr. 13. p. 452. h. Sunt exteriores ceremoniales observantiæ, ut inclinationes, genu flexiones, quibus claustrales &illegible; in divino officio, quibus sæpe minus virtuosi sunt magis devoti. The true character of our Clergie at the Altar, and crucifixe against, Deut. 16. 21, 22. Hos. 8. 11, and 10. 1. Any Altar with Images is detestable to God, and their multitude a sin. Its true Antiquitie called the Lords table by no other name for 300. yeers, and they learned it, Rev. 8. 3. and 11. 1. That it is not Christ, the Angel in both places declares it, that it is for no materiall sacrifice, the exposition of the incense is sufficient, and the measure of it manifests the moneths of Apostasie in three Blasphemies, Rev. 13. 6. and do we tanquam pre Aris & focis strive for them? Its true our warre is civill, but why are Papists in it, but in confidence to raise their Religion. Tacitus tells us what betrayed us to the Romanes, Dum singuli pugnant, universi vineuntur: we fight one by one that all may be conquered; and whats the reason? in commune non consulimus, we heed not our Parliament. Rarus conventus ad propulsandum commune periculum, we meet thinly, and thicken not as one man. Frivola illa verba meum & tuum, said Chrysostome, those two words mine and thine are frivolous in the Church cause, and have caused many warres, but earth to the Saints, should be as heaven to the Angels to exterminate worldly thoughts. Rude people, are &illegible; pascua, the Souldiers eat them up. And Lewis the 12. said more, that souldiers were, Dæmonum pascua, Satan sollace. Duke d’Alva rosting some, starving others, said, I promised you your lives, no meat, such measure is given us, and all for want of resolution, and a good conscience, which is a continuall feast. Reade and fear not to find enough against the Doctors damnation.
THe person, Rom. 13. 1. is the subject charged, and is universally every man in any Common-wealth, which begins with an humane societie, and it is fundamentall that no man exempt himself from the power that is over him, no not the King the people choose to be over them; for it is done, juris consensu, by the consent of Law, and no Laws consent that Tyrants shall rule, but be ruled; for if Kings consent with the people to Laws, the Laws must rule, and none be freed from subjection. Powers are the object, which are applyed to all rulers, whether supreme persons, co-ordinate States, or subordinate officers to both. Peter tells us Kings are supreame, and we must submit unto them. Saint Paul tels us powers are supreame, and we must be subject unto them. Now these Powers may be in a Councell to decree Justice, or in Courts to see it executed, and both have their Officers to attend them, and so the whole power is distributed through the whole Kingdome, and comes to the very Constable of a village, who may no more be resisted then the King; and he is no good Divine that denies resistance of Kings, and cares not to teach the people to resist his Parliament, ordinary Courts of Justice, and their officers. All these powers may execute tyranny, and be resisted; As for example, to begin with the Highest the King, he may command the people to resist the Constable in preserving the peace, and to assist riotous and rebellious persons in killing the Townsmen, ravishing their wives and daughters, burning their houses, cartying away their goods and substance. The Constable raiseth the Town, armes them, fights with the Kings Caviliers, kils them, takes away what they have ill gotten, apprehends as many as he can, keeps them safe till he can informe the Higher powers, may be a Justice of Peace, and he raiseth the Countrey, sends to the Sheriffe, who armes the Countie, incounters with the Kings forces, kills them, and drives them out of his jurisdiction. The King is angry his Command is not obeyed, seconds his forces, till all Counties rise and resist the violence, and destroy their enemies. The King is still enraged he cannot have his will, he comes in person, and will have his power obeyed, the Parliament steps in for the whole Kingdome, cals for the Kings followers to be brought before them, the King denyes it, bids them resist, and go on with the riot and rebellion, he in person will joyn with them, and runs their hazards, the people hold on, and the Parliament with them, kill as many as they can, give the King warning not to be in their companie, as manifest Rebels to his Realme, and his own Crowne. He cares not for that, the power is his to subvert Religion, Laws, Liberties, lives, chastitie, mens estates, peace, and the very being and prosperitie of His Kingdome. Say not, God forbid, we have a good King, and I deny it not, but say against the Doctor, and the King hath a good people, and presume I may say as much for them against the King, as he hath said for the King against them, nay his words are against both, making the King a Tyrant by supposition, and his people rebels without it. Suppose the King he seduced, and bent to subvert Religion established by Laws, and the Laws that establish it, and every mans right, to take away mens lives and fortunes, cause rapine, and ravishment, rage and ruine to be practised over all his Kingdome, no man may resist him, nor his followers; and suppose they do, the Doctor concludes them to be Rebels. I suppose the contrary, that good subjects, suppose they resist illegall commands, said to be the Kings, nay, the King himself in the execution of them, they are no Rebels, but his liege people: and to say he may be killed in the multitude, is to accuse them that detaine him; for the people seek not his life, but theirs that would ruine both. [The duty subjection is obedience to just Laws, and submission to their just penalties. Many obey the King against his Laws, and thats no duty; many suffer with him to avoid just punishment, and thats neither any mans dutie. Subjection must then be legall, either I must do the will of the Law, or submit to suffer it, and the Apostle seems to excuse this, when he sayes not in opposition to subjection a negative deniall, but positive resistance is damnable; for he that will neither do, nor suffer the Law to proceed against him is just a Delinquent, or Royalist, to make the King a Tyrant, which the Doctor sees not, nor his blinded Disciples. The Parliament would try them that have wronged the people under the Kings protection: The King and they will not suffer it. Here’s no subjection active or passive to the Laws, they will neither do them, nor suffer for the breach of them. And here Christians suffered for Religion, not because they might not resist for Religion, but because Religion was against Law, the Law being civill, belonged to the second table, and Religion to the first, and good men are bound to both, and must in them obey, both God and man. God against Idolatrie, and man against rebellion. Man commands a false Religion, and by Law establisheth it. Now a Christian hath no Law to justifie him to take up armes for his Religion which belongs to another Kingdome, Joh. 18. 36. which allows not the servants thereof to fight with the subjects of another kingdome. But the Doctor hath put the case home, and with Religion, joynes Laws, and so both tables are for us, and we may defend both, against Papists and Malignants. The Law of God and man is for us; and for a Christian to say I may not resist a Papist, because the King armes him against Law is no reason, nor to destroy a Malignant that takes his part for his own defence in sinne. We are not under the King to do or suffer his will, but the will of our Laws, and such as rule us after them, even the very Constable before the King. As for example, upon the Doctors supposition, say the King bids a Malignant in any Town use his Commission of Array, and he armes his familie, and sets upon his neighbours houses, and the very Constable commands me to assist him, I will obey him legally, before I obey the King illegally.
The reasons against resistance are two. First, à genore, all powers. Secondly, I specie, the powers that are for government, or ordained of God. There is no power but of God, naturall, or civill. Thou couldest have no power to speake or do ought against me, no power at all, except it were from another, Joh. 19. 11. Bracton applied these words to the King, as Christ does to God, and both make a good harmonie in the truth. Jurisdictiones, &c. Jurisdiction and execution of Law, cannot be exercised by any private person, except that his power, datum fuerit ei desuper, be first given him from above: he meanes the King, the publique person of the kingdome, whose power is from God, whatsoever he doth even in his naturall capacitie, but that will neither justifie Pilate, nor him to judge amisse. But the second reason is full, that God ordaines or orders the powers, and as farre as they are his ordinance no man may resist them: and to say Tyranny is Gods ordinance is no where taught in Scripture; and how shall conscience beleeve it, without the conviction of the same, and where then is the texts taken up by the Doctor say nothing. God ordaines all sorts and degrees of Magistrates and Officers in a Kingdome, and as the precept is generall to obey them all, so is the prohibition, as generall that we may not resist the meanest of them. The Doctor applies all to the King, the Apostle to every one that hath power from him, or the Laws, and whosoever doth against them may be resisted: But you will say who knows that? Ask the Malignants, and they will tell you all the people against the Parliament, that makes and interprets them; for so they exhort to rebellion and insurrection, that the people should re-assume the power they have given to both Houses, and resist them in their ordinances, which the King saies he is assured are no Laws, but void in Law, because he consents not, and it is true if they meant they should stand longer then the Kingdome had need of them, and the two Houses judge them necessarie, because the King will not discharge his trust, but mis-use it to his own will, which he makes the Law to overthrow all Laws. For first he sayes he will rule by known Laws, and wills his people to obey him in them. Secondly, he and they shall judge of known Laws against both Houses, and so the last judgement is where it ought not to be, directly against the very first fundamentali, for where the legislative power is not, the people judge in vaine, and so does the King when he forsakes it, and rules after his own will. Its true the Doctor hath opened one way to mis-lead the people by their own wills, and the will of the King, and to should I another, if I should leave resistance at libertie for every man to judge of it. I have left it to the Law, and the Law-makers, and say by it and them tyranny may be resisted. Let the powers be legall, and no resistance is lawfull to the very Constable, let them be illegall, and they may be resisted to the Supreame, which is not to depose them, for thats illegall without Law, and we having no text to depose a King, and a plain one to resist him in his commands; for if resistance be regular, and kept within Laws, and tyrants will obey none, they may be forced to them, when they cannot be deposed by them: for if no reason nor Scripture lead us to that, we are tied from deposition, more then resistance, which must not be confounded.
No doubt the Apostles scope is wholly to urge obedience to the second table, the foundation of civill Laws in all States, and at this time in the Romane Empire, where we see the duty, subjection; the object, the Higher powers; the subject, every soule; the Christians more especially, whose Religion admitted no resistance, and that for good reason from their God, whose goodnesse subverted no Laws, but gave them power, and ordained that by them men should rule and be ruled, and that to them should be no resistance, and whosoever resisted, justly received both (κίν&illegible;) judgement, and (κα&illegible;&illegible;&illegible;μα) damnation. Humane and divine vengeance waited upon the wicked, not upon good works, for God appointed no rulers to be a terrour to such, and therefore no tyrants to rage against them, and to be afraid of them is not the same to feare the power, which he needs not do as from God; for Gods minister is to others for their good, and not their ruine. His end is not vanitie in vile affections to satisfie his own lusts, but according to Laws draw the sword and punish the offendours, and that not to satisfie the Magistrates wrath upon the body and goods, but Gods wrath which conscience was bound most to consider, though temporall wrath might be escaped. The benefit of Magistrates moves for their maintenance, and we pay them Tributes not for tyranny, but the good they do us. The Doctor is dumbe in the declaration of a good Watchman, Isa. 21. 6. Go set a watchman, and let him declare what he seeth. He must neither be blinde, nor tongue-tyed, that will teach others. If he will have the tower and table, take the watchmans wages let him look to his work, and not suffer the King to sit securely, when God is angry. The Army advanceth, and with heed the carefull sentinull sees the Lyon, or like one with a mightie voice awaketh the secure, and suffers not no notice to be taken, where truth is most necessary, as here it is, Army being ingaged against Army, booke against booke, and conscience against conscience. The first is dangerous to the body, the second to the soule, but the third to the peace of God; for if conscience erre, the heart may be quiet, but it can never be good.
Go we on with the Doctor and his damnable clauses, oppugning resistance of Kings carelesse of all others; when the text relates to all Magistrates and officers, as farre as their authority reacheth according to Laws, and not the Doctors sencelesse reasons. I may by Law no more resist a Constable then a King, commanding me to keep the peace, arresting me by a Justices Warrant, or distraining my goods by the same. Of all this the Doctor takes no notice, and that which is most notorious omits the power of Parliament nay, teacheth men to resist their ordinances to obey the meere pleasure of the King, and his not Officers, but Officials, that that against Law licentiously cite, cast out of the kingdome, this world, as unworthie protection, all that make conscience to obey legally: and because the King forbids aid to the Parliament, they denie it, and deale ill with all agents or instruments imployed by the Parliament, as if nothing were warrantable done by them. See the reasons against Registers, for Rulers are not a terrour to good works, but to evill. This cannot agree with tyrants, who are cleane contrary to the reason, as being no terrour to evill works, but to the good. He that subverts Religion, Laws, Liberties, cannot be the Apostles ruler. Nor the second reason which would be fencelesse being so applyed, Wilt thou not be afraid of the power, do good and it shall praise thee: will a tyrant do so that hates nothing more? Nor yet the third Argument, For he is the Minister of God to thee for good, so is no tyrant that ministers for evill. A fourth reason, not to beare the sword in vaine, is to punish where, whom, and when God pleaseth, but a tyrant does contrary. Fifthly, Conscience is stupid that makes no resistance to the subversion of Religion, Laws, and Liberties, like our poore that would have peace upon any termes, and rather suffer tyranny, then any trouble to advance the truth. Sixthly, is tribute payed to tyrants, or plous and just Princes? If all have their due, what deserves a tyrant? The Question not rightly stated, can stand no man of use for his quiet conscience, except he meane it should speak peace without Gods allowance. By this we may understand how the examples of Scripture move in this sense.
Saul against Law attempts his sons death, which is lesse then to subvert a whole State. The Doctor finds a resistance in this of words without weapons, and is that lawfull, Eccl. 8. 4. Where the word of a King is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou? The word of a King may not be resisted by words, where God commands thee to keep his Commandement, and regard the oath thou hast taken, vers. 2. A loving violence the Doctor dreams of, and truth that is no violence may be used to oppose a lawfull command. But Saul sweares his sonne shall die to satisfie his rash vow, and the people sweare the contrary, and the contradiction carries it as farre as words can resist, and if they would not have served, their oath bound them to reall resistance, and better Saul should be forsworn then the people, and Jonathan perish. This was done in a private quarrell, and what saith the Doctor to our capitall controversie. The Caviliers have cursed themselves in a combination against the Parliament to dissolve it, and they hold the King in their company, carry him into the field like traytors, against all love of him and his kingdome, when we read of others, that have so loved their Prince, as they have taken all his evils to themselves, and wished him the wrong should be upon them, and so the Parliament would not onely have it, but lay it upon them; and yet these wretches wave all from themselves, & load their liege Lord with all their lewd actions; and not only so, but suffer him to appear with them where danger is: when Davids armed men seeing his hazards, would endure the King to enter no more into the battell, as worth a thousand of them. But these having done all the villanies, adde this to all the rest, to urge the King to keep them company in the greatest perils. But the note I observe from the people, is to advance the King, and his Counsell, to sweare they shall not die upon the place, where all the powers of the kingdome are; and such an Association I shall entreat may be blessed of God. Destroy them, and Charles may have a being as his Caviliers please, and so shall we, but better not be at all, then to be so miserable. David resisted Saul with armes. The Doctor deales daintily with this, and delivers foure Answers. First, David did it to secure his own life. Secondly, not to hurt Saul. Thirdly, the supposition cannot satisfie conscience. Fourthly, the example is extraordinarie. The first is false, for Abiathar is bidden by David to abide with him, and not to fear, and makes their calamitie common, and promiseth him protection, against Saul, 1. Sam. 22, 23. and in Keilah he is resolved to do it; and by Abiathar is directed (the Ephod being brought him) and it appeares by the Councell of Warre, that David and his men meant to resist Saul, it God had said Amen to the consultation, who in his wisedome provided othewise. But the Doctor addes, if Sauls cut-throats had come to take away his life, David would not have spared them, and therefore meant to make use of his Armes. Its true he hurt not Saul when he might have done it, 1. Sam. 26. 10. and yet sayes in Battell he might justly perish, which if at any time it had happened between them, as it might have done; David excuseth himself, and refused not, voluntarily so to have fought with Saul, 1. Sam. 29. 8. for his king he was forced to serve by Sauls cruelties, and counts him an enemie to be resisted in an hostile manner; and doubtlesse if God at any time had cast him upon a Battell he would have used his Armes, and not laid himselfe and his Forces at the feet of Saul and his cut-throats to have been destroyed. To kill the King is not the same with resisting him, for the intention is not the same, neither does any valiant man use his vertue, as the Beast of the bottomlesse pit does, Rev. 11. 7. to overcome and kill, but if he kill it is to overcome, and victory is the end of his violence, and then mercie his merit.
The supposition is certain; for David asks two questions before he depart. First whether Saul will come to besiege Keilah. Secondly, whether the men of the place will betray him, meaning plainly to have stayed, if Keilah would have been as true to him, as he had been to them; and when God saies they will not, as an ungratefull people, David departs from the danger. His fourth Answer is idle, for to use miracles when he hath meanes is to tempt God. He had his armes, and God without them could have protected him, and if he had promised it, he did ill to use any other meanes, then wholly to have trusted God; but as he had no word for that, so it was not his way, and his wisdome served him in the ordinarie course of Gods providence. To make it extraordinarie in his designation and unction, as a King to succeed Saul, is dangerous, for so he may teach the Heire to resist, because he hath a right to the Crown. Another piece of learning the Doctor leaves us to make the way damnable rebellion in all others, and onely religious in David for his unction, as if God had meant all but David should be damned for resistance, and when Gods anointing strengthened his faith, his fear should exceed all mens to use such means as no man else might have done. As for them that conceive the example nothing in sparing of Saul, I for my part in this, I make his practice, the interpreter of a precept, and what David in dutie did to Saul not to kill him when he might, ought to be in every mans mind armed as David to spare the Lords anointed, and hinder other from hurting him, and yet to save themselves harmlesse against tyranny. Our next example is both of words in speaking, and 80. Priests, valiant men in forcing the King out of the Temple, 2. Chron. 26. 17. 20. which seems to be more then words, to have him out of the Temple, as Athaliah was fetched out. That the king was discharged of his kingdome is not true, and if leprosie might depose a king, tyranny is worse; but the two Houses are examples to us all, both of their thoughts, words and deeds, calling God to witnesse to depose the king, or procure his death, is to them most odious; and yet to resist to save the kingdome, and Gods true Religion, is most deare unto them. Our last example of resistance is in Elisha, who commands the doore to be shut to save his own head. This speaks little, saies the Doctor, and yet force it is, and Sir John Hotham might better shut the Gates of Hull, then the Prophet his doores, to deliver many from danger, and doubtlesse private men may save themselves in their owne houses, against violent and illegall assaults. He grants it to persons suddenly set upon and so all resistance is not unlawfull; and may we not safely say much more against deliberate, mischievous, and plotted violence? But his fetch is a crosse blow which may not be given, for that offends which is more then defence. A woman that defends her chastitie may draw blood with her nailes, which she does unwillingly, and so he that defends himselfe may be forced to offend another, rather then die himselfe: and David directs well to hold our hands, as long as we can help our selves from danger. The Doctor saies the whole kingdome is concerned in the person of the king, and so is it in the Parliament, and more in that then the King, and we yeeld our persons to protect them; and though our parents be deare unto us, yet, Patria, our Countrey is dearest. We may loose our fathers and subsist, but not the representative Body that beares us all and sustaines us from all injuries. The Doctor tells us what tends to the dissolution of the whole, as Schisme, and yet tels us not who make is, and we wish they that do it were cut off, as members mischievous to the whole. His thoughts of single persons, and not of a considerable Bodie is needlesse shifting, for what one may do against tyranny, many may do the same. Yes, saies he, against outward force, but not as one part against another. If the King imploy his own subjects to tyrannize over the rest, they must suffer; but if he use strangers, we may kill them. Kind Doctor, cruell Teacher, who can beleeve such Divinitie? Elisha defended but one against a sudden passionate command, and shall not the two Houses trusted with the whole kingdome, seek remedie against long plotted designes to destroy Religion, Laws and Liberties? Surely the examples say something in particular cases, but conscience may confide much more in the universall good studied for us all by them that sit in Counsell, deserted by such as would destroy us.
The Allegations of the Doctor are more strange then strong, urged not as arguments to purpose or his owne propounded question, as the 250 Princes against Moses and Aaron, of whom the Doctor cannot suppose they were bent to subvert Religion, Laws, and Liberties, and therefore to rise against them was damnable. This cannot justly be supposed, and that the Princes suspected it by their words, Ye take too much upon you: is no other but an opinion of pride more in themselves, then Gods servants, which God resisted, and they received testimonie of the truth by a visible demonstration. His second Scripture is to the purpose of a tyrant, but teacheth not the Remedie, 1. Sam. 8. 11. To cry was in vain, for God would not change his mind to punish them, neither should they pray with any promise. They should find Saul a king to their minds, to rule them as Pagans did, to whom the Lord gave them too; for Kings they had, few good, when their Judges were most so, to shew the contented how God can provide for them: but discontented persons cry, and are crossed; for after their native kings strangers ruled them, and in that way they perish by the Monarchies, and the last in Daniel is said to prosper, till divine indignation be satisfied, Dan. 11. 36, which is come upon them to the uttermost, 1. Thess. 2. 16. Furthermore the punishment in Samuel is in goods and lands, which losse is lesse then Religion, Laws, life, and chastitie; and though a tyrant in the first be tolerable, yet in the rest he that resists not is, felo de se, to suffer himselfe to be murthered contrary to Law, a coward that having Law for his religion will loose it to them, that against Law arme to destroy it: and seeing Magna Charta gives us a threefold right, jus personarum, the securitie of our persons. Secondly, jus rerum, the right of our goods. Thirdly, jus actionum, the right of Law, we are not worthy of our priviledges dearly bought from tyrants with blood, if we will not venture some of it to save our selves. Si non esset qui justitiam faceret, pax de facili potest exterminari: Bract. fo. 107. our peace without justice perisheth. The King denies to do this at the request of his people and Parliament, which his oath tyes him unto, 6. H. 7. and his first creation and election, so saies Bract. Ad hoc creatuest, & electus, ut justitiam saciat universis: and he saies further, the King sweares unto it; Se esse præcepturum, & pro veribus opem impensurum ut Ecclesiæ Dei, & omni populo Christiano, vera pax omni suo tempore, observetur. The people and Parliament have petitioned him to settle the Militia, the meanes of peace, and he without them, and the counsell of others hath raised it to the destruction of both; and the Doctor adviseth both to sit still, and let him do what he will, and so comes to his third text in the power of the Trumpets, Num. 10. and its true, Magistrates and Ministers are charged with them, and if they warne not the people, God will call for their blood at their hands, and yet it may be upon their own heads too, if they take no care for themselves, when Enemies invade them. Satan would be glad of such a Doctor, that he might come in upon a Christian carelesse, because his Watchman cares not for him, and so would Spaniards, Irish Rebels, and Papists be glad, the people would be secure, and sit still, because they may not stirre except the King command them; and if he forbid them to heare the two Houses, they must heed no other but his Trumpet, giving them the Alarme in all townes to arme for him, and his will. The hardest accident of warre is the heaviest argument the Doctor hath. The fury of the Ordinance puts no difference twixt King and common souldiers, but discretion does, and who are wanting in that the meanest man may judge, and a few questions will satisfie. The State may not sacrifice Religion. Laws, and Liberties to those that would subvert them to save any one person in the kingdome. It needs not be a question, the position is firme without it. Secondly, the necessitie of so hard an Accident, must have a cause, and what is, per accidens, must come to some cause, per se, say what it is, and then see the errour owned, and the fault laid where it should be. And here I would ask the Doctor a question, if Saul will go down into the Battell where God promiseth him no protection, and David be on the contrary side, as at Keilah where he would have stayed, what if an arrow or stone from the wall kill the King, is he not guiltie of his own death? We know he died in battell, and David should have been against him, and would, if providence had not prevented it; what say you, had David deserved damnation for the fact, when Saul had banished him to another kingdome, when in his own he left the Philistines to fight with his owne servant, and now in another kingdome cast out and commanded by his Lord, if he had been with him when Saul died by his Army, had he not been guiltlesse? His Majestie hath great reason to be ruled by his Parliament, and fight with the Philistines, the Irish Rebels, but he leaves them, and with his Parliament and people fights at home, who to defend themselves, their Religion, Laws and Liberties, take up Armes, more justly then ever David did against Saul in his private defence.
We will suppost it as the Doctor does it is for Religion, Laws and Liberties, the case will be just, if it be so, and that it is, all men may judge how Religion hath been abused by Papists and Popish Bishops, Laws by injustice and oppression, Liberties are left to the arbitrary will of the King, who out of his Parliament, against it, hath raised such a warre, that he hath left the Subject no other subjection, but slavery, remedilesse without a Parliament, for the Kings way is conquest, and that the Doctor sales is the Kings title, and he will now make it good if he may prevaile, which I wish he never may, and it is no ill wish to him or us all, if ever we turne againe to our right minds, being miserably distracted; and I pray God no more blood may be letten out of the veines, then may cure us.
The return of the Doctor out of the Old Testament into the New is with a tang and touch to his own shame; for he askes his adversaries in this Argument, why they use the Old Testament, and not the New? would he have us adde Armes against Law, and yet our Saviour toucheth both, bidding his Disciples sell their garments to be girt with swords, and he had them in his company, and Peter used one of them not to defend himselfe, but his Master against his will, and smites at the head, and the hand of providence directs it to the right care, to shew what the Jews wanted in hearing, but he heals the care, and seldome did it without the heart; and Malehus was made whole and happy by that hand that touched him: and though the sword was condemned in Peter, and all men that use it without a warrant, yet our Saviour warrants the buying of it, and using of it to defend our selves. And to satisfie the Doctor in the New Testament, I conceive the sword came to the Church, Revel. 12. 5. We know how the rod of iron succeeded against Maxentius, Maximinus, Licinius, all Tyrants, and the Christians had an hand in it, in taking part with Constantine, as they did afterwards with Theodosius, and resisted for Religion. The Waldenses have done the like, so have the Princes of Germanie, the States of Holland, and Queone Elizabeth hath helped them, and the French, and so have &illegible; Kings since, but with no good successe, because not heartie and constant; for they have joyned too much with Papists, and we are justly punished for it; But if he will view the texts, let him take these for our times, Revel. 11. 9. we should be buried for this last bite of the Beast, if God favoured us not in these warres. The Angel of the waters, that is, of wars, blesseth Jesus Christ, that he hath given our enemies blood to drink, Revel. 16. 6. and they are blessed that do it, and are the called, chosen, and faithfull, that fight with the Lambe against Bishops or rivo-horned Beasts, and all Kings that take their parts, Rev. 17. 14. And to say they hate the Whore that honour the Papists, puts me to a non-plus, ver. 16. God put it into their hearts that do not, v. 17. for there is hope that they shall help Christ, that have been deluded by Antichrist.
Come we with the Doctor to his learned discourse upon the New Testament, and he is upon the supposition. Suppose that the King is supreme as Peter calls him, or the higher power as St. Paul. The first needs not be supposed, and the latter is a meere supposition, and both to no purpose, and I will suppose with him. Suppose all powers tyrannize to the very Constable, may we resist them all, none, or some? set down who may not be resisted. The Doctor sales the King, Rom. 13. 1. But in the second verse he saies by power may any Magistrate be meant, and in that verse is the resistance, why not he then as well as the King? If he answer, the Law resists all under the King, why then not the King, if it be above him? And if armes may be opposed to restraine any tyranny against Law, why not against all that use it? I do but suppose it, as the Doctor does, the King may. Take St. Pauls words in the superlative, and the Parliament in England is transcendent to the King in the Legistative power.
But the Doctor three wayes works the King into the Supremacie. First, by distinction. Secondly, subjection. Thirdly, petitior. Distinction, all power is supreme, or subordinate. The distinction is true, but not of the King, for he alone is not supreme, he hath his co-ordinates. Secondly, many are Governors he send, not, and in some States where they have no King to send them, but God and the people; and if Peter be so meant, that God sends both Kings and Governors, the Doctor is out, and the text may be so taken; but take it how he will, the people send powers from themselves, that in Parliament vote as freely as the King, and may affirm and denie as well as he. The Spartans had two kings, and both ruled by the Ephori, and he is truly supreme that is so called by the Law, and then we know that He is under it, that is, the Law, the Legislative power, and Parliament. The Oath is answered by them that made it, as being against forraigne powers, and the Pope, and persons in the Realme, not the great Authoritie in it, for the King is no such a Supreme, as to have authoritie to do what he lift. That the two Houses petition as under the King is right and true for their persons, which they subject unto the King, but not their power and trust; for by the Kings owne words to the 19. Propositions he propounds enough to satisfie the doubt, and just with the text that tyranny may be restrained legally by the two Houses, and that sometimes cannot be without Armes. Its true no subordinate power may legally resist the Supreme; but to subvert Religion, Laws, and Liberties is so farre from legall, that legally it may be resisted.
Fundamentals of Government common to all States, stand tottering as much as the Building, and the people lay them in the sand by the Doctors deseants and syllabicall Divinitie. Its fitter for a good Lawyer, or expert Statist, then Divine to deale with such Doctrine; and I must needs confesse he rather casts carelesly his stones upon heaps then placeth them orderly in the bottome of the worke. He holds a correspondencie of fundamentals with the established Laws of all kingdomes, as limited by them. The safetie of the whole is fundamentall, as all the elements to prevent vacuitie move contrary to their standing, as water will ascend, Aire descend, and in the creation with the constant nature of the Heavens and their Inhabitants, Gen. 1. 1. 2. was created an earth called all things in matter nothing in forme, to be the beginning of all elements and elementaries in this sublunarie and inconstant world, it touched the third heaven, and though it self was void of forme, yet it had a miraculous being and preservation to preserve the Universe; and in the top of it was formed the first Element, and so of the rest to the bottome, which we call the lowest earth, and the creatures so serve one another that they had rather forsake the horbs, then suffer a crany of the earth to be without aire or light; And so in the case of our kingdome, the King holds the highest orbe, but must descend to the necessities of his people, and being trusted with the Militia must not use it as he doth, like the lightner Salmoneus, Apoliodor. de Orig. Deor. l. 1. to daunt his people, as he did the wavering Greeks, and towne of Elis, who flastor his torches till God from heaven with true lightning destroyed him and his Citizens: So may we perish in our thundering, if our Ordinance be not better limited, the King may not so discharge upon his people, and ruine the fundamentall of their safetie in Parliament, which does onely discharge his trust for a time till the people be secured; and if the elements roare thus amongst us, the people must up and reassume with the Parliament their owne selfe preservation, till the King will remember that he is for the peoples edification, and not their destruction, as now be is moved by some Monsters in nature, that had rather eat thorow their mothers wombe, then not be born to vent their wickednesse. The Doctor calumiates in two things, as if ordinarie emissio as were to be resisted, and the King not discharging his trust punctually, might have others to enter upon it: whereas the state of the Question explained by himself is this, A King subverting Religion; Laws, Liberty, &c. which is more then the non-use of his trust, a mis-use of it in the highest degree, and deserves duty to God and man to do all that may be done to deliver from the danger in the right way the subjects have alwayes gone, as the people did with Hezekiah against Sennacherib, 2. Chron. 18. 7. Secondly, the people and Parliament re-assume the power no longer, till they be secured of the danger; for as we have said, a man may loose his right for a time, have it taken from him, or what is most proper transmitted to others, when the partie is not able, or will not use it as he ought to do; and we may rather say this fundamentall is reserved at the first, as most naturall to all estates, to make use of it in case of necessitie; power, saies the Doctor in his definition, is a sufficiencie of authoritie to command a people, and he thinks so necessarie that all men are to be under it, as from God and nature, which is true of families, but not of Nations, for God never appointed any Nationall Government till Moses. If so, all men are naturally free, and when they agree in a policie, not being divine, the people wholly chuse it, and can by no command be forced unto it.
He proves wittily his own work, Rom. 13. 1. 2. the man is inspired like Paracelsus, with all spirits, for he draws must out of the text, and yet it is not before the powers are; and except divine, they are not before the people will: as a woman is a wise by Gods ordinance when she hath consented to her husband, but she needs not consent before she will; and the Doctors co-ertion is of the text, not of the truth, for he forceth it to his fancie, and falnes a fable of the dutie to be as naturall to a king, as a mans father that begot him. To fundamentals he addes for feitures, and &illegible; it in the supreme trust, and it were good, if he received it from God without the people as Moses did; but saving this Nation he cannot name one more, and the text will tell him that not one Nation more under heaven was so great and happie, Dent. 4. 7. 8. Our Divines have studied themselves into a dreame of nature for grace, and magnisie kingdomes too much, to give them the divine benediction from universall Grece. Let God be true, and every man a Iyar; God hath not dealt with all Nations alike. I make no question when the Doctor sees his errour, that the power to be a king comes from the people by humane election, he will stand no longer upon divine right, then the ordinance of God to establish the orders men have freely put themselves under, and that by reservation and re-assumption as often as need requireth, and good kings should count it no resistance, but an happie remedie to have his people joyne with him in Parliament, and them a pest and plague that drive him from it. The Doctor trimly tries his wit with distinctions of power in the clouds, the designation in the people, and qualification in the subject. The power he hangs in the &illegible; to drop from heaven upon kings, before the people know it, and then the people shall designe the person, and his qualities shall be either what he will, or others will him to do. When in my apprehension the people designe the person first, then God ratifies the power, and that no further then its legall; which if it degenerate into tyranny is none of his. The Doctor hath done the King a great displeasure, to suffer men to dispute the case further then the Parliament hath determined, which pretends no right to all, but so much as may save the kingdome, and the Doctor in denying this, hath opened a gap from a qualified forfeiture to one that is absolute, and some books so sing, and say more then the Doctor will answer; but both Houses must stay the Argument, and he will undo the King if he denie all, even a transmission to his Councell, which he may yet do by consent; which if he do not. I dare say he sees not his owne danger to hazard both himself and Parliament upon the people, for Pamphlets of the worst Malignance have counselled the people to re-assume their power from both, and play their own game, which will be the worst piece of our warre, and the dissolution of all to the lowest foundation; which I would have the people to consider in the words of our Saviour, Matth. 24. 2. His Majestie makes Officers for terme of life, and the Law gives them their right, yet it is not so firme, but some fault may void it. Secondly, others have Honours, Quandiu bene se gesserint, and they are secure till they be convinced of some misbehaviour. Thirdly, they are most at will, that by a Writ of Ease are discharged, because the grant was, Durante bene placito. I would be loath the Majestie of the people should presume to do the like, and give the Law; farre better that holds us to the legislative power where it is. We are upon another case, the law of necessitie that goes farre, the wise parts with all to her husband, and that in necessaries she may supply her wants. Hezekiah in this case made bold with the Temple, and David with the shew-bread, and our Saviour warrants it with good use, I will have mercie, and not sacrifice; and if the King will not see this, the Doctor in too blame to keep it from him. The Doctor complains of injurios, and augments them, if the Parliament will take the power from the King, yet they should leave it to his Heire. He complaines without a cause, they intend neither, but have complained of Gods Ministers discharged without a crime, as many old Justices of Peace the people want, and of them God speaks, as well as of the King. Its true God is the God of order, and leaves not every man to do his will, nor resist at pleasure, but in case that be true the Doctor supposeth, the resistance is lawfull, and though the head be more honoured then any other member, yet in a frensie, if it be not held by hands, the surious man may knock out his brains against his own bed-posts. In resistance we rise not to death and deposition, and if that may have construction in the Bill of Divorce, it was yeelded to the man to put away his wife, and Josephus relates of a woman that put away her husband; yet God that allowed the one for the hardnesse of heart, did not allow the other; and we may grant more to a King then to any other in discharging some men, yet his heart should never be so hardned, as to send away his subjects with such constant frownes, and as for them I shall never think how they may discharge the King wholly of his trust; yet if a husband would kill his wife, she may resist him, and call in her neighbours to help her.
Fundamentals and forfeitures are handled, and now comes in the means of safety. I name no Sections, for they are rather so called, then righty resolved by any method, the Doctor intending to play with his matter as boyes do at the cudgels, to canvase one another with crosse blowes. Salus populi in a good sense, is suprema lex. The sense must be his own, for the stabs necessitie at the heart by the popish plea to save the Church, which, he saies, is the Philistines Forge, and Antichrists schoole; and for this we shall scourge him. Our Saviour allows us no Armes to defend Religion but by the second Table. Truth is uniform, and puts no Bishop out of his Rotchet into an Helmet, for then the Turke would take up the argument as he did with the Pope, having disarmed a Prelate, saying in his message sent him, Vide an ea sit tunica filiitni, Father look how you clothe your children. The Catholique faith is above Armes, and the weapons of our warfare more mightie then they, to break into such holds as they cannot come neer, even thoughts to captivate them to the will of God, 2. Cor. 10. 4, 5. But States are not so preserved, nor any person in them, but se defendendo is a plea in nature, and so in any kingdome to keepe it from tyranny, and where God hath not provided for it, as he hath done for his Church, the means are gladium materiale, and politicum in Parliament, which is in no Church Synod. The Senate of Rome after the people have given Cæsar too much, used the Sword against him, and spared not Nero, who if he could have taken them away with the sword, would not have attempted it by poyson: but they pay him in his right kind, and force him to flie, and follow him so hard, that to escape their sword he kils himself. That of Tertullian is true for ought I know, and though I will not follow the Fathers in faith, yet for fact I shall yeeld them more credit, and answer for them, they resisted not the Law to preserve the Gospel, but followed their Master, and fought not for his kingdome but by their prayers and teares, and prevailed by their blood, Revel. 12. 11. and they shed blood too, Rev. 6. 12. The Altar was the Embleme of the fifth Seale, and an earthquake of the sixth which changed the Empire, and it was done by warre, and Christians were deep in the blood of Pagans, and shall not need to feare to be as deep in the blood of Papists by the fifth Commandement, obeying Magistrates, and the sixth preserving themselves, which for faith I wish no man to do, he may die for that if the Law be against him; for I will not defend pietie by any injustice, or Religion by any injurie. The Doctor importunately urgeth, Rom. 13. 2. and let Nero be the man, seeing he is all for the person. He that resists Nero shall be damned, but the Senate resisted him, and yet there was no &illegible;μα against it, but great rejoycing in it, and all the people, Psal. 58. 11. and 107. 42. nor &illegible;α&illegible;ί
&illegible;&illegible;μα, the Doctors damnation. And one thing more I would have him take notice of, when Christians opposed both Cæsar and the Senate, as first when they took part with Constantine and the Senate, Secondly, with Theodosius both against Cæsar, and the Senate. The Senate caused Gratian to be murthered, because he would not be their high Priest, and set up Maximus in his roome, who is slain by Gratians Generall, and then Eugenius appearing for the Pagans against Theodosius, the Christians assist him, which sheweth plainly tyrants may be resisted. And the Doctor does ill to state his Question of a tyrant, for Kings no man disputes against them, nor any Magistrate the ordinance of God, and whiles the Doctor deals so basely with the Parliament to raise up arms against it, he justifies them in resisting that which he states to be tyranny. He is forced to yeeld resistance, but it must be reasonable, as if all men were beasts that were not of his mind.
Its true three agreeing make the State farre more secure, and it were happie it were so now, and very honourable to the King that will not, because in the Militia he will be alone, and rather loose his kingdome, then consent unto it with his Parliament, which is the maine difference: and if he may do with us in warre after his own wisedome, the nise men of his kingdome shall not onely be dis-regarded, but we shall be destroyed: And by the same reason he may challenge Ea quæ sunt belli; by the like argument ea quæ sunt pacis are in him alone; and if both these, then ea quæ jurisaictionts sunt, and adde, ea quæ sunt justitiæ, and he shall have all praxi & peacepto, and both Houses may dissolve, and come home for fools. But he is a wicked foole that perswades the King to this tyranny, and teacheth him to undo himself, and all that truly love him; and whiles he trusts these, he is betrayed to his own ruine. The King pretends faire for his armes, that it is done to save Religion, Laws, his own rights, &c. and saies further, both Houses go about to subvert all by faction, as they say he does by ill Counsell; and the Question so stated puts tyranny upon them, and the Apostles arguments cannot make it damnable to resist them, being tyrants, but the Doctor will not yeeld them so much as to be among the Higher powers: but that singularly must be kept for the King. The King saies better by faction they may be seduced, and &illegible; to subvert all Government, which if they should, I see no reason but the King and Kingdome may resist them: but this is a case that never was, and subverts the greatest fundamentall we have; for when we say every man may defend himself by the law of nature, and the State by the Law of Nations, in our Nation we have no other fundamentall, but the Parliament, and the King was never so counted, and we trust not him without an oath, but we dare trust both Houses unsworne as our very selves. But the Doctor states the Question personally, if a Prince, for suppositions possible may be and conclude when they are what may be done, or not; but suppositions impossible conclude no such thing, but give way to reason, where, ficta negunt fidemque faciunt, where fables may fanfie true things. Cade, and Tyler may tell us of Tyrants, and so hath the Doctor done ill to teach it, and to preserve them without resistance for fear of rebellion against better men, then let the best judge of it, and the people follow the Parliament, and pray for the King he may return unto it, and force them no longer to preserve the Kingdome out of the hands of mischievous Monsters, which will soone shrink into their holes, if their pretended Head forsake them, and hold with His Houses, the proper place, and Center of all his legall actions: as the Kingdome now moves off the hooks it makes many giddy brains, and if this Vertiga be not speedily cured, an Apoplexie will follow. I have done with the Doctors disgraces, and will give him a table of sundrie words, as followeth.
Supreme | Law, Power, Trust, | Right | Re-assumption, Reservation, Return, | Dr. Fernes | Fundamentals, Forfeitures, Factions | Truth, | Tyranny, Resistance, Damnation |
SVpremacie of Law, Power, and Trust, the Doctor understands not. He supposeth a Trust from God, such as Moses had, Hebr. 3. 2. 5. A trust appointed by God, as a servant to him alone, and accountable to him onely. And good reason, for God committed his people to him, gave him power over them, and the Law by which he should rule them. And Moses makes this a distinction between the Nation of the Jews, and all Nations, Deut. 4. 7, 8. What Nation? that is, no other: and it is in two things, Revelation and righteousnesse. God nigh in prayer, and perfect in truth. The Doctor derives the Kings trust from God, we from the people, as all Nations did when they trusted their Governours, and consequently their power proceeded from the same fountain, and so did their Laws; and the Church hath spoyled the Kings of the earth to make their Monarchies as Divine, as the Dynastie of heaven that ruled not after the wils of men, but the Word of God. Hornes scatter Gods people, Zech. 1. 18. and Hammers breake them, or Axes cut them off. The like is in the Revelation of wicked Hornes, and may be resisted as all Ages testifie. Not the powers of God, but the tyrannies of men: and when the text speaks of Smiths and Carpenters to do it, it declares his providence for his Church, and we observe it not in divine justice; but, like the Doctor, think hurtfull Hornes have right to do any thing, and no remedie, but patience against them. He mistakes the Nations, and would have the powers as immediately from God, as Patriarchs, Judges and Kings are ruled by God, as having the Law from him, and so ruled not as they list; but we have our Laws from men, and they impose upon the King. The &illegible; of his power is from his people, and they grant him the trust he is bound to answer them; and therefore we adde they reserve their right in it, have power to re-assume it in the right way of Nature and Nations, which children and servants cannot do in families, but in Nations it may be done in all of them, save the Nation of Judah with his brethren, and Genealogies exactly observed to Christ, are forbidden after his birth, Tit. 3. 9. Veritie before, is vanitie now, and we are to beware how we reason from texts, when we turn them to our own teaching. A returne we make to the King and his Heire by our fundamentals of three Estates, and if that be true, that no Act of Parliament can be made, without the consent of the Lords, we must understand it of the Lords temporall, for the Judges have resolved it, 7. H. 8. Killway. fo. 184. B. that the King with his Lords Temporall, and Commons, without the Spirituall Lords, may hold his Parliament, and therefore Bishops are not so essentiall, as the Doctor would have them. And it is further resolved, that the King having called a Parliament, and the Barons will not come, the King with the Commons may preserve the kingdome, and doubtlesse if the King depart after his &illegible; the Lords and Commons may do it: but it is fundamentall, that without the Commons nothing can be done, all right and remedie being in the people, whom they most orderly do represent. I confesse the representation is in the whole Realme, but the basis is the people. The Doctors fundamentals I understand not, but that which is the great one I kene well enough, Salus populi suprema lex My Lord Cooke. 18. E. 2. 27. 10. Rep. 139 B. Keighleyes C. Nota, saies he, Reader upon a particular case of a wall against the Sea, that the Defendant was bound to repaire and suffered it to decay, the Plaintiffe recovered Damages, and why saies he? Because it was pro bono publico, and brings this fundamentall Law, Salus populi, suprema lex, and the defendant was compelled to do it; not onely to satisfie the injurie done to the Plaintiffe, but lest the defect against the Sea, a common Enemie, the Common-wealth might suffer by it. Such hath been the care of the Judges for Common good, which being well pondered in these dayes, would doubtlesse make us more readie for publique safetie. A custome prejudiciall to a private man, may be reasonable for the generall, as building of Bulwarks upon anothers Land for the defence of the Realme. 36. H. 8. Dyer fo. 60. B. 29. H. 8. Dyer fo. 36. B. 21. E. 4. 28. 8. F. 4. 18. He that turnes his plough upon the headland of another may do it by the Law of Husbandry. He that dries his nets upon another mans ground is favoured for Navigation and Fishing. Common utilitie is the generall end of all Laws; but what is beneficiall onely to some particular man, such a custome is &illegible; to the law of reason, which is above all positive Laws, and if this be &illegible; Parliament, more then the King, or all his Judges, our foundation is naughtily laid, and its a mystery to me: Malignants fall to talke of knowne positive Laws against the Parliament, which is the reason of all the Laws we have; and our silly Doctor because the King is not in the Parliament, thinks it is deprived of all reason, and he would pluck up all foundations to plant the King in their roome, to rume all. I think he knows not what a Cerciorari meanes, and how cases may be removed for right, and to the best reason in the Law; and say it is in the King is to make Cæsar above himself, and the King may well forfeit his Judgement to the Parliament, which will never make him forfeit his kingdome from himselfe or Heire; and yet truth will teach as he receives his kingdome from no particular man, no more can he forfeit it to him, but take heed of the whole kingdome that hath given it him, which cannot make a faction in taking their own; and it will not be from the King, but the resistance of his tyranny, which the Doctor would teach, and damnation to all those that would save the kingdome. Good Doctor forbear, I once heard you lost your Notes when you were to preach before the Judges, and you preach terrible things before the greatest Judge; but I hope you have lost your Notes, and I will give you a few more from Jacobs Prophesie, and Judahs Royalty. I pray you remember it, we wish you well by our paines.
Gen. 49. 10. The Scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a Law-giver from betweene his feet, untill Shiloh come, and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.
DOctor Ferne is the Tripos of this Kingdome, and he prevaricates with all men upon his Stoole of three feet, a King, a People, a Parliament. For the King he finds him the first in Mankind, as naturall to his kingdome, as a father to his familie. The originall of many, and their efficient both procreant and conservant; as for the people they are so base borne, that he begets them to be his slaves. The Shiloh in our text gathers his people, and of the basest makes them all Princes, 1. Pet. 2. 9. but these Princes must submit to their King, ver. 13. Governours, v. 14. and these Governours too to him that sent them: and here the Tripos prevaricates to purpose. The King sends all Governours, therefore all subjects but the King, even his two Houses of Parliament though he send them not, but for them to direct him if he will, if not, he is to do as he list, and neither people nor Parliament may resist him. Not the people, for they are subject to powers; nor the powers in Parliament, for they are subject to the power, that is, the supreme power, which is the King. I hope the Tripos is a firme stoole, and cannot trip at the tribunall of Cæsar, and yet by Pauls Appeale he does, Act. 25. 10. He appeals from Cæsar in Judea in all Courts Civill and Ecclesiasticall to Cæsar at Rome, and that to some Court where Cæsar had his Tribunall, and may be above the Senate, the Star-Chamber, and High Commission was his Councell: but in England they are put down, as just grievances of the Subjects, where then is the Kings Tribunall, in his Privie Councell? but he that appeals to that had need of a Favourite to open him the doores, and when he is in, he hath no securitie to come out: But the King is there, and of him I may say as Seneca does, de Clement. li. 1. ca. 29. Securitas securitats mutua paciscenda est: Errat enim si quis existimet tutum esse Regem, ubi nihil à Rege tutum est. Vnum est inexpugnabile munimentum, Amor civium. Love is the Loadstone that stayes the people, and Armes are such Arguments as destroy right, and to rule by them may be the Kings rage, and the kingdomes ruine; which if the Parliament prevent not the people perish: and if Cæsar be there to do us justice, he may not deny it; and if he do, his will is not the supremacie, but the Law, which is never dead in a Councell, and therefore if the King be resolved, Rempublican suam esse, non se Reipublicæ: and that the kingdome must trust him, and not he his kingdome, as it is now in Parliament, we have no other Appeale to Cæsar but his person, and then I am sure the Doctors stool stands so upon their feet, that the longest will cast down all the rest; and if the two may not supply the other, it will never stand again: and doubtlesse the Doctor having made it too long, the Kingdome hath a Saw to cut it off till it may stand with the rest, with more securitie to all feet; for we stand not upon the predominancie of three Estates, but their equall poyze, and the Doctor when he hath prevaricated all he can, he must leave the King in the two Houses, and the two Houses to be his Tribunall for all Appeals; and we are not to follow Cæsar to his Camp, but Court of Justice; and if that doctrine of Armes they may resist any camp that comes under any other command of might or majestic. The Doctors text is taken in two senses, and prevaricatours do alwaies equivocate, and hide the distinctions.
The integrum of his text is an humane creation, and the members of it, are King and Governours; the cause, God finall or efficient, the effect subjection. The adjunct supreme, the end praise or punishment. The humane creation is divided into the King, and Governours, the Doctor denies it, making the King a divine creation, and Governours the creatures of the King. The cause finall is to obey for Gods sake, or his glory, the efficient, because God equally sends them both; and the text saies not that the King sends all Governours but himself, as the Doctor divides it without all reason, when he saies all powers, Rom. 13. 1. are either the King or Governours, and if Peter so distribute the powers, in St. Paul he contradicts him; for Paul saies all powers are of God, and Peter denies it, making Kings onely of God, and all other Governours of the King. Subjection is the effect of Gods command, the Doctor of the King, and that not onely of Subjects, but rulers, that must do his will, and not the Lords. The adjunct supreme is an indifferent word given to all powers, Rom. 13. 1. particularly to men in authoritie that are not kings, 1. Tim. 2. 2. and personally to kings, 1. Pet. 2. 13. and therefore the word being common not proper, concludes not for the Doctor; and the end makes against him, applyed to the Governours who are bound to the same end with the King, and therefore have the same office; and for the Lords sake, and not mans, are to exercise it. I would have our learned Criticke of words made into the text propounded, and consider what Dominion is declared by Scepter, and how it cannot be restrained to Kings, but any power, or Majestie of Government, under what form soever, and every Tribe is called by the name Shabet, and united under one staffe or power of Government. The meaning therefore is not, that Judah shall not cease to be a kingdome, but a State having jurisdiction, and so the seventy for Scepter translate not King, but Ruler, and therefore the Doctor is wide in kingly Royalty, to make it ancient or necessarie. A Law-giver is as generall as the former, and in Israel was not legislative in any, but declaritory in any Judges, and in this the Doctor is not constant in his notion concerning Law-makers, the highest powers in the kingdome, and if the King be higher then the highest he alone may challenge to himself to be our Law-giver; & the Doctor would have it so, and yet couples with him both Houses, and then again against them both, proclaimes what Laws he pleaseth, and accuseth the Parliament to do the same, and concludes neither have legislative power. He wanders so about a Law-giver, as he leaves us none in Parliament, if the King please to desert it; and the truth is Laws cannot be made without the expresse consent of three Estates: but the Doctor ignorant of the Scripture phrase, understands not that a Law-giver is either one that makes Laws, peculiar to God in Sion, or that does jus dicere, declare what it is to others: and so does the King by his Judges in all Courts of Justice, and is the Law-giver in none in neither sense, nor can denie either in his Courts of Justice; and if he should do it in the inferiour Courts, it would not stand for good Law, but in the supreme it must stand for any thing, and if he denie to be present, or consent nothing can be done, as if he had power to suspend the whole legislative power in the kingdome. God that suffered his people to be without Kings, never suffered them to be without Law-givers, and if the Doctor scorn not to be taught, the Royall Tribe wanted neither Scepter nor Law-giver when it wanted kings, as for more then two third parts of that time, namely, not till David, nor after Zedekiah, saving that of the Maccabees, who were Levites, and of Herod by originall an Edomite, or Idumæan Proselyte, which both put together were some eighty yeers: so that the Jews never wanted Rulers of their own, till Titus destroyed them. Pompey brought them under the Romane Senate, and then some say the Scepter departed. Others when Herod a stranger, yet formerly incorporated into the Jewish State and blood, was by the Romanes invested to be their king, and the Hasmonæan, or Maccabæan race extinguished. A third sort say the Scepter then departed when Titus took the Citie, and quite ruined the whole policie of Religion and Law, and this for my part I conceive to end the prophesie, and then Christ had the people of the Gentiles at his charge, and for his Church converted them to his Government, or destroyed them for it, and raised up in all times such Law-givers as liked him best, and changed them as he had done before, and his Scepter never since that time departed from his people, who whiles they were governed by the Cæsars were so ruled by them that they were for their good, as in the case of Paul judged by the Jews, delivered by the Gentiles; and though they died Martyrs for Religion, yet they had great peace from Pagans, for whom they prayed for the benefit they enjoyed. 1. Tim. 2. 2, 3, 4. First, worldly, in peace and quiet. Secondly, pious and civill, by godlinesse and honesty. Thirdly, pleasing to God, as very good and acceptable in his sight. Fourthly, a meanes to convert Kings and their kingdomes, as it did at the last, Revel. 12. 5. The Rod that ruled them before, is now theirs to rule themselves, and so hath remained to this day, and now for the Doctors learning I will move him with two Questions. First, Whether God makes Tyrants his Law-givers. Secondly, whether Law-givers may not resist Tyrants? For the first, he may look over the whole Bible, and all Histories, and find God and man destroying them as evill Beasts, and more to be hunted after, and destroyed then Lyons, Beares, Dragons, or any other evill Beasts whatsoever. Its true that the Doctor saies it is dangerous for private persons to prevent mischief, yet no man, if tell Beasts follow him, and he cannot flie from them as David did from Saul, yet he may do as David did, Arme, seek holds, keep them, and neither yeeld himselfe nor them to his Enemie, but keep him out, as Elisha did in his own house against the sonne of a Murtherer, 2. King. 6. 32. And if Subjects may not keep their own houses, and joyn with others for help, let Elisha and the Elders reason his cause, and the Doctor answer better then he hath done, and his Disciples doubt his doctrine is not good. Now if he shall say Elisha did it not as a private person, then what was he in regard of the King that came as a tyrant to take away his life. But the Doctor hath said enough to bring us into the second Question, for I am sure the first is not answered; but the second will set him more out of his way, what a Law-giver may do by the Scepter or Rod that is carried before him, or the sword that is given unto him. Doubtlesse they have resulted tyrants, and rebelled against them as the Judges did when Israel was oppressed, as the Kings did when they were in slavery. After them the Princes did it, and Nehemiah armed his men to resist the &illegible;, and the Army of Samaria that the Emperours Generals raised by his authoritie; and Nehemiah as a Magistrate prepares for fight. The Maccabees do the like, and where God gives Law-givers the people may be directed by them; and as &illegible; case is, the Doctor is foulely culpable to make no more of the Parliament, then of a private man. To deprive it of all legislative power, and bind it so to the King that he must do what he list, and no law against him, nor any power pus dicere, where the King will contradicere, By which meanes the Doctor makes the King a Tyrant, and defends his right against Law, and yet perswades it is Law, and so the Divine and the Lawyer are the true causes to turn a Monarchie into a tyranny, and defend it by the Law of God to be lawfull, and that our Laws limit our two Houses like Elisha to sit still, and provide for themselves by a Guard, but give no direction to others against Murtherers, nay, the Doctor denies them all preservation, and that they must cast down all at their Soveraignes feet, and let his messengers murther them, and the whole kingdome.
Seemingly seient, but really inscient are by Erasmus taxed bitterly in these words, Doctum genus indoctissimorum hominum, vix ad Doroberinam usque docti, They that are learned in Court flatteries, Camp cruelties, Schoole falshoods, Universitie universals, will teach Parliaments, and be Judges what they may do, when Kings feare them for their power, which they need not, it these Agents might be their Advocates; For the truth is, when a King calls a Parliament, he goes above himselfe both for action and authoritie, as what he cannot do by his ordinarie jurisdiction, he labours to be helped by that which is extraordinarie, and arbitrarie in the greatest supremacie, as not to be limited by any in the protection of the people, and if the King will do it, it is contrary to his office and oath, and not protecting himself, others must do it. Read these unreasonable words in his papers, promising securitie against his Parliament: It is no ill counsell for the King to withdraw himselfe so farre, and so long from the Parliament, because at London, he and many whose affections were eminent towards him, were in danger everyday to be torns in pieces; and at Yorke, his Majestie, and all such as will there put themselves under his protection, may live securely, and that through the affection and loyaltie of that good people. Not one word of sence in the whole sentence. First, no ill counsell for the King to be long and farre absent from his Parliament. Strange in the Proposition, that the king should not be where he is bound to be, and no wayes without sicknesse excused; and after a Jurie of twelve Parliament men have sitten upon it, it is resolved by both Houses to bring the king nearer his Parliament, a serious parley is to be held, and the learned in the estates of mens bodies consulted withall, the Estates must be satisfied of the Kings removall, and if any possibilitie with the preservation of his life may draw him nearer them, by no meanes he may withdraw further off. But the strange proposition may have a strong reason to do it, and what reason can be against, causa sola, on the Kings part, who hath nothing but sicknesse to alledge for himselfe; for in warre in forraine parts, his Parliament excuseth him, if he make it with their consent; otherwise he is guiltie, and his Parliament may forsake him, and forbid his Subjects to follow him. But lets heare his Counsellors reason, Because at London, he, and his Lovers, were in danger to be torne in pieces every day. This is the first part of the reason, and the second is like it, at Yorke no such thing, but more then securitie for all subjects that meant to be loyall. We have the reason by the end, and to begin with him we cannot love except we forsake London. How did London teare him in pieces the next day after the tumult, surely the torment was in his eares with prayers and supplications; and since his going from them, and his eares have been closed up, and his eyes shut to see their miseries, they have gone to God to see their sorrows, and with teares and prayers begged for his return; and he that accuseth London to teare the King, teares him by his Counsell, and to save himself hath exposed him to all the danger he is in. Let all the world judge the safetie of Yorke, the whole Countie, and all places whither these kill Kings have carried him from his Counsell: and consider withall who are safe, but those onely the Parliament hath protected; and if the people would desert those the King protects, all the world should see of whom the King is in danger. But if he not onely out of his calling, but calling others from theirs, and keeping such from Justice as have not been faithfull in their callings, no marvell if the King from heaven and earth be not in danger; and whosoever kils him by the chance of battell, they shall be guiltie that have drawn him into it: and happie were he if he had eyes to see his first errour to depart from his Parliament, and persisting in it to embrue his whole kingdome in blood: And whiles the Doctor chargeth the two Houses with the warre, he dischargeth not his conscience to his King, nor deales truly with the kingdome to be their resolver in cases of Conscience as he does.
I have bidden the Doctor good night, and now salute him with a good day, and remember him of the burden of Dumah, Isa. 21. 11 placed between other two burthens of the Caldcan and Arabian, God not sparing the valley of vision, Isa. 22. 1. The Caldean is a burthen to Gods people, and they are the burthensome stone to all Nations, Zech. 12 3. lay them together, and consider who have the visions of God, and what they should do as the fruitfull valleys, Psal. 65. 13. be cloathed with increase: but alas the walls go down, and the mountains cry, Isa. 22. 5. Miserie begins where mercie is abused, 1. Pet. 4. 17. If with us God will be feared in his judgements, what end of evils will be with the Desert? Isa. 21. 1. A grievous vision is to them that have none, ver. 2. and the seer sorrows for them that will not see, ver. 3. and his heart is heavie at the hearing of the night, ver. 4. The senselesse prepare their tables. ver. 5. presume of their Watch-towers, eat and drinke, and suddenly the Alarme is given, Arise Princes, and anoint the shield. The full story is Dan. 5. Profane and profuse persons make merrie, and mourne too late. The Doctors last Section is to discharge himself of a scandalous assertion to charge the Parliament with hypocrisie, a language he either learned or taught in the Kings papers, where both Houses are termed Hypocrites, a faction of schismaticall, malignant, and ambitious persons. The Doctor answers, they are no charges upon a Parliament, but upon the chiefe contrivers of, and Actors in the resistance. Its well the hypocrisie is yet to be discovered by him that knows the hearts of all men, to their amazement that in time shall heare it, or feele it. Charitie binds no conscience to contradictions, or against sense, or from being a Judge betweene the King and his Counsell, the rules being given by him in the end of his former Treatise. It was too much for the King to say, He was not bound to renounce his own understanding, or contradict his own Conscience for any Counsellours sake whatsoever; which is most true where he is a competent Judge, as he is not of any Court in the kingdome, for he may not reverse the judgement given by it by his own; and now the Doctor with his King will be competent Judges of the Parliament, and the two Houses must be hypocrites if they judge them so to be, or lay down the rules for others to follow. Master Bridge saies the Parliament passeth no such sentence upon their Soveraigne, and the charge they lay upon his Counsellours is no other then David laid upon Sauls Counsellours, 1. Sam. 26. 19. The Doctor is glad of this, and claimes it for his King, who is driven out of his Parliament, and hunted up and down the Kingdome by Rebels. Now the Doctor speaks plainly of Armes, and if he will argue right in the cause, no armes are raised without the Parliament; but he saies the Parliament should have done, as David did, referred it to God. I say he speaks plainly, if the King command an army of men to destroy the kingdome, it may neither like David preserve it selfe, nor by the great Counsell be commanded to take up armes, because the King forbids it as Gods Minister; and I pray you how is he Gods Minister by St. Paul, but either as from the efficient, or the end. He is the minister of God to thee for good. Will you have any more in those words, then the author, end, and object. The Author is God, the end good, the object man. How farre will you bind the subject from God or the end? He is not for good, but destruction, and is the subject bound to his own destruction? Or to beleeve God gives him a minister for his mischief? When a King is Gods Minister, God is his Law-giver, and his power is not mastership, but service. When men are his Law-givers, he is not their Judge, but must judge with them; and what he doth without them, is void in Law; for he is both from God and man their Minister, and a Law-giver to neither, as I shall shew him.
I would seeke the Doctor downe to the Bishops, and the Kings Oath is in my way, which binds him not to protect them from a repeal, no more then it doth of any other Statute: but they have the approbation of the Catholique Church, and I find some using Isa. 21. 5. Prepare a table, that is, for Bishops, and very just they should have it as Watchmen: but the Tower sets them in eminent places, and some have counted them, Isa. 33. 18. and where are they? certainly if their places be of God, then Paul will speak for them out of the text, 1. Cor. 1. 20. and fools they shall be that will be wiser then God. Your continuation of Bishops since the plantation hath had as many over-turnes, as is in Ezekiels vision, Chap. 21. 27. till the Government come to strangers. And if the Doctor will give me leave to direct him in both, I shall tell him it is time for Shiloh to come the second time, for the Bishops are as much degenerated in the keyes of the Church, as ever the Jews were in the Scepter, Gen. 49. 10. Shiloh is the Messias, and one of his first names, and it comes of Shelah, the peace-maker, and the Masorites might have pointed it Shelah, the name of the first sonne of Judah that survived, and signifies peaceable; Er and Onan perishing. Gen. 46. 12. The Patriarch Jacob might by the direction of the holy Ghost chuse his name before any other, as the Saviour of the destroyed. For that of the secundine is more ambiguous, and lesse probable. The word Scepter is a rod or staffe, which is not a King, but a State or power of Government, having jurisdiction till it vanish. Judah was not a continued kingdom for more then two thirds of the kingly royalty in that Tribe; namely, not till David, nor after Zedekiah, saving that of the Maccabus, and of Herod, who were kings, and that not above tighty yeers and yet were they never without Rulers, and I say it the more to satisse the Doctor in his fancie of kings, as if they were the most naturall Governors. Judas Maccabeus after the Kings and Dukes had the conduct of the Jews. He seeks to Rome for their friendship, and Demetrius challengeth them for Subjects, and so they are not helped by the Romanes, and their Generall is slain by Demetrius. His Brother Jonathas succeeds him, and then his Brother Simon. After him rules Hyrcanus his sonne, and then Aristobulus changing the Government, assumes the Diademe and becomes their king for one yeer, and dying his brother Alexander reignt 26. yeers, and makes Hyrcanus his eldest sonne high Priest, and leaves Alexandra his wife Queene; and when she dies the Romane Senate deposeth the high Priest, and placeth Aristobulus his brother in his place. Antipater and Edomite opposeth Aristobulus; and because Hyrcanus his brother was pleased with his peace he prevailed not; yet not desisting he dealt with the king of Arabia to invade Judea, who entring, forced Aristobulus to flie to Jerusalem, and Easter coming, the besieged beg Beasts for Sacrifices, and their Enemies having received their moneys, break their promises, and the Brothers unite, and send Messengers to Scaurus in Syria, Pompeyes Legate, who receives their money, and removes Aretas the Arabian king, and confirmes Aristobulus in his Principalitie who is poysoned, and Alexander his sonne is accused by the Romanes, and by Pompey a few moneths after his father is beheaded, and then Antipater the Father of Herod when he had re-edified the walls of Jerusalem, finding Hyrcanus stupid and dull deposeth him of his Ethnarchie, and gives it to his eldest sonne: and Herod having taken Ezechias a notorious thiefe with his companions robbing in Syria, punisheth them, and for it is accused at Jerusalem, and cited to the Synedrion.
Sextus Cæsar writes for him, and Hyrcanus frees him: but Herod being in great favour with Cæsar raiseth an Armie to revenge the injurie; but Antipater his Father and Phaselus his elder Brother stay him. Afterward Herod goes to Rome, and by the help of Antoney obtaines of the Senate the name of a king; yet neither in the Levites nor the Edomites ceased the Rulers, but they had still some of their own: And so we come to the next word, Law-giver, which signifies not onely a Law-maker, but qui jus dixit, one that useth jurisdiction. As for the last words, from betweene his feet, meanes his posteritie, by a modest expression of the place of generation. And the very heathen observed it in Bacchus borne ex femore Jovis, which is no more then Jupiters sonne, though in ignorance the Greeks made it a fable. Now mark to whom the people are gathered, the Jews being rejected, to Christ. So this prediction was fulfilled when Titus destroyed the Citie, and then ceased all their rule: not first when the Romanes subdued them, nor under Herod, nor his sonne Archelaus, when Christ was borne, but the Nations gathered unto him, and our Saviours Scepter set up amongst them; and so Matthew gives this as the last signe, that their end should be, when the Gospel was preached to all Nations. Some policie they had as we have, and the Doctor thinks it is the same we had at the first, which he may as easily perswade, as at the destruction of Jerusalem the Government was Gods, and not to be repealed by the Parliament. I make no question what is divinely established that Counsell will never reject, but if corruptions be crept into Divine orders, good reason that Court should carefully correct them, which is not to teare up all by the roots, but take away the wild branches which will suck from the tree the whole sap, and suffer no good fruit to grow. What is best is not for the Doctor to determine, and defend the kings armie in any thing against both Houses; and I shall give him a good reason from our discourse of a Law-giver, which cannot from the creation be conceived ever to be allowed amongst the people of God to any one man, or all men in any Counsell, but to God alone in the sense of making Laws; for the Morall, Judiciall, and Ceremoniall Laws, were all of God, and the Jurisdiction that any had from God, was jus dicere, to administer under God, and so do all Magistrates: and Paul saies they are Ministers for no other end but to do justice, and his whole discourse is of that, and subjection to just commands, and the fifth booke the Doctor never saw, hath set him a long lesson to learne in all the texts of Scripture to warrant what he hath said for a tyrant, and let him know the Thearchies of the Scripture quite overthrow the jurisdiction of the King in his sense: and if he come to the second, where men have legislative power to rule by the Edict of one man, or the verdict of many, let him take which he will, whether the King is to rule us by his personall Edict, or the verdict of his wise men? He cannot say the legislative power is in Edicts, and the jurisdiction of the King is jus dicere, not to make it what he will, but to proclaime it from others, not against his Councell, but from it; and if they passe not the verdict, his wisedome may not presume any power is in him to contradict them, as they may contradict him.
Its well known de facto, that no grant of the King is good, he can neither make an Executor nor Administratour of his Will, as owners do that have a proprietie in their lands and goods. Whose is the Land, 2. Sam. 3. 12. not the Kings to dispose of it as he list, nor any goods of the Crowne. He hath an Heire, but he can give him nothing by succession; for succession of Kings is no other then a continued election: and though the people have bound themselves to the Heire, yet it is by promise no patrimonie from his Father, but the kingdomes trust from the people. And if the Doctor will not acknowledge this, he destroyes the whole contrivement of States, and forme of Government; for conquest is tyranny, and the Doctors reason for translation of kingdomes, as one of Gods meanes argues not alwayes justice in the doer. The example of David, 2. Sam. 12. is not to purpose, for David did it justly. First, because the old grudge was just when Israel came out of Ægypt, that they would not relieve them in the wildernesse. Secondly, they had violated the Law of Nations, in abusing Davids Messengers. Thirdly, they had taken occasion by the slaughter of Uriah, and others to blaspheme God. Fourthly, they had disturbed all the Nations round about stirring them up, and hiring them to joyne with them against David, 2. Sam. 10. 6. Fifthly, they were most cruell and vile Idolaters, sacrificing their own children to their abominable Idol Molech, therefore they were worthily punished to passe through fire, and be put under sawes, harrows, and axes. The Kings Plunderers plow as deep furrows upon the backs of this Nation, as if the people had deserved the like punishment with the Ammonites, which David by conquest without a cause compelled not to serve him. The Edomites deserved the same, and Dominion was not as the Doctor saies a just claime for any that could master another. He addes as idly the descent of kingdomes, as if that were all the right, which indeed is none without a successive election; and when the Doctor hath done all he can, he must be brought to a divine or humane power above all kings, who are but Ministers of justice, and may not meddle to make Laws for God or man. God is sufficient for his Church and people, and by him Christians have learned to rule, and referre all to the Eldership, and as worthy Hooker hath it in his Preface to his Policie, that he that will not submit to a supreme Senate, or generall Synod, meanes to follow no judgement but his own. So I will say of the Doctor, and all Royalists, as the Apostle does, Rom. 3. 17. The way of peace they have not known, and therefore I joyne it with the precedent and consequent verses. Their throats are sepulchres to devoure. Their tongues are deceitfull, their lips speak poysoned words, and they fill their mouthes with curses and bitternesse. Their feet are swift to shed blood. Their wayes are nothing but miserie and destruction, and there is no fear of God before their eyes.
Hear, O heavens, and judge upon whom the guilt will lie. The King would continue the Episcopall Government according to a forged Oath, and law of his own. Must the Bishops be pardoned and protected because they have made him sweare it against Laws, take up Armes for them by his own will, and no force of Armes to repell, or repeal his personall acts? And how dispute the Malignants, the Parliament may make, revive, repeale, &c. no new Laws without personall consent; therefore they may ordain, restrain, repell, repeal, or revive no necessaries provisions of preservation for themselves and the kingdom. The Question is not now of a full legislative power to do all things that may bind at all times: but what binds for the present, and the necessitie of the time. All men know whatsoever is done by the King in the administration of justice, is to be questioned by both Houses, but no king can question them, nor never did; and seeing this Doctor will divide them, let it be so in his notion, and so much confessed that nothing can be done de jure, I meane to make, repeal, or revive Laws: yet de facto some thing must be done for the present necessitie. Nothing by the King, for in him is not the power to determine what shall be done, and it he do, it is out of his jurisdiction, and the Law saies he that obeyes any command out of its proper jurisdiction shall be punished. The Kings ordinarie jurisdiction will not reach the Question, his extraordinarie cannot be from himselfe, for then he might do all things without a Parliament: but he is bound to call it when dangers and difficulties require it, and the Law is what he cannot denie both Houses when they are called, and deale with Bils to be granted by the King, and errours he hath nothing to do with all for judgement, or punishment. The best of the Kings Judges may erre, and do wrong by witnesses, or weaknesse in themselves, and the Subject suffers and can have no remedie, but in Parliament by reason the King favours a Courtier in the injurie of a Countrey-man. This poore man complains where common compassion is, and is comforted, the King informed against him, and displeased, saies such fellows have been factious, the complaint of Bishops; seditious the complaint of Courtiers, ill members the cry of Malignants, and these men can cry unto none but God, till his immediate Law-givers heare it; having heard it, they reverse any judgement, Civill or Ecclesiasticall, that is not meerly spirituall, and referred to the keyes. They know as they have no power to excommunicate, so they undertake no mans absolution: yet the judgement of injustice executed in any Court, they can call it before them; and in a word, all erronious judgements, Royall Pattents, illegall impositions, tyrannous exactions, the removall and repressing of all publique grievances, the redressing of all wrongs, censuring Delinquents, declaring Law, punishing their own Members, &c. The Common Law and Statutes denie the King a Negative vote, to delay by his Great or Privie Seale for any moment of time any legall proceeding. Reverse, recall, controull, countermand any judgement, resolution, determination or sentence of his Judges, either by word of mouth, Proclamation, or any denunciation whatsoever.
Doctors of Divinitie would teach conscience conviction against Law and reason, as if the high Court of Parliament were more in subjection to the King, then Court Baron, or petty Sessions; and I wonder whence they fetch this wisedome, more to bind the two Houses to beat the will of the King, then other Benches, Common-Pleas, Chancery, &c. But surely to flatter the King to be free where he is most bound, to succour them where they ought most to suffer; for our Arch-prelate in his pride made Judges quake for their own quiet, and to be questioned, never dreamed whiles their dread Soveraigne was their Sanctuarie; but Hell is not more horrour to them, then the two Honourable Houses. Againe for Bills of Grace the Bishops raised themselves when the kingdome was theirs, which for the Church had almost swallowed it up, and what they hold in Commendants, Impropriations, Revenues, mens purses, divine powers, they would perswade all men of divine right that they need to do no right to any bodie, but their own bellies, that they plead for more then God: yet Bills of Grace preferred by both Houses in private profits, priviledges, favours are not obligatory merited, constrained, but freely granted when, where, and to whom the King will; but by these to say he is bound to none, and that they are of his bountie, goodnesse, grace, and meer good will is challenged by Chaplains to cheare up their hopes the King will never hurt them, but hold all Laws from the Parliament to passe against them; which he cannot do without a negative voice to wrong all men, as they have done in their prelaticall pride. Notwithstanding Bils of common right and justice to pull down their Lordships in the Lambes Hornes, Revel. 13. 7. and make them Lambe-like in the keyes, and rightly ruled about the throne of Christ, Revel. 4. 4. in the Crownes and thrones is not yet reduced to primitive purenesse, and farre from ancient order applauded by the Doctor in his last Section, and though our judgement passe not by the new Bridge, yet we cannot forsake our way with him to accuse them of the most of our miseries, or say with the Doctor, Heare, O Heavens, the guilt upon whom it lies, that the King cannot countenance or continue the Episcopall tyranny against the whole kingdome to beare the yoke and burthen of Bishops, as our times have had it; no nor yet the King and his people if the Oaths they have made of late be examined. But to let that passe, which pincheth the Doctor in his hopes to be a Bishop, which I could wish he were in his own words, of ancient and primitive times, for he is no more in love with it, then I professe my selfe to be, but cannot teach the King the libertie of his Vote to denie common Justice, and be a Tyrant. I wish him to be as he is an happie King to vote where he is bound, and not stand upon any greater power then the freedome of his own will from a right judgement, and no violent externall force to compell as free as himselfe to obey him. Such Bils are the preservation of publique peace and safetie, liberties, properties, priviledges of all subjects, the prevention, ablation, punition of all causes that cause publique or private grievances, mischiefs, wrongs, offences, frauds; the redresse of all defects or inconveniences of the Common Law, the advancing and regulating of all trades, the speedie execution of justice, the reformation of Church-men and Church abuses, their religion of Popery, Arminianisme, Ceremonie, unsound preaching, and unfitnesse to be either in the Church, or a Synode to reforme it: for if the King do it by a Convocation then most of the Offendors shall be their own Judges, against the ancient Canons and Constitutions. Let Catiline judge betweene the Senate and himself, and Tully shall be judged a Rebell, stand he never so much for the libertie of Citie and Countrey, and Catiline shall be a good Citizen, and worthy to rule the Empire with his companions. The Councell at Tyre condemned Athanasius, and 46. Bishops branded it with Eusebius and Theogius his enemies, saying, Lex Dei inimicum neq; testem, n que Judicem esse vult, God allows no man being an enemie to be witnesse or Judge of another. Athan. Apolog. 2 non arbitramur, pag. 216. Chrysostome excepts against Theophilus, Quod contra omnes Canones & Leges, &c. that against all rule and Law, he had called him into judgement, before he had answered his own crimes, Ipse reus est inimi us & kostis: He himselfe is guiltie, our adversarie and open enemie, Chrysost. ad Innocent, Papam, Epist. To. 1. Concil. post Epist. Jun. 27. Pope Nicholas the first, and Celestine the third, say, Quia suspecti & inimies, Judices esse non &illegible; &c. Common reason doth teach, that those who are ones enemies, should not be their Judges, Epist. 8. Nich. 1. Extr. de Appel. cap. 2. ipsi ratio dictat, &c. If the gravitie and integritie of the Imperiall presidents in the Councell of Chalcedon had not checked the temeritie and insolencie of the Popes Legates, it had been worse then the Ephesine Latrocinie.
In the Councell causes were heard and examined as they ought both for the accuser, and the accused, Dioscorus being set as Judge after Leo’s Legates, had lashed out with rebuke, saying, Either let Dioscorus go out, or we will depart. The Judges told them gravely, If you will be Judges, you must not prosecute as accusers. Then after passion speaking reason, Non patimur ut iste sedeat, qui judicandus advenit: Dioscorus comes to be judged, and may not judge in his own cause. An equall motion say the glorious Judges, and so Dioscorus is removed from the Bench of Bishops and placed inter reos, in the place of those who were to be judged. The religion Emperour in the second Ephesine Synod said, if Theodoret be questioned, let the Synod assemble, and iudge without him. The like he commanded concerning Flavianus, who justly judged Entiches, yet to avoid all errour, referred the accusation to &illegible; higher Councell that should have been generall above that at Constantinople, Flavianus orthodoxall, and Dioscorus an Entichian are both justly tried without their owne judgement in a most just equall, and upright Councell. Another example we have in this holy Synod well ordered by secular Judges, concerning Athanasius Bishop of Paros deposed by Domuus in a Provinciall Councell after three citations, refusing to come, and Sabianus set in his roome. Athanasius complaines in the Councell of Chalcedon, and hath nothing to say against his triall at Antioch, but that Domuus the chiefe Judge was his Enemie, and these goodly Judges presently order that Maximus Bishop of Antioch by a second Synod held with him should examine the matter, and if it proved that Domuus had done injustice as an enemie, that Sabianus should remaine substitute to Athanasius, and he be restored to his See. Thus ordered the secular Judges, and the sacred cried, Nihil iustius, Nothing more equall. I have said this that the Doctor might understand his primitive times, and the secular Judges disposed in Councels of good order, and that the Parliament meddles not too farre, the King being corrupted with his Bishops, and drawn by them into an obstinate errour to loose all before he will leave them, for so saies the Doctor in his last Section, that the King will continue their Government according to Law and Oath; and that the guilt must lie upon them that by Armes would force him from it. Its plaine the Doctor makes the Episcopacie the bloodie quarrell, and the Parliament hath found them guiltie of this ill counsell, and for Law cannot stand by the Kings pleasure, if divine they need not the Kings protection; the Parliament will not punish them for their calling, the matter in question is fact, of forgery for the Kings Oath to protect and pardon them plotting against the Parliament ever since King James came to the Crown, who began his Reigne with a false Oath, and ended it with the repeale of the Militia, which two things are now, de facto, the quarrell, whether the Bishops shall be pardoned, and protected in all their evils, and the King by a Militia of his own defend them and Papists against the Parliament. The Doctor is not so well read as to answer the justice of the cause. The King, may be, would call a Convocation, and then the Bishops shall be their own Judges. The Parliament, as the case standeth, thinks upon a more just Synod, qualified with a lawfull calling, which they will commit to the King, not in the Popish way of a Convocation, but a free Election of all it concernes, and that of orthodox Divines; which three conditions when they are rightly known, the King shall call, the people chuse, and orthodoxe Divines with the Brethren conclude it.
We know Commons were called at the first by common consent, and consisted of Pastours and people, and the chiefe Elders for order preceded in the Convocation, and the Pastours disputed, and by the holy Scriptures defined, and subscribed first, saying, I so defining and consenting subscribe, or vote, the people passed their sentence and said, I consenting subscribe or vote; and so what seemed good to the Elders and Brethren was sent to the Churches, and by pacificall subscriptions gave their consent, as if they had been present; and before Councels the Church had an excellent way of conference and confirmation of their faith, not much unlike that, Galat. 2. 2. Such presence could not be alwayes, and therefore the universall way was by letters, as the learned know, called, Letters of conference, and they were for this end as Authors say, ad exponendam sidem, and at length the Bishops being the great men sent one to another for the Pall, which is no other but sealed letters to signifie how the Church prospered in all places; and Patriarkes being the greatest men did it in behalfe of all the Churches and the Church of Rome being the seat of the Emperour was of greatest note, and so esteemed in the first generall Councell, which set it before the Church of Alexandria, and Antioch, which are onely mentioned in the Councell of Nice; and the next generall Councell addes a fourth Patriarke, and sets him next the Pope, which made Rome in pride denie that Councell, as Leo did the fourth, when the fifth came in I am not certain, I leave it to the Doctor to tell me; and tell him how the Pope did change fidem exponere, into fidem dare, for mutuall and Christian exposition of faith, into swearing and obligation, as our Bishops have dealt with us to bridle us as horses and mules without understanding to be ruled by the reason of our riders, and since we began to kick have tamed with oaths, and made themselves odious to all men to dispise them for the most unfavorie salt in the kingdome, good for nothing but the dunghill, and that which is worst they have made the Salt-peter that blows us up, if God be not mercifull to our King in the directive part to a Councell, to second it with a coactive power from his Councell to save us. The essentiall Decrees of Synods have been before Senates seconded them, and so the civill Magistrates power is but Accidentall to the Church, yet so necessarie that God in time added it to take away persecution; and yet the Bishops have used it since the ten hornes submitted to their two, that they have hurt more then the Dragon. Its therefore high time for his Majestie to awake, and consider with his Parliament the perils, Papists and Bishops have brought us into. His Majestie is made beleeve his Congr de’sliers for Bishops and all great Officers are such prerogatives as have ever gone with the person of the King, and yet nothing better known then that the Clergie and people have chosen their Bishops, and so much at this day is intimated in that instrument, and elect Privy Counsellours, State Officers, and Judges have been nominated by the Parliament, and yet without prejudice to any priviledge the King can challenge. We are all agreed of the three properties of a Synod, that Princes may call them, the people elect the Members; for if their Laws bind all, then fit all should have an hand in them; and if the multitude mistake in the Members, its free for any man to accuse Sectary or Heretique, and he is to be no Judge till he have cleared himself from all crime. The Doctor is cleare in his last Section for this assertion, that Princes in their necessarie defence may entertaine such as they would not, nay, ought not by Law, as Papists disarmed by Parliament may by him be armed against it, and not onely so but our Religion, for he is mad that will think they will fight for it. Ziba sales nothing to the point, and the Doctor lesse, when he speaks of the duty and service of Subjects, for can any man that serves the King against Law, serve as a Subject, or a Rebell? And may Kings commands his Subjects to rebell against his Laws, because they rebell not against him? Good Divinitie not onely to oppose the King and his Laws, but set him against God; for whiles he gives his power to the Beast, Rev. 17. 14. he makes war with the Lambe, better the Doctor taught him to hate the whore, v. 16.
What he saies of just authoritie to bear Arms, argues his wilfull ignorance, for can any man be armed justly against Law? His List of the Army against the King, of Papists or as bad, must make him blush; for who allows them to fight for us that are such as God hath taxed, 2. Chron. 19. 2. The ungodly are just such Idolaters as Papists are; for some worship not the true God at all, as the Nations that succeeded the ten Tribes. Some the true God alone, but in calves, as Jeroboam. Some the true God and Baal, as Ahab. Some bring with them their false gods, and for fear are forced to regard the true God; yet as Topicall, which was the sinne of all Idolaters to the captivitie, and some think to have been the infirmitie of Jonah in his flight to Tarshish, but God meets him with another lesson, Chap. 1. 9. and then he sees a larger Lord then ever he dreamed of before, and confesseth himselfe an Idolater, in observing lying vanities, which all do that forsake better mercies, Chap. 2. 8. Papists serve the true God as Ahab did, but they have their Idols with Jeroboam, and dead men and Angels with wicked Jezabel mentioned, Rev. 2. 20. And now may the Doctor be ashamed of his Papists as the ungodly, which was should neither help, or be helped by them, and to love them that hate God, sheweth our Religion to be suspected, or some affinitie that makes us fall, and a better Seer God send the King. The Arch-Angel to the Arch-Accuser, the Lord rebuke thee, may admonish the Doctor his mouth his blacker then it should be, and for a giddie age he wrongs himselfe that he sees not the gad-flee sting him to fling up his taile, and after brushing with the swip runnes as fast as the rest. The Papists may not applaud themselves in the Doctor, nor yet the Parliament. The King is put to it, to admit the Papists for his helpers, and the Parliament is the cause. Say not againe, The Lord rebuke thee, for so he does what you make just and reasonable for the King. Good Subjects may be used by the King, but Papists are good subjects; therefore the King may use them. Good Subjects transgresse not the Laws, Arme not without authoritie, oppose not the Parliament, set not one part against another, gain-say not the Parliament that cannot be dissolved, nor study to dissolve it by Armes, nor provoke the King to do it by his authoritie, which the Doctor saies is sufficient to direct any mans conscience to be satisfied, and he hath resolved it so to do, and by it may judge what a Resolver he is. The tradition of reserved power to resist, dispense with oaths, transcends the art of Jesuites in the cunning of lies and forgeries; and I bequeath the whet-stone to the Doctor that pretends Religion to a good conscience, and convinceth it with an implicite faith to be subject to the King, when he commands contrary to Law, and yet may do it by his authoritie, and the Parliament as he hath left it hath no power to maintain the Laws, to discerne them by it, to arme men to do it: but they may do neither, because the King commands the contrary. Master Burrows that began the businesse with the Doctor, must end it with his Lord of Hosts. Of the Doctors collection I will say nothing, of his conclusion he shall have enough. The Doctor puts the case how conscience can be perswaded of his intentions, or its own resolution to take up armes against him. Mr. Burrows bids him state the Question right, and not hide his falshood from the people. The sufficient cause for a people to take up Armes is the defence of themselves against ruine. The Doctor will not so admit it, except it be against the King. What is this to the purpose, but to passe away in a shadow to his own shame. He saies the King is bound by his Oath to protect his Subjects against those that seek their ruine, and can he do this without the Sword? But you will have it in your own hands against bad Counsellours, as was done in the end of the Queens time, and declared to be against her, as being without her authoritie, by the meere motion of private men.
The Doctor saies in this point the Parliament helps not, for that’s not the point. What is it then? He saies we may see it in this, our Armes are against the King, if without him we take up Armes under any pretence whatsoever. The Parliaments power and authoritie is nothing without the King; and what is the Kings without theirs? The Doctor saies the Sword is his to use without them, and all Papists may arme if he bid them, though Law forbids them, this is expresse, and may not the Parliament take up Armes to disarme them that arme against Law? Now speak Doctor, what Law forbids? The will of the King? then that’s authoritie enough against the Parliament. The King denies to deliver us from the danger of armed Papists and Malignants, and that’s cause enough for people and Parliament to satisfie their consciences they may take up Armes to protect themselves. To this the Doctor saies, he did it not till people and Parliament put themselves out of his protection: God blesse us, if the King may thus be pleaded for The people petition the Parliament to be protected by some Militia, King James in his last Parliament having repealed all Laws made for it, and there might be reason for the Lords and Commons to consent unto it, and their present peace not urge them to a present remedie, but Commissions appointed by the King and his Privy Councell made the people groan under the Burthen; and this Parliament prayed they might be restored to their ancient liberties, and have things done for warre by common consent as formerly. Besides dangers were great, and to prevent them the King by ill counsell produced them, as with Scotland, by the Bishops to disturbe them in their Government, and settle their own tyranny amongst them, which the Scots resisted, and the English were forced to an Army by the meere pleasure of the King and his Bishops. The Scots gained their end, and were discharged as good Subjects, and shewed it by disbanding as soone as they were satisfied in their right, to continue in their ancient liberties. This happie peace was made by the Parliament, which now with the King cannot make the peoples peace, except he may have the power, as the Doctor teacheth to do what he will; for he hath denied them the Militia, and made it his own, and armes whom he will against Law, and by arms protects Delinquents, and they bid battell to his people, calling them Rebels, because they will not do as the Papists do take up Armes against Law, but by it arme against them that do. A pettie Constable may arme any Towne to resist a Riot, and he that will not assist, shall be foundly punished for it. The Sheriffe of the shire may raise the Countie to take Felons, and destroy Rebels, and all this by the Law, though the King should command the contrary; and shall the Parliament be prevented by a frivolous Doctor to withstand Armies raised against Law, and made to be Law, because the King commands against it? Once more good night blind Doctor, God send thee a better morning, and so I return to the Prophet again, and his foure Burthens. The valley of vision, the Church of God suffers, and it is by the Caldean, and shall he escape? Mark Doctor in hope of the morning, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, and all the graven Images of her gods are broken down to the ground, Isa. 21. 9. O my threshing, and the corn of my stoore, v. 10. Thrash clean for God and send away all the Romane chaffe out of our kingdome; and if the Edomites will heare. I will tell them of their morning and mirth, ver. 12. Rev. 11. 10. but of the night also. v. 13.
&illegible; rejoycing shall be the Cities ruine, and that tenth part that stands shall fall; and if any fear the judgement, let me direct him to three duties. First, inquisition, enquire for the good way. Secondly, conversion, return from errour. Thirdly, accession, and come to the Lord. Thine heart shall meditate terrour, Isa. 33. 18. Such is our time, and such must be our teaching. The terrour is warre, the meditation prayer, the fountain a good heart, and that’s in a good man, and this good man I take to be Hezekiah terrified with Sennacherib, and comforted by God, the feare of the Lord is his treasure, yet 6. A noise of a tumult shall be to the wicked when God lifts up his hand, v. 3. His Enemies suffered as caterpillars shall eat up all and fall themselves and perish &illegible; &illegible; The locusts shall leap in after them, and &illegible; to and fro &illegible; they be taken, &illegible; 4. First, they run in upon Sennacherib, and spoile him as he spoiled others, and the Caldæans come to their end, and so shall all enemies, that have the receivers of other mens goods, and Scribes to take their names they meane to spoyle, and he that counts the Towers for his own shall go without them; and St. Paul makes the generall use, that God makes foolish the wisedome of this world, 1. Cor. 1. 20. O thou sword of the Lord, how long will it be ere thou be quiet? Put up thy selfe into thy scabbard, rest and be still. How can it be quiet, seeing the Lord hath given a charge against Ashkelon, and against the Sea shore? there hath he protested it. Jer. 47. 6, 7. Pharaoh give the Philistines a faire warning, and the Caldean makes an end of both, and Judah for trusting in Pharaoh is punished with him; and the Philistines for rejoycing at Sions sorrows, suffers by the same hand; and the sword is the Lords, whosoever lift it up, yet flesh and blood, saies, How long Lord shall it be, and determines without the text. It cannot be quiet, as long as God chargeth it, and as the last words shews it, sweares the sword not to returne emptie till as a Judge it hath gone the full circuit: and the cause with us is laid down, Levit. 26. 25. Revel. 6. 2, 3, 4. the white horse comes to fetch &illegible; in to Jesus Christ, and that red Horse follows to revenge our disobedience; and if the report be true, our bloody battell at Edge-Hill sheweth our blasphemie, and may well for this be called, the valley of the red Horse, and if any Records have named it so before, the thing deserves the more to be noted. And now I have done with the Doctor, onely I must tell him of one Booke more then the rest, bearing the title of Scripture and reason pleaded for Defensive Armes. It is against him as well as the rest, and more fully then any other, stating the Question so as we may see both the negative and affirmative. The negative by the Doctor, the affirmative by learned Divines; and the Doctor is much too blame, to think the people are led by blind guides.
He shall find this book to deale truly with the texts, which he takes clearly from the Doctor, and I think they that follow him mightily blind that conceive so well of the Doctor, as to think he hath sufficiently satisfied their consciences, when he hath lost the foundation of all his labour; and to speak plainly the Resolver of conscience is not cleare in his own, for he trembles to leave the King out of all his discourse, and so states the Question, Whether if the King will not discharge his trust, but is bent or seduced to subvert Religion, Laws, and liberties, Subjects may take up Armes and resist. This last book I have seene takes the first word King, and in it containes the full power of a kingdome, co-ordinate or subordinate. Co-ordinate as the Parliament, and this is not onely supreme, but vertually the whole power, and Gods ordinance, and to it subjection is due by every person, not one excepted, and if that be the duty, then resistance is the sinne, which three things must be adequate and reciprocall. The power being of God must be legall, which no tyranny is, and therefore not of God; and that which is not of God, is not to be obeyed either actively or passively. Now if power and subjection be equall, then my obedience cannot be of God to that power which is not of God. When the Doctor hath proved tyrannie to be of God, then he hath proved to the conscience that it must be obeyed. Resistance is the sinne, and being opposite to subjection, is no sinne where subjection is not required; and subjection is not required, where Gods ordinance is not. And therefore suppose the power of a Parliament to be tyranny, the text enjoynes me no subjection unto it, and then to resist it is no sinne. I confesse the Co-ordinatour saies the contrary, but both overthrow the Doctor, and the Divines in the last book must be limited to judgement in the meanes against rash attempts in resistance, for Resistance not legall may be against legall power, and then it is not the subversion of Religion, Laws, liberties, but their establishment, and the opposition is flat rebellion. A subordinate power sets the King for the supreme, yet the other powers joyned with it, are higher also in relation to the people, though inferiour to the supreme, and the Apostle meanes both alike as powers ordained of God, and subjection alike as duty to all, and resistance will be the same sinne to the Officer that is to the King. All the care is in resistance that the King be safe, and for the rest it seemes by the Doctor all men may knock them on the head, and starve them. The Doctor will be hard driven by this consideration. The King is supreme, all his Officers subordinate. The King commands them to kill his Subjects for serving of God, obeying the Laws, defending their liberties, and these as murtherers, theeves, cut-throats, &c. come upon them, what shall they do? resist, or stand like sheepe till such wolves devoure them all? If he say, let the King be in securitie, and then no matter if such rogues perish, for they are not Officers of State, but offendours as Rebels and Traytors, and ought by the Laws of the kingdome to die. If the Doctor grant this, all is granted, that tyrannie may be resisted: and the King to secure all his people saies enough, if he would suffer it to be done. The power which is legally placed in both Houses, is more then sufficient to prevent and restraine the power of tyranny. This would be as the Laws are the Kings and kingdomes securitie, for the fifth booke against the Doctor saies well, Kings have seldome or never been murthered or deposed, where Laws have been preserved in their vigour: but violences are vain helps, and Papists pacified by sparing, spare not when Laws are sharpened against them. Judicia committuntur injustis Leges ex legibus, pax discordantibus, Justitia injuriosis, &c. Matthew Paris, Hist. Angl. 371. When the lawlesse give us laws we loose all, and our lives are to the Kings Souldiers no more then Turks. Seneca de Clem. lib. 1. ca. 24. gives Princes the best precept, Remissius imperanti melius paretur, & non minus principi turpia sunt multa supplicia, quam medico multa funera. But we were happy dead, then live as they that desired it, and yet had death flee from them, Revel. 9. 5. 6.
THere is a terrible Commination, Jer. 13. 12, 13, 14. arising from Wine in every bottle, till it burst or breake, and it begins with the King, then the Priests and Prophets, and lastly the people, and in their drunkennesse they dash one upon another. Fathers and children, and the proud will not heare, nor give him glory that calls for it, and he causeth darknesse, that they may stumble upon the very mountains of their pride, and where they look for light, the shadow of death is upon them, and they perish in grosse darknesse, Say unto the King, and to the Queene, humble your selves, for your principalities, and even the crowne of your glory shall come down. Beware of being accustomed to evill, ver. 23. for the skin changeth not, neither will the spots alter that are naturall. Our Nationall sinnes are many, and Divines are the most dangerous, and like the steele and the flint wast themselves to strike fire, which is the onely issue of contentious wits. The Dragon sucks the Elephants bloud, and is killed with his fall, Morte cadunt subito per mutua vulnera fratres, wee call that civill which is most barbarous. The Turkes prayers are to God to keepe Christians at variance, and when one perswaded their Grandee from warre with the Germanes being many, he answered he feared them not, affirming his singers would sooner be all of one length, then their Princes of one mind. You shall finde six of us seemingly to be of six minds, and the Doctor is upon us all, as having listed himselfe for Cæsar, not knowing who he is. And being in the field in his Armes would have all men cast downe their weapons in conscience to his command, and by Gods word urgeth it, Rom. 13, 1, 2. A plaine case rightly stated, that all powers of God must be obeyed from the King to the Constable, when they are regular, and not crosse one to another, for God ordains no more contrary powers, then contrary beginnings, which made the Manichees hold a good and bad God, the one to begin evill and the other good: So the Doctor looking upon contrary powers, and loath to be a Manichee, makes them both of God, and so is very strong for obedience. God bids us resist the Devill, why should wee his power is of God? This must be a good argument, or powers must be resisted when they are not of God; but the Text sayes there is no power but of God. The first that ever writ against him was Master Burrowes, who distinguished rightly between the power, and the abuse of it. The Doctor claps both together, and sayes we must be subject to both, and the Scripture is silent in such a distinction, which is not true, Hes. 5. 11. that which God punisheth is no part of his will. But the Doctor will distinguish by the word willingly, and walking after the Commandement. This is meant of active obedience to sinne, but passively he may obey sinne. I wonder who taught him this distinction to obey sinne at all. The body is but a passive instrument to the soule, as the Serpent was to the Devill, and yet God spared neither, and as the body dyes the second death by the soule, so the soule dyes the first death by the body, and sinne casts them both from God. So then no subjection to sinne is warrantable. What then must it be to the punish of sinne? This is to suffer penaltie, and penaltie must be from the Law, and the Lawes of men are onely civill, and may concerne matters of Religion contained in the first Table, but the whole power of it is meerely in the Second Table, and as wee must by that give Cæsar his due, so by the other God requires what is due to him without mans inventions. Our Bishops have imposed many things upon weake consciences, and by a civill power have forced subjection, and many have denied them an active obedience, as having nothing to doe to charge upon them such a Religion, as Gods word allowes not: yet in respect of the civill Magistrate, and Law established, have made no resistance, but suffered the penaltie of the Law. But where there is no Law neither divine nor humane, but the meere will and pleasure of a man, and that against all Law, and the power that makes it in Parliament, to plead subjection, Master Burrowes hath beaten downe the Doctor, if never pen besides it had put hand to paper, but the fuller Answer hath handled him in another kinde, the Doctor never dreamed of in behalfe of the Parliament, and the Doctor is not ashamed of Alèquid, and secundum quid, where the truth is universall, for three Estates are co-ordènate ad omnia, and being once met the supreme power is in them all united not divided; for the Doctor is not well advised to make the two Houses two Estates, for so they were never constituted in this Kingdome, for such as the whole bodie is dispersed, so is it congregated, and wee say the Parliament, is totus populus, totum regnum, both before, in, and after the co-alition. Wee can make no more of it at any time in the matter, then the King, Lords, and common people, and they are so in the highest forme when they come together, and to speake of a Parliament otherwise then entire of three Estates, is but to æquivocate with words as Vertumnus Romanus does, and that which some call Protestant Religion; But wee speake without equivocation, the two Houses or a perfect Parliament, of three Estates, and the King cannot be out of them, and for his person and all the persons with him of either House, have not destroyed the co-ordination, which is such as to save the Kingdome they may doe any thing, and if they want any officers of the State necessary for use they may create them till his Majesty returne, and Mr. Bridges comes in with the co-ordinatour to an haire, onely they differ in the right which is easily reconciled, that selfe-preservation is naturall, & co-ordination nationall, and the fundamentall policie of this Kingdome, and both together make strongly for the peoples preservation, if the Doctor made them not blocks to beleeve him. As for the Deposer and the restrainer of a tyrant, they are not so contrary, but reason may reconcile them, for goe to the Law and nothing can be shewed to the contrary, and neither Aristotle nor any but the Divine have questioned the deposing of tyrants, & Popish Bishops and Barons have made no bones of it, though now for selfe-love they would be the best Protestats, but the present Parliamet hath best determined of it from the Kings own words that tyranny may be restrained, and I think the reverend and learned Divines that writ last by resistance meane no more, and both Houses have plainly peatested it that their thoughts were never to depose the King, and the whole kingdome may curse the Doctor for resolving conscience not to resist, and yet against all &illegible; powers hath resolved they may be resisted in subjection to a King, nay, to &illegible; and the King may curse him and all his ill Counsellers to draw him from his Parliament into so many dangers. Ad hoc corripit ut emendet, ad hoc emendet &illegible; serves: the Aloes that purge us with bitternesse, bring us to the breasts of the Lord Jesus to sweeten our sorrows. Justitiæ gladium oleo misericordiæ semper &illegible; God whets with oyle, and mingles mercie with justice; He makes the &illegible; to &illegible; with the mightie, Isa. 41. 14, 15. Souldiers we may be and Saints: &illegible; &illegible; nos vobiscum & militamus, & rusticamur, & mercamur, the best worthies in the world, can warre and plough, be Merchants and Mariners: yet mercifull men to mother Cities, as Joah was wished to be to Abel, 2. Sam. 20. 19, 20. He was a &illegible; Commander that told his Souldiers, when he payed for what he took, having taken the place by force, and his traine told him the money was lost, Sirs I do what in vigor, God put me not into this world to live upon rapine. To conclude, I shall commend a Divines saying to the Doctor. Legi possunt Scripturæ & tamen negligi, &illegible; not neglects of Gods blessed Book will satisfie conscience best; and I know more may still be said, and that God that is at hand moderate our minde with his truth, and send us peace in our miseries. Amev.
FINIS.
T.265 John Milton, The Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce (1 August, 1643).↩
This Text is available elsewhere in the OLL Collection
Milton's Prose Works, vol. 1, pp. 192-256. [elsewhere in OLL]
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date
OLL Thumbs TP Image
Local JPEG TP Image

Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.265 [1643.08.01] John Milton, The Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce (August, 1643).
Full titleThe Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce restor'd to the good of both sexes from the bondage of Canon Law. [By John Milton.] Printed by T. P. and M. S.
Estimated date of publication1 August, 1643
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 277. E. 62. (17.).
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
(insert text of pamphlet here)
THE DOCTRINE AND DISCIPLINE OF DIVORCE;
RESTORED TO THE GOOD OF BOTH SEXES, FROM THE BONDAGE OF CANON LAW, AND OTHER MISTAKES, TO THE TRUE MEANING OF SCRIPTURE IN THE LAW AND GOSPEL COMPARED. WHEREIN ALSO ARE SET DOWN THE BAD CONSEQUENCES OF ABOLISHING, OR CONDEMNING AS SIN, THAT WHICH THE LAW OF GOD ALLOWS, AND CHRIST ABOLISHED NOT.
Matth. xiii. 52. “Every scribe instructed in the kingdom of heaven is like the master of a house, which bringeth out of his treasury things new and old.”
Prov. xviii. 13. “He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.”
[FIRST PUBLISHED 1643, 1644.]
TO THE PARLIAMENT OF ENGLAND, WITH THE ASSEMBLY.
If it were seriously asked, (and it would be no untimely question,) renowned parliament, select assembly! who of all teachers and masters, that have ever taught, hath drawn the most disciples after him, both in religion and in manners? it might be not untruly answered, Custom. Though virtue be commended for the most persuasive in her theory, and conscience in the plain demonstration of the spirit finds most evincing; yet whether it be the secret of divine will, or the original blindness we are born in, so it happens for the most part, that custom still is silently received for the best instructor. Except it be, because her method is so glib and easy, in some Edition: current; Page: [193] manner like to that vision of Ezekiel rolling up her sudden book of implicit knowledge, for him that will to take and swallow down at pleasure; which proving but of bad nourishment in the concoction, as it was heedless in the devouring, puffs up unhealthily a certain big face of pretended learning, mistaken among credulous men for the wholesome habit of soundness and good constitution, but is indeed no other than that swoln visage of counterfeit knowledge and literature, which not only in private mars our education, but also in public is the common climber into every chair, where either religion is preached, or law reported: filling each estate of life and profession with abject and servile principles, depressing the high and heaven-born spirit of man, far beneath the condition wherein either God created him, or sin hath sunk him. To pursue the allegory, custom being but a mere face, as echo is a mere voice, rests not in her unaccomplishment, until by secret inclination she accorporate herself with error, who being a blind and serpentine body without a head, willingly accepts what he wants, and supplies what her incompleteness went seeking. Hence it is, that error supports custom, custom countenances error: and these two between them would persecute and chase away all truth and solid wisdom out of human life, were it not that God, rather than man, once in many ages calls together the prudent and religious counsels of men, deputed to repress the encroachments, and to work off the inveterate blots and obscurities wrought upon our minds by the subtle insinuating of error and custom; who, with the numerous and vulgar train of their followers, make it their chief design to envy and cry down the industry of free reasoning, under the terms of humour and innovation; as if the womb of teeming truth were to be closed up, if she presume to bring forth aught that sorts not with their unchewed notions and suppositions. Against which notorious injury and abuse of man’s free soul, to testify and oppose the utmost that study and true labour can attain, heretofore the incitement of men reputed grave hath led me among others; and now the duty and the right of an instructed Christian calls me through the chance of good or evil report, to be the sole advocate of a discountenanced truth: a high enterprise, lords and commons! a high enterprise and a hard, and such as every seventh son of a seventh son does not venture on. Nor have I amidst the clamour of so much envy and impertinence whither to appeal, but to the concourse of so much piety and wisdom here assembled. Bringing in my hands an ancient and most necessary, most charitable, and yet most injured statute of Moses; not repealed ever by him who only had the authority, but thrown aside with much inconsiderate neglect, under the rubbish of canonical ignorance; as once the whole law was by some such like conveyance in Josiah’s time. And he who shall endeavour the amendment of any old neglected grievance in church or state, or in the daily course of life, if he be gifted with abilities of mind, that may raise him to so high an undertaking, I grant he hath already much whereof not to repent him; yet let me aread him, not to be the foreman of any misjudged opinion, unless his resolutions be firmly seated in a square and constant mind, not conscious to itself of any deserved blame, and regardless of ungrounded suspicions. For this let him be sure, he shall be boarded presently by the ruder sort, but not by discreet and well-nurtured men, with a thousand idle descants and surmises. Who when they cannot confute the least joint or sinew of any passage in the book; yet God forbid that truth should be truth, because they have a boisterous conceit of some pretences in the writer.
But were they not more busy and inquisitive than the apostle commends, they would hear him at least, “rejoicing so the truth be preached, whether Edition: current; Page: [194] of envy or other pretence whatsoever:” for truth is as impossible to be soiled by any outward touch, as the sunbeam; though this ill hap wait on her nativity, that she never comes into the world, but like a bastard, to the ignominy of him that brought her forth; till time, the midwife rather than the mother of truth, have washed and salted the infant, declared her legitimate, and churched the father of his young Minerva, from the needless causes of his purgation. Yourselves can best witness this, worthy patriots! and better will, no doubt, hereafter: for who among ye of the foremost that have travailed in her behalf to the good of church or state, hath not been often traduced to be the agent of his own by-ends, under pretext of reformation? So much the more I shall not be unjust to hope, that however infamy or envy may work in other men to do her fretful will against this discourse, yet that the experience of your own uprightness misinterpreted will put ye in mind, to give it free audience and generous construction. What though the brood of Belial the draff of men, to whom no liberty is pleasing, but unbridled and vagabond lust without pale or partition, will laugh broad perhaps, to see so great a strength of Scripture mustering up in favour, as they suppose, of their debaucheries; they will know better when the shall hence learn, that honest liberty is the greatest foe to dishonest license. And what though others, out of a waterish and queasy conscience, because ever crazy and never yet sound, will rail and fancy to themselves that injury and license is the best of this book? Did not the distemper of their own stomachs affect them with a dizzy megrim, they would soon tie up their tongues and discern themselves like that Assyrian blasphemer, all this while reproaching not man, but the Almighty, the Holy One of Israel, whom they do not deny to have belawgiven his own sacred people with this very allowance, which they now call injury and license, and dare cry shame on, and will do yet a while, till they get a little cordial sobriety to settle their qualming zeal. But this question concerns not us perhaps: indeed man’s disposition, though prone to search after vain curiosities, yet when points of difficulty are to be discussed, appertaining to the removal of unreasonable wrong and burden from the perplexed life of our brother, it is incredible how cold, how dull, and far from all fellow-feeling we are, without the spur of self-concernment. Yet if the wisdom, the justice, the purity of God be to be cleared from foulest imputations, which are not yet avoided; if charity be not to be degraded and trodden down under a civil ordinance; if matrimony be not to be advanced like that exalted perdition written of to the Thessalonians, “above all that is called God,” or goodness, nay against them both; then I dare affirm, there will be found in the contents of this book that which may concern us all. You it concerns chiefly, worthies in parliament! on whom, as on our deliverers, all our grievances and cares, by the merit of your eminence and fortitude, are devolved. Me it concerns next, having with much labour and faithful diligence first found out, or at least with a fearless and communicative candour first published to the manifest good of Christendom, that which, calling to witness every thing mortal and immortal, I believe unfeignedly to be true. Let not other men think their conscience bound to search continually after truth, to pray for enlightening from above, to publish what they think they have so obtained, and debar me from conceiving myself tied by the same duties. Ye have now, doubtless, by the favour and appointment of God, ye have now in your hands a great and populous nation to reform; from what corruption, what blindness in religion, ye know well; in what a degenerate and fallen spirit from the apprehension of native liberty, and true manliness, I am sure ye find; with what unbounded license rushing to whoredoms and Edition: current; Page: [195] adulteries, needs not long inquiry: insomuch that the fears, which men have of too strict a discipline, perhaps exceed the hopes that can be in others, of ever introducing it with any great success. What if I should tell ye now of dispensations and indulgences, to give a little the reins, to let them play and nibble with the bait a while; a people as hard of heart as that Egyptian colony that went to Canaan. This is the common doctrine that adulterous and injurious divorces were not connived only, but with eye open allowed of old for hardness of heart. But that opinion, I trust, by then this following argument hath been well read, will be left for one of the mysteries of an indulgent Antichrist, to farm out incest by, and those his other tributary pollutions. What middle way can be taken then, may some interrupt, if we must neither turn to the right, nor to the left, and that the people hate to be reformed? Mark then, judges and lawgivers, and ye whose office it is to be our teachers, for I will utter now a doctrine, if ever any other, though neglected or not understood, yet of great and powerful importance to the governing of mankind. He who wisely would restrain the reasonable soul of man within due bounds, must first himself know perfectly, how far the territory and dominion extends of just and honest liberty. As little must he offer to bind that which God hath loosened, as to loosen that which he hath bound. The ignorance and mistake of this high point hath heaped up one huge half of all the misery that hath been since Adam. In the gospel we shall read a supercilious crew of masters, whose holiness, or rather whose evil eye, grieving that God should be so facile to man, was to set straiter limits to obedience, than God hath set, to enslave the dignity of man, to put a garrison upon his neck of empty and over-dignified precepts: and we shall read our Saviour never more grieved and troubled, than to meet with such a peevish madness among men against their own freedom. How can we expect him to be less offended with us, when much of the same folly shall be found yet remaining where it least ought, to the perishing of thousands? The greatest burden in the world is superstition, not only of ceremonies in the church, but of imaginary and scarecrow sins at home. What greater weakening, what more subtle stratagem against our Christian warfare, when besides the gross body of real transgressions to encounter, we shall be terrified by a vain and shadowy menacing of faults that are not? When things indifferent shall be set to overfront us under the banners of sin, what wonder if we be routed, and by this art of our adversary, fall into the subjection of worst and deadliest offences? The superstition of the papist is, “touch not, taste not,” when God bids both; and ours is, “part not, separate not,” when God and charity both permits and commands. “Let all your things be done with charity,” saith St. Paul; and his master saith, “She is the fulfilling of the law.” Yet now a civil, an indifferent, a sometime dissuaded law of marriage, must be forced upon us to fulfil, not only without charity but against her. No place in heaven or earth, except hell, where charity may not enter: yet marriage, the ordinance of our solace and contentment, the remedy of our loneliness, will not admit now either of charity or mercy, to come in and mediate, or pacify the fierceness of this gentle ordinance, the unremedied loneliness of this remedy. Advise ye well, supreme senate, if charity be thus excluded and expulsed, how ye will defend the untainted honour of your own actions and proceedings. He who marries, intends as little to conspire his own ruin, as he that swears allegiance: and as a whole people is in proportion to an ill government, so is one man to an ill marriage. If they, against any authority, covenant, or statute, may by the sovereign edict of charity, save not only their lives but honest liberties from unworthy bondage, as well may he against any private Edition: current; Page: [196] covenant, which he never entered to his mischief, redeem himself from unsupportable disturbances to honest peace, and just contentment. And much the rather, for that to resist the highest magistrate though tyrannizing, God never gave us express allowance, only he gave us reason, charity, nature, and good example to bear us out; but in this economical misfortune thus to demean ourselves, besides the warrant of those four great directors, which doth as justly belong hither, we have an express law of God, and such a law, as whereof our Saviour with a solemn threat forbid the abrogating. For no effect of tyranny can sit more heavy on the commonwealth, than this household unhappiness on the family. And farewell all hope of true reformation in the state, while such an evil as this lies undiscerned or unregarded in the house: on the redress whereof depends not only the spiritful and orderly life of our own grown men, but the willing and careful education of our children. Let this therefore be now examined, this tenure and freehold of mankind, this native and domestic charter given us by a greater lord than that Saxon king the confessor. Let the statutes of God be turned over, be scanned anew, and considered not altogether by the narrow intellectuals of quotationists and common places, but (as was the ancient right of councils) by men of what liberal profession soever, of eminent spirit and breeding, joined with a diffuse and various knowledge of divine and human things; able to balance and define good and evil, right and wrong, throughout every state of life; able to show us the ways of the Lord straight and faithful as they are, not full of cranks and contradictions, and pitfalling dispenses, but with divine insight and benignity measured out to the proportion of each mind and spirit, each temper and disposition created so different each from other, and yet by the skill of wise conducting, all to become uniform in virtue. To expedite these knots, were worthy a learned and memorable synod; while our enemies expect to see the expectation of the church tired out with dependencies, and independencies, how they will compound, and in what calends. Doubt not, worthy senators! to vindicate the sacred honour and judgment of Moses your predecessor, from the shallow commenting of scholastics and canonists. Doubt not after him to reach out your steady hands to the misinformed and wearied life of man; to restore this his lost heritage, into the household state; wherewith be sure that peace and love, the best subsistence of a Christian family, will return home from whence they are now banished; places of prostitution will be less haunted, the neighbour’s bed less attempted, the yoke of prudent and manly discipline will be generally submitted to; sober and well ordered living will soon spring up in the commonwealth. Yet have an author great beyond exception, Moses; and one yet greater, he who hedged in from abolishing every smallest jot and title of precious equity contained in that law, with a more accurate and lasting Masoreth, than either the synagogue of Ezra or the Galilæan school at Tiberias hath left us. Whatever else ye can enact, will scarce concern a third part of the British name: but the benefit and good of this your magnanimous example, will easily spread far beyond the banks of Tweed and the Norman isles. It would not be the first or second time, since our ancient druids, by whom this island was the cathedral of philosophy to France, left off their pagan rites, that England hath had this honour vouchsafed from heaven, to give out reformation to the world. Who was it but our English Constantine that baptized the Roman empire? Who but the Northumbrian Willibrode, and Winifride of Devon, with their followers, were the first apostles of Germany? Who but Alcuin and Wickliff our countrymen opened the eyes of Europe, the one in arts, the other in religion? Let not England forget her precedence of teaching nations how to live.
Edition: current; Page: [197]Know, worthies; and exercise the privilege of your honoured country. A greater title I here bring ye, than is either in the power or in the policy of Rome to give her monarchs; this glorious act will style ye the defenders of charity. Nor is this yet the highest inscription that will adorn so religious and so holy a defence as this: behold here the pure and sacred law of God, and his yet purer and more sacred name, offering themselves to you, first of all Christian reformers to be acquitted from the long-suffered ungodly attribute of patronizing adultery. Defer not to wipe off instantly these imputative blurs and stains cast by rude fancies upon the throne and beauty itself of inviolable holiness: lest some other people more devout and wise than we bereave us this offered immortal glory, our wonted prerogative, of being the first asserters in every great vindication. For me, as far as my part leads me, I have already my greatest gain, assurance and inward satisfaction to have done in this nothing unworthy of an honest life, and studies well employed. With what event, among the wise and right understanding handful of men, I am secure. But how among the drove of custom and prejudiced this will be relished by such whose capacity, since their youth run ahead into the easy creek of a system or a medulla, sails there at will under the blown physiognomy of their unlaboured rudiments; for them, what their taste will be, I have also surety sufficient, from the entire league that hath ever been between formal ignorance and grave obstinacy. Yet when I remember the little that our Saviour could prevail about this doctrine of charity against the crabbed textuists of his time, I make no wonder, but rest confident, that whoso prefers either matrimony or other ordinance before the good of man and the plain exigence of charity, let him profess papist, or protestant, or what he will, he is no better than a Pharisee, and understands not the gospel: whom as a misinterpreter of Christ I openly protest against; and provoke him to the trial of this truth before all the world: and let him bethink him withal how he will sodder up the shifting flaws of his ungirt permissions, his venial and unvenial dispenses, wherewith the law of God pardoning and unpardoning hath been shamefully branded for want of heed in glossing, to have eluded and baffled out all faith and chastity from the marriage-bed of that holy seed, with politic and judicial adulteries. I seek not to seduce the simple and illiterate: my errand is to find out the choicest and the learnedest, who have this high gift of wisdom to answer solidly, or to be convinced. I crave it from the piety, the learning, and the prudence which is housed in this place. It might perhaps more fitly have been written in another tongue: and I had done so, but that the esteem I have of my country’s judgment, and the love I bear to my native language to serve it first with what I endeavour, made me speak it thus, ere I assay the verdict of outlandish readers. And perhaps also here I might have ended nameless, but that the address of these lines chiefly to the parliament of England might have seemed ingrateful not to acknowledge by whose religious care, unwearied watchfulness, courageous and heroic resolutions, I enjoy the peace and studious leisure to remain,
The Honourer and Attendant of their noble Worth and Virtues,
BOOK I.
THE PREFACE.
That man is the occasion of his own miseries in most of those evils which he imputes to God’s inflicting. The absurdity of our canonists in their decrees about divorce. The Christian imperial laws framed with more equity. The opinion of Hugo Grotius and Paulus Fagius: And the purpose in general of this discourse.
Many men, whether it be their fate or fond opinion, easily persuade themselves, if God would but be pleased a while to withdraw his just punishments from us, and to restrain what power either the devil or any earthly enemy hath to work us wo, that then man’s nature would find immediate rest and releasement from all evils. But verily they who think so, if they be such as have a mind large enough to take into their thoughts a general survey of human things, would soon prove themselves in that opinion far deceived. For though it were granted us by divine indulgence to be exempt from all that can be harmful to us from without, yet the perverseness of our folly is so bent, that we should never lin hammering out of our own hearts, as it were out of a flint, the seeds and sparkles of new misery to ourselves, till all were in a blaze again. And no marvel if out of our own hearts, for they are evil; but even out of those things which God meant us, either for a principal good, or a pure contentment, we are still hatching and contriving upon ourselves matter of continual sorrow and perplexity. What greater good to man than that revealed rule, whereby God vouchsafes to show us how he would be worshipped? And yet that not rightly understood became the cause, that once a famous man in Israel could not but oblige his conscience to be the sacrificer; or if not, the jailer of his innocent and only daughter: and was the cause ofttimes that armies of valiant men have given up their throats to a heathenish enemy on the sabbath day; fondly thinking their defensive resistance to be as then a work unlawful. What thing more instituted to the solace and delight of man than marriage? And yet the misinterpreting of some scripture, directed mainly against the abusers of the law for divorce given by Moses, hath changed the blessing of matrimony not seldom into a familiar and coinhabiting mischief; at least into a drooping and disconsolate household captivity, without refuge or redemption. So ungoverned and so wild a race doth superstition run us, from one extreme of abused liberty into the other of unmerciful restraint. For although God in the first ordaining of marriage taught us to what end he did it, in words expressly implying the apt and cheerful conversation of man with woman, to comfort and refresh him Edition: current; Page: [199] against the evil of solitary life, not mentioning the purpose of generation till afterwards, as being but a secondary end in dignity, though not in necessity: yet now, if any two be but once handed in the church, and have tasted in any sort the nuptial bed, let them find themselves never so mistaken in their dispositions through any error, concealment, or misadventure, that through their different tempers, thoughts, and constitutions, they can neither be to one another a remedy against loneliness, nor live in any union or contentment all their days; yet they shall, so they be but found suitably weaponed to the least possibility of sensual enjoyment, be made, spite of antipathy, to fadge together, and combine as they may to their unspeakable wearisomeness, and despair of all sociable delight in the ordinance which God established to that very end. What a calamity is this, and as the wise man, if he were alive, would sigh out in his own phrase, what a “sore evil is this under the sun!” All which we can refer justly to no other author than the canon law and her adherents, not consulting with charity, the interpreter and guide of our faith, but resting in the mere element of the text; doubtless by the policy of the devil to make that gracious ordinance become unsupportable, that what with men not daring to venture upon wedlock, and what with men wearied out of it, all inordinate license might abound. It was for many ages that marriage lay in disgrace with most of the ancient doctors, as a work of the flesh, almost a defilement, wholly denied to priests, and the second time dissuaded to all, as he that reads Tertullian or Jerom may see at large. Afterwards it was thought so sacramental, that no adultery or desertion could dissolve it; and this is the sense of our canon courts in England to this day, but in no other reformed church else: yet there remains in them also a burden on it as heavy as the other two were disgraceful or superstitious, and of as much iniquity, crossing a law not only written by Moses, but charactered in us by nature, of more antiquity and deeper ground than marriage itself; which law is to force nothing against the faultless proprieties of nature, yet that this may be colourably done, our Saviour’s words touching divorce are as it were congealed into a stony rigour, inconsistent both with his doctrine and his office; and that which he preached only to the conscience is by canonical tyranny snatched into the compulsive censure of a judicial court; where laws are imposed even against the venerable and secret power of nature’s impression, to love, whatever cause be found to loath: which is a heinous barbarism both against the honour of marriage, the dignity of man and his soul, the goodness of Christianity, and all the human respects of civility. Notwithstanding that some the wisest and gravest among the Christian emperors, who had about them, to consult with, those of the fathers then living, who for their learning and holiness of life are still with us in great renown, have made their statutes and edicts concerning this debate far more easy and relenting in many necessary cases, wherein the canon is inflexible. And Hugo Grotius, a man of these times, one of the best learned, seems not obscurely to adhere in his persuasion to the equity of those imperial decrees, in his notes upon the Evangelist; much allaying the outward roughness of the text, which hath for the most part been too immoderately expounded; and excites the diligence of others to inquire further into this question, as containing many points that have not yet been explained. Which ever likely to remain intricate and hopeless upon the suppositions commonly stuck to, the authority of Paulus Fagius, one so learned and so eminent in England once, if it might persuade, would straight acquaint us with a solution of these differences no less prudent than compendious. He, in his comment on the Pentateuch, doubted not to maintain that divorces Edition: current; Page: [200] might be as lawfully permitted by the magistrate to Christians, as they were to the Jews. But because he is but brief, and these things of great consequence not to be kept obscure, I shall conceive it nothing above my duty, either for the difficulty or the censure that may pass thereon, to communicate such thoughts as I also have had, and do offer them now in this general labour of reformation to the candid view both of church and magistrate: especially because I see it the hope of good men, that those irregular and unspiritual courts have spun their utmost date in this land, and some better course must now be constituted. This therefore shall be the task and period of this discourse to prove, first, that other reasons of divorce, besides adultery, were by the law of Moses, and are yet to be allowed by the Christian magistrate as a piece of justice, and that the words of Christ are not hereby contraried. Next, that to prohibit absolutely any divorce whatsoever, except those which Moses excepted, is against the reason of law, as in due place I shall show out of Fagius with many additions. He therefore who by adventuring, shall be so happy as with success to light the way of such an expedient liberty and truth as this, shall restore the much-wronged and over-sorrowed state of matrimony, not only to those merciful and life-giving remedies of Moses, but as much as may be, to that serene and blissful condition it was in at the beginning, and shall deserve of all apprehensive men, (considering the troubles and distempers, which, for want of this insight have been so oft in kingdoms, in states, and families,) shall deserve to be reckoned among the public benefactors of civil and human life, above the inventors of wine and oil; for this is a far dearer, far nobler, and more desirable cherishing to man’s life, unworthily exposed to sadness and mistake, which he shall vindicate. Not that license, and levity, and unconsented breach of faith should herein be countenanced, but that some conscionable and tender pity might be had of those who have unwarily, in a thing they never practised before, made themselves the bondmen of a luckless and helpless matrimony. In which argument, he whose courage can serve him to give the first onset must look for two several oppositions; the one from those who having sworn themselves to long custom, and the letter of the text, will not out of the road; the other from those whose gross and vulgar apprehensions conceit but low of matrimonial purposes, and in the work of male and female think they have all. Nevertheless, it shall be here sought by due ways to be made appear, that those words of God in the institution, promising a meet help against loneliness, and those words of Christ, “that his yoke is easy, and his burden light,” were not spoken in vain: for if the knot of marriage may in no case be dissolved but for adultery, all the burdens and services of the law are not so intolerable. This only is desired of them who are minded to judge hardly of thus maintaining, that they would be still, and hear all out, nor think it equal to answer deliberate reason with sudden heat and noise; remembering this, that many truths now of reverend esteem and credit, had their birth and beginning once from singular and private thoughts, while the most of men were otherwise possessed; and had the fate at first to be generally exploded and exclaimed on by many violent opposers: yet I may err perhaps in soothing myself that this present truth revived will deserve on all hands to be not sinisterly received, in that it undertakes the cure of an inveterate disease crept into the best part of human society; and to do this with no smarting corrosive, but with a smooth and pleasing lesson, which received hath the virtue to soften and dispel rooted and knotty sorrows, and without enchantment, if that he feared, or spell used, hath regard at once both to serious pity and upright honesty; Edition: current; Page: [201] that tends to the redeeming and restoring of none but such as are the object of compassion, having in an ill hour hampered themselves, to the utter dispatch of all their most beloved comforts and repose for this life’s term. But if we shall obstinately dislike this new overture of unexpected ease and recovery, what remains but to deplore the frowardness of our hopeless condition, which neither can endure the estate we are in, nor admit of remedy either sharp or sweet. Sharp we ourselves distaste; and sweet, under whose hands we are, is scrupled and suspected as too luscious. In such a posture Christ found the Jews, who were neither won with the austerity of John the Baptist, and thought it too much license to follow freely the charming pipe of him who sounded and proclaimed liberty and relief to all distresses: yet truth in some age or other will find her witness, and shall be justified at last by her own children.
CHAPTER I.
The position proved by the law of Moses. That law expounded and asserted to a moral and charitable use, first by Paulus Fagius, next with other additions.
To remove therefore, if it be possible, this great and sad oppression, which through the strictness of a literal interpreting hath invaded and disturbed the dearest and most peaceable estate of household society, to the overburdening, if not the overwhelming of many Christians better worth than to be so deserted of the church’s considerate care, this position shall be laid down, first proving, then answering what may be objected either from Scripture or light of reason.
“That indisposition, unfitness, or contrariety of mind, arising from a cause in nature unchangeable, hindering, and ever likely to hinder, the main benefits of conjugal society, which are solace and peace; is a greater reason of divorce than natural frigidity, especially if there be no children, and that there be mutual consent.”
This I gather from the law in Deut. xxiv. 1. “When a man hath taken a wife and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her, let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house,” &c. This law, if the words of Christ may be admitted into our belief, shall never while the world stands, for him be abrogated. First therefore I here set down what learned Fagius hath observed on this law; “the law of God,” saith he, “permitted divorce for the help of human weakness. For every one that of necessity separates, cannot live single. That Christ denied divorce to his own, hinders not; for what is that to the unregenerate, who hath not attained such perfection? Let not the remedy be despised, which was given to weakness. And when Christ saith, who marries the divorced commits adultery, it is to be understood if he had any plot in the divorce.” The rest I reserve until it be disputed, how the magistrate is to do herein. From hence we may plainly discern a twofold consideration in this law: first, the end of the lawgiver, and the proper act of the law, to command or to allow something just and honest, or indifferent. Secondly, his sufferance from some accidental result of evil by this allowance, which the law cannot remedy. For if this law have no other end or act but only the allowance of sin, though never to so good intention, that law is no law, but Edition: current; Page: [202] sin muffled in the robe of law, or law disguised in the loose garment of sin. Both which are too foul hypotheses, to save the phænomenon of our Saviour’s answer to the Pharisees about this matter. And I trust anon by the help of an infallible guide, to perfect such Prutenic tables, as shall mend the astronomy of our wide expositors.
The cause of divorce mentioned in the law is translated “some uncleanness,” but in the Hebrew it sounds “nakedness of aught, or any real nakedness:” which by all the learned interpreters is referred to the mind as well as to the body. And what greater nakedness or unfitness of mind than that which hinders ever the solace and peaceful society of the married couple; and what hinders that more than the unfitness and defectiveness of an unconjugal mind? The cause therefore of divorce expressed in the position cannot but agree with that described in the best and equallest sense of Moses’ law. Which being a matter of pure charity, is plainly moral, and more now in force than ever; therefore surely lawful. For if under the law such was God’s gracious indulgence, as not to suffer the ordinance of his goodness and favour through any error to be seared and stigmatised upon his servants to their misery and thraldom; much less will he suffer it now under the covenant of grace, by abrogating his former grant of remedy and relief. But the first institution will be objected to have ordained marriage inseparable. To that a little patience until this first part have amply discoursed the grave and pious reasons of this divorcive law; and then I doubt not but with one gentle stroking to wipe away ten thousand tears out of the life of man. Yet thus much I shall now insist on, that whatever the institution were, it could not be so enormous, nor so rebellious against both nature and reason, as to exalt itself above the end and person for whom it was instituted.
CHAPTER II.
The first reason of this law grounded on the prime reason of matrimony. That no covenant whatsoever obliges against the main end both of itself, and of the parties covenanting.
For all sense and equity reclaims, that any law or covenant, how solemn or strait soever, either between God and man, or man and man, though of God’s joining, should bind against a prime and principal scope of its own institution, and of both or either party covenanting: neither can it be of force to engage a blameless creature to his own perpetual sorrow, mistaken for his expected solace, without suffering charity to step in and do a confessed good work of parting those, whom nothing holds together but this of God’s joining, falsely supposed against the express end of his own ordinance. And what his chief end was of creating woman to be joined with man, his own instituting words declare, and are infallible to inform us what is marriage, and what is no marriage; unless we can think them set there to no purpose; “it is not good,” saith he, “that man should be alone, I will make him a help meet for him.” From which words, so plain, less cannot be concluded, nor is by any learned interpreter, than that in God’s intention a meet and happy conversation is the chiefest and the noblest end of marriage: for we find here no expression so necessarily implying carnal knowledge, as this prevention of loneliness to the mind and spirit of man. To this, Fagius, Calvin, Pareus, Rivetus, as willingly and largely assent as can be wished. Edition: current; Page: [203] And indeed it is a greater blessing from God, more worthy so excellent a creature as man is, and a higher end to honour and sanctify the league of marriage, whenas the solace and satisfaction of the mind is regarded and provided for before the sensitive pleasing of the body. And with all generous persons married thus it is, that where the mind and person pleases aptly, there some unaccomplishment of the body’s delight may be better borne with, than when the mind hangs off in an unclosing disproportion, though the body be as it ought; for there all corporal delight will soon become unsavoury and contemptible. And the solitariness of man, which God had namely and principally ordered to prevent by marriage, hath no remedy, but lies under a worse condition than the loneliest single life: for in single life the absence and remoteness of a helper might inure him to expect his own comforts out of himself, or to seek with hope; but here the continual sight of his deluded thoughts, without cure, must needs be to him, if especially his complexion incline him to melancholy, a daily trouble and pain of loss, in some degree like that which reprobates feel. Lest therefore so noble a creature as man should be shut up incurably under a worse evil by an easy mistake in that ordinance which God gave him to remedy a less evil, reaping to himself sorrow while he went to rid away solitariness, it cannot avoid to be concluded, that if the woman be naturally so of disposition, as will not help to remove, but help to increase that same God-for-bidden loneliness, which will in time draw on with it a general discomfort and dejection of mind, not beseeming either Christian profession or moral conversation, unprofitable and dangerous to the commonwealth, when the household estate, out of which must flourish forth the vigour and spirit of all public enterprises, is so illcontented and procured at home, and cannot be supported; such a marriage can be no marriage, whereto the most honest end is wanting: and the aggrieved person shall do more manly, to be extraordinary and singular in claiming the due right whereof he is frustrated, than to piece up his lost contentment by visiting the stews, or stepping to his neighbour’s bed; which is the common shift in this misfortune: or else by suffering his useful life to waste away, and be lost under a secret affliction of an unconscionable size to human strength. Against all which evils the mercy of this Mosaic law was graciously exhibited.
CHAPTER III.
The ignorance and iniquity of canon law, providing for the right of the body in marriage, but nothing for the wrongs and grievances of the mind. An objection, that the mind should be better looked to before contract, answered.
How vain therefore is it, and how preposterous in the canon law, to have made such careful provision against the impediment of carnal performance, and to have had no care about the unconversing inability of mind so defective to the purest and most sacred end of matrimony; and that the vessel of voluptuous enjoyment must be made good to him that has taken it upon trust, without any caution; whenas the mind, from whence must flow the acts of peace and love, a far more precious mixture than the quintescence of an excrement, though it be found never so deficient and unable to perform the best duty of marriage in a cheerful and agreeable conversation, shall be thought good enough, however flat and melancholius it be, and must serve, though to the eternal disturbance and languishing of him that Edition: current; Page: [204] complains! Yet wisdom and charity, weighing God’s own institution, would think that the pining of a sad spirit wedded to loneliness should deserve to be freed, as well the impatience of a sensual desire so providently relieved. It is read to us in the liturgy, that “we must not marry to satisfy the fleshly appetite, like brute beasts, that have no understanding;” but the canon so runs, as if it dreamed of no other matter than such an appetite to be satisfied; for if it happen that nature hath stopped or extinguished the veins of sensuality, that marriage is annulled. But though all the faculties of the understanding and conversing part after trial appear to be so ill and so aversely met through nature’s unalterable working, as that neither peace, nor any sociable contentment can follow, it is as nothing; the contract shall stand as firm as ever, betide what will. What is this but secretly to instruct us, that however many grave reasons are pretended to the married life, yet that nothing indeed is thought worth regard therein, but the prescribed satisfaction of an irrational heat? Which cannot be but ignominious to the state of marriage, dishonourable to the undervalued soul of man, and even to Christian doctrine itself: while it seems more moved at the disappointing of an impetuous nerve, than at the ingenuous grievance of a mind unreasonably yoked; and to place more of marriage in the channel of concupiscence, than in the pure influence of peace and love, whereof the soul’s lawful contentment is the only fountain.
But some are ready to object, that the disposition ought seriously to be considered before. But let them know again, that for all the wariness can be used, it may yet befall a discreet man to be mistaken in his choice, and we have plenty of examples. The soberest and best governed men are least practised in these affairs; and who knows not that the bashful muteness of a virgin may ofttimes hide all the unliveliness and natural sloth which is really unfit for conversation; nor is there that freedom of access granted or presumed, as may suffice to a perfect discerning till too late; and where any indisposition is suspected, what more usual than the persuasion of friends, that acquaintance, as it increases, will amend all? And lastly, it is not strange though many, who have spent their youth chastely, are in some things not so quick-sighted, while they haste too eagerly to light the nuptial torch; nor is it therefore that for a modest error a man should forfeit so great a happiness, and no charitable means to release him: since they who have lived most loosely, by reason of their bold accustoming, prove most successful in their matches, because their wild affections unsettling at will, have been as so many divorces to teach them experience. Whenas the sober man honouring the appearance of modesty, and hoping well of every social virtue under that veil, may easily chance to meet, if not with a body impenetrable, yet often with a mind to all other due conversation inaccessible, and to all the more estimable and superior purposes of matrimony useless and almost lifeless: and what a solace, what a fit help such a consort would be through the whole life of man, is less pain to conjecture than to have experience.
CHAPTER IV.
The second reason of this law, because without it, marriage as it happens oft is not a remedy of that which it promises, as any rational creature would expect. That marriage, if we pattern from the beginning, as our Saviour bids, was not properly the remedy of lust, but the fulfilling of conjugal love and helpfulness.
And that we may further see what a violent cruel thing it is to force the continuing of those together, whom God and nature in the gentlest end of marriage never joined; divers evils and extremities, that follow upon such a compulsion, shall here be set in view. Of evils, the first and greatest is, that hereby a most absurd and rash imputation is fixed upon God and his holy laws, of conniving and dispensing with open and common adultery among his chosen people; a thing which the rankest politician would think it shame and disworship that his laws should countenance: how and in what manner that comes to pass I shall reserve till the course of method brings on the unfolding of many scriptures. Next, the law and gospel are hereby made liable to more than one contradiction, which I refer also thither. Lastly, the supreme dictate of charity is hereby many ways neglected and violated; which I shall forthwith address to prove. First, we know St. Paul saith, It is better to marry than to burn. Marriage therefore was given as a remedy of that trouble; but what might this burning mean? Certainly not the mere motion of carnal lust, not the mere goad of a sensitive desire: God does not principally take care for such cattle. What is it then but that desire which God put into Adam in Paradise, before he knew the sin of incontinence; that desire which God saw it was not good that man should be left alone to burn in, the desire and longing to put off an unkindly solitariness by uniting another body, but not without a fit soul to his, in the cheerful society of wedlock? Which if it were so needful before the fall, when man was much more perfect in himself, how much more is it needful now against all the sorrows and casualties of this life, to have an intimate and speaking help, a ready and reviving associate in marriage? Whereof who misses, by chancing on a mute and spiritless mate, remains more alone than before, and in a burning less to be contained than that which is fleshly, and more to be considered; as being more deeply rooted even in the faultless innocence of nature. As for that other burning which is but as it were the venom of a lusty and over-abounding concoction, strict life and labour, with the abatement of a full diet, may keep that low and obedient enough: but this pure and more inbred desire of joining to itself in conjugal fellowship a fit conversing soul (which desire is properly called love) “is stronger than death,” as the spouse of Christ thought; “many waters cannot quench it, neither can the floods drown it.” This is that rational burning that marriage is to remedy, not to be allayed with fasting, nor with any penance to be subdued: which how can he assuage who by mishap hath met the most unmeet and unsuitable mind? Who hath the power to struggle with an intelligible flame, not in Paradise to be resisted, become now more ardent by being failed of what in reason it looked for; and even then most unquenched, when the importunity of a provender burning is well enough appeased; and yet the soul hath obtained nothing of what it justly desires. Certainly such a one forbidden to divorce, is in effect forbidden to marry, and compelled to greater difficulties than in a single life: for if there be not a more humane burning which marriage must satisfy, or else may be dissolved, Edition: current; Page: [206] than that of copulation, marriage cannot be honourable for the meet reducing and terminating lust between two; seeing many beasts in voluntary and chosen couples live together as unadulterously, and are as truly married in that respect. But all ingenuous men will see that the dignity and blessing of marriage is placed rather in the mutual enjoyment of that which the wanting soul needfully seeks, than of that which the plenteous body would joyfully give away. Hence it is that Plato, in his festival discourse, brings in Socrates relating what he feigned to have learned from the prophetess Diotima, how Love was the son of Penury, begot of Plenty in the garden of Jupiter. Which divinely sorts with that which in effect Moses tells us, that Love was the son of Loneliness, begot in Paradise by that sociable and helpful aptitude which God implanted between man and woman toward each other. The same also is that burning mentioned by St. Paul, whereof marriage ought to be the remedy: the flesh hath other mutual and easy curbs which are in the power of any temperate man. When therefore this original and sinless penury or loneliness of the soul cannot lay itself down by the side of such a meet and acceptable union as God ordained in marriage, at least in some proportion, it cannot conceive and bring forth love, but remains utterly unmarried under a former wedlock, and still burns in the proper meaning of St. Paul. Then enters Hate, not that hate that sins, but that which only is natural dissatisfaction, and the turning aside from a mistaken object: if that mistake have done injury, it fails not to dismiss with recompense; for to retain still, and not be able to love, is to heap up more injury. Thence this wise and pious law of dismission now defended, took beginning: he therefore who lacking of his due in the most native and humane end of marriage, thinks it better to part than to live sadly and injuriously to that cheerful covenant, (for not to be beloved, and yet retained, is the greatest injury to a gentle spirit,) he, I say, who therefore seeks to part, is one who highly honours the married life and would not stain it: and the reasons which now move him to divorce, are equal to the best of those that could first warrant him to marry; for, as was plainly shown, both the hate which now diverts him, and the loneliness which leads him still powerfully to seek a fit help, hath not the least grain of a sin in it, if he be worthy to understand himself.
CHAPTER V.
The third reason of this law, because without it, he who has happened where he finds nothing but remediless offences and discontents, is in more and greater temptations than ever before.
Thirdly, Yet it is next to be feared, if he must be still bound without reason by a deaf rigour, that when he perceives the just expectance of his mind defeated, he will begin even against law to cast about where he may find his satisfaction more complete, unless he be a thing heroically virtuous; and that are not the common lump of men, for whom chiefly the laws ought to be made; though not to their sins, yet to their unsinning weaknesses, it being above their strength to endure the lonely estate, which while they shunned they are fallen into. And yet there follows upon this a worse temptation: for if he be such as hath spent his youth unblameably, and laid up his chiefest earthly comforts in the enjoyments of a contented marriage, nor did neglect that furtherance which was to be obtained therein by constant prayers; when he shall find himself bound fast to an uncomplying discord Edition: current; Page: [207] of nature, or, as it oft happens, to an image of earth and phlegm, with whom he looked to be the copartner of a sweet and gladsome society, and sees withal that his bondage is now inevitable; though he be almost the strongest Christian, he will be ready to despair in virtue, and mutiny against Divine Providence: and this doubtless is the reason of those lapses, and that melancholy despair, which we see in many wedded persons, though they understand it not, or pretend other causes, because they know no remedy; and is of extreme danger: therefore when human frailty surcharged is at such a loss, charity ought to venture much, and use bold physic, lest an overtossed faith endanger to shipwreck.
CHAPTER VI.
The fourth reason of this law, that God regards love and peace in the family, more than a compulsive performance of marriage, which is more broke by a grievous continuance, than by a needful divorce.
Fourthly, Marriage is a covenant, the very being whereof consists not in a forced cohabitation, and counterfeit performance of duties, but in unfeigned love and peace: and of matrimonial love, no doubt but that was chiefly meant, which by the ancient sages was thus parabled; that Love, if he be not twin born, yet hath a brother wondrous like him, called Anteros; whom while he seeks all about, his chance is to meet with many false and feigning desires, that wander singly up and down in his likeness: by them in their borrowed garb, Love though not wholly blind, as poets wrong him, yet having but one eye, as being born an archer aiming and that eye not the quickest in this dark region here below, which is not love’s proper sphere, partly out of the simplicity and credulity which is native to him, often deceived, embraces and consorts him with these obvious and suborned striplings, as if they were his mother’s own sons; for so he thinks them, while they subtilly keep themselves most on his blind side. But after a while, as his manner is when soaring up into the high tower of his Apogæum, above the shadow of the earth, he darts out the direct rays of his then most piercing eyesight upon the impostures and trim disguises that were used with him, and discerns that this is not his genuine brother as he imagined; he has no longer the power to hold fellowship with such a personated mate: for straight his arrrows lose their golden heads, and shed their purple feathers, his silken braids untwine, and slip their knots, and that original and fiery virtue given him by fate all on a sudden goes out, and leaves him undeified and despoiled of all his force; till finding Anteros at last he kindles and repairs the almost faded ammunition of his deity by the reflection of a coequal and homogeneal fire. Thus mine author sung it to me: and by the leave of those who would be counted the only grave ones, this is no mere amatorious novel (though to be wise and skilful in these matters, men heretofore of greatest name in virtue have esteemed it one of the highest arcs, that human contemplation circling upwards can make from the globy sea whereon she stands): but this a deep and serious verity, showing us that love in marriage cannot live nor subsist unless it be mutual; and where love cannot be, there can be left of wedlock nothing but the empty husk of an outside matrimony, as undelightful and unpleasing to God as any other kind of hypocrisy. So far is his command from tying men to the observance of duties which there is no help for, but they must be dissembled. If Solomon’s Edition: current; Page: [208] advice be not over-frolic, “live joyfully,” saith he, “with the wife whom thou lovest, all thy days, for that is thy portion.” How then, where we find it impossible to rejoice or to love, can we obey this precept? How miserably do we defraud ourselves of that comfortable portion, which God gives us, by striving vainly to glue an error together, which God and nature will not join, adding but more vexation and violence to that blissful society by our importunate superstition, that will not hearken to St. Paul, 1 Cor. vii. who, speaking of marriage and divorce, determines plain enough in general, that God therein “hath called us to peace, and not to bondage.” Yea God himself commands in his law more than once, and by his prophet Malachi, as Calvin and the best translations read, that “he who hates, let him divorce,” that is, he who cannot love. Hence it is that the rabbins, and Maimonides, famous among the rest, in a book of his set forth by Buxtorfius, tells us, that “divorce was permitted by Moses to preserve peace in marriage, and quiet in the family.” Surely the Jews had their saving peace about them as well as we, yet care was taken that this wholesome provision for household peace should also be allowed them: and must this be denied to Christians? O perverseness! that the law should be made more provident of peace-making than the gospel! that the gospel should be put to beg a most necessary help of mercy from the law, but must not have it; and that to grind in the mill of an undelighted and servile copulation, must be the only forced work of a Christian marriage, ofttimes with such a yokefellow, from whom both love and peace, both nature and religion mourns to be separated. I cannot therefore be so diffident, as not securely to conclude, that he who can receive nothing of the most important helps in marriage, being thereby disenabled to return that duty which is his, with a clear and hearty countenance, and thus continues to grieve whom he would not, and is no less grieved; that man ought even for love’s sake and peace to move divorce upon good and liberal conditions to the divorced. And it is a less breach of wedlock to part with wise and quiet consent betimes, than still to foil and profane that mystery of joy and union with a polluting sadness and perpetual distemper: for it is not the outward continuing of marriage that keeps whole that covenant, but whatsoever does most according to peace and love, whether in marriage or in divorce, he it is that breaks marriage least; it being so often written, that “Love only is the fulfilling of every commandment.”
CHAPTER VII.
The fifth reason, that nothing more hinders and disturbs the whole life of a Christian, than a matrimony found to be incurably unfit, and doth the same in effect that doth an idolatrous match.
Fifthly, As those priests of old were not to be long in sorrow, or if they were, they could not rightly execute their function; so every true Christian in a higher order of priesthood, is a person dedicate to joy and peace, offering himself a lively sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, and there is no Christian duty that is not to be seasoned and set off with cheerishness; which in a thousand outward and intermitting crosses may yet be done well, as in this vale of tears: but in such a bosom affiction as this, crushing the very foundation of his inmost nature, when he shall be forced to love against a possibility, and to use a dissimulation against his soul in the perpetual and Edition: current; Page: [209] ceaseless duties of a husband; doubtless his whole duty of serving God must needs be blurred and tainted with a sad unpreparedness and dejection of spirit wherein God has no delight. Who sees not therefore how much more Christianity it would be to break by divorce, that which is more broken by undue and forcible keeping, rather than “to cover the altar of the Lord with continual tears, so that he regardeth not the offering any more,” rather than that the whole worship of a Christian man’s life should languish and fade away beneath the weight of an immeasurable grief and discouragement? And because some think the children of a second matrimony succeeding a divorce would not be a holy seed, it hindered not the Jews from being so; and why should we not think them more holy than the offspring of a former ill-twisted wedlock, begotten only out of a bestial necessity, without any true love or contentment, or joy to their parents? So that in some sense we may call them the “children of wrath” and anguish, which will as little conduce to their sanctifying, as if they had been bastards: for nothing more than disturbance of mind suspends us from approaching to God; such a disturbance especially, as both assaults our faith and trust in God’s providence, and ends, if there be not a miracle of virtue on either side, not only in bitterness and wrath, the canker of devotion, but in a desperate and vicious carelessness, when he sees himself, without fault of his, trained by a deceitful bait into a snare of misery, betrayed by an alluring ordinance, and then made the thrall of heaviness and discomfort by an undivorcing law of God, as he erroneously thinks, but of man’s iniquity, as the truth is: for that God prefers the free and cheerful worship of a Christian, before the grievance and exacted observance of an unhappy marriage, besides that the general maxims of religion assure us, will be more manifest by drawing a parallel argument from the ground of divorcing an idolatress, which was, lest she should alienate his heart from the true worship of God: and what difference is there whether she pervert him to supersition by her enticing sorcery, or disenable him in the whole service of God through the disturbance of her unhelpful and unfit society; and so drive him at last, through murmuring and despair, to thoughts of atheism? Neither doth it lessen the cause of separating, in that the one willingly allures him from the faith, the other perhaps unwillingly drives him; for in the account of God it comes all to one, that the wife loses him a servant: and therefore by all the united force of the Decalogue she ought to be disbanded, unless we must set marriage above God and charity, which is the doctrine of devils, no less than forbidding to marry.
CHAPTER VIII.
That an idolatrous heretic ought to be divorced, after a convenient space given to hope of conversion. That place of 1 Cor. vii. restored from a two-fold erroneous exposition; and that the common expositors flatly contradict the moral law.
And here by the way, to illustrate the whole question of divorce, ere this treatise end, I shall not be loth to spend a few lines in hope to give a full resolve of that which is yet so much controverted; whether an idolatrous heretic ought to be divorced. To the resolving whereof we must first know, that the Jews were commanded to divorce an unbelieving Gentile for two causes: First, because all other nations, especially the Canaanites, were to Edition: current; Page: [210] them unclean. Secondly, to avoid seducement. That other nations were to the Jews impure, even to the separating in marriage, will appear out of Exod. xxxiv. 16, Deut. vii. 3, 6, compared with Ezra ix. 2, also chap. x. 10, 11, Neh. xiii. 30. This was the ground of that doubt raised among the Corinthians by some of the circumcision; whether an unbeliever were not still to be counted an unclean thing, so as that they ought to divorce from such a person. This doubt of theirs St. Paul removes by an evangelical reason, having respect to that vision of St. Peter, wherein the distinction of clean and unclean being abolished, all living creatures were sanctified to a pure and Christian use, and mankind especially, now invited by a general call to the covenant of grace. Therefore saith St. Paul, “the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband;” that is made pure and lawful to his use, so that he need not put her away for fear lest her unbelief should defile him; but that if he found her love still towards him he might rather hope to win her. The second reason of that divorce was to avoid seducement, as is proved by comparing those two places of the law to that which Ezra and Nehemiah did by divine warrant in compelling the Jews to forego their wives. And this reason is moral and perpetual in the rule of Christian faith without evasion; therefore saith the apostle, 2 Cor. vi., “Misyoke not together with infidels,” which is interpreted of marriage in the first place. And although the former legal pollution be now done off, yet there is a spiritual contagion in idolatry as much to be shunned; and though seducement were not to be feared, yet where there is no hope of converting, there always ought to be a certain religious aversion and abhorring, which can no way sort with marriage: Therefore saith St. Paul, “What fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? What communion hath light with darkness? What concord hath Christ with Belial? What part hath he that believeth with an infidel?” And in the next verse but one he moralizes, and makes us liable to that command of Isaiah; “Wherefore come out from among them, and be separate, saith the Lord; touch not the unclean thing, and I will receive ye.” And this command thus gospelized to us, hath the same force with that whereon Ezra grounded the pious necessity of divorcing. Neither had he other commission for what he did, than such a general command in Deut. as this, nay not so direct; for he is bid there not to marry, but not bid to divorce, and yet we see with what a zeal and confidence he was the author of a general divorce between the faithful and the unfaithful seed. The gospel is more plainly on his side, according to three of the evangelists, than the words of the law; for where the case of divorce is handled with such severity, as was fittest to aggravate the fault of unbounded license; yet still in the same chapter, when it comes into question afterwards, whether any civil respect, or natural relation which is dearest, may be our plea to divide, or hinder, or but delay, our duty to religion, we hear it determined that father, and mother, and wife also, is not only to be hated, but forsaken, if we mean to inherit the great reward there promised. Nor will it suffice to be put off by saying we must forsake them only by not consenting or not complying with them, for that were to be done, and roundly too, though being of the same faith, they should but seek out of a fleshly tenderness to weaken our Christian fortitude with worldly persuasions, or but to unsettle our constancy with timorous and softening suggestions; as we may read with what a vehemence Job, the patientest of men, rejected the desperate counsels of his wife; and Moses, the meekest, being thoroughly offended with the profane speeches of Zippora, sent her back to her father. But if they shall perpetually, at our elbow, seduce us from the true worship of God, or defile and daily scandalize our conscience by their hopeless continuance in misbelief; Edition: current; Page: [211] than even in the due progress of reason, and that ever equal proportion which justice proceeds by, it cannot be imagined that his cited place commands less than a total and final separation from such an adherent; at least that no force should be used to keep them together; while we remember that God commanded Abraham to send away his irreligious wife and her son for the offences which they gave in a pious family. And it may be guessed that David, for the like cause, disposed of Michal in such a sort as little differed from a dismission. Therefore against reiterated scandals and seducements, which never cease, much more can no other remedy or retirement be found but absolute departure. For what kind of matrimony can that remain to be, what one duty between such can be performed as it should be from the heart, when their thoughts and spirits fly asunder as far as heaven and hell; especially if the time that hope should send forth her expected blossoms, be past in vain? It will easily be true, that a father or a brother may be hated zealously, and loved civilly, or naturally; for those duties may be performed at distance, and do admit of any long absence: but how the peace and perpetual cohabitation of marriage can be kept, how that benevolent and intimate communion of body can be held, with one that must be hated with a most operative hatred, must be forsaken and yet continually dwelt with and accompanied; he who can distinguish, hath the gift of an affection very oddly divided and contrived: while others both just and wise, and Solomon among the rest, if they may not hate and forsake as Moses enjoins, and the gospel imports, will find it impossible not to love otherwise than will sort with the love of God, whose jealousy brooks no co-rival. And whether is more likely, that Christ bidding to forsake wife for religion, meant it by divorce as Moses meant it, whose law, grounded on moral reason, was both his office and his essence to maintain; or that he should bring a new morality into religion, not only new, but contrary to an unchangeable command, and dangerously derogating from our love and worship of God? As if when Moses had bid divorce absolutely, and Christ had said, hate and forsake, and his apostle had said no communication with Christ and Belial; yet that Christ after all this could be understood to say, divorce not, no not for religion, seduce or seduce not. What mighty and invisible remora is this in matrimony able to demur and to contemn all the divorcive engines in heaven or earth! both which may now pass away, if this be true, for more than many jots or tittles, a whole moral law is abolished. But if we dare believe it is not, then in the method of religion, and to save the honour and dignity of our faith, we are to retreat and gather up ourselves from the observance of an inferior and civil ordinance, to the strict maintaining of a general and religious command, which is written, “Thou shalt make no covenant with them,” Deut. vii. 2. 3: and that covenant which cannot be lawfully made, we have directions and examples lawfully to dissolve. Also 2 Chron. ii. 19, “Shouldest thou love them that hate the Lord?” No doubtless; for there is a certain scale of duties, there is a certain hierarchy of upper and lower commands, which for want of studying in right order, all the world is in confusion.
Upon these principles I answer, that a right believer ought to divorce an idolatrous heretic, unless upon better hopes: however, that it is in the believer’s choice to divorce or not.
The former part will be manifest thus first, that an apostate idolater, whether husband or wife seducing, was to die by the decree of God, Deut. xiii. 6, 9; that marriage therefore God himself disjoins: for others born idolaters, the moral reason of their dangerous keeping, and the incommunicable antagony that is between Christ and Belial will be sufficient to Edition: current; Page: [212] enforce the commandment of those two inspired reformers Ezra and Nehemiah, to put an idolater away as well under the gospel.
The latter part, that although there be no seducement feared, yet if there be no hope given, the divorce is lawful, will appear by this; that idolatrous marriage is still hateful to God, therefore still it may be divorced by the pattern of that warrant that Ezra had, and by the same everlasting reason: neither can any man give an account wherefore, if those whom God joins no man can separate, it should not follow, that whom he joins not, but hates to join, those men ought to separate. But saith the lawyer, “That which ought not to have been done, once done, avails.” I answer, “this is but a crotchet of the law; but that brought against it is plain Scripture.” As for what Christ spake concerning divorce, it is confessed by all knowing men, he meant only between them of the same faith. But what shall we say then to St. Paul, who seems to bid us not divorce an infidel willing to stay? We may safely say thus, that wrong collections have been hitherto made out of those words by modern divines. His drift, as was heard before, is plain; not to command our stay in marriage with an infidel, that had been a flat renouncing of the religious and moral law; but to inform the Corinthians, that the body of an unbeliever was not defiling, if his desire to live in Christian wedlock showed any likelihood that his heart was opening to the faith; and therefore advises to forbear departure so long till nothing have been neglected to set forward a conversion: this I say he advises, and that with certain cautions, not commands, if we can take up so much credit for him, as to get him believed upon his own word: for what is this else but his counsel in a thing indifferent, “to the rest speak I, not the Lord?” for though it be true, that the Lord never spake it, yet from St. Paul’s mouth we should have took it as a command, had not himself forewarned us, and disclaimed; which notwithstanding if we shall still avouch to be a command, he palpably denying it, this is not to expound St. Paul, but to outface him. Neither doth it follow, that the apostle may interpose his judgment in a case of Christian liberty, without the guilt of adding to God’s word. How do we know marriage or single life to be of choice, but by such like words as these, “I speak this by permission, not of commandment; I have no command of the Lord, yet I give my judgment.” Why shall not the like words have leave to signify a freedom in this our present question, though Beza deny? Neither is the Scripture hereby less inspired, because St. Paul confesses to have written therein what he had not of command: for we grant that the Spirit of God led him thus to express himself to Christian prudence, in a matter which God thought best to leave uncommanded. Beza therefore must be warily read, when he taxes St. Austin of blasphemy, for holding that St. Paul spake here as of a thing indifferent. But if it must be a command, I shall yet the more evince it to be a command that we should herein be left free; and that out of the Greek word used in the 12th ver., which instructs us plainly, there must be a joint assent and good liking on both sides: he that will not deprave the text must thus render it; “If a brother have an unbelieving wife, and she join in consent to dwell with him,” (which cannot utter less to us than a mutual agreement,) let him not put her away from the mere surmise of judaical uncleanness: and the reason follows, for the body of an infidel is not polluted, neither to benevolence, nor to procreation. Moreover, this note of mutual complacency forbids all offer of seducement, which to a person of zeal cannot be attempted without great offence: if therefore seducement be feared, this place hinders not divorce. Another caution was put in this supposed command, of not Edition: current; Page: [213] oringing the believer into “bondage” hereby, which doubtless might prove extreme, if Christian liberty and conscience were left to the humour of a pagan staying at pleasure to play with, and to vex and wound with a thousand scandals and burdens, above strength to bear. If therefore the conceived hope of gaining a soul come to nothing, then charity commands that the believer be not wearied out with endless waiting under many grievances sore to his spirit; but that respect be had rather to the present suffering of a true Christian, than the uncertain winning of an obdurate heretic. The counsel we have from St. Paul to hope, cannot countermand, the moral and evangelic charge we have from God to fear seducement, to separate from the misbeliever, the unclean, the obdurate. The apostle wisheth us to hope; but does not send us a wool-gathering after vain hope; he saith, “How knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?” that is, till he try all due means, and set some reasonable time to himself, after which he may give over washing an Ethiop, if he will hear the advice of the gospel; “Cast not pearls before swine,” saith Christ himself. “Let him be to thee as a heathen. Shake the dust off thy feet.” If this be not enough, “hate and forsake” what relation soever. And this also that follows must appertain to the precept, “Let every man wherein he is called, therein abide with God,” v. 24, that is, so walking in his inferior calling of marriage, as not by dangerous subjection to that ordinance, to hinder and disturb the higher calling of his Christianity. Last, and never too oft remembered, whether this be a command, or an advice, we must look that it be so understood as not to contradict the least point of moral religion that God hath formerly commanded; otherwise what do we but set the moral law and the gospel at civil war together? and who then shall be able to serve these two masters?
CHAPTER IX.
That adultery is not the greatest breach of matrimony: that there may be other violations as great.
Now whether idolatry or adultery be the greatest violation of marriage, if any demand let him thus consider; that among Christian writers touching matrimony, there be three chief ends thereof agreed on: godly society, next civil, and thirdly, that of the marriage-bed. Of these the first in name to be the highest and most excellent, no baptized man can deny, nor that idolatry smites directly against this prime end; nor that such as the violated end is, such is the violation: but he who affirms adultery to be the highest breach, affirms the bed to be the highest of marriage, which is in truth a gross and boorish opinion, how common soever: as far from the countenance of Scripture, as from the light of all clean philosophy or civil nature. And out of the question the cheerful help that may be in marriage towards sanctity of life, is the purest, and so the noblest end of that contract: but if the particular of each person be considered, then of those three ends which God appointed, that to him is greatest which is most necessary; and marriage is then most broken to him when he utterly wants the fruition of that which he most sought therein, whether it were religious, civil, or corporal society. Of which wants to do him right by divorce only for the last and meanest is a perverse injury, and the pretended reason of it as frigid as frigidity itself, which the code and canon are only sensible of. Edition: current; Page: [214] Thus much of this controversy. I now return to the former argument. And having shown that disproportion, contrariety, or numbness of mind may justly be divorced, by proving already the prohibition thereof opposes the express end of God’s institution, suffers not marriage to satisfy that intellectual and innocent desire which God himself kindled in man to be the bond of wedlock, but only to remedy a sublunary and bestial burning, which frugal diet, without marriage, would easily chasten. Next, that it drives many to transgress the conjugal bed, while the soul wanders after that satisfaction which it had hope to find at home, but hath missed; or else it sits repining, even to atheism, finding itself hardly dealt with, but misdeeming the cause to be in God’s law, which is in man’s unrighteous ignorance. I have shown also how it unties the inward knot of marriage, which is peace and love, (if that can be untied which was never knit,) while it aims to keep fast the outward formality: how it lets perish the Christian man, to compel impossibly the married man.
CHAPTER X.
The sixth reason of this law; that to prohibit divorce sought for natural cases is against nature.
The sixth place declares this prohibition to be as respectless of human nature, as it is of religion, and therefore is not of God. He teaches, that an unlawful marriage may be lawfully divorced: and that those who have thoroughly discerned each other’s disposition, which ofttimes cannot be till after matrimony, shall then find a powerful reluctance and recoil of nature on either side, blasting all the content of their mutual society, that such persons are not lawfully married, (to use the apostle’s words,) “Say I these things as a man or saith not the law also the same? For it is written, [Deut. xxii.] Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with different seeds, lest thou defile both. Thou shalt not plough with an ox and an ass together;” and the like. I follow the pattern of St. Paul’s reasoning; “Doth God care for asses and oxen,” how ill they yoke together, “or is it not said altogether for our sakes? for our sakes no doubt this is written.” Yea the apostle himself, in the forecited 2 Cor. vi. 14, alludes from that place of Deut. to forbid misyoking marriage, as by the Greek word is evident; though he instance but in one example of mismatching with an infidel, yet next to that, what can be a fouler incongruity, a greater violence to the reverend secret of nature, than to force a mixture of minds that cannot unite, and to sow the sorrow of man’s nativity with seed of two incoherent and incombining dispositions? which act being kindly and voluntary, as it ought, the apostle in the language he wrote called eunoia, and the Latins, benevolence, intimating the original thereof to be in the understanding, and the will; if not, surely there is nothing which might more properly be called a male-volence rather; and is the most injurious and unnatural tribute that can be extorted from a person endued with reason, to be made pay out the best substance of his body, and of his soul too, as some think, when either for just and powerful causes he cannot like, or from unequal causes finds not recompense. And that there is a hidden efficacy of love and hatred in man as well as in other kinds, not moral but natural, which though not always in the choice, yet in the success of marriage will ever be most predominant, besides daily experience, the author of Ecclesiasticus, whose Edition: current; Page: [215] wisdom hath set him next the Bible, acknowledges, xiii. 16, “A man, saith he, will cleave to his like.” But what might be the cause, whether each one’s allotted Genius or proper star, or whether the supernal* influence of schemes and angular aspects, or this elemental crasis here below; whether all these jointly or singly meeting friendly, or unfriendly in either party, I dare not, with the men I am like to clash, appear so much a philosopher as to conjecture. The ancient proverb in Homer less abstruse, entitles this work of leading each like person to his like, peculiarly to God himself: which is plain enough also by his naming of a meet or like help in the first espousal instituted; and that every woman is meet for every man, none so absurd as to affirm. Seeing then there is a twofold seminary, or stock in nature, from whence are derived the issues of love and hatred, distinctly flowing through the whole mass of created things, and that God’s doing ever is to to bring the due likenesses and harmonies of his works together, except when out of two contraries met to their own destruction, he moulds a third existence; and that it is error, or some evil angel which either blindly or maliciously hath drawn together, in two persons ill embarked in wedlock, the sleeping discords and enmities of nature, lulled on purpose with some false bait, that they may wake to agony and strife, later than prevention could have wished, if from the bent of just and honest intentions beginning what was begun and so continuing, all that is equal, all that is fair and possible hath been tried, and no accommodation likely to succeed; what folly is it still to stand combating and battering against invincible causes and effects, with evil upon evil, till either the best of our days be lingered out, or ended with some speeding sorrow! The wise Ecclesiasticus advises rather, xxxvii. 27, “My son, prove thy soul in thy life, see what is evil for it, and give not that unto it.” Reason he had to say so; for if the noisomeness or disfigurement of body can soon destroy the sympathy of mind to wedlock duties, much more will the annoyance and trouble of mind infuse itself into all the faculties and acts of the body, to render them invalid, unkindly, and even unholy against the fundamental law book of nature, which Moses never thwarts, but reverences: therefore he commands us to force nothing against sympathy or natural order, no not upon the most abject creatures; to show that such an indignity cannot be offered to man without an impious crime. And certainly those divine meditating words of finding out a meet and like help to man, have in them a consideration of more than the indefinite likeness of womanhood; nor are they to be made waste paper on, for the dulness of canon divinity: no, nor those other allegoric precepts of beneficence fetched out of the closet of nature, to teach us goodness and compassion in not compelling together unmatchable societies; or if they meet through mischance, by all consequence to disjoin them, as God and nature signifies, and lectures to us not only by those recited decrees, but even by the first and last of all his visible works; when by his divorcing command the world first rose out of chaos, nor can be renewed again out of confusion, but by the separating of unmeet consorts.
CHAPTER XI.
The seventh reason, that sometimes continuance in marriage may be evidently the shortening or endangering of life to either party; both law and divinity concluding, that life is to be preferred before marriage, the intended solace of life.
Seventhly, The canon law and divines consent, that if either party be found contriving against another’s life, they may be served by divorce: for a sin against the life of marriage is greater than a sin against the bed; the one destroys, the other but defiles. The same may be said touching those persons who being of a pensive nature and course of life, have summed up all their solace in that free and lightsome conversation which God and man intends in marriage; whereof when they see themselves deprived by meeting an unsociable consort, they ofttimes resent one another’s mistake so deeply, that long it is not ere grief end one of them. When therefore this danger is foreseen, that the life is in peril by living together, what matter is it whether helpless grief or wilful practice be the cause? This is certain, that the preservation of life is more worth than the compulsory keeping of marriage; and it is no less than cruelty to force a man to remain in that state as the solace of his life, which he and his friends know will be either the undoing or the disheartening of his life. And what is life without the vigour and spiritual exercise of life? How can it be useful either to private or public employment? Shall it therefore be quite dejected, though never so valuable, and left to moulder away in heaviness, for the superstitious and impossible performance of an ill-driven bargain? Nothing more inviolable than vows made to God; yet we read in Numbers, that if a wife had made such a vow, the mere will and authority of her husband might break it: how much more then may he break the error of his own bonds with an unfit and mistaken wife, to the saving of his welfare, his life, yea his faith and virtue, from the hazard of overstrong temptations? For if man be lord of the sabbath, to the curing of a fever, can he be less than lord of marriage in such important causes as these?
CHAPTER XII.
The eighth reason, It is probable, or rather certain, that every one who happens to marry, hath not the calling; and therefore upon unfitness found and considered, force ought not to be used.
Eighthly, It is most sure that some even of those who are not plainly defective in body, yet are destitute of all other marriageable gifts, and consequently have not the calling to marry, unless nothing be requisite thereto but a mere instrumental body; which to affirm, is to that unanimous covenant a reproach: yet it is as sure that many such, not of their own desire, but by the persuasion of friends, or not knowing themselves, do often enter into wedlock; where finding the difference at length between the duties of a married life, and the gifts of a single life, what unfitness of mind, what wearisomeness, scruples, and doubts, to an incredible offence and displeasure, are like to follow between, may be soon imagined; whom thus to shut up, and immure, and shut up together, the one with a mischosen Edition: current; Page: [217] mate, the other in a mistaken calling, is not a course that Christian wisdom and tenderness ought to use. As for the custom that some parents and guardians have of forcing marriages, it will be better to say nothing of such a savage inhumanity, but only thus; that the law which gives not all freedom of divorce to any creature endued with reason so assassinated, is next in cruelty.
CHAPTER XIII.
The ninth reason; because marriage is not a mere carnal coition, but a human society: where that cannot reasonably be had, there can be no true matrimony. Marriage compared with all other covenants and vows warrantably broken for the good of man. Marriage the Papists’ sacrament, and unfit marriage the Protestants’ idol.
Ninthly, I suppose it will be allowed us that marriage is a human society, and that all human society must proceed from the mind rather than the body, else it would be but a kind of animal or beastish meeting: if the mind therefore cannot have that due company by marriage that it may reasonably and humanly desire, that marriage can be no human society, but a certain formality; or gilding over of little better than a brutish congress, and so in very wisdom and pureness to be dissolved.
But marriage is more than human, “the covenant of God,” Prov. ii. 17, therefore man cannot dissolve it. I answer, if it be more than human, so much the more it argues the chief society thereof to be in the soul rather than in the body, and the greatest breach thereof to be unfitness of mind rather than defect of body: for the body can have least affinity in a covenant more than human, so that the reason of dissolving holds good the rather. Again, I answer, that the sabbath is a higher institution, a command of the first table, for the breach whereof God hath far more and oftener testified his anger than for divorces, which from Moses to Malachi he never took displeasure at, nor then neither if we mark the text; and yet as oft as the good of man is concerned, he not only permits, but commands to break the sabbath. What covenant more contracted with God and less in man’s power, than the vow which hath once passed his lips? yet if it be found rash, if offensive, if unfruitful either to God’s glory or the good of man, our doctrine forces not error and unwillingness irksomely to keep it, but counsels wisdom and better thoughts boldly to break it; therefore to enjoin the indissoluble keeping of a marriage found unfit against the good of man both soul and body, as hath been evidenced, is to make an idol of marriage, to advance it above the worship of God and the good of man, to make it a transcendent command, above both the second and first table; which is a most prodigious doctrine.
Next, whereas they cite out of the Proverbs, that it is the covenant of God, and therefore more than human, that consequence is manifestly false: for so the covenant which Zedekiah made with the infidel king of Babel, is called the Covenant of God, Ezek. xvii. 19, which would be strange to hear counted more than a human covenant. So every covenant between man and man, bound by oath, may be called the covenant of God, because God therein is attested. So of marriage he is the author and the witness; yet hence will not follow any divine astriction more than what is subordinate to the glory of God, and the main good of either party: for as Edition: current; Page: [218] the glory of God and their esteemed fitness one for the other, was the motive which led them both at first to think without other revelation that God had joined them together; so when it shall be found by their apparent unfitness, that their continuing to be man and wife is against the glory of God and their mutual happiness, it may assure them that God never joined them; who hath revealed his gracious will not to set the ordinance above the man for whom it was ordained; not to canonize marriage either as a tyranness or a goddess over the enfranchised life and soul of man; for wherein can God delight, wherein be worshipped, wherein be glorified by the forcible continuing of an improper and ill-yoking couple? He that loved not to see the disparity of several cattle at the plough, cannot be pleased with vast unmeetness in marriage. Where can be the peace and love which must invite God to such a house? May it not be feared that the not divorcing of such a helpless disagreement will be the divorcing of God finally from such a place? But it is a trial of our patience, say they: I grant it; but which of Job’s afflictions were sent him with that law, that he might not use means to remove any of them if he could? And what if it subvert our patience and our faith too? Who shall answer for the perishing of all those souls, perishing by stubborn expositions of particular and inferior precepts against the general and supreme rule of charity? They dare not affirm that marriage is either a sacrament or a mystery, though all those sacred things give place to man; and yet they invest it with such an awful sanctity, and give it such adamantine chains to bind with, as if it were to be worshipped like some Indian deity, when it can confer no blessing upon us, but works more and more to our misery. To such teachers the saying of St. Peter at the council of Jerusalem will do well to be applied: “Why tempt ye God to put a yoke upon the necks of” Christian men, which neither the Jews, God’s ancient people, “nor we are able to bear;” and nothing but unwary expounding hath brought upon us?
CHAPTER XIV.
Considerations concerning Familism, Antinomianism; and why it may be thought that such opinions may proceed from the undue restraint of some just liberty, than which no greater cause to contemn discipline.
To these considerations this also may be added as no improbable conjecture, seeing that sort of men who follow Anabaptism, Familism, Anti-nomianism, and other fanatic dreams, (if we understand them not amiss,) be such most commonly as are by nature addicted to religion, of life also not debauched, and that their opinions having full swing, do end in satisfaction of the flesh; it may be come with reason into the thoughts of a wise man, whether all this proceed not partly, if not chiefly, from the restraint of some lawful liberty, which ought to be given men, and is denied them? As by physic we learn in menstruous bodies, where nature’s current hath been stopped, that the suffocation and upward forcing of some lower part affects the head and inward sense with dotage and idle fancies. And on the other hand, whether the rest of vulgar men not so religiously professing, do not give themselves much the more to whoredom and adulteries, loving the corrupt and venial discipline of clergy-courts, but hating to hear of perfect reformation; whenas they foresee that then fornication Edition: current; Page: [219] shall be austerely censured, adultery punished, and marriage, the appointed refuge of nature though it hap to be never so incongruous and displeasing, must yet of force be worn out, when it can be to no other purpose but of strife and hatred, a thing odious to God? This may be worth the study of skilful men in theology, and the reason of things. And lastly, to examine whether some undue and ill-grounded strictness upon the blameless nature of man, be not the cause in those places where already reformation is, that the discipline of the church, so often, and so unavoidably broken, is brought into contempt and derision? And if it be thus, let those who are still bent to hold this obstinate literality, so prepare themselves, as to share in the account for all these transgressions, when it shall be demanded at the last day, by one who will scan and sift things with more than a literal wisdom of equity: for if these reasons be duly pondered, and that the gospel is more jealous of laying on excessive burdens than ever the law was, lest the soul of a Christian, which is inestimable, should be over-tempted and cast away; considering also that many properties of nature, which the power of regeneration itself never alters, may cause dislike of conversing, even between the most sanctified; which continually grating in harsh tune together, may breed some jar and discord, and that end in rancour and strife, a thing so opposite both to marriage and to Christianity, it would perhaps be less scandal to divorce a natural disparity, than to link violently together, an unchristian dissension, committing two insnared souls inevitably to kindle one another, not with the fire of love, but with a hatred irreconcileable; who, were they dissevered, would be straight friends in any other relation. But if an alphabetical servility must be still urged, it may so fall out, that the true church may unwittingly use as much cruelty in forbidding to divorce, as the church of Antichrist doth wilfully in forbidding to marry.
BOOK II.
CHAPTER I.
The ordinance of sabbath and marriage compared. Hyperbole no unfrequent figure in the gospel. Excess cured by contrary excess. Christ neither did nor could abrogate the law of divorce, but only reprieve the abuse thereof.
Hitherto the position undertaken has been declared, and proved by a law of God, that law proved to be moral, and unabolishable, for many reasons equal, honest, charitable, just, annexed thereto. It follows now, that those places of Scripture, which have a seeming to revoke the prudence of Moses, or rather that merciful decree of God, be forthwith explained and reconciled. For what are all these reasonings worth, will some reply, whenas the words of Christ are plainly against all divorce, “except in case of fornication?” to whom he whose mind were to answer no more but this, “except also in case of charity,” might safely appeal to the more plain words of Christ in defence of so excepting. “Thou shalt do no manner of work,” saith the commandment of the sabbath. Yes, saith Christ, works of charity. And shall we be more severe in paraphrasing the considerate and tender gospel, than he was in expounding the rigid Edition: current; Page: [220] and peremptory law? What was ever in all appearance less made for man, and more for God alone, than the sabbath? yet when the good of man comes into the scales, we hear that voice of infinite goodness and benignity, that “sabbath was made for man, and not man for sabbath.” What thing ever was more made for man alone, and less for God, than marriage? And shall we load it with a cruel and senseless bondage utterly against both the good of man, and the glory of God? Let whoso will now listen; I want neither pall nor mitre, I stay neither for ordination nor induction; but in the firm faith of a knowing Christian, which is the best and truest endowment of the keys, I pronounce the man, who shall bind so cruelly a good and gracious ordinance of God, hath not in that the spirit of Christ. Yet that every text of Scripture seeming opposite may be attended with a due exposition, this other part ensues, and makes account to find no slender arguments for this assertion, out of those very scriptures, which are commonly urged against it.
First, therefore, let us remember, as a thing not to be denied, that all places of Scripture, wherein just reason of doubt arises from the letter, are to be expounded by considering upon what occasion every thing is set down, and by comparing other texts. The occasion which induced our Saviour to speak of divorce, was either to convince the extravagance of the Pharisees in that point, or to give a sharp and vehement answer to a tempting question. And in such cases, that we are not to repose all upon the literal terms of so many words, many instances will teach us: wherein we may plainly discover how Christ meant not to be taken word for word, but like a wise physician, administering one excess against another, to reduce us to a permiss; where they were too remiss, he saw it needful to seem most severe: in one place he censures an unchaste look to be adultery already committed; another time he passes over actual adultery with less reproof than for an unchaste look; not so heavily condemning secret weakness, as open malice: so here he may be justly thought to have given this rigid sentence against divorce not to cut off all remedy from a good man, who finds himself consuming away in a disconsolate and unenjoined matrimony, but to lay a bridle upon the bold abuses of those overweening rabbies; which he could not more effectually do, than by a countersway of restraint curbing their wild exorbitance almost in the other extreme; as when we bow things the contrary way, to make them come to their natural straightness. And that this was the only intention of Christ is most evident, if we attend but to his own words and protestation made in the same sermon, not many verses before he treats of divorcing, that he came not to abrogate from the law “one jot or tittle,” and denounces against them that shall so teach.
But St. Luke, the verse immediately foregoing that of divorce, inserts the same caveat, as if the latter could not be understood without the former; and as a witness to produce against this our wilful mistake of abrogating, which must needs confirm us, that whatever else in the political law of more special relation to the Jews might cease to us; yet that of those precepts concerning divorce, not one of them was repealed by the doctrine of Christ, unless we have vowed not to believe his own cautious and immediate profession; for if these our Saviour’s words inveigh against all divorce, and condemn it as adultery, except it be for adultery, and be not rather understood against the abuse of those divorces permitted in the law, then is that law of Moses, Deut. xxiv. 1, not only repealed and wholly annulled against the promise of Christ, and his known profession not to meddle in matters judicial; but that which is more strange, the very substance Edition: current; Page: [221] and purpose of that law is contradicted, and convinced both of injustice and impurity, as having authorized and maintained legal adultery by statute. Moses also cannot scape to be guilty of unequal and unwise decrees punishing one act of secret adultery by death, and permitting a whole life of open adultery by law. And albeit lawyers write, that some political edicts, though not approved, are yet allowed to the scum of the people, and the necessity of the times; these excuses have but a weak pulse: for first, we read, not that the scoundrel people, but the choicest, the wisest, the holiest of that nation have frequently used these laws, or such as these, in the best and holiest times. Secondly, be it yielded, that in matters not very bad or impure, a human lawgiver may slacken something of that which is exactly good, to the disposition of the people and the times: but if the perfect, the pure, the righteous law of God, (for so are all his statutes and his judgments,) be found to have allowed smoothly, without any certain reprehension, that which Christ afterward declares to be adultery, how can we free this law from the horrible indictment of being both impure, unjust, and fallacious?
CHAPTER II.
How divorce was permitted for hardness of heart, cannot be understood by the common exposition. That the law cannot permit, much less enact a permission of sin.
Neither, will it serve to say this was permitted for the hardness of their hearts, in that sense as it is usually explained: for the law were then but a corrupt and erroneous schoolmaster, teaching us to dash against a vital maxim of religion, by doing foul evil in hope of some certain good.
This only text is not to be matched again throughout the whole Scripture, whereby God in his perfect law should seem to have granted to the hard hearts of his holy people, under his own hand, a civil immunity and free charter to live and die in a long successive adultery, under a covenant of works, till the Messiah, and then that indulgent permission to be strictly denied by a covenant of grace; besides, the incoherence of such a doctrine cannot, must not be thus interpreted, to the raising of a paradox never known till then, only hanging by the twined thread of one doubtful scripture, against so many other rules and leading principles of religion, of justice, and purity of life. For what could be granted more either to the fear, or to the lust of any tyrant or politician, than this authority of Moses thus expounded; which opens him a way at will to dam up justice, and not only to admit of any Romish or Austrian dispenses, but to enact a statute of that which he dares not seem to approve, even to legitimate vice, to make sin itself, the ever alien and vassal sin, a free citizen of the commonwealth, pretending only these or these plausible reasons? And well he might, all the while that Moses shall be alleged to have done as much without showing any reason at all. Yet this could not enter into the heart of David, Psal. xciv. 20, how any such authority, as endeavours to “fashion wickedness by a law,” should derive itself from God. And Isaiah says, “Woe upon them that decree unrighteous decrees,” chap. x. 1. Now which of these two is the better lawgiver, and which deserves most a woe, he that gives out an edict singly unjust, or he that confirms to generations a fixed and unmolested impunity of that which is not only held to be unjust, Edition: current; Page: [222] but also unclean, and both in a high degree; not only as they themselves affirm, an injurious expulsion of one wife, but also an unclean freedom by more than a patent to wed another adulterously? How can we therefore with safety thus dangerously confine the free simplicity of our Saviour’s meaning to that which merely amounts from so many letters, whenas it can consist neither with its former and cautionary words, nor with other more pure and holy principles, nor finally with a scope of charity, commanding by his express commission in a higher strain? But all rather of necessity must be understood as only against the abuse of that wise and ingenuous liberty, which Moses gave, and to terrify a roving conscience from sinning under that pretext.
CHAPTER III.
That to allow sin by law is against the nature of law, the end of the lawgiver, and the good of the people. Impossible therefore in the law of God. That it makes God the author of sin more than any thing objected by the Jesuits or Arminians against predestination.
But let us yet further examine upon what consideration a law of license could be thus given to a holy people for their hardness of heart. I suppose all will answer, that for some good end or other. But here the contrary shall be proved. First, that many ill effects, but no good end of such a sufferance can be shown; next, that a thing unlawful can, for no good end whatever, be either done or allowed by a positive law. If there were any good end aimed at, that end was then good either to the law or to the lawgiver licensing; or as to the person licensed. That it could not be the end of the law, whether moral or judicial, to license a sin, I prove easily out of Rom. v. 20, “The law entered, that the offence might abound,” that is, that sin might be made abundantly manifest to be heinous and displeasing to God, that so his offered grace might be the more esteemed. Now if the law, instead of aggravating and terrifying sin, shall give out license, it foils itself and turns recreant from its own end: it forestalls the pure grace of Christ, which is through righteousness, with impure indulgences, which are through sin. And instead of discovering sin, for “by the law is the knowledge thereof,” saith St. Paul; and that by certain and true light for men to walk in safety, it holds out false and dazzling fires to stumble men; or, like those miserable flies, to run into with delight and be burnt: for how many souls might easily think that to be lawful which the law and magistrate allowed them? Again, we read, 1 Tim. i. 5, “The end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned.” But never could that be charity, to allow a people what they could not use with a pure heart, but with conscience and faith both deceived, or else despised. The more particular end of the judicial law is set forth to us clearly, Rom. xiii. That God hath given to that “law a sword not in vain, but to be a terror to evil works, a revenge to execute wrath upon him that doth evil.” If this terrible commission should but forbear to punish wickedness, were it other to be accounted than partial and unjust? but if it begin to write indulgence to vulgar uncleanness, can it do more to corrupt and shame the end of its own being? Lastly, if the law allow sin, it enters into a kind of covenant with sin; and if it do, there is not a greater sinner in the world than the Edition: current; Page: [223] law itself. The law, to use an allegory something different from that in Philo-Judæus concerning Amalek, though haply more significant, the law is the Israelite, and hath this absolute charge given it, Deut. xxv. “To blot out the memory of sin, the Amalekite, from under heaven, not to forget it.” Again, the law is the Israelite, and hath this express repeated command, “to make no covenant with sin, the Canaanite,” but to expel him lest he prove a snare. And to say truth, it were too rigid and reasonless to proclaim such an enmity between man and man, were it not the type of a greater enmity between law and sin. I speak even now, as if sin were condemned in a perpetual villanage never to be free by law, never to be manumitted: but sure sin can have no tenure by law at all, but is rather an eternal outlaw, and in hostility with law past all atonement: both diagonal contraries, as much allowing one another, as day and night together in one hemisphere. Or if it be possible, that sin with his darkness may come to composition, it cannot be without a foul eclipse and twilight to the law, whose brightness ought to surpass the noon. Thus we see how this unclean permittance defeats the sacred and glorious end both of the moral and judicial law.
As little good can the lawgiver propose to equity by such a lavish remissness as this: if to remedy hardness of heart, Paræus and other divines confess it more increases by this liberty, than is lessened: and how is it probable, that their hearts were more hard in this, that it should be yielded to, than in any other crime? Their hearts were set upon usury, and are to this day, no nation more; yet that which was the endamaging only of their estates was narrowly forbid; this which is thought the extreme injury and dishonour of their wives and daughters, with the defilement also of themselves, is bounteously allowed. Their hearts were as hard under their best kings to offer in high places, though to the true God: yet that, but a small thing, it strictly forewarned; this, accounted a high offence against one of the greatest moral duties, is calmly permitted and established. How can it be evaded, but that the heavy censure of Christ should fall worse upon this lawgiver of theirs, than upon all the scribes and Pharisees? For they did but omit judgment and mercy to trifle in mint and cummin, yet all according to law; but this their lawgiver, altogether as punctual in such niceties, goes marching on to adulteries, through the violence of divorce by law against law. If it were such a cursed act of Pilate a subordinate judge to Cæsar, overswayed by those hard hearts, with much ado to suffer one transgression of law but once, what is it then with less ado to publish a law of transgression for many ages? Did God for this come down and cover the mount of Sinai with his glory, uttering in thunder those his sacred ordinances out of the bottomless treasures of his wisdom and infinite pureness, to patch up an ulcerous and rotten commonwealth with strict and stern injunctions, to wash the skin and garments for every unclean touch; and such easy permission given to pollute the soul with adulteries by public authority, without disgrace or question? No, it had been better that man had never known law or matrimony, than that such foul iniquity should be fastened upon the Holy One of Israel, the Judge of all the earth; and such a piece of folly as Belzebub would not commit, to divide against himself, and prevent his own ends: or if he, to compass more certain mischief, might yield perhaps to feign some good deed, yet that God should enact a license of certain evil for uncertain good against his own glory and pureness, is abominable to conceive. And as it is destructive to the end of law, and blasphemous to the honour of the lawgiver licensing, so is it as pernicious to the person licensed. If a private friend admonish not, the Edition: current; Page: [224] Scripture saith, “he hates his brother, and lets him perish;” but if he soothe him and allow his faults, the Proverbs teach us “he spreads a net for his neighbour’s feet, and worketh ruin.” If the magistrate or prince forget to administer due justice, and restrain not sin, Eli himself could say, “it made the Lord’s people to transgress.” But if he countenance them against law by his own example, what havoc it makes both in religion and virtue among the people may be guessed, by the anger it brought upon Hophni and Phineas not to be appeased “with sacrifice nor offering for ever.” If the law be silent to declare sin, the people must needs generally go astray, for the apostle himself saith, “he had not known lust but by the law:” and surely such a nation seems not to be under the illuminating guidance of God’s law, but under the horrible doom rather of such as despise the gospel; “he that is filthy, let him be filthy still.” But where the law itself gives a warrant for sin, I know not what condition of misery to imagine miserable enough for such a people, unless that portion of the wicked, or rather of the damned, on whom God threatens, in Psal. xi. “to rain snares;” but that questionless cannot be by any law, which the apostle saith is “a ministry ordained of God for our good,” and not so many ways and in so high a degree to our destruction, as we have now been graduating. And this is all the good can come to the person licensed in his hardness of heart.
I am next to mention that, which because it is a ground in divinity, Rom. iii. will save the labour of demonstrating, unless her given axioms be more doubted than in other hearts, (although it be no less firm in precepts of philosophy,) that a thing unlawful can for no good whatsoever be done, much less allowed by a positive law. And this is the matter why interpreters upon that passage in Hosea will not consent it to be a true story, that the prophet took a harlot to wife: because God, being a pure spirit, could not command a thing repugnant to his own nature, no not for so good an end as to exhibit more to the life a wholesome and perhaps a converting parable to many an Israelite. Yet that he commanded the allowance of adulterous and injurious divorces for hardness of heart, a reason obscure and in a wrong sense, they can very favourably persuade themselves; so tenacious is the leaven of an old conceit. But they shift it; he permitted only. Yet silence in the law is consent, and consent is accessory: why then is not the law being silent, or not active against a crime, accessory to its own conviction, itself judging? For though we should grant, that it approves not, yet it wills: and the lawyers’ maxim is, that “the will compelled is yet the will.” And though Aristotle in his ethics calls this “mixed action,” yet he concludes it to be voluntary and inexcusable, if it be evil. How justly then might human law and philosophy rise up against the righteousness of Moses, if this be true which our vulgar divinity fathers upon him, yea upon God himself, not silently, and only negatively to permit, but in his law to divulge a written and general privilege to commit and persist in unlawful divorces with a high hand, with security and no ill fame? for this is more than permitting and contriving, this is maintaining: this is warranting, this is protecting, yea this is doing evil, and such an evil as that reprobate lawgiver did, whose lasting infamy is engraven upon him like a surname, “he who made Israel to sin.” This is the lowest pitch contrary to God that public fraud and injustice can descend.
If it be affirmed, that God, as being Lord, may do what he will, ye we must know, that God hath not two wills, but one will, much less two contrary. If he once willed adultery should be sinful, and to be punished with death, all his omnipotence will not allow him, to will the allowance that his Edition: current; Page: [225] holiest people might as it were by his own antinomy, or counter-statute, live unreproved in the same fact as he himself esteemed it, according to our common explainers. The hidden ways of his providence we adore and search not, but the law is his revealed will, his complete, his evident and certain will: herein he appears to us as it were in human shape, enters into covenant with us, swears to keep it, binds himself like a just lawgiver to his own prescriptions, gives himself to be understood by men, judges and is judged, measures and is commensurate to right reason; cannot require less of us in one cantle of his law than in another, his legal justice cannot be so fickle and so variable, sometimes like a devouring fire, and by and by connivent in the embers, or, if I may so say, oscitant and supine. The vigour of his law could no more remit, than the hallowed fire upon his altar could be let go out. The lamps that burned before him might need snuffing, but the light of his law never. Of this also more beneath, in discussing a solution of Rivetus.
The Jesuits, and that sect among us which is named of Arminius, are wont to charge us of making God the author of sin, in two degrees especially, not to speak of his permission: 1. Because we hold, that he hath decreed some to damnation, and consequently to sin, say they: next, because those means, which are of saving knowledge to others, he makes to them an occasion of greater sin. Yet considering the perfection wherein man was created and might have stood, no degree necessitating his freewill, but subsequent, though not in time, yet in order to causes which were in his own power; they might methinks be persuaded to absolve both God and us. Whenas the doctrine of Plato and Chrysippus, with their followers, the Academics and the Stoics, who knew not what a consummate and most adorned Pandora was bestowed upon Adam, to be the nurse and guide of his arbitrary happiness and perseverance, I mean his native innocence and perfection, which might have kept him from being our true Epimetheus; and though they taught of virtue and vice to be both the gift of divine destiny, they could yet give reasons not invalid, to justify the councils of God and fate from the insulsity of mortal tongues: that man’s own freewill self-corrupted, is the adequate and sufficient cause of his disobedience besides fate; as Homer also wanted not to express, both in his Iliad and Odyssee. And Manilius the poet, although in his fourth book he tells of some “created both to sin and punishment;” yet without murmuring, and with an industrious cheerfulness, he acquits the Deity. They were not ignorant in their heathen lore, that it is most godlike to punish those who of his creatures became his enemies with the greatest punishment; and they could attain also to think, that the greatest, when God himself throws a man furthest from him; which then they held he did, when he blinded, hardened, and stirred up his offenders, to finish and pile up their desperate work since they had undertaken it. To banish for ever into a local hell, whether in the air, or in the centre, or in that uttermost and bottomless gulf of chaos, deeper from holy bliss than the world’s diameter multiplied; they thought not a punishing so proper and proportionate for God to inflict, as to punish sin with sin. Thus were the common sort of Gentiles wont to think, without any wry thoughts cast upon divine governance. And therefore Cicero, not in his Tusculan or Campanian retirements among the learned wits of that age, but even in the senate to a mixed auditory, (though he were sparing otherwise to broach his philosophy among statists and lawyers,) yet as to this point, both in his oration against Piso, and in that which is about the answers of the soothsayers against Clodius, he declares it publicly as no paradox to common ears, that God cannot punish man more, nor make him more miserable, than still Edition: current; Page: [226] by making him more sinful. Thus we see how in this controversy the justice of God stood upright even among heathen disputers. But if any one be truly, and not pretendedly zealous for God’s honour, here I call him forth before men and angels, to use his best and most advised skill, lest God more unavoidably than ever yet, and in the guiltiest manner, be made the author of sin: if he shall not only deliver over and incite his enemies by rebuke to sin as a punishment, but shall by patent under his own broad seal allow his friends whom he would sanctify and save, whom he would unite to himself and not disjoin, whom he would correct by wholesome chastening, and not punish as he doth the damned by lewd sinning; if he shall allow these in his law, the perfect rule of his own purest will, and our most edified conscience, the perpetrating of an odious and manifold sin without the least contesting. It is wondered how there can be in God a secret and revealed will; and yet what wonder, if there be in man two answerable causes. But here there must be two revealed wills grappling in a fraternal war with one another without any reasonable cause apprehended. This cannot be less, than to ingraft sin into the substance of the law, which law is to provoke sin by crossing and forbidding, not by complying with it. Nay this is, which I tremble in uttering, to incarnate sin into the unpunishing and well-pleased will of God. To avoid these dreadful consequences, that tread upon the heels of those allowances to sin, will be a task of far more difficulty, than to appease those minds, which perhaps out of a vigilant and wary conscience except against predestination. Thus finally we may conclude, that a law wholly giving license cannot upon any good consideration be given to a holy people, for hardness of heart in the vulgar sense.
CHAPTER IV.
That if divorce be no command, no more is marriage. That divorce could be no dispensation, if it were sinful. The solution of Rivetus, that Goa dispensed by some unknown way, ought not to satisfy a Christian mind.
Others think to evade the matter by not granting any law of divorce, but only a dispensation, which is contrary to the words of Christ, who himself calls it a “Law,” Mark x. 5: or if we speak of a command in the strictest definition, then marriage itself is no more a command than divorce, but only a free permission to him who cannot contain. But as to dispensation, I affirm, the same as before of the law, that it can never be given to the allowance of sin: God cannot give it, neither in respect of himself, nor in respect of man; not in respect of himself, being a most pure essence, the just avenger of sin; neither can he make that cease to be a sin, which is in itself unjust and impure, as all divorces they say were, which were not for adultery. Not in respect of man, for then it must be either to his good, or to his evil. Not to his good; for how can that be imagined any good to a sinner, whom nothing but rebuke and due correction can save, to hear the determinate oracle of divine law louder than any reproof dispensing and providing for the impunity and convenience of sin; to make that doubtful, or rather lawful, which the end of the law was to make most evidently hateful? Nor to the evil of man can a dispense be given; for if “the law were ordained unto life,” Rom. vii. 10, how can the same God publish dispenses against that law, which must needs be unto death? Absurd and monstrous would that dispense be, if any judge or law should give it a man to cut his Edition: current; Page: [227] own throat, or to damn himself. Dispense therefore presupposes full pardon, or else it is not a dispense, but a most baneful and bloody snare. And why should God enter covenant with a people to be holy, as “the command is holy, and just, and good,” Rom. vii. 12, and yet suffer an impure and treacherous dispense, to mislead and betray them under the vizard of law to a legitimate practice of uncleanness? God is no covenant-breaker; he cannot do this.
Rivetus, a diligent and learned writer, having well weighed what hath been written by those founders of dispense, and finding the small agreement among them, would fain work himself aloof these rocks and quicksands, and thinks it best to conclude, that God certainly did dispense, but by some way to us unknown, and so to leave it. But to this I oppose, that a Christian by no means ought to rest himself in such an ignorance; whereby so many absurdities will straight reflect both against the purity, justice, and wisdom of God, the end also both of law and gospel, and the comparison of them both together. God indeed in some ways of his providence is high and secret, past finding out: but in the delivery and execution of his law, especially in the managing of a duty so daily and so familiar as this is whereof we reason, hath plain enough revealed himself, and requires the observance thereof not otherwise, than to the law of nature and equity imprinted in us seems correspondent. And he hath taught us to love and extol his laws, not only as they are his, but as they are just and good to every wise and sober understanding. Therefore Abraham, even to the face of God himself, seemed to doubt of divine justice, if it should swerve from the irradiation wherewith it had enlightened the mind of man, and bound itself to observe its own rule; “wilt thou destroy the righteous with the wicked? that be far from thee; shall not the judge of the earth do right?” Thereby declaring, that God hath created a righteousness in right itself, against which he cannot do. So David, Psalm cxix., “the testimonies which thou hast commanded are righteous and very faithful; thy word is very pure, therefore thy servant loveth it.” Not only then for the author’s sake, but for its own purity. “He is faithful,” saith St. Paul, “he cannot deny himself;” that is, cannot deny his own promises, cannot but be true to his own rules. He often pleads with men the uprightness of his ways by their own principles. How should we imitate him else, to “be perfect as he is perfect?” If at pleasure he can dispense with golden poetic ages of such pleasing license, as in the fabled reign of old Saturn, and this perhaps before the law might have some covert; but under such an undispensing covenant as Moses made with them, and not to tell us why and wherefore, indulgence cannot give quiet to the breast of an intelligent man? We must be resolved how the law can be pure and perspicuous, and yet throw a polluted skirt over these Eleusinian mysteries, that no man can utter what they mean: worse in this than the worst obscenities of heathen superstition; for their filthiness was hid, but the mystic reason thereof known to their sages. But this Jewish imputed filthiness was daily and open, but the reason of it is not known to our divines. We know of no design the gospel can have to impose new righteousness upon works, but to remit the old by faith without works, if we mean justifying works: we know no mystery our Saviour could have to lay new bonds upon marriage in the covenant of grace which himself had loosened to the severity of law. So that Rivetus may pardon us, if we cannot be contented with his nonsolution, to remain in such a peck of uncertainties and doubts, so dangerous and ghastly to the fundamentals of our faith.
CHAPTER V.
What a Dispensation is.
Therefore to get some better satisfaction, we must proceed to inquire as diligently as we can what a dispensation is, which I find to be either properly so called, or improperly. Improperly so called, is rather a particular and exceptive law, absolving and disobliging from a more general command for some just and reasonable cause. As Numb. ix. they who were unclean, or in a journey, had leave to keep the passover in the second month, but otherwise ever in the first. As for that in Leviticus of marrying the brother’s wife, it was a penal statute rather than a dispense; and commands nothing injurious or in itself unclean, only prefers a special reason of charity before an institutive decency, and perhaps is meant for lifetime only, as is expressed beneath in the prohibition of taking two sisters. What other edict of Moses, carrying but the semblance of a law in any other kind, may bear the name of a dispense, I have not readily to instance. But a dispensation most properly is some particular accident rarely happening, and therefore not specified in the law, but left to the decision of charity, even under the bondage of Jewish rites, much more under the liberty of the gospel. Thus did “David enter into the house of God and did eat the shewbread, he and his followers, which was” ceremonially “unlawful.” Of such dispenses as these it was that Verdune the French divine so gravely disputed in the council of Trent against friar Adrian, who held that the pope might dispense with any thing. “It is a fond persuasion,” saith Verdune, “that dispensing is a favour; nay, it is as good distributive justice as what is most, and the priest sins if he gives it not, for it is nothing else but a right interpretation of law.” Thus far that I can learn touching this matter wholesomely decreed. But that God, who is the giver of every good and perfect gift, Jam. i., should give out a rule and directory to sin by, should enact a dispensation as long-lived as a law, whereby to live in privileged adultery for hardness of heart, (and this obdurate disease cannot be conceived how it was the more amended by this unclean remedy,) is the most deadly and scorpion-like gift, that the enemy of mankind could have given to any miserable sinner, and is rather such a dispense as that was, which the serpent gave to our first parents. God gave quails in his wrath, and kings in his wrath, yet neither of these things evil in themselves: but that he whose eyes cannot behold impurity, should in the book of his holy covenant, his most unpassionate law, give license and statute for uncontrolled adultery, although it go for the received opinion, I shall ever dissuade my soul from such a creed, such an indulgence as the shop of Antichrist never forged a baser.
CHAPTER VI.
That the Jew had no more right to this supposed dispense than the Christian hath, and rather not so much.
But if we must needs dispense, let us for a while so far dispense with truth, as to grant that sin may be dispensed; yet there will be copious reason found to prove, that the Jew had no more right to such a supposed indulgence Edition: current; Page: [229] than the Christian; whether we look at the clear knowledge wherein he lived, or the strict performance of works whereto he was bound. Besides visions and prophecies, they had the law of God, which in the Psalms and Proverbs is chiefly praised for sureness and certainty, both easy and perfect to the enlightening of the simple. How could it be so obscure then, or they so sottishly blind in this plain, moral, and household duty? They had the same precepts about marriage; Christ added nothing to their clearness, for that had argued them imperfect; he opens not the law, but removes the pharisaic mists raised between the law and the people’s eyes: the only sentence which he adds, “What God hath joined, let no man put asunder,” is as obscure as any clause fetched out of Genesis, and hath increased a yet undecided controversy of clandestine marriages. If we examine over all his sayings, we shall find him not so much interpreting the law with his words, as referring his own words to be interpreted by the law, and oftener obscures his mind in short, and vehement, and compact sentences, to blind and puzzle them the more, who would not understand the law. The Jews therefore, were as little to be dispensed with for lack of moral knowledge as we.
Next, none I think will deny, but that they were as much bound to perform the law as any Christian. That severe and rigorous knife not sparing the tender foreskin of any male infant, to carve upon his flesh the mark of that strict and pure covenant whereinto he entered, might give us to understand enough against the fancy of dispensing. St. Paul testifies, that every “circumcised man is a debtor to the whole law,” Gal. v., or else “circumcision is in vain,” Rom. ii. 25. How vain then, and how preposterous must it needs be to exact a circumcision of the flesh from an infant into an outward sign of purity, and to dispense an uncircumcision in the soul of a grown man to an inward and real impurity! How vain again was that law, to impose tedious expiations for every slight sin of ignorance and error, and to privilege without penance or disturbance an odious crime whether of ignorance or obstinacy! How unjust also inflicting death and extirpation for the mark of circumstantial pureness omitted, and proclaiming all honest and liberal indemnity to the act of a substantial impureness committed, making void the covenant that was made against it! Thus if we consider the tenor of the law, to be circumcised and to perform all, not pardoning so much as the scapes of error and ignorance, and compare this with the condition of the gospel, “believe and be baptized,” I suppose it cannot be long ere we grant, that the Jew was bound as strictly to the performance of every duty, as was possible; and therefore could not be dispensed with more than the Christian, perhaps not so much.
CHAPTER VII.
That the Gospel is apter to dispense than the Law.—Parœus answered.
If then the law will afford no reason why the Jew should be more gently dealt with than the Christian, then surely the gospel can afford as little why the Christian should be less gently dealt with than the Jew. The gospel indeed exhorts to highest perfection, but bears with weakest infirmity more than the law. Hence those indulgences, “all cannot receive this saying, every man hath his proper gift,” with express charges not “to lay on yokes, which our fathers could not bear.” The nature of man still is as Edition: current; Page: [230] weak, and yet as hard; and that weakness and hardness as unfit and as unteachable to be harshly used as ever. Ay but, saith Paræus, there is a greater portion of spirit poured upon the gospel, which requires from us perfecter obedience. I answer, this does not prove, that the law might give allowance to sin more than the gospel; and if it were no sin, we know it were the work of the spirit to “mortify our corrupt desires and evil concupiscence;” but not to root up our natural affections and disaffections, moving to and fro even in wisest men upon just and necessary reasons, which were the true ground of that Mosaic dispense, and is the utmost extent of our pleading. What is more or less perfect we dispute not, but what is sin or no sin. And in that I still affirm the law required as perfect obedience as the gospel: besides that the prime end of the gospel is not so much to exact our obedience, as to reveal grace, and the satisfaction of our disobedience. What is now exacted from us, it is the accusing law that does it, even yet under the gospel; but cannot be more extreme to us now than to the Jews of old; for the law ever was of works, and the gospel ever was of grace.
Either then the law by harmless and needful dispenses, which the gospel is now made to deny, must have anticipated and exceeded the grace of the gospel, or else must be found to have given politic and superficial graces without real pardon, saying in general, “do this and live,” and yet deceiving and damning underhand with unsound and hollow permissions; which is utterly abhorring from the end of all law, as hath been showed. But if those indulgences were safe and sinless, out of tenderness and compassion, as indeed they were, and yet shall be abrogated by the gospel; then the law, whose end is by rigour to magnify grace, shall itself give grace, and pluck a fair plume from the gospel; instead of hastening us thither, alluring us from it. And whereas the terror of the law was a servant to amplify and illustrate the mildness of grace; now the unmildness of evangelic grace shall turn servant to declare the grace and mildness of the rigorous law. The law was harsh to extol the grace of the gospel, and now the gospel by a new affected strictness of her own shall extenuate the grace which herself offers. For by exacting a duty which the law dispensed, if we perform it, then is grace diminished, by how much performance advance, unless the apostle argue wrong: if we perform it not, and perish for not performing, then are the conditions of grace harder than those of rigour. If through faith and repentance we perish not, yet grace still remains the less, by requiring that which rigour did not require, or at least not so strictly. Thus much therefore to Paræus; that if the gospel require perfecter obedience than the law as a duty, it exalts the law and debases itself, which is dishonourable to the work of our redemption. Seeing therefore that all the causes of any allowance, that the Jews might have, remain as well to the Christians; this is a certain rule, that so long as the causes remain, the allowance ought. And having thus at length inquired the truth concerning law and dispense, their ends, their uses, their limits, and in what manner both Jew and Christian stand liable to the one or capable of the other; we may safely conclude, that to affirm the giving of any law or law-like dispense to sin for hardness of heart, is a doctrine of that extravagance from the sage principles of piety, that whoso considers thoroughly cannot but admire how this hath been digested all this while.
CHAPTER VIII.
The true sense how Moses suffered divorce for hardness of heart.
What may we do then to salve this seeming inconsistence? I must not dissemble, that I am confident it can be done no other way than this:
Moses, Deut. xxiv. 1, established a grave and prudent law, full of moral equity, full of due consideration towards nature, that cannot be resisted, a law consenting with the wisest men and civilest nations; that when a man hath married a wife, if it come to pass, that he cannot love her by reason of some displeasing natural quality or unfitness in her, let him write her a bill of divorce. The intent of which law undoubtedly was this, that if any good and peaceable man should discover some helpless disagreement or dislike either of mind or body, whereby he could not cheerfully perform the duty of a husband without the perpetual dissembling of offence and disturbance to his spirit; rather than to live uncomfortably and unhappily both to himself and to his wife; rather than to continue undertaking a duty, which he could not possibly discharge, he might dismiss her whom he could not tolerably and so not conscionably retain. And this law the Spirit of God by the mouth of Solomon, Prov. xxx. 21, 23, testifies to be a good and a necessary law, by granting it that “a hated woman,” (for so the Hebrew word signifies, rather than “odious,” though it come all to one,) that “a hated woman, when she is married, is a thing that the earth cannot bear.” What follows then, but that the charitable law must remedy what nature cannot undergo? Now that many licentious and hardhearted men took hold of this law to cloak their bad purposes, is nothing strange to believe. And these were they, not for whom Moses made the law, (God forbid!) but whose hardness of heart taking ill-advantage by this law he held it better to suffer as by accident, where it could not be detected, rather than good men should lose their just and lawful privilege of remedy: Christ therefore having to answer these tempting Pharisees, according as his custom was, not meaning to inform their proud ignorance what Moses did in the true intent of the law, which they had ill cited, suppressing the true cause for which Moses gave it, and extending it to every slight matter, tells them their own, what Moses was forced to suffer by their abuse of his law. Which is yet more plain, if we mark that out Saviour, in Matt. v. cites not the law of Moses, but the pharisaical tradition falsely grounded upon that law. And in those other places, chap. xix. and Mark x. the Pharisees cite the law, but conceal the wise and humane reason there expressed; which our Saviour corrects not in them, whose pride deserved not his instruction, only returns them what is proper to them: “Moses for the hardness of your heart suffered you,” that is, such as you, “to put away your wives; and to you he wrote this precept for that cause,” which (“to you”) must be read with an impression, and understood limitedly of such as covered ill purposes under that law; for it was seasonable, that they should hear their own unbounded license rebuked, but not seasonable for them to hear a good man’s requisite liberty explained. But us he hath taught better, if we have ears to hear. He himself acknowledged it to be a law, Mark x., and being a law of God, it must have an undoubted “end of charity, which may be used with a pure heart, a good conscience, and faith unfeigned,” as was heard: it cannot allow sin, but is purposely to resist sin, as by the same chapter to Timothy appears. There we learn also, “that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully.” Out of doubt then Edition: current; Page: [232] there must be a certain good in this law, which Moses willingly allowed, and there might be an unlawful use made thereof by hypocrites; and that was it which was unwillingly suffered, foreseeing it in general, but not able to discern it in particulars. Christ therefore mentions not here what Moses and the law intended; for good men might know that by many other rules; and the scornful Pharisees were not fit to be told, until they could employ that knowledge they had less abusively. Only he acquaints them with what Moses by them was put to suffer.
CHAPTER IX.
The Words of the institution how to be understood; and of our Saviour’s Answer to his Disciples.
And to entertain a little their overweening arrogance as best befitted, and to amaze them yet further, because they thought it no hard matter to fulfil the law, he draws them up to that unseparable institution, which God ordained in the beginning before the fall, when man and woman were both perfect, and could have no cause to separate: just as in the same chapter he stands not to contend with the arrogant young man, who boasted his observance of the whole law, whether he had indeed kept it or not, but screws him up higher to a task of that perfection, which no man is bound to imitate. And in like manner, that pattern of the first institution he set before the opinionative Pharisees, to dazzle them, and not to bind us. For this is a solid rule, that every command, given with a reason, binds our obedience no otherwise than that reason holds. Of this sort was that command in Eden; “therefore shall a man cleave to his wife, and they shall be one flesh;” which we see is no absolute command, but with an inference “therefore:” the reason then must be first considered, that our obedience be not misobedience. The first is, for it is not single, because the wife is to the husband, “flesh of his flesh,” as in the verse going before. But this reason cannot be sufficient of itself: for why then should he for his wife leave his father and mother, with whom he is far more “flesh of flesh, and bone of bone,” as being made of their substance? and besides, it can be but a sorry and ignoble society of life, whose inseparable injunction depends merely upon flesh and bones. Therefore we must look higher, since Christ himself recalls us to the beginning, and we shall find, that the primitive reason of never divorcing was that sacred and not vain promise of God to remedy man’s loneliness by “making him a meet help for him,” though not now in perfection, as at first; yet still in proportion as things now are. And this is repeated, verse 20, when all other creatures were fitly associated and brought to Adam, as if the Divine Power had been in some care and deep thought, because “there was not yet found any help meet for man.” And can we so slightly depress the all-wise purpose of a deliberating God, as if his consultation had produced no other good for man, but to join him with an accidental companion of propagation, which his sudden word had already made for every beast? nay a far less good to man it will be fouud, if she must at all adventures be fastened upon him individually. And therefore even plain sense and equity, and, which is above them both, the all-interpreting voice of charity herself cries aloud, that this primitive reason, this consulted promise of God, “to make a meet help,” is the only cause that gives authority to this command of not divorcing, Edition: current; Page: [233] to be a command. And it might be further added, that if the true definition of a wife were asked at good earnest, this clause of being “a meet help” would show itself so necessary and so essential, in that demonstrative argument, that it might be logically concluded: therefore she who naturally and perpetually is no “meet help,” can be no wife; which clearly takes away the difficulty of dismissing such a one. If this be not thought enough, I answer yet further, that marriage, unless it mean a fit and tolerable marriage, is not inseparable neither by nature nor institution. Not by nature, for then Mosaic divorces had been against nature, if separable and inseparable be contraries, as who doubts they be? and what is against nature is against law, if soundest philosophy abuse us not: by this reckoning Moses should be most unmosaic, that is, most illegal, not to say most unnatural. Nor is it inseparable by the first institution; for then no second institution of the same law for so many causes could dissolve it; it being most unworthy a human, (as Plato’s judgment is in the fourth book of his laws,) much more a divine lawgiver, to write two several decrees upon the same thing. But what would Plato have deemed, if one of these were good, and the other evil to be done? Lastly, suppose it to be inseparable by institution, yet in competition with higher things, as religion and charity in mainest matters, and when the chief end is frustrate for which it was ordained, as hath been shown; if still it must remain inseparable, it holds a strange and lawless propriety from all other works of God under heaven. From these many considerations, we may safely gather, that so much of the first institution as our Saviour mentions, for he mentions not all, was but to quell and put to nonplus the tempting Pharisees, and to lay open their ignorance and shallow understanding of the Scriptures. For, saith he, “have ye not read that he which made them at the beginning, made them male and female, and said, for this cause shall a man cleave to his wife?” which these blind usurpers of Moses’s chair could not gainsay: as if this single respect of male and female were sufficient against a thousand inconveniences and mischiefs, to clog a rational creature to his endless sorrow unrelinquishably, under the guileful superscription of his intended solace and comfort. What if they had thus answered? Master, if thou mean to make wedlock as inseparable as it was from the beginning, let it be made also a fit society, as God meant it, which we shall soon understand it ought to be, if thou recite the whole reason of the law. Doubtless our Saviour had applauded their just answer. For then they had expounded his command of Paradise, even as Moses himself expounds it by the laws of divorce, that is, with due and wise regard to the premises and reasons of the first command; according to which, without unclean and temporizing permissions, he instructs us in this imperfect state what we may lawfully do about divorce.
But if it be thought, that the disciples, offended at the rigour of Christ’s answer, could yet obtain no mitigation of the former sentence pronounced to the Pharisees, it may be fully answered, that our Saviour continues the same reply to his disciples, as men leavened with the same customary license which the Pharisees maintained, and displeased at the removing of a traditional abuse, whereto they had so long not unwillingly been used: it was no time then to contend with their slow and prejudicial belief, in a thing wherein an ordinary measure of light in Scripture, with some attention, might afterwards inform them well enough. And yet ere Christ had finished this argument, they might have picked out of his own concluding words an answer more to their minds, and in effect the same with that which hath been all this while intreating audience: “All men,” saith he, “cannot Edition: current; Page: [234] receive this saying, save they to whom it is given; he that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” What saying is this which is left to a man’s choice to receive, or not receive? what but the married life? Was our Saviour so mild and so favourable to the weakness of a single man, and is he turned on the sudden so rigorous and inexorable, to the distresses and extremities of an ill-wedded man? Did he so graciously give leave to change the better single life for the worse married life? Did he open so to us this hazardous and accidental door of marriage, to shut upon us like the gate of death, without retracting or returning, without permitting to change the worst, most insupportable, most unchristian mischance of marriage, for all the mischiefs and sorrows that can ensue, being an ordinance which was especially given as a cordial and exhilarating cup of solace, the better to bear our other crosses and afflictions? Questionless this was a hard-heartedness of divorcing, worse than that in the Jews, which they say extorted the allowance from Moses, and is utterly dissonant from all the doctrine of our Saviour. After these considerations therefore, to take a law out of Paradise given in time of original perfection, and to take it barely without those just and equal inferences and reasons which mainly establish it, nor so much as admitting those needful and safe allowances, wherewith Moses himself interprets it to the fallen condition of man; argues nothing in us but rashness and contempt of those means that God left us in his pure and chaste law, without which it will not be possible for us to perform the strict imposition of this command: or if we strive beyond our strength, we shall strive to obey it otherwise than God commands it. And lamented experience daily teaches the bitter and vain fruits of this our presumption, forcing men in a thing wherein we are not able to judge either of their strength or their sufferance. Whom neither one voice nor other by natural addiction but only marriage ruins, which doubtless is not the fault of that ordinance, for God gave it as a blessing, nor always of man’s mischoosing, it being an error above wisdom to prevent, as examples of wisest men so mistaken manifest: it is the fault, therefore, of a perverse opinion, that will have it continued in despite of nature and reason, when indeed it was never so truly joined. All those expositors upon the fifth Matthew confess the law of Moses to be the law of the Lord, wherein no addition or diminution hath place; yet coming to the point of divorce, as if they feared not to be called least in the kingdom of heaven, any slight evasion will content them, to reconcile those contradictions, which they make between Christ and Moses, between Christ and Christ.
CHAPTER X.
The vain shift of those who make the law of divorce to be only the premises of a succeeding law.
Some will have it no law, but the granted premises of another law following, contrary to the words of Christ, Mark x. 5, and all other translations of gravest authority, who render it in form of a law, agreeably to Mal. ii. 16, as it is most anciently and modernly expounded. Besides, the bill of divorce, and the particular occasion therein mentioned, declares it to be orderly and legal. And what avails this to make the matter more righteous, if such an adulterous condition shall be mentioned to build a law upon without either punishment or so much as forbidding? They pretend it is implicitly Edition: current; Page: [235] reproved in these words, Deut. xxiv. 4, “after she is defiled;” but who sees not that this defilement is only in respect of returning to her former husband after an intermixed marriage? else why was not the defiling condition first forbidden, which would have saved the labour of this after-law? Nor is it seemly or piously attributed to the justice of God and his known hatred of sin, that such a heinous fault as this through all the law should be only wiped with an implicit and oblique touch, (which yet is falsely supposed,) and that his peculiar people should be let wallow in adulterous marriages almost two thousand years, for want of a direct law to prohibit them: it is rather to be confidently assumed, that this was granted to apparent necessities, as being of unquestionable right and reason in the law of nature, in that it still passes without inhibition, even when the greatest cause is given to us to expect it should be directly forbidden.
CHAPTER XI.
The other shift of saying divorce was permitted by law, but not approved. More of the institution.
But it was not approved. So much the worse that it was allowed; as if sin had over-mastered the word of God, to conform her steady and straight rule to sin’s crookedness, which is impossible. Besides, what needed a positive grant of that which was not approved? It restrained no liberty to him that could but use a little fraud; it had been better silenced, unless it were approved in some case or other. But still it was not approved. Miserable excusers! he who doth evil, that good may come thereby, approves not what he doth; and yet the grand rule forbids him, and counts his damnation just if he do it. The sorceress Medea did not approve her own evil doings, yet looked not to be excused for that: and it is the constant opinion of Plato in Protagoras, and other of his dialogues, agreeing with that proverbial sentence among the Greeks, that “no man is wicked willingly.” Which also the Peripatetics do rather distinguish than deny. What great thank then, if any man, reputed wise and constant, will neither do, nor permit others under his charge to do, that which he approves not, especially in matter of sin? but for a judge, but for a magistrate the shepherd of his people, to surrender up his approbation against law, and his own judgment, to the obstinacy of his herd; what more unjudgelike, unmagistratelike, and in war more uncommanderlike? Twice in a short time it was the undoing of the Roman state, first when Pompey, next when Marcus Brutus, had not magnanimity enough but to make so poor a resignation of what they approved, to what the boisterous tribunes and soldiers bawled for. Twice it was the saving of two of the greatest commonwealths in the world, of Athens by Themistocles at the sea-fight of Salamis, of Rome by Fabius Maximus in the Punic war; for that these two matchless generals had the fortitude at home against the rashness and the clamours of their own captains and confederates, to withstand the doing or permitting of what they could not approve in their duty of their great command. Thus far of civil prudence. But when we speak of sin, let us look again upon the old reverend Eli; who in his heavy punishment found no difference between the doing and permitting of what he did not approve. If hardness of heart in the people may be an excuse, why then is Pilate branded through all memory? He approved not what he did, he openly Edition: current; Page: [236] protested, he washed his hands, and laboured not a little ere he would yield to the hard hearts of a whole people, both princes and plebeians, importuning and tumulting even to the fear of a revolt. Yet is there any will undertake his cause? If therefore Pilate for suffering but one act of cruelty against law, though with much unwillingness testified, at the violent demand of a whole nation, shall stand so black upon record to all posterity; alas for Moses! what shall we say for him, while we are taught believe he suffered not one act only both of cruelty and uncleanliness in one divorce, but made it a plain and lasting law against law, whereby ten thousand acts accounted both cruel and unclean might be daily committed, and this without the least suit or petition of the people, that we can read of?
And can we conceive without vile thoughts, that the majesty and holiness of God could endure so many ages to gratify a stubborn people in the practice of a foul polluting sin? and could he expect they should abstain, he not signifying his mind in a plain command, at such time especially when he was framing their laws and them to all possible perfection? But they were to look back to the first institution; nay rather why was not that individual institution brought out of Paradise, as was that of the sabbath, and repeated in the body of the law, that men might have understood it to be a command? For that any sentence that bears the resemblance of a precept, set there so out of place in another world, at such a distance from the whole law, and not once mentioned there, should be an obliging command to us, is very disputable; and perhaps it might be denied to be a command without further dispute: however, it commands not absolutely, as hath been cleared, but only with reference to that precedent promise of God, which is the very ground of his institution: if that appear not in some tolerable sort, how can we affirm such a matrimony to be the same which God instituted? in such an accident it will best behoove our soberness to follow rather what moral Sinai prescribes equal to our strength, than fondly to think within our strength all that lost Paradise relates.
CHAPTER XII.
The third shift of them who esteem it a mere judicial law. Proved again to be a law of moral equity.
Another while it shall suffice them, that it was not a moral but a judicial law, and so was abrogated: nay rather not abrogated because judicial; which law the ministry of Christ came not to deal with. And who put it in man’s power to exempt, where Christ speaks in general of not abrogating “the least jot or tittle,” and in special not that of divorce, because it follows among those laws which he promised expressly not to abrogate, but to vindicate from abusive traditions? which is most evidently to be seen in the 16th of Luke, where this caution of not abrogating is inserted immediately, and not otherwise than purposely, when no other point of the law is touched but that of divorce. And if we mark the 31st verse of Matt. v. he there cites not the law of Moses, but the licentious gloss which traduced the law; that therefore which he cited, that he abrogated, and not only abrogated, but disallowed and flatly condemned; which could not be the law of Moses, for that had been foully to the rebuke of his great servant. To abrogate a law made with God’s allowance, had been to tell us only that such a law was now to cease: but to refute it with an ignominious note of civilizing Edition: current; Page: [237] adultery, casts the reproof, which was meant only to the Pharisees, even upon him that made the law. But yet if that be judicial, which belongs to a civil court, this law is less judicial than nine of the ten commandments: for antiquaries affirm, that divorces proceeded among the Jews without knowledge of the magistrate, only with hands and seals under the testimony of some rabbies to be then present. Perkins, in a “Treatise of Conscience,” grants, that what in the judicial law is of common equity binds also the Christian: and how to judge of this, prescribes two ways: if wise nations have enacted the like decree; or if it maintain the good of a family, church, or commonwealth. This therefore is a pure moral œconomical law, too hastily imputed of tolerating sin; being rather so clear in nature and reason, that it was left to a man’s own arbitrement to be determined between God and his own conscience; not only among the Jews, but in every wise nation: the restraint whereof, who is not too thick-sighted, may see how hurtful and distractive it is to the house, the church, and commonwealth. And that power which Christ never took from the master of a family, but rectified only to a right and wary use at home; that power the undiscerning canonist hath improperly usurped in his court-leet, and bescribbled with a thousand trifling impertinences, which yet have filled the life of man with serious trouble and calamity. Yet grant it were of old a judicial law, it need not be the less moral for that, being conversant as it is about virtue or vice. And our Saviour disputes not here the judicature, for that was not his office, but the morality of divorce, whether it be adultery or no; if therefore he touch the law of Moses at all, he touches the moral part thereof, which is absurd to imagine, that the covenant of grace should reform the exact and perfect law of works eternal and immutable; or if he touch not the law at all, then is not the allowance thereof disallowed to us.
CHAPTER XIII.
The ridiculous opinion, that divorce was permitted from the custom in Egypt. That Moses gave not this law unwillingly. Perkins confesses this law was not abrogated.
Others are so ridiculous as to allege, that this license of divorcing was given them because they were so accustomed in Egypt. As if an ill custom were to be kept to all posterity; for the dispensation is both universal and of time unlimited, and so indeed no dispensation at all: for the overdated dispensation of a thing unlawful, serves for nothing but to increase hardness of heart, and makes men but wax more incorrigible; which were a great reproach to be said of any law or allowance that God should give us. In these opinions it would be more religion to advise well, lest we make ourselves juster than God, by censuring rashly that for sin, which his unspotted law without rebuke allows, and his people without being conscious of displeasing him have used: and if we can think so of Moses, as that the Jewish obstinacy could compel him to write such impure permissions against the word of God and his own judgment; doubtless it was his part to have protested publicly what straits he was driven to, and to have declared his conscience, when he gave any law against his mind: for the law is the touchstone of sin and of conscience, and must not be intermixed with corrupt indulgences: for then it loses the greatest praise it has of being certain, and Edition: current; Page: [238] infallible, not leading into error as the Jews were led by this connivance of Moses, if it were a connivance. But still they fly back to the primitive institution, and would have us re-enter Paradise against the sword that guards it. Whom I again thus reply to, that the place in Genesis contains the description of a fit and perfect marriage, with an interdict of ever divorcing such a union: but where nature is discovered to have never joined indeed, but vehemently seeks to part, it cannot be there conceived that God forbids it; nay, he commands it both in the law and in the prophet Malachi, which is to be our rule. And Perkins upon this chapter of Matthew deals plainly, that our Saviour here confutes not Moses’ law, but the false glosses that depraved the law; which being true, Perkins must needs grant, that something then is left to that law which Christ found no fault with; and what can that be but the conscionable use of such liberty, as the plain words import? so that by his own inference, Christ did not absolutely intend to restrain all divorces to the only cause of adultery. This therefore is the true scope of our Saviour’s will, that he who looks upon the law concerning divorce, should also look back upon the institution, that he may endeavour what is perfectest: and he that looks upon the institution shall not refuse as sinful and unlawful those allowances, which God affords him in his following law, lest he make himself purer than his Maker, and presuming above strength, slip into temptations irrecoverably. For this is wonderful, that in all those decrees concerning marriage, God should never once mention the prime institution to dissuade them from divorcing, and that he should forbid smaller sins as opposite to the hardness of their hearts, and let this adulterous matter of divorce pass ever unreproved.
This is also to be marvelled, that seeing Christ did not condemn whatever it was that Moses suffered, and that thereupon the Christian magistrate permits usury and open stews, and here with us adultery to be so slightly punished, which was punished by death to these hard-hearted Jews; why we should strain thus at the matter of divorce, which may stand so much with charity to permit, and make no scruple to allow usury esteemed to be so much against charity? But this it is to embroil ourselves against the righteous and all-wise judgments and statutes of God; which are not variable and contrarious as we would make them, one while permitting, and another while forbidding, but are most constant and most harmonious each to other. For how can the uncorrupt and majestic law of God, bearing in her hand the wages of life and death, harbour such a repugnance within herself, as to require an unexempted and impartial obedience to all her decrees, either from us or from our Mediator, and yet debase herself to faulter so many ages with circumcised adulteries by unclean and slubbering permissions?
CHAPTER XIV.
That Beza’s opinion of regulating sin by apostolic law cannot be found.
Yet Beza’s opinion is, that a politic law (but what politic law I know not, unless one of Machiavel’s) may regulate sin; may bear indeed, I grant, with imperfection for a time, as those canons of the apostles did in ceremonial things: but as for sin, the essence of it cannot consist with rule; and if the law fail to regulate sin, and not to take it utterly away, it necessarily confirms and establishes sin. To make a regularity of sin by law, either Edition: current; Page: [239] the law must straighten sin into no sin, or sin must crook the law into no law. The judicial law can serve to no other end than to be the protector and champion of religion and honest civility, as is set down plainly, Rom. xiii., and is but the arm of moral law, which can no more be separate from justice, than justice from virtue. Their office also, in a different manner, steers the same course; the one teaches what is good by precept, the other unteaches what is bad by punishment. But if we give way to politic dispensations of lewd uncleanness, the first good consequence of such a relax will be the justifying of papal stews, joined with a toleration of epidemic whoredom. Justice must revolt from the end of her authority, and become the patron of that whereof she was created the punisher. The example of usury, which is commonly alleged, makes against the allegation which it brings, as I touched before. Besides that usury, so much as is permitted by the magistrate, and demanded with common equity, is neither against the word of God, nor the rule of charity; as hath been often discussed by men of eminent learning and judgment. There must be therefore some other example found out to show us wherein civil policy may with warrant from God settle wickedness by law, and make that lawful which is lawless. Although I doubt not but, upon deeper consideration, that which is true in physic will be found as true in policy, that as of bad pulses those that beat most in order, are much worse than those that keep the most inordinate circuit; so of popular vices those that may be committed legally will be more pernicious, than those that are left to their own course at peril, not under a stinted privilege to sin orderly and regularly, which is an implicit contradiction, but under due and fearless execution of punishment.
The political law, since it cannot regulate vice, is to restrain it by using all means to root it out. But if it suffer the weed to grow up to any pleasurable or contented height upon what pretext soever it fastens the root, it prunes and dresses vice, as if it were a good plant. Let no man doubt therefore to affirm, that it is not so hurtful or dishonourable to a commonwealth, nor so much to the hardening of hearts, when those worse faults pretended to be feared are committed, by who so dares under strict and executed penalty, as when those less faults tolerated for fear of greater, harden their faces, not their hearts only, under the protection of public authority. For what less indignity were this, than as if justice herself, the queen of virtues, (descending from her sceptred royalty,) instead of conquering, should compound and treat with sin, her eternal adversary and rebel, upon ignoble terms? or as if the judicial law were like that untrusty steward in the gospel, and instead of calling in the debts of his moral master, should give out subtile and sly acquittances to keep himself from begging? or let us person him like some wretched itinerary judge, who to gratify his delinquents before him, would let them basely break his head, lest they should pull him from the bench, and throw him over the bar. Unless we had rather think both moral and judicial, full of malice and deadly purpose, conspired to let the debtor Israelite, the seed of Abraham, run on upon a bankrupt score, flattered with insufficient and ensnaring discharges, that so he might be haled to a more cruel forfeit for all the indulgent arrears which those judicial acquittances had engaged him in. No, no, this cannot be, that the law whose integrity and faithfulness is next to God, should be either the shameless broker of our impunities, or the intended instrument of our destruction. The method of holy correction, such as became the commonwealth of Israel, is not to bribe sin with sin, to capitulate and hire out one crime with another; but with more noble and graceful severity than Popilius the Roman legate used with Antiochus, to limit and level out the direct Edition: current; Page: [240] way from vice to virtue, with straightest and exactest lines on either side, not winding or indenting so much as to the right hand of fair pretences. Violence indeed and insurrection may force the law to suffer what it cannot mend; but to write a decree in allowance of sin, as soon can the hand of justice rot off. Let this be ever concluded as a truth that will outlive the faith of those that seek to bear it down.
CHAPTER XV.
That divorce was not given for wives only, as Beza and Paræus write. More of the institution.
Lastly, if divorce were granted, as Beza and others say, not for men, but to release afflicted wives; certainly, it is not only a dispensation, but a most merciful law; and why it should not yet be in force, being wholly as needful, I know not what can be in cause but senseless cruelty. But yet to say, divorce was granted for relief of wives rather than of husbands, is but weakly conjectured, and is manifestly the extreme shift of a huddled exposition. Whenas it could not be found how hardness of heart should be lessened by liberty of divorce, a fancy was devised to hide the flaw, by commenting that divorce was permitted only for the help of wives. Palpably uxurious! who can be ignorant, that woman was created for man, and not man for woman, and that a husband may be injured as insufferably in marriage as a wife? What an injury is it after wedlock not to be beloved! what to be slighted! what to be contended with in point of house-rule who shall be the head; not for any parity of wisdom, for that were something reasonable, but out of a female pride! “I suffer not,” saith St. Paul, “the woman to usurp authority over the man.” If the apostle could not suffer it, into what mould is he mortified that can? Solomon saith, “that a bad wife is to her husband as rottenness to his bones, a continual dropping. Better dwell in the corner of a house-top, or in the wilderness,” than with such a one. “Whoso hideth her, hideth the wind, and one of the four mischiefs which the earth cannot bear.” If the Spirit of God wrote such aggravations as these, and (as may be guessed by these similitudes) counsels the man rather to divorce than to live with such a colleague; and yet on the other side expresses nothing of the wife’s suffering with a bad husband: is it not most likely that God in his law had more pity towards man thus wedlocked, than towards the woman that was created for another? The same Spirit relates to us the course, which the Medes and Persians took by occasion of Vashti, whose mere denial to come at her husband’s sending, lost her the being queen any longer, and set up a wholesome law, “that every man should bear rule in his own house.” And the divine relater shows us not the least sign of disliking what was done; how should he, if Moses long before was nothing less mindful of the honour and pre-eminence due to man? So that to say divorce was granted for woman rather than man, was but fondly invented. Esteeming therefore to have asserted thus an injured law of Moses, from the unwarranted and guilty name of a dispensation, to be again a most equal and requisite law, we have the word of Christ himself, that he came not to alter the least title of it; and signifies no small displeasure against him that shall teach to do so. On which relying, I shall not much waver to affirm, that those words, which are made to intimate as if they forbad all divorce, but for adultery, (though Moses have Edition: current; Page: [241] constituted otherwise,) those words taken circumscriptly, without regard to any precedent law of Moses or attestation of Christ himself, or without care to preserve those his fundamental and superior laws of nature and charity, to which all other ordinances give up their seal, are as much against plain equity and the mercy of religion, as those words of “Take, eat, this is my body,” elementally understood, are against nature and sense.
And surely the restoring of this degraded law hath well recompensed the diligence was used by enlightening us further to find out wherefore Christ took off the Pharisees from alleging the law, and referred them to the first institution; not condemning, altering, or abolishing this precept of divorce, which is plainly moral, for that were against his truth, his promise, and his prophetic office; but knowing how fallaciously they had cited and concealed the particular and natural reason of the law, that they might justify any froward reason of their own, he lets go that sophistry unconvinced; for that had been to teach them else, which his purpose was not. And since they had taken a liberty which the law gave not, he amuses and repels their tempting pride with a perfection of Paradise, which the law required not; not thereby to oblige our performance to that whereto the law never enjoined the fallen estate of man: for if the first institution must make wedlock, whatever happen, inseparable to us, it must make it also as perfect, as meetly helpful, and as comfortable as God promised it should be, at least in some degree; otherwise it is not equal or proportionable to the strength of man, that he should be reduced into such indissoluble bonds to his assured misery, if all the other conditions of that covenant be manifestly altered.
CHAPTER XVI.
How to be understood, that they must be one flesh; and how that those whom God hath joined, man should not sunder.
Next he saith, “they must be one flesh;” which when all conjecturing is done, will be found to import no more but to make legitimate and good the carnal act, which else might seem to have something of pollution in it; and infers thus much over, that the fit union of their souls be such as may even incorporate them to love and amity: but that can never be where no correspondence is of the mind; nay, instead of being one flesh, they will be rather two carcasses chained unnaturally together; or, as it may happen, a living soul bound to a dead corpse; a punishment too like that inflicted by the tyrant Mezentius, so little worthy to be received as that remedy of loneliness, which God meant us. Since we know it is not the joining of another body will remove loneliness, but the uniting of another compliable mind; and that it is no blessing but a torment, nay a base and brutish condition to be one flesh, unless where nature can in some measure fix a unity of disposition. The meaning therefore of these words, “For this cause shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife,” was first to show us the dear affection which naturally grows in every not unnatural marriage, even to the leaving of parents, or other familiarity whatsoever. Next, it justifies a man in so doing, that nothing is done undutifully to father or mother. But he that should be here sternly commanded to cleave to his error, a disposition which to his he finds will never cement, a quotidian of sorrow and discontent in his house; let us be excused to pause a little, and bethink us every way round ere we lay such a flat solecism upon the gracious, Edition: current; Page: [242] and certainly not inexorable, not ruthless and flinty ordinance of marriage. For if the meaning of these words must be thus blocked up within their own letters from all equity and fair deduction, they will serve then well indeed their turn, who affirm divorce to have been granted only for wives; whenas we see no word of this text binds women, but men only, what it binds. No marvel then if Salomith (sister to Herod) sent a writ of ease to Costobarus her husband, which (as Josephus there attests) was lawful only to men. No marvel though Placidia, the sister of Honorius, threatened the like to earl Constantius for a trivial cause, as Photius relates from Olympiodorus. No marvel any thing, if letters must be turned into palisadoes, to stake out all requisite sense from entering to their due enlargement.
Lastly, Christ himself tells who should not be put asunder, namely, those whom God hath joined. A plain solution of this great controversy, if men would but use their eyes; for when is it that God may be said to join? when the parties and their friends consent? No surely, for that may concur to lewdest ends. Or is it when church rites are finished? Neither; for the efficacy of those depends upon the presupposed fitness of either party. Perhaps after carnal knowledge: least of all; for that may join persons whom neither law nor nature dares join. It is left, that only then when the minds are fitly disposed and enabled to maintain a cheerful conversation, to the solace and love of each other, according as God intended and promised in the very first foundation of matrimony, “I will make him a help meet for him;” for surely what God intended and promised, that only can be thought to be his joining, and not the contrary. So likewise the apostle witnesseth, 1 Cor. vii. 15, that in marriage “God hath called us to peace.” And doubtless in what respect he hath called us to marriage, in that also he hath joined us. The rest, whom either disproportion or deadness of spirit, or something distasteful and averse in the immutable bent of nature renders conjugal, error may have joined, but God never joined against the meaning of his own ordinance. And if he joined them not, then is there no power above their own consent to hinder them from unjoining, when they cannot reap the soberest ends of being together in any tolerable sort. Neither can it be said properly that such twain were ever divorced, but only parted from each other, as two persons unconjunctive are unmarriable together. But if, whom God hath made a fit help, frowardness or private injuries hath made unfit, that being the secret of marriage, God can better judge than man, neither is man indeed fit or able to decide this matter: however it be, undoubtedly a peaceful divorce is a less evil, and less in scandal than hateful, hard-hearted, and destructive continuance of marriage in the judgment of Moses and of Christ, that justifies him in choosing the less evil; which if it were an honest and civil prudence in the law, what is there in the gospel forbidding such a kind of legal wisdom, though we should admit the common expositors?
CHAPTER XVII.
The sentence of Christ concerning divorce how to be expounded. What Grotius hath observed. Other additions.
Having thus unfolded those ambiguous reasons, wherewith Christ (as his wont was) gave to the Pharisees that came to sound him, such an answer as they deserved, it will not be uneasy to explain the sentence itself that Edition: current; Page: [243] now follows; “Whosoever shall put away his wife except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery.” First therefore I will set down what is observed by Grotius upon this point, a man of general learning. Next, I produce what mine own thoughts gave me before I had seen his annotations. Origen, saith he, notes that Christ named adultery rather as one example of other like cases, than as one only exception; and that is frequent not only in human but in divine laws, to express one kind of fact, whereby other causes of like nature may have the like plea, as Exod. xxi. 18, 19, 20, 26; Deut. xix. 5. And from the maxims of civil law he shows, that even in sharpest penal laws the same reason hath the same right; and in gentler laws, that from like causes to like the law interprets rightly. But it may be objected, saith he, that nothing destroys the end of wedlock so much as adultery. To which he answers, that marriage was not ordained only for copulation, but for mutual help and comfort of life: and if we mark diligently the nature of our Saviour’s commands, we shall find that both their beginning and their end consists in charity; whose will is, that we should so be good to others, as that we be not cruel to ourselves: and hence it appears why Mark, and Luke, and St. Paul to the Corinthians, mentioning this precept of Christ, add no exception, because exceptions that arise from natural equity are included silently under general terms: it would be considered therefore, whether the same equity may not have place in other cases less frequent. Thus far he.
From hence is what I add: First, that this saying of Christ, as it is usually expounded, can be no law at all, that a man for no cause should separate but for adultery, except it be a supernatural law, not binding us as we now are: had it been the law of nature, either the Jews, or some other wise and civil nation, would have pressed it: or let it be so, yet that law, Deut. xxiv. 1, whereby a man hath leave to part, whenas for just and natural cause discovered he cannot live, is a law ancienter and deeper engraven in blameless nature than the other: therefore the inspired lawgiver Moses took care, that this should be specified and allowed; the other he let vanish in silence, not once repeated in the volume of his law, even as the reason of it vanished with Paradise. Secondly, this can be no new command, for the gospel enjoins no new morality, save only the infinite enlargement of charity, which in this respect is called the new commandment by St. John, as being the accomplishment of every command. Thirdly, it is no command of perfection further than it partakes of charity, which is “the bond of perfection.” Those commands therefore, which compel us to self-cruelty above our strength, so hardly will help forward to perfection, that they hinder and set backward in all the common rudiments of Christianity, as was proved. It being thus clear, that the words of Christ can be no kind of command as they are vulgarly taken, we shall now see in what sense they may be a command, and that an excellent one, the same with that of Moses, and no other. Moses had granted, that only for a natural annoyance, defect, or dislike, whether in body or mind, (for so the Hebrew word plainly notes,) which a man could not force himself to live with, he might give a bill of divorce, thereby forbidding any other cause, wherein amendment or reconciliation might have place. This law the Pharisees depraving extended to any slight contentious cause whatsoever. Christ therefore seeing where they halted, urges the negative part of the law, which is necessarily understood, (for the determinate permission of Moses binds them from further license,) and checking their supercilious drift, declares that no accidental, temporary, or reconcileable offence (except fornication) can justify a divorce. He touches not here those natural and perpetual hinderances of society, Edition: current; Page: [244] whether in body or mind, which are not to be removed; for such as they are aptest to cause an unchangeable offence, so are they not capable of reconcilement, because not of amendment, they do not break indeed, but they annihilate the bands of marriage more than adultery. For that fault committed argues not always a hatred either natural or incidental against whom it is committed; neither does it infer a disability of all future helpfulness, or loyalty, or loving agreement, being once past and pardoned, where it can be pardoned: but that which naturally distastes, and “finds no favour in the eyes” of matrimony, can never be concealed, never appeased, never intermitted, but proves a perpetual nullity of love and contentment, a solitude and dead vacation of all acceptable conversing. Moses therefore permits divorce, but in cases only that have no hands to join, and more need of separating than adultery. Christ forbids it, but in matters only that may accord, and those less than fornication. Thus is Moses’ law here plainly confirmed, and those causes which he permitted not a jot gainsaid. And that this is the true meaning of this place, I prove by no less an author than St. Paul himself, 1 Cor. vii. 10, 11; upon which text interpreters agree, that the apostle only repeats the precept of Christ: where while he speaks of the “wife’s reconcilement to her husband,” he puts it out of controversy, that our Saviour meant chiefly matters of strife and reconcilement; of which sort he would not that any difference should be the occasion of divorce, except fornication. And that we may learn better how to value a grave and prudent law of Moses, and how unadvisedly we smatter with our lips, when we talk of Christ’s abolishing any judicial law of his great Father, except in some circumstances which are judaical rather than judicial, and need no abolishing, but cease of themselves; I say again, that this recited law of Moses contains a cause of divorce greater beyond compare than that for adultery: and whoso cannot so conceive it, errs and wrongs exceedingly a law of deep wisdom for want of well fathoming. For let him mark, no man urges the just divorcing of adultery as it is a sin, but as it is an injury to marriage; and though it be but once committed, and that without malice, whether through importunity or opportunity, the gospel does not therefore dissuade him who would therefore divorce; but that natural hatred whenever it arises, is a greater evil in marriage than the accident of adultery, a greater defrauding, a greater injustice, and yet not blameable, he who understands not after all this representing, I doubt his will like a hard spleen draws faster than his understanding can well sanguify: nor did that man ever know or feel what it is to love truly, nor ever yet comprehend in his thoughts what the true intent of marriage is. And this also will be somewhat above his reach, but yet no less a truth for lack of his perspective, that as no man apprehends what vice is so well as he who is truly virtuous, no man knows hell like him who converses most in heaven; so there is none that can estimate the evil and the affliction of a natural hatred in matrimony, unless he have a soul gentle enough and spacious enough to contemplate what is true love.
And the reason why men so disesteem this wise-judging law of God, and count hate, or “the not finding of favour,” as it is there termed, a humourous, a dishonest, and slight cause of divorce, is because themselves apprehend so little of what true concord means: for if they did, they would be juster in their balancing between natural hatred and casual adultery; this being but a transient injury, and soon amended, I mean as to the party against whom the trespass is: but that other being an unspeakable and unremitting sorrow and offence, whereof no amends can be made, no cure, no ceasing but by divorce, which like a divine touch in one moment heals all, and (like the word of God) in one instant hushes outrageous tempests Edition: current; Page: [245] into a sudden stillness and peaceful calm. Yet all this so great a good of God’s own enlarging to us is, by the hard reins of them that fit us, wholly diverted and embezzled from us. Maligners of mankind! But who hath taught you to mangle thus, and make more gashes in the miseries of a blameless creature, with the leaden daggers of your literal decrees, to whose ease you cannot add the tithe of one small atom, but by letting alone your unhelpful surgery. As for such as think wandering concupiscence to be here newly and more precisely forbidden than it was before; if the apostle can convince them, we know that we are to “know lust by the law,” and not by any new discovery of the gospel. The law of Moses knew what it permitted, and the gospel knew what it forbid; he that under a peevish conceit of debarring concupiscence, shall go about to make a novice of Moses, (not to say a worse thing, for reverence sake,) and such a one of God himself, as is a horror to think, to bind our Saviour in the default of a downright promise-breaking; and to bind the disunions of complaining nature in chains together, and curb them with a canon bit; it is he that commits all the whoredom and adultery which himself adjudges, besides the former guilt so manifold that lies upon him. And if none of these considerations, with all their weight and gravity, can avail to the dispossessing him of his precious literalism, let some one or other entreat him but to read on in the same 19th of Matth. till he comes to that place that says, “Some make themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.” And if then he please to make use of Origen’s knife, he may do well to be his own carver.
CHAPTER XVII.
Whether the words of our Saviour be rightly expounded only af actual fornication to be the cause of divorce. The opinion of Grotius, with other reasons.
But because we know that Christ never gave a judicial law, and that the word fornication is variously significant in Scripture, it will be much right done to our Saviour’s words, to consider diligently whether it be meant here, that nothing but actual fornication proved by witness can warrant a divorce; for so our canon law judges. Nevertheless, as I find that Grotius on this place hath observed the Christian emperors, Theodosius the IId and Justinian, men of high wisdom and reputed piety, decreed it to be a divorcive fornication, if the wife attempted either against the knowledge, or obstinately against the will of her husband, such things as gave open suspicion of adulterizing; as the wilful haunting of feasts, and invitations with men not of near kindred; the lying forth of her house, without probable cause; the frequenting of theatres against her husband’s mind; her endeavour to prevent or destroy conception. Hence that of Jerom, “where fornication is suspected, the wife may lawfully be divorced:” not that every motion of a jealous mind should be regarded, but that it should not be exacted to prove all things by the visibility of law witnessing, or else to hoodwink the mind: for the law is not able to judge of these things but by the rule of equity, and by permitting a wise man to walk the middle way of prudent circumspection, neither wretchedly jealous, nor stupidly and tamely patient. To this purpose hath Grotius in his notes. He shows also, that fornication is taken in Scripture for such a continual headstrong Edition: current; Page: [246] behaviour, as tends to plain contempt of the husband, and proves it out of Judges xix. 2, where the Levite’s wife is said to have played the whore against him; which Josephus and the Septuagint, with the Chaldean, interpret only of stubborness and rebellion against her husband: and to this I add, that Kimchi, and the two other rabbies who gloss the text, are in the same opinion. Ben Gersom reasons, that had it been whoredom, a Jew and a Levite would have disdained to fetch her again. And this I shall contribute, that had it been whoredom, she would have chosen any other place to run to than to her father’s house, it being so infamous for a Hebrew woman to play the harlot, and so opprobrious to the parents. Fornication then in this place of the judges is understood for stubborn disobedience against the husband, and not for adultery. A sin of that sudden activity, as to be already committed when no more is done, but only looked unchastely: which yet I should be loth to judge worthy a divorce, though in our Saviour’s language it be called adultery. Nevertheless, when palpable and frequent signs are given, the law of God, Numb. v., so far gave way to the jealousy of a man, as that the woman, set before the sanctuary with her head uncovered, was adjured by the priest to swear whether she were false or no, and constrained to drink that “bitter water,” with an undoubted “curse of rottenness and tympany” to follow, unless she were innocent. And the jealous man had not been guiltless before God, as seems by the last verse, if having such a suspicion in his head, he should neglect his trial; which if to this day it be not to be used, or be thought as uncertain of effect as our antiquated law of Ordalium, yet all equity will judge, that many adulterous demeanours, which are of lewd suspicion and example, may be held sufficient to incur a divorce, though the act itself hath not been proved. And seeing the generosity of our nation is so, as to account no reproach more abominable than to be nicknamed the husband of an adulteress; that our law should not be as ample as the law of God, to vindicate a man from that ignoble sufferance, is our barbarous unskilfulness, not considering that the law should be exasperated according to our estimation of the injury. And if it must be suffered till the act be visibly proved, Solomon himself, whose judgment will be granted to surpass the acuteness of any canonist, confesses, Prov. xxx. 19, 20, that for the act of adultery it is as difficult to be found as the “track of an eagle in the air, or the way of a ship in the sea;” so that a man may be put to unmanly indignities ere it be found out. This therefore may be enough to inform us, that divorcive adultery is not limited by our Saviour to the utmost act, and that to be attested always by eyewitness, but may be extended also to divers obvious actions, which either plainly lead to adultery, or give such presumption whereby sensible men may suspect the deed to be already done. And this the rather may be thought, in that our Saviour chose to use the word Fornication, which word is found to signify other matrimonial transgressions of main breach to that covenant besides actual adultery. For that sin needed not the riddance of divorce, but of death by the law, which was active even till then by the example of the woman taken in adultery; or if the law had been dormant, our Saviour was more likely to have told them of their neglect, than to have let a capital crime silently scape into a divorce: or if it be said, his business was not to tell them what was criminal in the civil courts, but what was sinful at the bar of conscience, how dare they then, having no other ground than these our Saviour’s words, draw that into the trial of law, which both by Moses and our Saviour was left to the jurisdiction of conscience? But we take from our Saviour, say they, only that it was adultery, and our law of itself applies the punishment. Edition: current; Page: [247] But by their leave that so argue, the great Lawgiver of all the world, who knew best what was adultery, both to the Jew and to the Gentile, appointed no such applying, and never likes when mortal men will be vainly presuming to outstrip his justice.
CHAPTER XIX.
Christ’s manner of teaching. St. Paul adds to this matter of divorce without command, to show the matter to be of equity, not of rigour. That the bondage of a Christian may be as much, and his peace as little, in some other marriages besides idolatrous. If those arguments therefore be good in that one case, why not in those other? Therefore the apostle himself adds, ἐν το[Editor: illegible character]ς τοιούτοις.
Thus at length we see both by this and other places, that there is scarce any one saying in the gospel but must be read with limitations and distinctions to be rightly understood; for Christ gives no full comments or continued discourses, but (as Demetrius the rhetorician phrases it) speaks oft in monosyllables, like a master scattering the heavenly grain of his doctrine like pearls here and there, which requires a skilful and laborious gatherer, who must compare the words he finds with other precepts, with the end of every ordinance, and with the general analogy of evangelic doctrine: otherwise many particular sayings would be but strange repugnant riddles, and the church would offend in granting divorce for frigidity, which is not here excepted with adultery, but by them added. And this was it undoubtedly, which gave reason to St. Paul of his own authority, as he professes, and without command from the Lord, to enlarge the seeming construction of those places in the gospel, by adding a case wherein a person deserted (which is something less than divorced) may lawfully marry again. And having declared his opinion in one case, he leaves a further liberty for Christian prudence to determine in cases of like importance, using words so plain as not to be shifted off, “that a brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases;” adding also, that “God hath called us to peace” in marriage.
Now if it be plain, that a Christian may be brought into unworthy bondage, and his religious peace not only interrupted now and then, but perpetually and finally hindered in wedlock, by misyoking with a diversity of nature as well as of religion, the reasons of St. Paul cannot be made special to that one case of infidelity but are of equal moment to a divorce, wherever Christian liberty and peace are without fault equally obstructed: that the ordinance which God gave to our comfort may not be pinned upon us to our undeserved thraldom, to be cooped up, as it were in mockery of wedlock, to a perpetual betrothed loneliness and discontent, if nothing worse ensue. There being nought else of marriage left between such, but a displeasing and forced remedy against the sting of a brute desire: which fleshly accustoming without the soul’s union and commixture of intellectual delight, as it is rather a soiling than a fulfilling of marriage rites, so is it enough to abase the mettle of a generous spirit, and sinks him to a low and vulgar pitch of endeavour in all his actions; or, (which is worse,) leaves him in a despairing plight of abject and hardened thoughts: which condition rather than a good man should fall into, a man useful in the service of God and mankind, Christ himself hath taught us to dispense with Edition: current; Page: [248] the most sacred ordinance of his worship, even for a bodily healing to dispense with that holy and speculative rest of sabbath, much more then with the erroneous observance of an ill-knotted marriage, for the sustaining of an overcharged faith and perseverance.
CHAPTER XX.
The meaning of St. Paul, that “charity believeth all things.” What is to be said to the license which is vainly feared will grow hereby. What to those who never have done prescribing patience in this case. The papist most severe against divorce, yet most easy to all license. Of all the miseries in marriage God is to be cleared, and the faults to be laid on man’s unjust laws.
And though bad causes would take license by this pretext, if that cannot be remedied, upon their conscience be it who shall so do. This was that hardness of heart, and abuse of a good law, which Moses was content to suffer, rather than good men should not have it at all to use needfully. And he who to run after one lost sheep left ninety-nine of his own flock at random in the wilderness, would little perplex his thoughts for the obduring of nine hundred and ninety such as will daily take worse liberties, whether they have permission or not. To conclude, as without charity God hath given no commandment to men, so without it neither can men rightly believe any commandment given. For every act of true faith, as well that whereby we believe the law, as that whereby we endeavour the law, is wrought in us by charity, according to that in the divine hymn of St. Paul, 1 Cor. xiii. “Charity believeth all things;” not as if she were so credulous, which is the exposition hitherto current, for that were a trivial praise, but to teach us that charity is the high governess of our belief, and that we cannot safely assent to any precept written in the Bible, but as charity commends it to us. Which agrees with that of the same apostle to the Eph. iv. 14, 15; where he tells us, that the way to get a sure undoubted knowledge of things, is to hold that for truth which accords most with charity. Whose unerring guidance and conduct having followed as a loadstar, with all diligence and fidelity, in this question; I trust (through the help of that illuminating spirit which hath favoured me) to have done no every day’s work, in asserting after many the words of Christ, with other scriptures of great concernment, from burdensome and remorseless obscurity, tangled with manifold repugnances, to their native lustre and consent between each other; hereby also dissolving tedious and Gordian difficulties, which have hitherto molested the church of God, and are now decided not with the sword of Alexander, but with the immaculate hands of charity, to the unspeakable good of Christendom. And let the extreme literalist sit down now, and revolve whether this in all necessity be not the due result of our Saviour’s words, or if he persist to be otherwise opinioned, let him well advise, lest thinking to gripe fast the gospel, he be found instead with the canon law in his fist: whose boisterous edicts tyrannizing the blessed ordinance of marriage into the quality of a most unnatural and unchristianly yoke hath given the flesh this advantage to hate it, and turn aside, ofttimes unwillingly, to all dissolute uncleanness, even till punishment itself is weary of and overcome by the incredible frequency of trading lust and uncontrolled adulteries. Yet men whose creed is custom, Edition: current; Page: [249] I doubt not will be still endeavouring to hide the sloth of their timorous capacities with this pretext, that for all this it is better to endure with patience and silence this affliction which God hath sent. And I agree it is true, if this be exhorted and not enjoined; but withal it will be wisely done to be as sure as may be, that what man’s iniquity hath laid on be not imputed to God’s sending, lest under the colour of an affected patience we detain ourselves at the gulf’s mouth of many hideous temptations, not to be withstood without proper gifts, which (as Perkins well notes) God gives not ordinarily, no not to most earnest prayers. Therefore we pray, “Lead us not into temptation;” a vain prayer, if, having led ourselves thither, we love to stay in that perilous condition. God sends remedies as well as evils, under which he who lies and groans that may lawfully acquit himself, is accessory to his own ruin; nor will it excuse him though he suffer through a sluggish fearfulness to search thoroughly what is lawful, for fear of disquieting the secure falsity of an old opinion. Who doubts not but that it may be piously said, to him who would dismiss his frigidity, Bear your trial: take it as if God would have you live this life of continence? if he exhort this, I hear him as an angel, though he speak without warrant; but if he would compel me, I know him for Satan. To him who divorces an adulteress, piety might say, pardon her; you may show much mercy, you may win a soul: yet the law both of God and man leaves it freely to him: for God loves not to plough out the heart of our endeavours with overhard and sad tasks. God delights not to make a drudge of virtue, whose actions must be all elective and unconstrained. Forced virtue is as a bolt overshot: it goes neither forward nor backward, and does no good as it stands. Seeing therefore that neither Scripture nor reason hath laid this unjust austerity upon divorce, we may resolve that nothing else hath wrought it but that letter-bound servility of the canon doctors, supposing marriage to be a sacrament, and out of the art they have to lay unnecessary burdens upon all men, to make a fair show in the fleshly observance of matrimony, though peace and love with all other conjugal respects fare never so ill. And indeed the papists, who are the strictest forbidders of divorce, are the easiest libertines to admit of grossest uncleanness; as if they had a design by making wedlock a supportless yoke, to violate it most, under colour of preserving it most inviolable; and withal delighting (as their mystery is) to make men the day labourers of their own afflictions, as if there were such a scarcity of miseries from abroad, that we should be made to melt our choicest home blessings, and coin them into crosses, for want whereby to hold commerce with patience. If any therefore who shall hap to read this discourse, hath been through misadventure ill engaged in this contracted evil here complained of, and finds the fits and workings of a high impatience frequently upon him; of all those wild words which men in misery think to ease themselves by uttering, let him not open his lips against the providence of Heaven, or tax the ways of God and his divine truth: for they are equal, easy, and not burdensome: nor do they ever cross the just and reasonable desires of men, nor involve this our portion of mortal life into a necessity of sadness and malecontent, by laws commanding over the unreducible antipathies of nature, sooner or later found, but allow us to remedy and shake off those evils into which human error hath led us through the midst of our best intentions, and to support our incident extremities by that authentic precept of sovereign charity, whose grand commission is to do and to dispose over all the ordinances of God to man, that love and truth may advance each other to everlasting. While we, literally superstitious, through customary faintness of heart, not venturing Edition: current; Page: [250] to pierce with our free thoughts into the full latitude of nature and religion, abandon ourselves to serve under the tyranny of usurped opinions; suffering those ordinances which were allotted to our solace and reviving, to trample over us, and hale us into a multitude of sorrows, which God never meant us. And where he sets us in a fair allowance of way, with honest liberty and prudence to our guard, we never leave subtilizing and casuisting till we have straightened and pared that liberal path into a razor’s edge to walk on; between a precipice of unnecessary mischief on either side, and starting at every false alarm, we do not know which way to set a foot forward with manly confidence and Christian resolution, through the confused ringing in our ears of panic scruples and amazements.
CHAPTER XXI.
That the matter of divorce is not to be tried by law, but by conscience, as many other sins are. The magistrate can only see that the condition of the divorce be just and equal. The opinion of Fagius, and the reasons of this assertion.
Another act of papal encroachment it was, to pluck the power and arbitrement of divorce from the master of the family, into whose hands God and the law of all nations had put it, and Christ so left it, preaching only to the conscience, and not authorizing a judicial court to toss about and divulge the unaccountable and secret reason of disaffection between man and wife, as a thing most improperly answerable to any such kind of trial. But the popes of Rome, perceiving the great revenue and high authority it would give them even over princes, to have the judging and deciding of such a main consequence in the life of man as was divorce; wrought so upon the superstition of those ages, as to divest them of that right, which God from the beginning had entrusted to the husband: by which means they subjected that ancient and naturally domestic prerogative to an external and unbefitting judicature. For although differences in divorce about dowries, jointures, and the like, besides the punishing of adultery, ought not to pass without referring, if need be, to the magistrate; yet that the absolute and final hindering of divorce cannot belong to any civil or earthly power, against the will and consent of both parties, or of the husband alone, some reasons will be here urged as shall not need to decline the touch. But first I shall recite what hath been already yielded by others in favour of this opinion. Grotius and many more agree, that notwithstanding what Christ spake therein to the conscience, the magistrate is not thereby enjoined aught against the preservation of civil peace, of equity, and of convenience. And among these Fagius is most remarkable, and gives the same liberty of pronouncing divorce to the Christian magistrate as the Mosaic had. “For whatever,” saith he, “Christ spake to the regenerate, the judge hath to deal with the vulgar: if therefore any through hardness of heart will not be a tolerable wife to her husband, it will be lawful as well now as of old to pass the bill of divorce, not by private but by public authority. Nor doth man separate them then, but God by his law of divorce given by Moses. What can hinder the magistrate from so doing, to whose government all outward things are subject, to separate and remove from perpetual vexation, and no small danger, those bodies whose minds are already separate; it being his office to procure peaceable and convenient living in Edition: current; Page: [251] the commonwealth; and being as certain also, that they so necessarily separated cannot all receive a single life?” And this I observe, that our divines do generally condemn separation of bed and board, without the liberty of second choice; if that therefore in some cases be most purely necessary, (as who so blockish to deny?) then is this also as needful. Thus far by others is already well stepped, to inform us that divorce is not a matter of law, but of charity: if there remain a furlong yet to end the question, these following reasons may serve to gain it with any apprehension not too unlearned or too wayward. First, because ofttimes the causes of seeking divorce reside so deeply in the radical and innocent affections of nature, as is not within the diocese of law to tamper with. Other relations may aptly enough be held together by a civil and virtuous love: but the duties of man and wife are such as are chiefly conversant in that love which is most ancient and merely natural, whose two prime statutes are to join itself to that which is good, and acceptable, and friendly; and to turn aside and depart from what is disagreeable, displeasing, and unlike: of the two this latter is the strongest, and most equal to be regarded; for although a man may often be unjust in seeking that which he loves, yet he can never be unjust or blameable in retiring from his endless trouble and distaste, when as his tarrying can redound to no true content on either side. Hate is of all things the mightiest divider, nay is division itself. To couple hatred therefore, though wedlock try all her golden links, and borrow to her aid all the iron manacles and fetters of law, it does but seek to twist a rope of sand, which was a task they say that posed the devil: and that sluggish fiend in hell, Ocnus, whom the poems tell of, brought his idle cordage to as good effect, which never served to bind with, but to feed the ass that stood at his elbow. And that the restrictive law against divorce attains as little to bind any thing truly in a disjointed marriage, or to keep it bound, but serves only to feed the ignorance and definitive impertinence of a doltish canon, were no absurd allusion. To hinder therefore those deep and serious regresses of nature in a reasonable soul, parting from that mistaken help, which he justly seeks in a person created for him, recollecting himself from an unmeet help which was never meant, and to detain him by compulsion in such an unpredestined misery as this, is in diameter against both nature and institution: but to interpose a jurisdictive power over the inward and irremediable disposition of man, to command love and sympathy, to forbid dislike against the guiltless instinct of nature, is not within the province of any law to reach; and were indeed an uncommodious rudeness, not a just power: for that law may bandy with nature, and traverse her sage motions, was an error in Callicles the rhetorician, whom Socrates from high principles confutes in Plato’s Gorgias. If therefore divorce may be so natural, and that law and nature are not to go contrary; then to forbid divorce compulsively, is not only against nature, but against law.
Next it must be remembered, that all law is for some good, that may be frequently attained without the admixture of a worse inconvenience; and therefore many gross faults, as ingratitude and the like, which are too far within the soul to be cured by constraint of law, are left only to be wrought on by conscience and persuasion. Which made Aristotle, in the 10th of his Ethics to Nicomachus, aim at a kind of division of law into private or persuasive, and public or compulsive. Hence it is, that the law forbidding divorce never attains to any good end of such prohibition, but rather multiplies evil. For if nature’s resistless sway in love or hate be once compelled, it grows eareless of itself, vicious, useless to friends, unserviceable and spiritless to the commonwealth. Which Moses rightly foresaw, and Edition: current; Page: [252] all wise lawgivers that ever knew man, what kind of creature he was. The parliament also and clergy of England were not ignorant of this, when they consented that Harry the VIII. might put away his queen Anne of Cleve, whom he could not like after he had been wedded half a year; unless it were that, contrary to the proverb, they made a necessity of that which might have been a virtue in them to do: for even the freedom and eminence of man’s creation gives him to be a law in this matter to himself, being the head of the other sex which was made for him: whom therefore though he ought not to injure, yet, neither should he be forced to retain in society to his own overthrow, nor to hear any judge therein above himself. It being also an unseemly affront to the sequestered and veiled modesty of that sex, to have her unpleasingness and other concealments bandied up and down and aggravated in open court by those hired masters of tongue-fence. Such uncomely exigences it befel no less a majesty than Henry the VIII. to be reduced to, who, finding just reason in his conscience to forego his brother’s wife, after many indignities of being deluded, and made a boy of by those his two cardinal judges, was constrained at last, for want of other proof, that she had been carnally known by prince Arthur, even to uncover the nakedness of that virtuous lady, and to recite openly the obscene evidence of his brother’s chamberlain. Yet it pleased God to make him see all the tyranny of Rome, by discovering this which they exercised over divorce, and to make him the beginner of a reformation to this whole kingdom, by first asserting into his familiary power the right of just divorce. It is true, an adulteress cannot be shamed enough by any public proceeding; but the woman whose honour is not appeached is less injured by a silent dismission, being otherwise not illiberally dealt with, than to endure a clamouring debate of utterless things, in a business of that civil secrecy and difficult discerning, as not to be overmuch questioned by nearest friends. Which drew that answer from the greatest and worthiest Roman of his time, Paulus Emilius, being demanded why he would put away his wife for no visible reason? “This shoe,” said he, and held it out on his foot, “is a neat shoe, a new shoe, and yet none of you know where it wrings me;” much less by the unfamiliar cognizance of a feed gamester can such a private difference be examined, neither ought it.
Again, if law aim at the firm establishment and preservation of matrimonial faith, we know that cannot thrive under violent means, but is the more violated. It is not when two unfortunately met are by the canon forced to draw in that yoke an unmerciful day’s work of sorrow till death unharness them, that then the law keeps marriage most unviolated and unbroken; but when the law takes order, that marriage be accountant and responsible to perform that society, whether it be religious, civil, or corporal, which may be conscionably required and claimed therein, or else to be dissolved if it cannot be undergone. This is to make marriage most indissoluble, by making it a just and equal dealer, a performer of those due helps, which instituted the covenant; being otherwise a most unjust contract, and no more to be maintained under tuition of law, than the vilest fraud, or cheat, or theft, that may be committed. But because this is such a secret kind of fraud or theft, as cannot be discerned by law but only by the plaintiff himself; therefore to divorce was never counted a political or civil offence, neither to Jew nor Gentile, nor by any judicial intendment of Christ, further than could be discerned to transgress the allowance of Moses which was of necessity so large, that it doth all one as if it sent back the matter undeterminable at law, and intractable by rough dealing, to have instructions and admonitions bestowed about it by them whose spiritual office is to adjure Edition: current; Page: [253] and to denounce, and so left to the conscience. The law can only appoint the just and equal conditions of divorce, and is to look how it is an injury to the divorced, which in truth it can be none, as a mere separation; for if she consent, wherein has the law to right her? or consent not, then is it either just, and so deserved; or if unjust, such in all likelihood was the divorcer: and to part from an unjust man is a happiness, and no injury to be lamented. But suppose it to be an injury, the law is not able to amend it, unless she think it other than a miserable redress, to return back from whence she was expelled, or but entreated to be gone, or else to live apart still married without marriage, a married widow. Last, if it be to chasten the divorcer, what law punishes a deed which is not moral but natural, a deed which cannot certainly be found to be an injury; or how can it be punished by prohibiting the divorce, but that the innocent must equally partake both in the shame and in the smart? So that which way soever we look, the law can to no rational purpose forbid divorce, it can only take care that the conditions of divorce be not injurious. Thus then we see the trial of law, how impertinent it is to this question of divorce how helpless next, and then how hurtful.
CHAPTER XXII.
The last reason why divorce is not to be restrained by law, it being against the law of nature and of nations. The larger proof whereof referred to Mr. Selden’s book, “De Jure Naturali et Gentium.” An objection of Paræus answered. How it ought to be ordered by the church. That this will not breed any worse inconvenience, nor so bad as is now suffered.
Therefore the last reason, why it should not be, is the example we have, not only from the noblest and wisest commonwealths, guided by the clearest light of human knowledge, but also from the divine testimonies of God himself, lawgiving in person to a sanctified people. That all this is true, whoso desires to know at large with least pains, and expects not here overlong rehearsals of that which is by others already so judiciously gathered; let him hasten to be acquainted with that noble volume written by our learned Selden, “Of the Law of Nature and of Nations,” a work more useful and more worthy to be perused by whosoever studies to be a great man in wisdom, equity, and justice, than all those “decretals and sumless sums,” which the pontifical clerks have doted on, ever since that unfortunate mother famously sinned thrice, and died impenitent of her bringing into the world those two misbegotten infants, and for ever infants, Lombard and Gratian, him the compiler of canon iniquity, the other the Tubalcain of scholastic sophistry, whose overspreading barbarism hath not only infused their own bastardy upon the fruitfullest part of human learning, not only dissipated and dejected the clear light of nature in us, and of nations, but hath tainted also the fountains of divine doctrine, and rendered the pure and solid law of God unbeneficial to us by their calumnious dunceries. Yet this law, which their unskilfulness hath made liable to all ignominy, the purity and wisdom of this law shall be the buckler of our dispute. Liberty of divorce we claim not, we think not but from this law; the dignity, the faith, the authority thereof is now grown among Christians, O astonishment! a labour of no mean difficulty and envy to defend. That it should not be counted a faultering dispense, a flattering permission of sin, the bill of adultery, a snare, is the expense of all this apology. And all that we solicit is, that it Edition: current; Page: [254] may be suffered to stand in the place where God set it, amidst the firmament of his holy laws, to shine, as it was wont, upon the weaknesses and errors of men, perishing else in the sincerity of their honest purposes: for certain there is no memory of whoredoms and adulteries left among us now, when this warranted freedom of God’s own giving is made dangerous and discarded for a scroll of license. It must be your suffrages and votes, O Englishmen, that this exploded decree of God and Moses may scape and come off fair, without the censure of a shameful abrogating: which, if yonder sun ride sure, and means not to break word with us to-morrow, was never yet abrogated by our Saviour. Give sentence if you please, that the frivolous canon may reverse the infallible judgment of Moses and his great director. Or if it be the reformed writers, whose doctrine persuades this rather, their reasons I dare affirm are all silenced, unless it be only this. Paræus on the Corinthians would prove, that hardness of heart in divorce is no more now to be permitted, but to be amerced with fine and imprisonment. I am not willing to discover the forgettings of reverend men, yet here I must: what article or clause of the whole new covenant can Paræus bring, to exasperate the judicial law upon any infirmity under the gospel? I say infirmity, for if it were the high hand of sin, the law as little would have endured it as the gospel; it would not stretch to the dividing of an inheritance; it refused to condemn adultery, not that these things should not be done at law, but to show that the gospel hath not the least influence upon judicial courts, much less to make them sharper and more heavy, least of all to arraign before a temporal judge that which the law without summons acquitted. “But,” saith he, “the law was the time of youth, under violent affections; the gospel in us is mature age, and ought to subdue affections.” True, and so ought the law too, if they be found inordinate, and not merely natural and blameless. Next I distinguish, that the time of the law is compared to youth and pupilage in respect of the ceremonial part, which led the Jews as children through corporal and garish rudiments, until the fulness of time should reveal to them the higher lessons of faith and redemption. This is not meant of the moral part; therein it soberly concerned them not to be babies, but to be men in good earnest: the sad and awful majesty of that law was not to be jested with: to bring a bearded nonage with lascivious dispensations before that throne, had been a lewd affront, as it is now a gross mistake. But what discipline is this, Paræus, to nourish violent affections in youth, by cockering and wanton indulgences, and to chastise them in mature age with a boyish rod of correction? How much more coherent is it to Scripture, that the law as a strict schoolmaster should have punished every trespass without indulgence so baneful to youth, and that the gospel should now correct that by admonition and reproof only, in free and mature age, which was punished with stripes in the childhood and bondage of the law? What therefore it allowed then so fairly, much less is to be whipped now, especially in penal courts: and if it ought now to trouble the conscience, why did that angry accuser and condemner law reprieve it? So then, neither from Moses nor from Christ hath the magistrate any authority to proceed against it. But what, shall then the disposal of that power return again to the master of a family? Wherefore not, since God there put it, and the presumptuous canon thence bereft it? This only must be provided, that the ancient manner be observed in the presence of the minister and other grave selected elders, who after they shall have admonished and pressed upon him the words of our Saviour, and he shall have protested in the faith of the eternal gospel, and the hope he has of happy resurrection, that otherwise than thus Edition: current; Page: [255] he cannot do, and thinks himself and this his case not contained in that prohibition of divorce which Christ pronounced, the matter not being of malice, but of nature, and so not capable of reconciling; to constrain him further were to unchristian him, to unman him, to throw the mountain of Sinai upon him, with the weight of the whole law to boot, flat against the liberty and essence of the gospel; and yet nothing available either to the sanctity of marriage, the good of husband, wife, or children; nothing profitable either to church or commonwealth, but hurtful and pernicious in all these respects. But this will bring in confusion: yet these cautious mistrusters might consider, that what they thus object lights not upon this book, but upon that which I engage against them, the book of God and Moses, with all the wisdom and providence which had forecast the worst of confusion that could succeed, and yet thought fit of such a permission. But let them be of good cheer, it wrought so little disorder among the Jews, that from Moses till after the captivity, not one of the prophets thought it worth the rebuking; for that of Malachi well looked into will appear to be not against divorcing, but rather against keeping strange concubines, to the vexation of their Hebrew wives. If therefore we Christians may be thought as good and tractable as the Jews were, (and certainly the prohibitors of divorce presume us to be better,) then less confusion is to be feared for this among us than was among them. If we be worse, or but as bad, which lamentable examples confirm we are, then have we more, or at least as much, need of this permitted law, as they to whom God therefore gave it (as they say) under a harsher covenant. Let not therefore the frailty of man go on thus inventing needless troubles to itself, to groan under the false imagination of a strictness never imposed from above; enjoining that for duty, which is an impossible and vain supererogating. “Be not righteous overmuch,” is the counsel of Ecclesiastes; “why shouldst thou destroy thyself?” Let us not be thus overcurious to strain at atoms, and yet to stop every vent and cranny of permissive liberty, lest nature wanting those needful pores and breathing-places, which God hath not debarred our weakness, either suddenly break out into some wide rupture of open vice and frantic heresy, or else inwardly fester with repining and blasphemous thoughts, under an unreasonable and fruitless rigour of unwarranted law. Against which evils nothing can more beseem the religion of the church, or the wisdom of the state, than to consider timely and provide. And in so doing let them not doubt but they shall vindicate the misreputed honour of God and his great lawgiver, by suffering him to give his own laws according to the condition of man’s nature best known to him, without the unsufferable imputation of dispensing legally with many ages of ratified adultery. They shall recover the misattended words of Christ to the sincerity of their true sense from manifold contradictions, and shall open them with the key of charity. Many helpless Christians they shall arise from the depth of sadness and distress, utterly unfitted as they are to serve God or man: many they shall reclaim from obscure and giddy sects, many regain from dissolute and brutish license, many from desperate hardness, if ever that were justly pleaded. They shall set free many daughters of Israel not wanting much of her sad plight whom “Satan had bound eighteen years.” Man they shall restore to his just dignity and prerogative in nature, preferring the soul’s free peace before the promiscuous draining of a carnal rage. Marriage, from a perilous hazard and snare, they shall reduce to be a more certain haven and retirement of happy society; when they shall judge according to God and Moses, (and how not then according to Christ,) when they shall judge it more wisdom and goodness to break that covenant seemingly, and keep it Edition: current; Page: [256] really, than by compulsion of law to keep it seemingly, and by compulsion of blameless nature to break it really, at least if it were ever truly joined. The vigour of discipline they may then turn with better success upon the prostitute looseness of the times, when men, finding in themselves the infirmities of former ages, shall not be constrained above the gift of God in them to unprofitable and impossible observances, never required from the civilest, the wisest, the holiest nations, whose other excellences in moral virtue they never yet could equal. Last of all, to those whose mind is still to maintain textual restrictions, whereof the bare sound cannot consist sometimes with humanity, much less with charity; I would ever answer, by putting them in remembrance of a command above all commands, which they seem to have forgot, and who spake it: in comparison whereof, this which they so exalt is but a petty and subordinate precept. “Let them go” therefore with whom I am loth to couple them, yet they will needs run into the same blindness with the Pharisees; “let them go therefore,” and consider well what this lesson means, “I will have mercy and not sacrifice;” for on that “saying all the law and prophets depend,” much more the gospel, whose end and excellence is mercy and peace. Or if they cannot learn that, how will they hear this? which yet I shall not doubt to leave with them as a conclusion, That God the Son hath put all other things under his own feet, but his commandments he hath left all under the feet of charity.
T.30 (1.10.) [William Walwyn], The Power of Love (19 September 1643).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date
OLL Thumbs TP Image

Local JPEG TP Image

Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.30 [1643.09.19] (1.10) [William Walwyn], The Power of Love (19 September 1643).
Full title[William Walwyn], The Power of Love.
London, Printed by R.C. for John Sweeting, at the signe of the Angell in Popes-head Alley, 1643.
Estimated date of publication19 September 1643.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 285; Thomason E. 1206. (2.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
To every Reader.
For there is no respect of persons with God: and whosoever is possest with love, judgeth no longer as a man, but god like, as a true Christian. What’s here towards? (sayes one) sure one of the Family of love: very well! pray stand still and consider: what family are you of I pray? are you of Gods family? no doubt you are: why, God is love, and if you bee one of Gods children be not ashamed of your Father, nor his family: and bee assured that in his family, he regards neither fine clothes, nor gold rings, nor stately houses, nor abundance of wealth, nor dignities, and titles of honour, nor any mans birth or calling, indeed he regards nothing among his children but love. Consider our Saviour saith. He that hath this worlds goods, and seeth his brother lack, how dwelleth the love of God in him? Judge then by this rule who are of Gods family; Looke about and you will finde in these woefull dayes thousands of miserable, distressed, starved, imprisoned Christians: see how pale and wan they looke: how coldly, raggedly, & unwholsomely they are cloathed; live one weeke with them in their poore houses, lodge as they lodge, eate as they eate, and no oftner, and bee at the same passe to get that wretched food for a sickly wife, and hunger-starved children; (if you dare doe this for feare of death or diseases) then walke abroad, and observe the generall plenty of all necessaries, observe the gallant bravery of multitudes of men and women abounding in all things that can be imagined: observe likewise the innumerable numbers of those that have more then sufficeth. Neither will I limit you to observe the inconsiderate people of the world, but the whole body of religious people themselves, and in the very Churches and upon solemne dayes: view them well, and see whether they have not this worlds goods; their silkes, their beavers, their rings, and other divises will testifie they have; I, and the wants and distresses of the poore will testifie that the love of God they have not. What is here aimed at? (sayes another) would you have all things common? for love seeketh not her owne good, but the good of others. You say very true, it is the Apostles doctrine: and you may remember the multitude of beleevers had all things common: that was another of their opinions, which many good people are afraid of. But (sayes another) what would you have? would you have no distinction of men, nor no government? feare it not: nor flye the truth because it suites not with your corrupt opinions or courses; on Gods name distinguish of men and women too, as you see the love of God abound in them towards their brethren, but no otherwise; And for that great mountaine (in your understanding) government, ’tis but a molehill if you would handle it familiarly, and bee bold with it: It is common agreement to bee so governed: and by common agreement men chuse for governours, such as their vertue and wisedome make fit to governe: what a huge thing this matter of trust is made of? and what cause is there that men that are chosen should keepe at such distance, or those that have chosen them bee so sheepish in their presence? Come, you are mightily afraid of opinions, is there no other that you feare? not the Anabaptists, Brownists, or Antinomians? Why doe you start man? have a little patience, would you truly understand what kinde of people these are, and what opinions they hold? If you would; bee advised by some learned man, and with him consult what hath learnedly beene written of the most weake and vitious amongst any of them that could bee found, and make your conclusion (according to custome) that they are all such: but if you would free your selves from common mistakes concerning those your brethren, then acquaint your selves with them, observe their wayes, and enquire into their doctrines your selfe, and so make your conclusion, or judge not of them; visit them, heare them out, stand cleare from all prejudging: and then see what dangerous people they are that are generally so called: particulars being absurd rules of judging; for so the Turke is misled in his judgment of Christianity: and no marvaile since hee judgeth thereof by the doctrine and life of the most superstitious, Idolatrous, and vitious amongst them. Well, what next are you afraid of? for some men take delight to be under the spirit of bondage, and doe not think themselves in good estate except they be in feare: but come, feare nothing, you are advised by the Apostle to try all things, and to hold fast that which is good: to prove the Spirits whether they bee of God or not: ’tis your selfe must doe it, you are not to trust to the authority of any man, or to any mans relation: you will finde upon tryall that scarcely any opinion hath beene reported truly to you: and though in every one of them you may finde some things that you cannot agree unto, you will yet be a gainer, by discovering many excellent things that you as yet may be unsatisfied in, and by due consideration of them all perfect your owne judgement. Reade the ensuing discourse impartially, and you will finde the minde of him that hateth no man for his opinion; nor would have any man troubled for any opinion, except such, as make the bloud of Christ ineffectuall, or such as would destroy all that will not submit to their opinions; hee seemes to bee of the Apostles minde, that considered all other things in love: (and that in matters of moment too, even where some observed a day unto the Lord, & others not observed) He bids you walke in love, as Christ hath loved you, and gave himselfe for you, an offering and a Sacrifice; you that love your brother so poorely, as that you cannot allow him the peaceable enjoyment of his mind and judgment would hardly lay downe your life for him; let brotherly love continue, and let every one freely speake his minde without molestation: and so there may be hope that truth may come to light, that otherwise may be obscured for particular ends: plaine truth will prove all, sufficient for vanquishing of the most artificiall, sophisticall errour that ever was in the world; give her but due and patient audience, and her perswasions are ten thousand times more powerfull to worke upon the most dull refractory minde, then all the adulterate allurements and deceivings of art. What is here publisht is out of fervent love to the Communion of Christians: that they might tast and see how good the Lord is. In whose presence there is fulnesse of joy, and at whose right hand there are pleasures for evermore. Wherefore rejoyce in the Lord alwayes, and againe I say rejoyce: and let your song bee alwayes. Glory be to God on high, in earth peace, good will towards men. Let truth have her free and perfect working, and the issue will bee increase of beleevers: let faith have her perfect working, and the issue will bee increase of love: and let love have her perfect working, and the whole world will be so refined, that God will be all in all; for hee that dwelleth in love, dwelleth in God, in whom, ever fare you well, and bee cheerefull.
Tit. 2. ii, 12. The grace (or love) of God that bringeth salvation unto all men hath appeared, teaching us to deny ungodlinesse and worldly lusts, and to live soberly, righteously, & godly in this present world.
It is evident (though it be little regarded or considered, the more is the pity) that in naturall things all things whatsoever that are necessary for the use of mankinde, the use of them is to be understood easily with out study or difficulty: every Capacity is capable thereof; and not only so, but they are all likewise ready at hand, or easily to be had: a blessing that God hath afforded to every man, insomuch, that there is no part of the habitable world, but yeeldes sufficient of usefull things for a comfortable and pleasant sustentation of the inhabitants; as experience testifieth in all places; and Saint Paul witnessed that God left himselfe not without witnesse, in that he did good, gave them raine from heaven, and fruitfull seasons, feeding their hearts with foode and gladnesse: by all which it plainely appeares that God ever intendeth unto man a pleasant and comfortable life: you know it is said, that God made man righteous, but he sought out many inventions: that is, he made him naturally a rationall creature, judging rightly of all things, and desiring only what was necessary, and so being exempt from all labour, and care of obtaining things superfluous, he passed his dayes with aboundance of delight and contentment: until he sought out unto himselfe many inventions: inventions of superfluous subtilities and artificiall things, which have beene multiplied with the ages of the world, every age still producing new: so now in these latter times we see nothing but mens inventions in esteeme, and the newer the more precious; if I should instance in particulars, I should or might be endlesse, as in diet, your selves know to your costs, (for it costs you not only your monyes, but your healths, and length of dayes) that this fruitfull nation sufficeth not to furnish scarce the meanest meale you make, but something must be had to please the luxurious palate from forraine and farre countryes: and ever the farther the better, and the dearer the more acceptable; you know likewise the excessive provision that is made for entertainments and set meetings, where all grosse meates (you know my meaning) must be banished, and nothing admitted but what is rare and fine, and full of invention, in the dresses, sauces, and manner of service: where all the senses must be pleased to the heighth of all possible conceipt. If I should reckon up your new inventions for buildings, and furniture for your houses, and the common costlinesse of your apparell, and should set before you the manifold vexations, perplexities, distractions, cares, and inconveniences that accrew unto you by these your vaine and ridiculous follies, I might be endlesse therein also, and lose my labour; for there is no hope that I should prevaile for a reformation of these things, when your daily experience scourges you continually therunto, in one kind or other, and all in vaine; yet I shall take leave to tell you that in these things, you walke not as becommeth the gospell of Christ, but are carnall and walke as men, as vaine, fantasticall, inconsiderate men; such as very heathen and meere naturall men would be ashamed of: their experience (that a life according to nature, to be content with little, with what was ever ready, and easy to be had, was the most pleasant life and exempt from all vexations) was instruction sufficient unto many of them, to frame themselves thereunto, and to abandon all kindes of superfluities, without retaining the least; & thereby obtained a freedome to apply themselves to the consideration and practise of wisedome and vertue.
It is a wonderfull thing to my understanding, that men should call themselves Christians, and professe to be religious, and to be diligent readers of Scripture, and hearers of Sermons, and yet content themselves to bee indeed in many things carnall, and to walke as did the most indiscreete and inconsiderate Gentiles. Doth the Scripture teach no more then nature teacheth? though it doe infinitely, yet your practise compared with wise considerate naturall men declares it doth not; how extreamely then (thinke you) doe you cause the name of God to be blasphemed? Doe you thinke it is sufficient that you are not drunkards, nor adulterers, nor usurers, nor contentious persons, nor covetous? beloved, if you will truely deserve the name of Christians, it is not sufficient: but you are to abandon all superfluities, all poring after vaine superfluous things, and thereby to exempt your selves from all unnecessary cares that choake the Word, and bee at liberty to consider, and to apply your selves freely to the continuall contemplation of the infinite love of God, evidently and plainely set forth unto you in his blessed word: as in the words that I have read un[to] you: for as it is in naturall things, so holds it in spirituall: God hath dealt abundantly well with us; there being nothing that is necessary either for the enlightning of our understandings, or the peace of our mindes, but what hee hath plainely declared and manifestly set forth in his Word: so plainely, that the meanest capacity is fully capable of a right understanding thereof, and need not to doubt but that he is so. I will not say that God is not more good unto us, then we are hurtfull to our selves, (for his goodnesse is more availeable to our welfare, then our evill can be to our misery) but wee are as evill to our selves in all things as we can be possible: and that not onely in naturall things, but likewise in spirituall and divine things too, for therein also we have our inventions; the plaine and evident places of Scripture and manifestly declaring our peace and reconciliation with God, is become nauseous to us: they make salvation too easie to be understood, and tender it upon too easie tearmes, and too generall: this Manna that comes to us without our labour, industry, study, and watching, is two fulsome, something that hath bones in it must bee found out, and will become more acceptable: every child or babe in Christs Schoole can understand these: We are full growne men in Christ, wee have spent our time in long and painefull studies, and have full knowledge in all Arts and sciences: there is no place of Scripture too hard for us: shew us the mysteries we cannot reveale: the Parables that wee cannot clearely open: the Prophesies that wee cannot interpret: a word or Syllable that wee cannot fitly apply, or the most palpable seeming contradiction that we cannot reconcile; nay it is to be doubted (wee have scene the vaine humour of man puft so high, and the world so filld and pestered with works and labours of this vaine nature) lest there are some such daring undertakers, that like as Alexander the great is said to have wept that there were no more worlds to conquer, so these Champions are grieved that there are no harder places for their braines to worke upon: or (which is more to bee lamented) one would feare they are much troubled that the most necessary truths are so easie to be understood: for that when they treate upon some very plaine place of Scripture, even so plaine as this which I have read unto you, yet in handling thereof they make it difficult, and darken the cleare meaning thereof with their forced and artificiall glosses: but as I wish there were no such dealers in divine things, so have I in my selfe resolved to avoid these extreame evills: for as in naturall things I am fully assured there is nothing of necessary use but what is easily understood and even ready at hand, so also doth my experience tell me, that we have no bettering of our understandings, or quieting of our mindes (the end for which God hath vouchsafed his word) from any places of Scripture that hath any obscurity in them, but from such as are clearely exempt from all difficulty. You know God frequently complaines by his Prophets, saying, My people will not consider, they will not understand: and when I consider that your owne experience schooles you not sufficiently against your dotage upon the vaine superfluities of this world, wherein you know your selves to be carnall, and to walke as men, heaping unto your selves vexation upon vexation; I doe wonder that it doth not stagger the Ministers of God in their publishing of things divine to a people so qualified, so extreamely inconsiderate: indeed it would make one to suspect that the doctrine that you continually heare, that it were not powerfull nor from heaven, but weake and fitted to your corrupt humours, and customes, since after so long time, it hath not subdued your worldly mindednesse. Sure I am, and I must have leave to tell you, that there is utterly a fault amongst you, nay those expressions are too soft, you have almost nothing but faults amongst you, and you will not consider, which you must doe, and seriously too, or you will never reduce your selves into such a condition, as will be really sutable to the blessed name of Christians. Beloved I have seriously considered it, and it is not your case alone, but it is the universall disease. I know not any that is not infected therewith, nor to whom it may not be said, Physitian heale they selfe; the milke we have suckt, and the common ayre hath beene totally corrupted: our first instructions, and all after discourses have beene indulgent flatterers to our darling superfluities: and therefore he that undertakes the cure, must bee sure to bee provided of a fit and powerfull medicine, and to be diligent and faithfull in his undertaking; it is a taske that I have proposed unto my selfe, and though I should meete with the greatest discouragements, (as, the world is like enough to furnish his utmost forces to preserve his Kingdome) yet considering whose service I have undertaken, and whose works it is, I shall not despaire of successe. I am not ignorant that this worke hath often-times beene attempted, and persisted in: but with little fruit; through the universall mistake, that men are sooner perswaded from their vanities, through pressures of the law, and affrighting terrors of wrath and hell, then by the cordes of love: which yet I abundantly preferre, as you may perceive by this text which I have chosen: for when all is done. It is the love of God bringing salvation, that teacheth us to deny all ungodlinesse and worldly lusts, and to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world. I must entreate your most earnest attention, as being full of hope that I shall doe you much more good then you conceive: for I must tell you, I cannot cure you of your earthly mindednesse, of your dotage upon superfluities, till I have first showne you your peace and reconciliation with God, and have wrought in you (through the power of Gods word) peace of conscience and joy in the holy Ghost. You are then seriously to consider what is said, and understanding will succeed. The love of God I know is often spoken of: a theame that hath begotten abundance of bookes and discourses: yet none in no comparison like the Scriptures: most (if not all) discourses, that ever I have read or heard, doe in some sense or other, or in some measure injure and wrong those blessed discourses therof.
The love and favour of God (saith David) is better then life it selfe; What man in the whole world doth not gladly heare the joyfull tydings of the love of God? But it is good that every man rightly understand, and mistake not himselfe in this so blessed and delightfull Subject. I shall lay downe therfore some infallible principles which concerne the same. And I shall tell you nothing but what your selves know: and that is, that God doth most vehemently hate all manner of sinnes, and that it is impossible for him to doe otherwise, as being directly opposite to his most righteous nature: and to that righteous nature wherein at first man was created, for in the likenesse of God created he him; and whilst you consider this, I shall advise you not to flatter your selves as the Pharisee did, saying. Lord I thanke thee I am not as other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, drunkards, covetous, proude, or licentious; can you say you have noe sinne? if you should, the word of God would contradict you, which testifieth that he that saith he hath no sinne is a liar, and the truth is not in him; and if sinne be in every one, necessarily it followes where sinne is, there is Gods hatred; nor doeth it any whit excuse or exempt those from the hatred of God, that can say their sinnes are fewe in number, and of very meane condition compared to others: whosoever you are that are thus indulgent to yourselves, you doe but deceive your selves, for Gods hatred, his wrath and anger, is so exact against all and every sinne, and so odious it is in his sight, that he denounceth, saying, Cursed is every one that continueth not to doe all that is written in the booke of the law: So as every mouth must be stopped, and all the world stand guilty before God; and though the sense and deepe apprehension of this woefull condition, doe worke in you the deepest of sorrow, though you should spend your dayes in weeping, and your nights in woefull lamentation, though you should repent your selves in dust and ashes, and cover your selves with sackcloathes: though you should fast your selves into palenesse, and hang downe your heads alwayes: though you should give all your goods to the poore; nay, though you should offer up the fruit of your bodies, for the sinne of your soules; all this and more could be no satisfaction for the least sinne, nor bring any peace to your mindes: but you must of force cry out at last, as Saint Paul did, (stating this sad condition of all mankind under the law) Oh wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from this body of death! Justly is it called a body of death; for man is of a fraile and weake condition at the best: a considerate man hath death alwayes before him: What joy or comfort then can hee take all his life long; being in the hatred of God, a vessell of wrath, and liable to eternall death in hell fire for ever? What can he looke upon that can give him content? Present a man that walkes in the sense of his sinfull condition, with all the pleasures the world afford, and his sad heart turnes all into death; his conscience continually afflicts him; terrours, and feares, and eternall torments are ever in his thoughts: and such a wounded Spirit, who can beare? My beloved, I would not be mistaken in what I have said of this woefull condition, as though I presented it to your thoughts, as a meanes to terrific you from any your sinfull courses: I know full well it is not the way, it is not Gods way: nor doe I wish this sad condition to be any of yours: though happily it may be thus with many of you: many of you may through sense of sinne, and of wrath due for sinne, waike in a very disconsolate condition: feares and terrours may abound in you: to whom (I doubt not) though great heavinesse may indure for a night, yet greater joy shall come in the morning: which as much as in mee lyes, I shall indeavour to produce in every one of you.
I have presented this woefull condition of all mankind under the law, thus sadly and truly, because I finde generally men doe not seriously consider the bottomlesse depth of the misery from the which they are redeemed: I am not a preacher of the law, but of the gospell; nor are you under the law, but under grace: the law was given by Moses, whose minister I am not: but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ, whose minister I am: whose exceeding love, hath appeared: and because I would have you fully to see and consider his love, therefore did I shew the woefull condition, from which only by his love you are delivered.
Another principle I shall pray you to consider, is that God loves nothing but what is pure and holy, without spot or blemish: so as it is a vaine and delusive doctrin, to say that God passes by our daily infirmities, accepting our wills for our performances: our desire to be obedient to his Commandements, for obedience: for where there is the least defect, God hates for that very defect, and loves not but where there is perfect holinesse and righteousnesse: which makes this truth appeare, that by the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sinne. It is a sad favour that the law ever did unto mankinde, to make his sinne appeare out of measure sinfull, stopping every mans mouth, admitting no plea or excuse on mans behalfe; And yet it is so naturall to thinke that he is still bound to doe something for obtaining the love and favour of God, that you will finde it is the hardest thing in the world to free your selves from it, though it be the grossest Antichristian errour that ever was, for if righteousnesse come by the law, then Christ died in vaine; It is such an errour that untill it be removed out of your mindes, it will be but labour lost to endeavour to worke any truth upon your mindes; and I have much cause, to feare your mindes are tainted therewith, because our publicke catechismes, bookes, and Sermons are for the most part corrupted therewith, so as we sucke this errour in even with our very milke, and it becomes one substance with many of us even to our old age; It was so in the Apostles times, as may be seene in Acts the 15, from the 5. verse to the end of the chapter, where you shall find that some that beleeved affirmed that it was necessary to circumcise, and to keepe the law: but you will finde by the story it was their errour; Also in the second to the Corinthians, the third to the end, where you shall find the law stiled the ministration of death, written in tables of stone (which was the 10 Commandements) and verse the 11. to be done away, and a more glorious ministration to take place and remaine: and yet the breeding of the Jewes being under the law, (though they did beleeve the comming of Christ) yet still (even to that day the Apostle wrote) their minds were blinded, and the vaile remained at the reading of the old Testament, which vayle is done away in Christ. These things (beloved) you are to consider seriously, for that untill you doe undoubtedly see your selves not to be under the law, no not in the least respect, you cannot see your selves to be under grace: that is, in the favour and love of God, untill when you cannot with sound judgment affirme, that which my text affirmeth, that is, that the love of God hath appeared: for he that in any measure conceiveth himselfe to be under the law, doth not clearely discerne the love of god: for that vayle is before his eyes; you all give credit to the word of God: let S. Paul then be your guide to leade you out of this sad Ægyptian bondage who knew all things that concerned the law, yet cryes out, I account all things as losse and dung, that I may be found in Christ, not having my owne (or mans) righteousnesse, which is of the law, but the righteousnesse which is of God in him: make it your own cases by sound consideration, for yee are all justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ: your feares, nor sinnes, nor doublings, cannot alter that condition which Christ hath purchased for you, for though the sting of death be sinne, & the strength of sin be the law, yet thankes be unto God, for he hath given us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ: so as you may all boldly say, Oh death where is thy sting, O grave where is thy victory? And that none of you may doubt of his exceeding love, and your perfect reconciliation with God, I wil reade unto you certaine passages (in the 5 chapter, to the Romans,) which if well weighed, will leave you without all scruple, (verse, 6) When we were yet without strength in due time Christ died for the ungodly: you see there that ungodlinesse did not hinder, but that Christ died for thee that art ungodly: dost thou stand amazed, and canst not throwly beleeve? the Apostle grants that to mans judgment it is incredible; for amongst men, scarcely for a righteous man will one dye, yet peradventure for a good man one would even dare to dye: but to confirme thy timorous heart (verse 8.) God commendeth his love towards us, in that whilst we were yet sinners Christ died for us, (v. 9.) much more being then justified by his bloud we shall be saved from wrath through him, (v. 10.) for if when we were enemies, we were reconciled by the death of his Sonne, much more being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life: so as now thou hast cause to joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom thou hast received the atonement: and to take from thee all staggering (in the 18. v.) he confirmes thee, saying. As by the offence of one, judgement came upon all men to condemnation: even so by the righteousnesse of one, the free gift came upon all men to justification of life: and (in the 20. vers.) because he knew thy pronenesse to make questions still about the Law, he tels thee the Law entred that sinne might abound, but withall assures thee, that where sinne abounded, grace (or love) did much more abound: that as sinne had reigned unto death, even so grace (or love) might reign through righteousnesse unto eternall life through Christ our Lord.
(Beloved) God by the power of his Word hath begotten so ful assurance of these things in me, as that thereby he hath made me an able Minister of the New Testament: not of the Letter, (or the Law) but of the Spirit: for the Letter killeth, but the Spirit (that is the Gospel) giveth life. Nor doe I see any cause why any of you here present should so much as doubt your salvation; I am a Minister of reconciliation, and am thereby bound to tell you (for woe is unto me if I preach not the Gospel, as in the 2 Cor. 5. 19.) that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himselfe, not imputing their trespasses unto them: and hath committed unto us the Word of reconciliation; Now then we are Ambassadours for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us, we pray you to be reconciled unto God; for he hath made him to be sinne for us, that knew no sinne, that we might be made the righteousnesse of God in him; so as (however we may vainely conceive to our owne prejudice) God considers us not as we see our selves full of sinne, full of iniquity, but as we should consider our selves, agreeable to all these passages of his blessed Word, fully and perfectly washed from all our sinnes by the bloud of his Son (which every one of us doe beleeve, though we doe not consider) and then with unspeakable joy we shall see that we are reconciled to God by the death of his Sonne: that we are justified freely by his grace: that for our lost righteousnesse of the Law, we are made the righteousnesse of God in him: having peace of conscience and joy in the holy Ghost, by whose word these blessed truths are declared unto us. Are these things so indeed, doth God accept me a poore miserable sinner, as righteous in his sight, and freed from sinne, from all sinne? Heare still the Word of God, he hath borne our sinnes in his body on the tree, and it is the bloud of Christ that cleanseth thee from all sinne: he by his one oblation once offered, hath made a full, perfect, and sufficient satisfaction, and sacrifice for the sinnes of the whole world; and if we sinne, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: and he is the propitiation for our sinnes; and not for ours onely, but for the sinnes of the whole world. This worke of your redemption and reconciliation with God was perfected when Christ died: and nothing shall be able to separate you from his love then purchased: neither infidelity, nor impenitencie, nor unthankfulnesse, nor sinne, nor any thing whatsoever can make void his purchase: no, though with the Jewes you should deny the Lord that bought you: so powerful was his bloudshedding, and of so full value for discharging of all our debts, past, present, and to come; so infinite is his goodnesse, so free is his love, and so abundantly happy is our condition, though many of us have beene too too ignorant thereof: and for want of this knowledge many of us have walked very uncomfortably, spending our time in fasting, weeping, and mourning; in praying, reading, and hearing, and in performance of other duties, as you call them, and all to get Christ: our feare distracts our judgements, that wee consider not what the Scripture sets forth unto us: if we did, wee should see aparently that it sets forth salvation wrought and perfected for ever: to whom doth it manifest the same? to sinners, to the ungodly, to all the world: a worke perfected, depending on no condition, no performance at all. What would people have to give peace to their mindes? you doe wrong your selves through nice distinctions: the word of God is given to declare these truths, and that he is our peace: the word of God you doe beleeve, and so cannot but be comforted, the onely end for which it is preserved unto you: that you might reade, and know, and understand your blessed condition: for faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God: and you are to looke for no other testimony: nor are you to doubt your selves: for though your present comfort depends upon your beleeving this word, yet the worke of Christ depends not on your beleeving: and though you should not beleeve, yet hee is faithfull and cannot deny himseife to be your redeemer, your peace-maker, your Saviour. Men are not pleased except salvation be proved to be very difficult to bee obtained, it must still depend either on our beleeving, or doing, or repenting, or selfe-deniall, or Sabbathkeeping, or something or other, or else man is not pleased: too easie? good God! that free love should be suspected; that because it is easie to be had, we should put it farre from us; why, God knew full well thou wert dead, he considered that thou wert but dust; suppose he had required any thing of thee, without which thou shouldst have no part in Christ, what a sad case hadst thou beene in? goe thy wayes, and with chearefulnesse possesse his infinite love, and declare unto thy brethren what the Lord hath done for al our souls; tel them that the love of God bringing salvation hath appeared, teaching us to deny all ungodlinesse, and worldly lusts, and to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world. And I shall desire to know of all that heare me this day, whereof some may happily be addicted to the corruptions of this world: for our times though we call them times of light, yet do abound with gluttony, drunkennesse, and whoredome, usury, pride, oppression, and all kinde of wickednesse, such as is not to be named amongst Christians, (what shall I say to these things? it will be in vaine for me to reprove you for them: for men never reforme their vices, till first their judgements be well informed, and then they kindly reforme themselves) I shall onely demand whether the love of God doth more appeare unto you now, then it hath done formerly? surely it is impossible but you must be sensible of his love, it is so full and absolute, so free and unexpecting love. How is it possible you should heare and not consider? had it not beene for this unexpressible and unexampled love, you had beene eternally wretched and miserable, companions of Devils, and damned spirits in Hell for ever, where the Worme never dieth, and the fire never goeth out; me thinkes you should embrace this love with open armes, and meditate thereupon day and night: it deserveth to be entertained with the greatest respect, and to be esteemed above ten thousand lives: for (beloved) though it comes freely to you, and costs you nothing, no not so much as a sigh or teare, yet if you read over the story of our Saviours passion, and sufferings, you will finde it was purchased at an excessive price, excessive paines, and excessive torments: nay it is even past wonder that he that thought it no robbery to be equall to God, should be in the forme of a servant, and become obedient to death, even the most bitter death of the Crosse for our sinnes: that he should be made sinne for us that knew no sinne, that we might be made the righteousnesse of God in him; me thinkes these and the like considerations should be powerfull in your minds, that your spirits should even burne within you, untill you found out some way to expresse your thankfulnesse for so great, so infinite love. I cannot suspect the most vitious man in the world, but that hearing these things his heart will make strict enquiry, what he shall render unto the Lord for all his benefits? and his heart once moving in thoughts of thankfulnesse will instantly be inflamed with love, which in an instant refines the whole man. God is love, and love makes man God-like; and henceforth let me pray you to marke the workings of love in your owne soules, and you shall finde that when your long accustomed corruptions (by which you have wounded your owne consciences, and brought dishonour to God, and reproach to the holy name of Christians) doe tempt to the like abominable actions, your love to God that so freely hath loved you, will be so prevalent with you, that you will resolve rather to lose your lives then to show your selves so basely ungratefull: the vanities you have delighted in will become odious unto you: all your labour will be that your conversation be as becommeth the Gospel of Christ, nay you will shunne the very appearance of evill: and if your brother offend you in any kinde whatsoever, you will finde no difficulty to forgive; if you doe, doe but thinke of the love wherewith Christ hath loved you, and nothing can be imagined so abominably injurious but you will gladly forgive. And if you have this worlds goods, and that brother lacke, you will rejoyce that you have an occasion and means to make known unto the world how powerfully the love of God dwelleth in you: you will be able to doe all things through love that strengthens you. Love will be as a new light in your understandings by which you will judge quite otherwise of all things, then formerly you have don; the vanities and superfluities which in the beginning of my discourse I reckoned up unto you, will seeme odious unto you, and you will no longer fashion your selves like unto this world, but will walk as becommeth the Gospel of Christ: you will no longer minde high things, but make your selves equall to men of low degree: you will no longer value men and women according to their wealth, or outward shewes, but according to their vertue, & as the love of God appeareth in them: nay if you be studious in this worke of love, nothing will be more deare unto you then the glory of God (who hath so infinitely loved you) so as you will be most zealously opposite to whatsoever is opposite unto God, you will finde it nothing to hazzard your lives for God, in defence of his truth from errour; in defence of your brother or neighbour from oppression or tyranny: love makes you no longer your owne but Gods servants, and prompts you to doe his will in the punishment of all kinde of exorbitances, whether it be breach of oathes, breach of trust, or any kinde of injustice in whomsoever, and to be no respecter of persons; nor will any ones greatnesse over-sway or daunt your resolutions, but you will be bold as Lions, not fearing the faces of men: you will when neede requires, that is, when tyrants and oppressors endeavour by might and force to pervert all Lawes, and compacts amongst men, and to pervert the truth of God into a lie, interpreting his sacred word as patron of their unjust power, as if any unjust power were of God, and were not to be resisted: I say, such insolencies as these will inflame your zeale, and set you all on fire manfully to fight the Lords battell, and to bring into subjection those abominable imaginations and ungodly courses of men: your judgements will be so well informed, as you will know these things are by God referred unto you, and you will not resigne them up to him, but willingly sacrifice your lives and fortunes, and all that is neare and deare unto you, rather then suffer his name to be so blasphemed, or your innocent brethren, or your wives and children to become a prey to wicked and bloud-thirsty men. The politicians of this world would have religious men to be fooles, not to resist, no by no meanes, lest you receive damnation: urging Gods holy Word, whilst they proceed in their damnable courses; but (beloved) they will finde that true Christians are of all men the most valiant defenders of the just liberties of their Countrey, and the most zealous preservers of true Religion: vindicating the truths of God with their lives, against all ungodlinesse and unrighteousnesse of men: making thereby the whole world to know that true Christianity hates and abhorres tyranny, oppression, perjury, cruelty, deceipt, and all kinde of filthinesse; and true Christians to be the most impartiall, and most severe punishers thereof, and of all kinde of wickednesse, of any men whatsoever.
Great is the power of love, for love makes men to bee of one mind: and what can bee too strong for men united in love? and therefore I shall warne you to marke and consider those that make divisions amongst you. I pray mistake me not, I doubt you are too apt in this case to make a wrong application: I doe not meane that you should marke those, that are different from you in judgement, with any ridiculous or reproachfull names: but my advice is that you marke those that make divisions amongst you, and those are they that have invented a name of reproach for every particular difference in judgement: and in their publike Sermons and private discourses, endeavour might and maine to keep at the widest distance, and by odious tales and false imputations make you irreconciliable: nay make you even ready to cut one anothers throates; or by this division prepare you for your common adversaries to cut both yours and theirs too; difference in judgement there will be, untill love have a more powerfull working in our hearts: wee should therefore like wise men at least beare with one anothers infirmities: love will cover all that can bee called infirmity; but resolved malice love it selfe will punish. Such opinions as are not destructive to humane society, nor blaspheme the worke of our Redemption, may be peaceably endured, and considered in love: and in case of conspiracy against our common liberty, what a madnesse is it for men to stand in strife about petty opinions? for who are all those that are so much railed at by our common Preachers? who are they say they? why, they are the most dangerous Anabaptists, Brownists, and Separatists: that are enemies to all order and decency, that cry down all learning and all government in the Church, or Common-wealth. (Beloved) to my knowledg these things are not true of any of them: it is true, they cannot do al things so orderly and decently as they would, because they are hunted into corners, and from one corner to another, and are not free to exercise their consciences, as had they liberty they might, and would; And as for learning, as learning goes now adaies, what can any judicious man make of it, but as an Art to deceive and abuse the understandings of men, and to mislead them to their ruine? if it be not so, whence comes it that the Universities, and University men throughout the Kingdome in great numbers are opposers of the welfare of the Common-wealth, and are pleaders for absurdities in government, arguers for tyranny, and corrupt the judgements of their neighbours? no man can be so simple as to imagine that they conceive it not lawfull, or not usefull for men to understand the Hebrew, Greeke, or Latine; but withall, if they conceive there is no more matter in one language then another, nor no cause why men should be so proud for understanding of languages, as therefore to challenge to themselves the sole dealing in all spirituall matters; who (I say) can blame them for this judgement? they desire that a mans ability of judgement should be proved by the cleare expression of necessary truths, rather then by learning: and since the Scriptures are now in English, which at first were in Hebrew, Greeke, or Syriack, or what other language; why may not one that understands English onely, both understand and declare the true meaning of them as well as an English Hebrician, or Grecian, or Roman whatsoever? I, but saies some politick learned man, a man that doth not understand the Originall language, cannot so perfectly give the sense of the Scripture, as he that doth: or as one that makes it his study for ten or twenty yeares together, and hath no other employment: every man being best skilled in his owne profession wherein he hath been bred and accustomed. I did well to say some politicke learned man might thus object: for indeed what is here but policie? for if it be as such men would imply, I pray what are you the better for having the Scripture in your owne language: when it was lock’d up in the Latine tongue by the policie of Rome, you might have had a learned Fryar for your money at any time to have interpreted the same: and though now you have it in your owne language, you are taught not to trust your owne understanding, (have a care of your purses) you must have an University man to interpret the English, or you are in as bad a case as before but not in worse; for, for your money you may have plenty at your service, & to interpret as best shall please your fancie. Let me prevaile with you to free your selves from this bondage, and to trust to your own considerations in any thing that is usefull for your understandings and consciences: and judge more charitably of your brethren, & understand what learning is, and to marke those that cause divisions among you, and you shal finde that they are learned men, & not unlearned. The learned man must live upon the unlearned, and therefore when the unlearned shal presume to know as much as the learned, hath not the learned man cause to bestir his wits, and to wrangle too when his Copy-hold is in such danger? I pray what was the cause that Demetr. and the Craftsmen cried out, great is Diana of the Ephesians, whom al Asia and the world worship? was it the love to the goddesse or her worship? no, we find it was their covetousnesse and particular gaine? What is it els to cry out, great is learning, great are the Universities, who shall answer an adversary? (money answereth all things) ambition, covetousnesse, disdaine, pride, and luxury are the things aimed at: and if it be not so, by the fruits you shall certainely know. As for government, those that are accused are not guilty, for they are enemies onely to usurpations, and innovations, and exorbitances in government: indeed they are haters of tyranny, and all arbitrary power, but no other: and therefore those that falsely accuse them, are they that cause and foment divisions amongst you: therefore marke them, and be not deceived by their dissembled insinuations to hold you in division, whilst they have opportunity to make a prey of you. You know there are Wolves in Sheepes cloathing: be wise as Serpents, able to discover them, innocent as Doves, gently bearing with the infirmities of the weake, having nothing in more esteeme then love: thus you will answer love with love: that henceforwards your owne soules may constantly witnes to your selves (what this Scripture expresseth) That the love of God bringing salvation to all men hath appeared, teaching you to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world: Now unto him that hath loved us, and washed away our sinnes in his owne bloud, be praise and glory for ever, Amen.
T.31 (1.11.) William Prynne, An Humble Remonstrance against The Tax of Ship-money (7 October 1643).↩
Editing History
- Illegibles corrected: HTML (date)
- Illegibles corrected: XML (date)
- Introduction: date
- Draft online: date
OLL Thumbs TP Image

Local JPEG TP Image

Bibliographical Information
ID NumberT.31 [1643.10.07] (1.11) William Prynne, An Humble Remonstrance against The Tax of Ship-money (7 October 1643).
Full titleWilliam Prynne, An Humble Remonstrance against The Tax of Ship-money Lately Imposed: Laying open the Illegality, Injustice, Abuses, and Inconveniences thereof. Written by William Prynne, Esqu. An. 1636. during his imprisonment in the Tower of London, to free his Countrey from that heavy Tax; and then communicated to some speciall friends in Writing. Since that printed without his privity, by an imperfect Copy, An. 1641. so full of Non-sence errors, and mistakes almost in every line, as makes it altogether uselesse, yea ridiculous: but now set out by a true Copy, agreeing with the originall; to right the Author, and promote the publique good. Together with some briefe Observations touching the Great Seale of England.
Fortescue de Laudibus Legum Angliae, cap. 36. f.84. In hoc individuo Rex Angliae, nec per se, nec Ministros suos, Tallagia, Aubsidia, aut quaevis ONERA ALIA imponit Legiis suis, aut Leges eorum mutat, aut nova condit, sine concessione vel asseniu TOTIUS REGNI SUI IN PARLIAMENTO SUO EXPRESSO.
Imprimatur Sept. 1. 1643. John White. London, Printed for Michael Sparke senior, at the signe of the Blew Bible in Greene-Arbour., 1643.
Estimated date of publication1636, revised 7 October 1643.
Thomason Tracts Catalog informationTT1, p. 289; Thomason E. 251. (1.)
Editor’s Introduction
(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)
Text of Pamphlet
To the Reader.
COurteous Reader, I here present thee with a Compleate Copy, of An humble Remonstrance against the Tax of Shipmoney, (under which we lately groaned;) which gave the first great blow to that oppressing project. It was at first communicated onely to some friends in writing, and I know not by what ill carriage, came to the Lords of the Privy Councels hands, before any store of Copies were dispersed; who were so much perplexed at it, for feare it should utterly subvert that illegall Tax, if once divulged, that they used all their art and industry to suppresse it, questioning divers persons, searching sundry studies, imprisoning some, enforcing others to obscure themselves, onely to smother this piece of truth, which yet at last brake forth into divers good hands in despight of all opposition; and thereupon brought this Imposition to a publique debate before all the Judges of England in the Exchequer-Chamber, Anno 1637. & 1638. in Mr. John Hampdens case, upon a Scire facias: and since that, before the last abortive, and this present Parliament, which hath dammed it by a speciall Act, as illegall.
The rarity and great esteeme of this Manuscript (containing many pertinent passages in it, omitted by the Iudges in their Arguments of this subject,) so much hunted after heretofore, induced some Stationer or other since this Parliament, who had gotten a maimed Copy of it, full of mistakes, both in quotations, names of Authors, words of Art, and ordinary English, to publish it in print An. 1641. without the Authors privity: who lately meeting with a printed Copy of it, found it so full of grosse non-sence errors, mistakes, and imperfections almost in every line, that he scarce knew this child of his owne getting (which he had not seen in 6 yeeres space before) but onely by the method and some Quotations: whereupon being somewhat grieved to see himselfe and others so much abused with such a spurious imperfect non-sence brat; having no written Copy by him wherewith to rectifie it; he made diligent inquiry among his Friends for a perfect Copy agreeing with the Originall; which at last he meeting with, gave way it should be published, to right both himselfe and the cause; as likewise to satisfie some Anti-Parliamentary Prelaticall Malignants, with others, who are ready to censure him for other workes formerly and lately published for the common good of Church and State; how much they, (if not the Republique too) are obliged to him for this Peece, to ease both them and it of such an intolerable grievance, of which themselves complained then and since, as much as others; it being compiled at such a time, when none else durst write a syllable of this subject; nay, while himselfe lay under the heaviest Wrath and Censures of the King, and those oppressing ill Counsellors, who then swayed all things both in Church and State at their pleasures; being shut up in the very Lyons Denne, Mouth; and yet then durst hazzard all his Prison-comforts, limbes, yea life it selfe, rather then see his dearest Country oppressed, ruined, through his silence, by this Tax, and not assist it to his utmost power.
Let those then, who either quarrell or maligne him for publike wel-doing, refuting Errors, vindicating Truths, with freedome and impartiality, either equall or exceed him in services, in sufferings for the common good of Church and Countrey, notwithstanding all oppositions, discouragements, dangers, losses, that have encountered him in his course; or cease to envy, malice, slaunder him without just cause; else all ingenious spirits will and must necessarily censure them for carping Zoilusses, or malignant Momusses whom no men can please; but such who flatter them in their Errors or Vices; which they must never expect this Author will doe, who is too generous to spare or Court any in their evill or unworthy actions, be they Friends or Foes.
AN HUMBLE REMONSTRANCE To His MAJESTY
AGAINST THE TAX OF SHIP-MONEY NOW IMPOSED:
Laying open the illegality, injustice, abuses, and inconveniences thereof.
MOst Gracious and dread Soveraigne, we Your poore loyall Subjects of this Your Realme of England, now grieved and oppressed with the late Taxes imposed on us, for the setting out of divers Ships to gard the narrow Seas, without our common consent thereunto had in Parliament, doe here in all humble duty prostrate our selves, and this our humble Remonstrance against the said Taxes, at Your Highnesse feet, beseeching Your Majesty, of Your Royall Justice and Clemency, to take the same into your Most gracious Consideration; and thereupon to release us Your poore Subjects from this intolerable burden, grievance, under which we groane and languish.
And here, first of all we most humbly represent to Your Excellent Majesty, that this Tax of Shipmoney, is directly contrary to the fundamentall Lawes and Liberties of this Your Realme of England, which Your Majesty both in point of Iustice and Honour is obliged inviolably to preserve, according to the Oath made to God and Your Subjects at Your Coronation; and Your frequent printed Royall Protestations since, both in Your Answers to the Petition of Right, in the third yeere of Your Highnesse raigne, in Your Royall Speech in Parliament, printed therewith, by Your speciall command; and in Your Declaration to all Your loving Subiects, of the causes which moved Your Majesty to dissolve the last Parliament, published likewise by Your speciall command, p. 22. 23. 42 43. 44. In all which, Your Majesty (to all Your subjects comforts) hath made these severall Declarations of Your royall pleasure, in these words: ‘The King willeth that right be done according to the Lawes and Customes of the Realme. And that the Statutes (recited in the Petition of Right) be put in due execution, that his Subjects may have no cause to complaine of any wrong or oppressions contrary to their just Rights and Liberties; to the Preservation whereof, He holds Himselfe IN CONSCIENCE as well obliged, as of His Prerogative. Let right be done as is desired. And I assure you My Maxime is, That the peoples Liberty strengthens the Kings Prerogative, and the Kings Prerogative is to defend the peoples liberty. I doe here declare, That those things which have been done, whereby men had some cause to suspect the liberty of the Subject to be trencht upon, shall not hereafter be drawne into example for your prejudice, and in time to come (in the word of a King) you shall not have the like cause to complaine. We were not unmindfull of the preservation of the just and ancient Liberties of our Subjects, which we secured to them by our gracious answer to the Petition in Parliament, having not since done any act, whereby to infringe them: but Our care is, and hereafter shall be, to keep them intire and inviolable, as We would doe our owne Right and Soveraignety. We doe also declare, that We will maintaine the ancient and just rights and liberties of our subjects, with so much constancy and justice, that they shall have cause to acknowledge, that under our government and gracious protection, they live in a more happy and free estate, then any Subjects in the Christian World. If then we shall make it appeare to Your Majestie, that this Tax is against the Lawes of this Your Realme, and the ancient Rights and Liberties of Your Subjects, we doubt not but Your Maiesty, out of your Royall Iustice and goodnesse, will be most graciously pleased to exonerate us thereof, and never to draw it into example more.
That it is against the fundamentall Lawes, just Rights and ancient Liberties of Your people, we shall make it evident by these particulars.
Not to mention the ancient Law of Edward the Confessor, and William the Conqueror, (ratified by all our Kings by their very Coronation Oath) registred by Mr. Lambert in his Archaion. f. 24.* Volumus & concedimus, quod omnes liberi homines Monarchiæ Regni nostri habeant & teneant terras suas bene & in pace, liberas ab omni exactione injusta, & AB OMNI TALLAGIO, ita quod NIHIL ab eis exigatur, praæer servitium suum liberum, quod de jure nobis facere debent, & facere tenentur, & prout STATUTUM EST EIS, & illis à Nobis datum & concessum, jure hæreditario imperpetuum, PER COMMUNE CONSILIUM TOTIUS REGNI nostri prædicti. Or King* Iohns great Charter granted to his Prelates, Lords, and Leiges, and their heires, for him and his heires for ever, at Running-mead, in the 17 yeere of his reigne; wherein there is this memorable clause; NULLUM scutagium, vel AUXILIUM ponam in Regno nostro NISI PER COMMUNE CONSILIUM REGNI NOSTRI, nisi ad redimendum corpus nostrum, & ad primogenitum filium nostrum militem faciendum, & ad primogenitam filiam nostram [Editor: illegible word] maritandam, & ad hoc non fuit nisi RATIONABILE AUXILIUM; which Charter was ratified by this Kings great Seale, his corporall Oath, the Bishops Excommunications, the Popes owne Bull, and five and twenty Lords, sworne and appointed to see it observed.
First, we humbly conceive it to bee contrary to sundry Statutes of this your Realme now in force.
First, to the Statutes of Magna Charta c. 29 30.1. (nine and thirty times ratified in Parliament) 5. Edw. 3. cap. 9. 25 Edw. 3. cap. 4. 28 Edw. 3. cap. 3. 37 Edw. 3. c. 18. and to the late Petition of Right, in the third yeere of your Majesties reigne, which enact, *That no free man shall be taken or imprisoned, or be disseised of his free hold, or liberties, or free customs, or be outlawed or exiled, or otherwise destroyed, nor his lands, goods, nor chattels seized into the Kings hands, nor passed upon, nor dealt with by you; but by the lawfull judgement of his Peers, and by the Law of the Land. But divers of your poore Subjects, by vertue and authority of the Writs for Ship-money, have been taken and imprisoned by your Officers, their goods and chattels seized, distreined, sold to their great dammage and destruction, without any lawfull Judgement first given against them, before the right of this Tax hath been legally heard and decided, against the very tenour of these Statutes, and the know Law of the Land.
Secondly, against the Statutes of *Confirmatio Chartarum, 25. Edw. 1. cap. 5, 6, 7.2. 25 Ed. 1. De Tallagio non concedendo, 34 Ed. 1. cap. 1. 45 Ed. 3. cap. 4. 36 Ed. 3. cap. 11. 14 Edw. 3. cap. 25. and Stat. 2. cap. 1. 25 Edw. 3. c. 8. 1 Rich. 3. cap. 2. and the late Petition of Right ratified by your Majestie, which enact, That no Tax, Tallage, Aide, Loane, Benevolence, nor any such like charge, shall be laid or leavied by the King or his Heirs in this Realm for NO BUSINESSE, without the good will and assent of the Archbishops, Bishops Earls, Barons, Knights, Burgesses, and other the free men of the Commonalty of this Realme, AND FOR THE COMMON PROFIT THEREOF; AND THAT BY COMMON CONSENT AND GRANT IN PARLIAMENT. By vertue of which Statutes your Subjects have inherited this freedome, That they should not be compelled to contribute to any Taxe, Tallage, Ayde, or other like charge, not set by common consent in Parliament; as it is recited in the said Petition. Therefore not to this Tax, Tallage, Aide, or charge of Ship-money, it being against these Acts, and not set by common consent in Parliament.
Thirdly, against all Acts of Tonnage, Poundage, and other Subsidies, which have3. from time to time in all your Royall Progenitors reignes granted them, either for yeers or terme of their naturall lives, a certaine Tax or Subsidie for the safeguard and defence of the Seas against Enemies and Pirats, as a free and voluntary grant, because themselves by their Royall Prerogative had *no power to impose it on their Subjects. Some few of which Acts we shall here recite.
14. Edw. 3. Stat. 1. cap. 20. and Stat. 2. ‘The Prelates, Earls, Barons, and Commons in Parliament, granted the King the ninth Lambe, Fleece, and Sheafe, and the ninth part of all goods and chattels in Burroughs for two yeers space then next ensuing, to be taken and leavied by lawfull and reasonable Taxe by the same two yeers, in aid of the good keeping of his Realme as well by Land as by Sea; and of his warres, as well against the parties of Scotland, France, Gascoine, and elsewhere; with this proviso, That this grant so chargeable shall not another time bee had forth in example, nor fall to their prejudice in time to come: And that all the profits thereof, with others rising of the Realme of England, shall be set and dispended upon the maintenance of the safeguard of the Realme of England, and of the wars in Scotland, France, and Gascoine, and in no places elsewhere during the said wars.
5. Rich. 2. Parleam. 2. chap. 3. ‘A Subsidie of Tonnage and Poundage, of two shillings on every Tonne of Wine, and six pence the pound of every merchandize else imported (some few excepted) was granted to the King by Parliament for two yeers (during which time the Mariners of the West proferred in Parliament to make an Army on the Sea:) Provided alwayes, that the money thereof comming be wholly imployed upon the safe keeping of the Sea, and no part elsewhere: the receivers and keepers whereof were appointed by the Parliament in this Act, which ordains, that the people of the said Sea-Army shall have all the lawfull prizes shared between them, and that the Admirals and other of the said Army shall give assurances to save the Kings Friends and Allies without dammages to be done to them or to any of them by any way; and if they doe, and that be proved, they shall binde them upon grievous pain thereof duly to make amends.
31. Hen. 6. Num. 41. ‘*A Subsidie of Tonnage and Poundage was granted to this King during his naturall life for the safeguard and keeping of the Sea, and to be applied to such uses and intent, by the advice and assent of the Lords Spirituall and Temporall, and Commons in Parliament: who appointed Richard Earle of Salisbury, John Earle of Shrewsbury, John Earle of Excester, Iames Earle of Wiltshire, and Iohn Lord Sturton, with great Navies of Ships and people defensible, to intend with all diligence the safeguard and keeping of the Sea according to their power; and to receive the said Subsidies for three whole yeeres, for that purpose.
4. Edw. 4. and 12. Edw. 4. cap. 3. ‘The Commons of the Realme of England, granted a Subsidie, called Tonnage, to this King for his life, for the defence of the same Realme, and in especiall for the safeguard and custody of the Sea. They are the words of the Act oft repeated: which Law was continued and renewed to King Henry the eight by Act of Parliament, 6. Hen. 8. cap. 14. which grants him Tonnage and Poundage during his life. The Statutes of 1 Edw. 6. cap. 13. 1 Mariæ cap. 18. and 1 Eliz. cap. 19. (for the grant of Tonnage and Poundage) severally recite; ‘That Henry the eighth, Henry the seventh, and * other of these Princes noble Progenitors, Kings of this Realme, time out of minde, have had granted unto them and enjoyed by the Commons of the same for the time being, by authority of Parliament, for defence of the same Realme, and the keeping and safeguard of the Seas for the entercourse of Merchandize safely to come into and passe out of the Realme, certain summes of Money, named Subsidies, of all manner of goods and merchandize comming in or going out of the same Realme. And for as much as we your poor Commons have perceived your Majesties good favour and good will towards us your said poore Commons, as well in defence of us and this your Realme, &c. as also in the keeping and sure defending of the Seas against all persons intending the disturbance and invasion of this your Realme, and us your Commons, to our great comfort and rejoycing, as cause requireth, to your Majesties great costs, charges, and expences, which is not (when need shall require in such cases) at any time to be lacked, but rather we your said Commons wishing that such furniture of all things may be had in readinesse from time to time when necessity shall require: for the speedy and indelayed provision and helpe, for the suppressing of such inconveniences and invasions, humbly desire your most Excellent Majestie beningly and favourably to take, accept, and receive these our poor grants hereafter ensuing, as granted of true hearts and good wills which we beare unto your Highnesse, towards your said great costs, charges, and expences which may be expended and laid out by your Majestie for the causes aforesaid, when need shall require, &c. and not perverted to other uses but those alone.
The Act for Tonnage and Poundage, 1 Iacobi cap. 33. which granted this Subsidie to your Royall Father during his naturall life, makes the* same recitall word for word, That it was granted him to guard the Seas withall against all persons, &c.
If then the Subsidies of Tonnage and Poundage have thus beene alwayes granted as a Taxe upon the Subjects for the guarding of the Seas, both against enemies and Pirats by Act of Parliament, and not otherwise, and all your Majesties royall Progenitors have accepted of it in this manner, by grant in Parliament, and not imposed any such annuall Taxe as now, by way of Writ, for the defence of the Seas, by their Prerogative royall; we humbly conceive, that your Majestie cannot now impose it on us by Law: The rather because your Majesty, ever since your comming to the Crowne, hath taken and received this Subsidie of Tonnage and Poundage, and yet still take and claime it, onely for the defence of the Sea; professing in your royall Declaration to all your loving Subjects, published by your speciall command. Anno 1628. pag. 44. that you take this duty of five in the hundred, for the guarding of the Seas and defence of the Realme, to which we hold our selfe STILL obliged.
Now since your Majestie receives this duty of your Subjects to this very purpose (the moity of which is abundantly sufficient to defend the Seas in these dayes of peace with all neighbour Princes and Nations;) and by reason hereof, hold your selfe still obliged to doe it with this duty; (yea, with the profits of Wards and Marriages, Customs and Escheats, and other profits rising of the Realme of England, which ought to be set and dispended upon the maintenance and safeguard of your Realme of England, as is expresly resolved by the Statutes of 14. Edw. 3. Parl. 2. cap. 1. and 11 Rich. 2. cap. 7.) We humbly conceive, that you cannot in point of Law and Iustice (neither will you in point of Honour or Conscience) receive the said duty, sufficient with an overplus, to defend the Seas, and yet notwithstanding impose this heavy Tax and burden wholly on your Subjects, laying the whole charge of guarding the Seas (even in these dayes of peace) on them (as if no Tonnage and Poundage were taken for that purpose) which none of your royall Progenitors ever yet did, and is a meere double charge and vexation to your people.4.
Fourthly, Against most of the Acts of Parliament for the severall Subsidies of the Clergy and Commonally in all your Royall Progenitors reigns, and your owne too; who when the annuall revenues of their Crownes, and the Customs and Subsidies granted them for the guarding of the Realme and Seas, by reason of open warres, offensive, defensive or both, were not able to supply and defray their extraordinary expences, never resorted to such Writs as these for the leavying of Ship-money (especially in times of peace) but ever to the *Parliament, for supplies for defence of the Seas and Realme, by grant of Subsidies, Impositions, Dismes or Quinzimes, rated and taxed by Parliament, not by their owne Authority royall. This is evident by all the Acts of Subsidies, Taxes, Aides, and Customs granted to your royall Progenitors, and in especiall by 14 Edward 3. Stat. 1. cap. 20, 21. and Stat. 2. 15 Edw. 3. cap. 1, 2, 3. 18 Edw. 3. Parl. 2. Proeme Parl. 3. cap. 1. 25 Edw. 3. Parl. 7. 36 Edw. 3. cap. 14. 11 Rich. 2. cap. 9. 9 Hen. 4. cap. 7. 11 Hen. 7. cap. 10. 32 Hen. 8. cap. 23. 37 Hen. 8. cap. 24. 2 and 3 Edw. 6. cap. 35, 36. 7 Edw. 6. cap. 12, 13. 4 and 5. Phil. & Mar. cap. 10, 11. 5 Eliz. cap. 29. 13 Eliz. cap. 23. 18 Eliz. cap. 21, 22. 23 Eliz. cap. 14, 15. 27 Eliz. cap. 28, 29. 29 Eliz. cap. 7, 8. 31 Eliz. cap. 14, 15. 35 Eliz. cap. 12, 13. 39 Eliz. cap. 26, 27. 43 Eliz. cap. 17, 18. 3 Jacobi cap. 16. 21 Jacobi cap. 32, 33. 1 Caroli cap. 5, 6. and 3 Caroli cap. 6 7. All which expresly recite, That the Subsidies and Ayds granted by them, were for the defence of the Kingdom by Sea and Land, the maintenance of the Navy, &c. Now if these Princes (who would part with no title of their just Prerogative) and your Majestie your selfe, have thus from time to time resorted for supplies by Sea and Land to* the Parliament, when Tonnage, Poundage, and their owne ordinary revenues would not suffice (which they would never have done, might they have supplied themselves by such Writs for Ship-money as these without a Parliament;) we humbly conceive that your Majestie ought to retaine the same course still, and may not by your Prerogative impose this taxe of Ship-money on us, without common consent in Parliament, contrary (as we beleeve) to the Petition of right and other Acts, confirmed by your Majesty, as our undoubted ancient Rights and Liberties.
2.Secondly, as this taxe of Ship-money is against these severall Statutes, so likewise against the very Common Law, and Law books.
1.For first, by the very Common Law, every generall duty and service which concernes all the Subjects, or the greater part of them, that is incertaine and indefinite, not reduced to any positive certainty, ought to be rated and imposed by the Parliament onely, not by your Majestie or the parties whom it concernes; as appeares by two notable instances pertinent to the present purpose. The first is that of Escuage uncertain; which though a duty to our Kings and others Lords heretofore, upon every Voyage Royall against the Scots; yet, because it concerned so many, could not be taxed but by Parliament, as is resolved, Littleton Sect. 97, 98, 100, 101, 102. 13 Hen. 4, 5, 6. Fitzh. Nat. Br. 83. C D and Cookes Institutes on Littleton, Sect. 97, 98, 101, 102. Secondly, In case of aide to marry the Kings or Lords daughter, or make his sonne a Knight, which though a duty by the Common Law,* yet it was taxed and reduced to a certainty by Parliament, and not left arbitrary, 3 Edward 1. cap. 36. 25 Edward 3. Stat. 5. cap. 11. Fitzh. Natur. Br. fol. 82. B. C. F. If then these incertaine services and duties, to avoid Oppression and Injustice ought to bee taxed in Parliament; much more this uncertaine and indefinite Tax of Ship-money, being no duty nor debt at all, not yet prescribed or reduced to certainty by any extant Law.
2.Secondly, no Dismes, Quindismes, Grand-Customs, or such like Aides, can bee imposed by the very Common Law (though usuall Subsides and Supplies)* but by Act of Parliament: as appeares by all the Cases in Fizherberts and Brookes Abridgements Title Quindisme; 9 Hen. 6. 13 Brooke Customes. 26. 4 Ed. 4. 3, 4, 5. Fitzh. Barre 309 [Editor: illegible word] Edw. 3. cap. 21. 36 Edw. 3. cap. 11. 45 Ed. 3. cap. 4. 50 Ed. 3. cap. 8. 11 Rich. 2. cap. 9. Dyer 43. b. 165. Therefore much lesse this unusuall extraordinary aid of Ship-money (amounting the first yeere to 15. and the last and this yeere to three subsidies a man, or more) of which there is not one sillable or title in all our common Law Books.
Thirdly, no Lawes can be made within the Realme to bind the Subjects either to3. See Cookes Institutes on Mag Chart. c. 29, 30. the losse of liberty, good, or member, by your Majesties absolute power, nor yet by your Majesties Lords in Parliament, without the Commons consent in full Parliament, as is resolved in these common Law-bookes, 1 H. 7. 27. 3 H. 7. 18 a. Br. Parliament 42. Fitzh 3. 7 H. 7. 14. 33 H. 6. 17. Fortescue c. 9. 11. 13. 14. 36. 13 H. 4. f. 14 Plowden. fo. 79. M. 9 E. 3. Fuz. Jurisdiction 28. And the very reason why Acts of Parliament binde all, is this, because every man is party, and consenting to them. 3 E. 4. 2. a. 21 E. 4. 45. a. 4 H 7. 11. b. 21 H. 7. 1. b. Plowden. 59. a. 396. If then no Lawes can be imposed on the Subjects but such as are made and consented to by them, to deprive them either of the liberty of their persons by imprisonment; or of the property of their goods by confiscations; much lesse then any Tax, or this Tax for Shipmoney, for which their goods shall be and are distreined, and their persons imprisoned, in case they refuse to pay it, contrary to Magna Charta, and the premised Statutes.
Fourthly, every subject hath as absolute a property in his goods by the Common4. Law, as he hath in his Lands; as therefore your Majesty cannot lawfully seise any of your Subjects lands unlesse by some just title, some forfeiture upon a penall law, or condition infringed, or by the parties voluntary grant and consent: So can you not seize upon his goods, unlesse by some grant from the party himselfe, either mediately (as in Parliament) or immediately, or for some debt or duty granted you in like manner: Therefore not for Shipmoney, unlesse granted by common consent in Parliament. This being a resolved Maxim, in Francis case. Cooke. lib. 8. f. 92. Quod nostrum est, sine facto seu defectu nostro amitii seu in alienum transferri non potest.
Fiftly, it is a Maxime in all Lawes Civill, Common, Canon; yea, a principle of5. reason and nature: Quod tangit omnes, ab omnibus debet approbari. Regul. Juris. n. 2 9. That which toucheth all ought to be approved by all, at least by the major part. This rule ever holds in all naturall and politicke bodies. In naturall bodies nothing is or can be effected by the head, hand, arme, or foot alone, unlesse the other parts of the body and faculties of the soule assent; In all elections popular, where there are divers Electors, there must be either a generall consent of all or the major part, else the election of the fewest or of one only is a meere nullity. In all Parliaments, Synods Colledges, Cities, Cathedrals, no Lawes, Canon, Ordinances, or Bylawes can be made, nor Levies or Taxes imposed, but by all or the Major part. The Bishop or Deane without the Chapter, the Major without the rest of the Corporation, the Abbot without the Covent, the Master of the Colledge without the Fellowes, the Masters or Wardens of Companies, without the Assistants; the Lords in Parliament without the Commons, or the lesser part without or against the greater, (in all these) can doe nothing, either to bind or charge the rest, by the Common, Civill, on Canon Law. Your Majesty therefore by the same reason, being but one member of the body Politicke of England (though the most excellent and supreame of all the rest) can impose no binding Lawes, or new Taxes on our Subjects without their common consents in Parliament especially now in times of peace, when a Parliament may be summoned to supply Your Exchequer.
Sixtly, if Your Majesty should grant a Commission to imprison, or seise any of your6. Subjects goods, without an Inditement and due processe of Law, it hath been adjudged voyd and against Law, 42 Ass. 5. 12. Br. Commission 15. 16. Therefore your Majesties Writ to destreine mens goodes and imprison their bodies for Ship-money [Editor: illegible word] [Editor: illegible word] to: and as your Majesty by your charter* cannot alter the common Law, 6 H. 7. 4 5, 10 H. 7, 23. a. So neither can you doe it by your writ.
Seventhly, it is a Maxime in Law, That no man ought to be Iudge in his owne case; and therefore no man can have conasance of Pleas where himselfe is Judge and party, and if a Lord of a Mannor prescrib in a custome to distraine all beasts that come within his Mannor dammage fesant, and to retaine them till a fee be made to him for the dammages at his will, this prescription is voyd, because it is against reason that he shall be Judge in his owne case; for by such meanes, if he had dammages but to the value of a halfe-penny, he might assesse and have therefore an hundred pounds, 51 H. 3. c. 1. Littleton Sect. 210. 212. & Cooke ibid. 7 E. 4. 24 4 E. 3. 14. 10 E. 3. 23. 38 E. 3. 18. 8 H. 6. 15. 5 H. 7. 9. b. 2 R. 3. 16. 4 E. 3. 7. 10 H. 4. 8. Br. Leet. 12. 7 H. 6. 13. a. 9 H. 6. 10. The same reason holds here in Ship-money. If it lay in your Majesties and your Officers power to impose what summes you pleased on your people, you should be a Judge in your owne case, which the Law permits you not to be. Hornes Mirrour of Justice, ch. 2. sect. 2. p. 9. 24 H. 8. c. 12. 25 H. 8. c. 21. 25 E. 3. parl. 2. and so your Majesty (by your Officers mis-information for their owne private lucre) might leavy farre more then need requires for this service, yea so much money and so often as would soone exhaust your subjects whole estates; which is both against reason and justice. Wherefore their concurrent assent in Parliament is requisite, that no more may be demanded then shall appeare to be necessary, to avoyd oppression both in the frequency of the imposition, the quantity of the summes collected, and in the undue, unequall taxing thereof.
8.Eighthly, if Your Majesty by your absolute authority, might impose such Taxes as these at Your pleasure on your Subjects; then you may doe it as oft, and raise them as high as you please; for what Law is there to hinder you from it, but that which denies you any power at all to doe it? Now if you may impose these Taxes as oft, and raise them as high as you will (even for an 100 or 200 ships every yeere, as well as 40 or 50, in times of peace) and then distraine upon all your Subjects goods, or imprison their bodies for it, all their Goods, Lands, Liberties, will be at your Majesties absolute disposition; and then are we no free Subjects, but meere villaines, vassals. And if so, where are all our just ancient Rights and Liberties, (so lately confirmed by Your Majesty in the Petition of Right) which You have protested You are bound in conscience to preserve inviolable?
9.Ninthly, It hath been adjudged in ancient times; that the Kings of England cannot by their Prerogative create a new office by Patent in charge of their people, neither can they grant Murage, or any other such Tallage to any by Patent, or demand it of any man by Writ (though it be but a petty Tax) because it is in charge of their people, QUE NE POEP ESTRE SANS PARLIAMENT, Which cannot be done without Parliament. 13 H. 4. 14. Br. Patents 100, Fitz. Nat. Br. f. 122. Cooke l. 11. f. 86. Darcies case. Magna Carta, p. 48. to 52. Therefore by the same reason, this Tax, which layes a farre greater charge on the Subject then any new office, Murage, Toll-travers, or thorough-toll, cannot be imposed but by Parliament. The rather, because Fortescue Chancellour of England in the raigne of King Henry the 6. in his Booke, De laudibus legum Angliæ, dedicated to this King, c. 9. 13. & 36. resolves in direct termes: That the King of England, neither by himselfe nor his Ministers can impose Tallages, Subsidies, or any other burdens or forraine impositions on his People, without the expresse grant, and assent of His whole Kingdome in Parliament.
Tenthly, admit your Majestie, by your absolute Prerogative, might inforce your10. Subjects to set out Ships to guard the Seas, yet we humbly conceive, as things now stand you cannot doe it neither in honour nor justice, nor yet in that way and proportion as it is now demanded.
For first, we humbly conceive, that your Majestie cannot impose this annuall1. charge on your Subjects onely and wholly, because you receive Tonnage and Poundage of your Subjects (of purpose to guard the Seas and ease your Subjects of this burden) which is sufficient to discharge this service, with a large surplusage besides to your Majestie; either therefore your Majestie must now, both in justice and honour release this taxe of Ship-money, or else your Tonnage and Poundage, since either of them are sufficient for this service; & one of them not due, if the other taken.
Secondly, we humbly conceive, That you cannot demand it now in a time of2. a generall peace, when there is no feare at all of any forraigne enemy, nor open warre proclaimed against any neighbour Prince or State: there being (as we beleeve) no president of any such taxe in times of peace.
Thirdly, we humbly conceive, That since the Writ enjoynes only every County3. to furnish out a Ship of so many Ton for so many moneths; that first, no Counties can by Law be inforced to furnish or set out Ships, but those that border on the Sea, and have Ships in them. Secondly; that they cannot be compelled to furnish out any2. other ships or ships of any other burden then such as they have, nor yet to build new ships, but onely to set forth such Ships as they have for the present, unlesse they have convenient time allowed them to build others. Thirdly, that they cannot be3. compelled to leavy so much money, and to returne it into the Exchequer, or to any of your Officers hands (as they now doe) whom they cannot call to an account to see how their money is imployed, but that they may and ought to appoint their own Officers, Treasurers, Collectors, and to make their own estimates, proportions, provisions at the best and cheapest rates as every man doth that is charged with horse or foot-arms on land: otherwise they may be over-reached, over-rated in their estimates, and put to almost double expence by your Majesties Officers, who are not, neither can be compelled to give your Subjects any account, as their owne Officers may be, and as those that collected the Subsidies of Tonnage and Poundage anciently were to doe, 5 Rich. 2. c. 12. Par. 2. c. 3. 21 Jac. c. 33. Fourthly, that they cannot4. be compelled to hire your Majesties Ships at such rates, with such furniture provision, &c. as your Officers shall thinke meete to set and appoint. For then by the same reason, your Majestie may enforce those Gentlemen and traine Souldiers who are bound to keepe Launces, light Horses; or to provide Armes in every County, though they have Horses and Armes of their owne which are serviceable, to buy or hire your Majesties Horses and Armes every yeere, at such rates as your Officers shall prescribe, and lay by their owne; and your Merchants that traffique may be constrained to hire and traffique onely in our Majesties Ships, not with their own, as your Officers rates there being the same reason in both. But your Majestie, as we suppose, cannot enforce your Subjects by Law to the one (to hire your Horses, Armes, Ships, to train, or trade with;) therefore not to the other. Fifthly,5. That they cannot be compelled to contribute money to set out seven and forty Ships (as they did the last yeere) and yet but seven and twenty only (and some of lesse burthen then limited in the Writs) be furnished out by your Officers, and so scarce halfe the pretended number imployed, and not halfe the money collected6. disbursed in that pretended service. Sixthly, that they cannot be enforced to provide fourty, five and fourty, and fifty shot round of powder and bullets, for every peece in the Ships set our, now there is a generall peace, and no likelihood of a Sea fight (when fifteen, twenty, or five and twenty round at most, is sufficient, and no more was allotted in 88. when the Spanish Fleet came against us) of purpose7. to put them to a double charge. Seventhly, that they cannot be inforced to pay for new Rigging Cables, Anchors, Carriages, Powder, Shot, Match, Pikes, Muskets, &c. every yeer, when little or nothing of all these provisions purveyed and paid for by them the first and last yeere are spent, but onely victuals and wages; (all the other provisions at the end of the service being taken into your Majesties Stores,) and so to buy their own Powder, Shot, Match, &c. every yeere afresh, though all fully bought and paid for with the first Ship-money, and yet once bought over since, the last yeere, and now likely to be bought the third time of your Majestie this yeere: who at the first gained four pence upon every pound of powder, when the first seven and twenty Ships were set out: all which taken into your stores at the returne (but what was idly shot away and spent) and bought the last yeere afresh, amounts to sixteene pence gaine in every pound; and if this third yeere bought over againe (as is likely, because cast into the present new estimates) will be two shillings foure pence cleare gaine on every pound of powder sent out, the like doubled and trebled gaine will accrue every subsequent yeere to your Majestie, if this Tax proceed, upon all Powder, Match, Shot, Carriages, Cordage, &c. and all stores but victuall, the onely provision that is spent, the most part of all the rest returning to your hands when the Ships returne. Which provisions if your Subjects found and provided themselves at the best rates, and tooke againe into their owne stores upon the Ships returne, one quarter of that they are now rated at, by reason of the remaining8. provisions, would discharge the intended service. Eighthly, that they cannot be enforced to contribute seven thousand pound to the furnishing out of a Ship of seven hundred ton, according to your Majesties Officers estimate, when as themselves could every way furnish it as well the first yeere for five thousand pounds or lesse, and the next yeer for lesse then halfe the money, by reason of the remaining9. stores. Ninthly, that they cannot be enforced to give your Majestie after the rate of sixteene shillings, eighteen shillings, or more a ton, for the hire of your Royall ships, built and maintained at the Kingdoms cost to guard the seas; when as they can hire other mens ships for foure shillings or five shillings a ton the moneth, or under; and your Majesty allowed them no more but four shillings a ton by the moneth for their ships imployed in Cales and Rochel voyage; some of which money is yet unsatisfied through your Officers default, to their great impoverishing: whereas your Majesty receives all or most of your monies before hand, ere your ships are sent10. to sea. Tenthly, that they ought not to be charged with any such Tax, unlesse those Officers, and others whom your Majestie imploy to guard the Seas, put in good security to preserve your Subjects, Friends, and Allies from Pirates and others without any dammage: and if any of them sustaine losse by them (as none ever did more in our memory then we the last yeere on the west coasts by the Turks) to give them full satisfaction and sufficient dammages, as those that undertooke to guard the seas at the subject costs were obliged to doe by 5. Rich. 2. Parl. 2. cap. 3. which is but just and equall. Eleventhly, they conceive, that since every subject (that is not a sea-faring 11. man) is bound* by Law to provide Horses, and other Arms for Horse and Foot for defence of the Kingdom by Land, upon all occasions and charged with Armes for Land-service at their owne proper cost, according to their estates and abilities; that therefore they ought not by Law to be doubly charged with Sea and Land service too; but that Mariners and Sea men who have ships, and are freed from all Land-services, Masters, Armes, ought onely to be charged with this Sea-service either on their owne proper costs (it discharged of Tonnage and Poundage) or else upon your Majesties, as they were in* King Johns reigne (and since A. 1588) when Land-men were discharged from Sea-service, and sea men from Land-service, the one serving with their Horse and Foot Armes on Land onely, the other with their ships on the sea onely, when Philip of France intended to invade the Realme, and deprive King John of his Crowne whom the Pope had then injuriously deposed by the Prelates instigations.
This our last reason we humbly conceive to be warranted by sundry printed Statutes and Presidents as, to omit Magna Charta, cap. 20. full in point.
First, by the Statutes of 1 Edw. 3. Parl. 2. chap. 5.* Item, the King wist that NO1. MAN FROM HENCEFORTH be charged TO ARME HIMSELFE OTHERWISE THEN HE WAS in the times of his Progenitors Kings of England. And that NO MAN be compelled to goe out of his Shire, but where necessity requireth, OF (for so is the Record and best Copies, not And, as some printed books render it) SODAINE COMMING OF STRANGE ENEMIES INTO THE REALME, and then it shall be done AS HATH BEEN USED IN TIMES PAST FOR THE DEFENCE OF THE REALME: which is thus recited and confirmed by the Statute of 4. Hen. 4. chap. 13. where it is ordained, that the Statute made in the first yeere of King Edward, &c. containing, That NONE shall be constrained to go out of their Counties, BUT ONELY FOR THE CAUSE OF NECESSITY OF SODAINE COMMING OF STRANGE ENEMIES INTO THE REALM, shall be firmly holden and KEPT IN ALL POINTS.
Secondly, by the punctuall Statute of 25. Edw. 3. c. 8. recited in, and ratified by2. the Statute of 4 Hen. 4. ch. 13. NO MAN SHALL BE CONSTRAINED to finde men of Armes, Hoblers, nor Archers, other then those which hold by such services, if it be not BY COMMON ASSENT AND GRANT MADE IN PARLIAMENT, with which the temporary expired statutes of 11 Hen. 7. c. 18. and 19 Hen. 7. cap. 1. accord.
Thirdly, by the statute of 1 Edw. 3. ch. 7. Whereas Commissions have been awarded3. to certaine people of Shires, to prepare men of Armes, and to convey them to the King into Scotland, or Gascoine, or elsewhere, at the charge of the Shires: The King hath not before this time given no wages to the said Preparers, or Counties, nor Souldiers whom they have brought, whereby the Commons of the Counties have been at great charge and much impoverished: The King wils, THAT IT SHALL BE SO DONE NO MORE. Thus seconded by 18. Edw. 3. c. 8. Men of Arms, Hoblers, Archers, chosen to go in the Kings service out of England, SHALL BE AT THE KINGS WAGES from the day that they depart of the Counties where they were chosen TILL THEIR COMMING AGAINE: recited in and ratified by the Statute of 4 Hen. 4. chap. 13.
Fourthly, by the statute of Winchester, 13. Edw. 1. cap. 6. And further it is commanded,4. That every man have in his house Harnesse for to keep the peace after the* ancient Assize, that is to say, Every man between fifteen years of age and fourty years shall be assessed and sworn to Armer, ACCORDING TO THE QUANTITY OF THEIR LANDS AND GOODS; that is to wit, from 15 li. lands and goods 40. Markes, an Hawberke, a brest-plate of iron, a sword, a knife, and an Horse. And from 10 li. of lands and 20. Marks goods, a Hawberke, a brest-plate of iron, a sword and a knife. And from 5 li. lands, a doublet, a brest-plate of iron, a sword, and a knife. And from 40 s. lands and more unto 5 li. land, a sword, a bow and arrows, and a knife. And he that hath lesse then 40. s. yearely shall be sworne to keepe gise-armes, Knives, and other lesse weapons: and that all other that may, shall have Bows and Arrows out of the Forests, and in the Forests bowes and bolts. And that view of Armour be made every yeere two times: And in all Hundreds and Franchises two Constables shall be chosen to make the view of Armour, and the Constables aforesaid, shall present before Justices assigned, such defaults as they doe see in the Country about Armour.
5.Fifthly, by the statute of 5 Eliz. cap. 5. Be it enacted in favour of Fishermen and Mariners, That none of them shall hereafter at any time be compelled against his or their will, TO SERUE A SOULDIER UPON THE LAND OR SEA, otherwise then as a Mariner, except it shall be to serve under any Captain of some Ship or Vessell for landing, to doe some speciall exploit which Mariners have used to doe; or under any other person, having authority to withstand ANY INVASION OF ENEMIES.
1.From which Acts it is apparent; First, that no man is bound to goe out of his own Shire for the defence of the Realm by Land, but only in case of necessity when strange enemies suddenly come into the Realme, for the necessary defence of the Realm. Therefore à fortiori; no man nor County remote from the Sea, is bound to go out of their own shire every yeere at the Counties proper cost, to build, furnish men, and set out ships to guard the seas in this time of peace, when as there is no necessity at all, nor sudden comming of strange enemies into the Realme which is now at peace with all the world; and neither feares nor hears of any such approaching enemies, and so requires no such defence.
2.Secondly, that no man can be lawfully charged to arme himselfe, otherwise then he was in times past, in the dayes of our ancient Kings, nor to finde men at Armes, Hoblers, or other souldiers, other then those that held by such services; unlesse it be by common assent and grant made in Parliament. Now no inland Counties were ever bound in our ancient Kings reigne; to arme themselves with Ships, Ammunition, and habiliments of warre to desend the Seas, or to finde men at Armes, Archers, Hoblers, or Mariners to furnish a Navy, much lesse to build and furnish out Ships, when they had neither Ship wrights, Harbours, Mariners, or Seamen of their own; neither is any man, or inland Town that ever we read of bound by their tenures to furnish the King or Kingdome with ships or Mariners for the guarding of the seas in time of invasion by forraign enemies, but* onely to finde Land Souldiers, and that in times of war alone. Therefore no man, nor inland County, certainely is or can be obliged to finde Mariners or Armes for Sea-service, much lesse to build and furnish out ships to guard the Seas, especially in these times of Peace, by vertue of any Writs, without speciall Act of Parliament.
Thirdly, that the King himself is to pay the wages of all Officers and land souldiers3. raised for the necessary service of the Kingdome, after they are departed from their owne Counties, not the Commons and Country. Therefore he cannot by his writ enforce the commons, contrary to these Acts, to pay Captaines and Sea-mens wages, imployed in his ships to guard the Seas; much lesse then to build set out, and maintaine ships at their owne expences, out of their Counties and the Land it selfe and that in times of peace.
Fourthly, That seeing every Land man, and in-land County is charged by the4. Law to finde Armes to guard the Realme by Land according to the quantity of their Lands and Goods; and cannot guard the Land and Sea at one; Therefore by all reason, justice, law, and equity, they ought to be discharged from building, furnishing ships, and finding men, or armes to guard the Sea, else they should be doubly charged; and impossibilities required at their hands, to defend the Realme both by Land and Sea at once, when as one person can be but in one place at once, and not in many: and therefore not upon Land and Sea at once, as this Writ would enforce them to be, contrary to the expresse Letter of Magna Charta, cap. 20.
Fifthly, that by the selfe-same law and reason as Fishermen and Marriners are freed from Land-service, and from finding Horses or Foot-men on the Land; because they are bound to serve at sea; land-men and in-land Counties should be discharged from all Sea-services, the building or setting out of Ships and Marriners at their owne costs to guard the Seas: it being as great an incongruity and absurdity to enforce land-men to build and set out ships to sea, in which they have no skill at all; as to force Marriners and Ship-wrights to build Castles, provide Horses, and serve on horse-backe on the Land, which they have no knowledge, nor skill to performe. Hence in the first Parliament of 13 E. 3. num. 10, 11. The Lords in Parliament requiring the Commons, to advise and take counsell how the Sea should be garded against the enemies, that they should doe no dammage nor enter the Realm for to destroy it; the Commons returned this answer, That the Barons of the Cinque-ports, who received great honours and priviledges, and much profit by the Sea, and were exempt from contributing to any aydes or charges of the Land; enjoyed these franchises of purpose to guard the Seas betweene us and strangers, if they would enter and assault the Land; and that they and other Sea-towns which have a Navy ought to maintaine a guard upon the Sea, as the Commons doe upon the land, without taking any wages; And that they being to defend the land, were exempted from guarding the sea. Whereupon in the second Parliament of 13 E. 3. n. 11. 12. 19. 23. The Cinqueports and Sea-townes were enforced to set out a Navy to guard the sea, and the Commons and in-land Counties, discharged of this burthen, because they were bound to defend the land. And upon this very reason the same yeere* 13 E. 3. pars 1. memb. 14. & 13 E. 3. pars 2. memb. 14. The men of Bodman in the County of Cornwell, and the Major and Communalty of Chichester, were discharged from finding Ships, Masters and Marriners to guard the Seas, which they were then enjoyned to finde, because they were no Port-townes adjoyning to the Sea, nor ever had any ships arriving in those Towns, nor any Masters, Seamen or Marriners dwelling therein; nor ever used to finde any such for Sea-service; and it would be an unjust oppression to charge them with such an incongruous, impossible service, which they could not performe; the Law requiring impossibilities and absurdities at no mans hands, and* adjudging impossible conditions, covenants and awards to be utterly voyd.
Now that the Cinqueports are bound to guard the Seas by their charters, and in what sort and for how long space, appeares by the record of 21 E. 1. in the Exchequor cited by Mr. Cambden in his Britannia, edit. ult. p. 318. which runs thus, Hastings and his members ought to finde at the Kings summons 21 ships, and in every ship there must be 21 tall and able men, well armed and appointed for the Kings service. Yet so, as that summons shall be made thereof on the Kings behalfe 40 daies before, And when the foresaid ships and men therein are come to the place whereunto they were summoned, they shall abide there in the Kings service 15 daies, at their owne proper costs and charges. And if the King shall have further need of their service, after the 15 daies above said, or will have them to stay there any longer; those ships with the men therein being, whiles they remaine there, shall be at the Kings service, AT THE KINGS COST & CHARGES so long as it shall please the King; to wit, the Master of every ship shall receive 6 pence by the day, the Constable 6 pence a day, and every one of the rest 3 pence by the day. If then the Cinqueports themselves, who are exempt from all land-services and taxes, & enjoy so many priviledges, the better to encourage them to guard the Seas, are bound by Charter Tenure, to find but 21 ships for 15 daies space, when there is occasion, at their own charges, & after that the Masters, Officers, Marriners to be at the Kings owne standing wages; a fortiori, all inland men & Counties who have no ships, and are not bound by Charter or Tenures to finde any ships to guard the Seas; can much lesse be obliged to finde ships, Ammunition, Mariners, or to pay both their fraught and wages for 26 weeks together, at their owne proper costs, (as the Writs now enjoyne them.) And therefore ought in point of Law, justice, conscience equity, to be for ever freed from this most heavy, unjust, oppressing Tax now growen annuall, and like to prove perpetuall to us and our posterities if not with stood in time, by all just and legall meanes.
Upon all these grounds (which we humbly represent to Your Majesties just and Royall consideration) we humbly conceive this Tax of shipmoney to be altogether illegall and unjust (especially as now it is ordered) and therefore humbly pray to be freed there from.
2.Secondly, admit your Majesty by your absolute power and prerogative might impose a Tax for ship-money without common consent in Parliament, which we humbly deny; yet, under your Majesties favour we conceive, that this present Tax as now leavied and ordered, is illegall and a great grievance, not only in respect of all the fore-named particulars specified in the ninth reason, but of these also ensuing.
1.First, in regard of the greatnesse and excessivenesse of these Taxes: the first, on the Port-towns only for 27 ships, An. 1634. came in most Towns to 15 Subsidies a man. That the last yeere for 47 ships, to all Counties of England and Wales, amounted to 3 or 4 subsidies in each County, or more. That this present yeere for 45 ships, comes to as much, and all these payable at once. The highest Taxes that were ever imposed on the subjects of this Realm, for ought we read in our stories, and that in times of generall peace; when the subsidie of Tonnage and Poundage, of purpose to guard the seas, is three, if not six times greater then in Qu. Elizabeths, or any Princes daies before her; and halfe of it, or of these Taxes, or lesse as we shall be able to make good, would furnish out all the ships now sent forth to guard the Seas,
2.Secondly, of the annuall vicissitudes of it three yeers together in times of peace not to be paraleld in any age; which is like to make a dangerous president for us, and our posterity after us.
Thirdly, the inequalitie of taxing it: In the first Tax, ordinary Merchants and3. Citizens paid 10 l. 12 l. 15 l. 20 l. yea, 25 l. or more, when as divers of your Majesties Great Officers, Earles, and Lords, that had fourty times greater Estates, and annuall Revenues than they, paid but fourty shillings, three pound, four pound, or five pound at the most. The last years Tax was rated accordingly in Cities and Corporations, where the middle or poorer sort paid more than the richest; and in the Countrey, where men are now rated by the Acre; poor Farmours pay more than the richest Knights or Gentlemen; yea, many poor men that have not bread to put into their own or their childrens mouthes, are forced to sell their Pewter, bedding, sheep, & stock to pay it. The like inequalitie is in this present asseasment and how the poor, that made such hard shifts to pay the last, can be able to discharge this, we cannot conceive; especially in London and other Cities, which are and have been visited with the Plague, where thousands that lived well before the sicknesse, now live upon Almes; and those that had wealth before, by means of want of trading, the charge of their Families, and their assessements to relieve the poor, are become poor themselves, fitter to crave relief, than to pay such an heavy Tax as this.
Fourthly, the abuse of some Sheriffs and Officers in leavying farre more than is4. prescribed in the Writ, as in Lincolnshire the last year, and in other places before and since.
Fiftly, the distreining of such Goods, Chattels and other Commodities for Ship-money,5. as are neither imported nor exported; whereas no goods but such, or lands onely have been anciently charged with any Tax towards the guarding of the Seas, as appears by the severall Acts for Tonnage, Poundage, and Danegeld.
Sixtly, the ill guarding of the Seas against Turks and Pirates, notwithstanding6. this great Tax, more mischiefs being done by Pirates both by Sea and Land, more of our Ships taken or pillaged by Sea, and more persons carried away Captives from the Land in the Western parts this last year notwithstanding the Navie, then in many years before, and no satisfaction given to the Subjects for these their irreparable losses, which they* ought in justice to receive. If a Carrier or Skipper undertake to carry or secure mens goods, and they miscarry through his default or negligence an* Action of the Case lies against him, and he shall render full damages to the partie: Your Majesties Officers imployed by you, undertooke to secure the Seas the last year, yet when they knew the Turks were pillaging on the Westerne Coasts, they negligently or wilfully left those part unguarded, to go Northward to pick a quarrell with Hollanders Fishermen, or to draw them to a composition, not leaving a Ship there-abouts to secure those Coasts, but two Ships onely in the Irish Seas; in the view of which some of your subjects Ships were taken, and yet not one Pirate taken or brought in by them, though they did so much mischief, and took so many of your subjects prisoners, to their undoing.
Seventhly, the great fear and jealousie we your poor Subjects have of an intention7. in some of your great Officers, to make this Tax an yearly revenue to your Crowne, and the guarding of the Sea but a meer pretence to leavie and collect it; which jealoufie of ours is grounded upon these particulars.
First, the continuance of this annuall Tax for three years together, even in times1. of peace.
2.Secondly, the sending out but of 27 Ships by your Officers the last year, when as money was leavied for 47; and so money raised for 45 Ships this year again, when not above 25 are to be set out, for ought we hear, if so many. Now if money be thus yearly collected for 20 Ships more then are set out, in the very beginning of this project, we fear worse consequences in the sequell.
3.Thirdly, your Officers enforcing your Subjects to buy over their own Powder, Match, Shot, Cordiage, Stores, and other provisions afiesh, the last year, and this, which were fully paid for the first year, and taken into your Majesties Stores at the first and last return, and rating the estimates, as high the last year and this, as at first, when as one third part of the estimate (the old Stores and other things considered) would defray the charge.
4.Fourthly, your Officers turning of Tonnage and Poundage, (given, taken onely, and abundantly sufficient, to defend the Seas withall) into a meer annuall revenue, and laying the whole charge of guarding the Seas on the subjects notwithstanding; Now if that Tonnage and Poundage, purposely granted and taken to guard the Seas withall, be thus turned by them into a meer annuall revenue, we fear this also will be so, the moity of the present money collected being not disbursed in the defence of the Sea, for which it is pretended.
5.Fiftly, the speeches and mutterings of some of your Officers, who already stile it, a duty, yea, a project to improve your Annuall Revenue, and as for the greater part of the money, now collected, make it so.
8.Eightly, the stopping of some legall proceedings by Replevin, or Habeas Corpus, to bring the right and lawfulnesse of this Tax to a fair, just, speedy publike triall and discision, it being never formerly adjudged; contrary to* Magna Charta, and the Judges Oathes.
Ninthly, the leavying of this as a present supply, by some of your Great Officers, under colour of guarding the Seas, of purpose to keep off a Parliament, wherein our9. grievances may be heard, redressed, and these Officers, who have abused your Majesties truct reposed in them, oppressed your people, violated their just Rights, Laws, Liberties, undermined their established Religion now in great danger to be supplanted by Popery) condignly questioned and punished.
10.Tenthly, That divers Corporations, (as London, Yorke, Hull,) together with Clergie-men, Eschequer-men, Church Lands, ancient Demesne, &c. exempted from Danegeld, and all other Taxes and Tallages by prescription or speciall Charters confirmed by Parliament, and many who have been priviledged even from paying of Subsidies, (is the Officers of the Mint, and Warders of the Tower) are burthened with this Tax, contrary to their very Charters of exemption. Which severall grievances we most humbly submit to your Majesties wise and most gracious consideration.
3.Thirdly, admit your Majestie might by your absolute Prerogative impose this Tax, yet the manifold inconveniences ensuing thereupon, both for the present and future, (which we shall here likewise represent to your Majesties royall wisdom) may justly induce your Highnesse to free us from this heavie mischievous burthen.
1.For first, it causeth a generall decay of Trading, both by ingrossing most of the ordinary currant money of the Kingdom, (the Nerves of Trade) and by breaking, undoing, or casting many poor Tradesmen and others so farre behinde-hand in the world, that they cannot recover themselves again.
Secondly, it causeth many Farmers in the Countrey to break, or hide their heads,2. and give over their Farms, and makes every where such a multitude of poore, that the rich, in a short time, will not be able to relieve them.
Thirdly, it produceth a great decrease and abatement in the rents and price of3. Lands, and enhanceth all other kindes of Commodities and Provisions to such an extraordinary rate, as the poor wil not be able to live or subsist, nor the rich to keep Hospitality, or to train up their Children to Learning, Sciences, Armes to serve your Majestie and their Countrey, if this Tax should continue.
Fourthly, it stops the current of the Common Laws of the Realme, by disabling4. men to prosecute their just Suits, and to recover their Rights, for want of Means, which will breed much oppression and confusion, if not prevented.
Fiftly, it much discontents the mindes, dejects the spirits, slackens the industry5. of most of your loyall Subjects, yea, causeth many of them to leave the Realme, and give over trading.
Sixtly, it so far exhausts your subjects Purses and Estates now in times of peace,6. that they will be unable (though willing) to supplie your Majestie in times of Warre, or upon other necessary important occasions. (A thing considerable.) That which* Speed writes of Danegeld, being true of this Taxe likewise, That it emptied the Land of all the Coyne, the Kingdom of her glory, the Commons of their content, and the Soveraigne of his wonted respects and observance.
Seventhly, it makes our neighbour Princes (especially the French) jealous of us,7. moveth them to fortifie themselves extraordinarily at Sea, more than otherwise they would have done, yea, to call in the very Turks to annoy and infest us.
Eightly, it much hinders Traffique by way of Merchandize, and fishing, by imploying8. divers of our ablest Ship-Masters, Pilots, Mariners and Fishermen in this service, which otherwise should and would have beene imployed in Merchants voyages and fishing.
Ninthly, it causeth a great unnecessary expence of Victuall, of Provision for9. Ships, and so raiseth the price of victuals and provisions for Shipping.
Tenthly, it serves to secure the coasts of Flaunders against the attempts and intended10. Designes of the French and Dutch, to guard and transport the Spanyards men, money, Artillery and provisions safely into Flaunders, which else could not escape the French and Dutch; and so by consequence, to maintain the warres against your Majesties own dearest Sister, her Children, friends, Allies, and helps to keep their Countrey and Inheritance from them; The Spanyards turnes being really served, yea, all their Goods, Provsions, Moneys safely transported, (not one Ship of ours fraught with their Commodities being taken the last year, that we hear of, among so many others of our own which miscarried) by means of this Tax and your Majesties Ships, whiles they on the contrary require, abuse your Majesty, your onely Sister and Nephews, with nothing but delayes or denyalls, to the grief of all your loyall Subjects.
Eleventhly, it much impoverisheth your whole Realme, benefitteth it nothing11. at all, and serves chiefly (as we humbly conceive) to advance the Spanyards Monarchie and Designes (by whose Friends or Agens we fear it was at fast broached and set on foot) who have had most benefit by your Ships and Fleets already set forth, and therefore ought to defray their whole or greatest expences; for, Qui sentit commodum, sentire debet & onus; by the very rules of Law.
12.Twelfthly, it is like to bring a great insupportable annuall constant charge of above three, if not four Subsidies a year on your Subjects, for the present, and to breed a dangerous president for posteritie, if not now released or withstood; since in such Taxes commonly, one Swallow makes a kinde of Sommer,* Et Binus actus inducit consuetudinem, a double or treble payment without opposition, will introduce a custome and prescription, be the Taxes never so unreasonable or unjust, as the Prelates and Clergy themselves could joyntly conclude in King Henry the third his dayes, in case of some other unjust Taxes.
These, most Gracious Soveraign, are the Grounds and Reasons we, in all humility, represent to your Sacred Majestie, against this Tax of Shipmony (set on foot, as we have cause to suspect, by such who ayme more at their owne private lucre, and sinister ends, then at your Majesties honour and service, or your Kingdoms welfare) upon which we humbly supplicate your Majesty to be exonerated of it, since, for the premised reasons, we neither can nor dare contribute any more monies to it.
Now because those men who have set your Majestie upon this project, (being such for the most part as have been advanced from low degree to great Offices and Estates for life by your Mies speciall favor, and having no Posterity of their own to care for, are regardlesse of others, or of future times, so as they may support themselves for the present by any, though unjust or dishonourable meanes, prejudiciall to posteritie, and all others but themselves,) pretend some ancient Presidents for the lawfulnesse of this Shipmoney Taxe, thereby to induce your Majestie (whose integritie and justice they know to be such, as will never give consent to the least unjust Taxation to oppresse your subjects withall, contrary to their just Rights, Liberties confirmed by your Majestie, even by your own good Lawes) to impose, exact it as a just and lawfull Tallage; We shall here, for the further clearing of the unlawfulnesse thereof, return a briefe answer to the chiefest of those Presidents they produce or suggest to your Majestie, to manifest the Legalitie of it.
In generall, we give this answer to all the Presidents they do (without grant in Parliament) or can produce to justifie this Tax.
1.First, that there is no direct President at all in point, to compell the Subject to finde Ships to guard the Seas; and if any one such President can be produced (as we presume none can) yet that it was never ruled nor adjudged lawfull upon solemne debate, either in Parliament, or any other publike Court of justice.
2.Secondly, that the Presidents produced, which have any colour at all to prove this Tax just or legall, were before Magna Charta and the forecited Statutes against imposing Taxes, Tallages, Without common consent in Parliament, or at least before any Tonage, and Poundage granted for the guarding of the Seas; not since.
3.Thirdly, they were onely in times of War and open Hostilitie, when the Realme was actually invaded by forraigne enemies, not of Peace, as now; which will answer all Presidents that can be produced.
4.Fourthly, that they were either by assent in Parliament, or else withstood or complained of as grievances, if otherwise.
5.Fiftly, that they are onely for pressing or staying of Ships upon the Kings hire and wages; not for setting out of Ships upon the Subjects proper cost (if not bound thereto by Charter, or Tenure, as in the Cinque-Ports) or else for stay of Ships for a time, and so impertinent to the case in question.
Sixtly, that these Presidents were not annuall, much lesse for sundry years together,6. but rare, once perchance in an age, and that upon speciall occasions, onely in times of War, and will not prove pertinent, if duely examined.
Seventhly, that none of them extend to Inland Countries, Cities, Villages, but7. to Maritine Towns alone.
These generall answers premised, we shall now descend to their most materiall ancient particular Presidents, in answering which alone, we shall fully cleare all the rest succeeding them.
The first President objectedThe first and main President they insist on, is that ancient Tax of Danegeld; this, say they, was lawfully imposed by his Majesties Royall Progenitors on the Subjects then, by their meet Royall Authoritie without Act of Parliament, to defend the Seas and Realm against the Danes;Answer. therefore his Majestie may impose on his Subjects the like Tax now, by his Prerogative.
To this objected President, we answer, That there was a double Tax or Tribute called Danegeld, mentioned in our Chronicles and Writers; The first* imposed by and paid to the Danes themselves, as to conquering enemies, by way of Composition or Tribute, to which the King himself contributed as well as the Subjects: This Composition was begun first by pusillanimous King Egelred, by the ill advice of Siricius Archbishop of Canterbury, and other Nobles Anno 983. this Tribute came to 10000 l. Anno 986. to 16000 l. Anno 991. to 10000 l. Anno 994 l. to 16000 l. An. 1002. to 24000 l. An. 1007. to 36000 l. Anno 1009. to 3000 l. out of Kent alone. An. 1012. to 48000 l. An. 1014. to 30000 l. So Matthew Westm. Wigorniensis, with others. Some write that Egelred at five severall times paid the Danes 113000 l. to be exacted of all the people. This was properly called Danegeld. This Tribute was exacted and collected by King Hardeknutus, whose Officers were slain at Worcester in gathering up this Tributum inexorabile & importabile; as Matthew Westminster and Malmesbury terme it. De Gestis Regum Anglorum, l. 2. c. 12. p. 76. 77. King Suanus the Dane exacting this Tribute from Saint Edmunds Bury Gate, or King Edwards lands, which pleaded exemption from it, was stabbed to death with King Edwards sword, in the midst of his Nobles; as our Historians record. Now this Danegeld, (so termed because it gelt, impaired mens Estates, and emasculated their spirits) hath no Analogie with the Tax of Shipmoney, as all our Historians and Writers testifie.
For first, it was not paid to the King, but to a conquering oppressing Enemie.
Secondly, it was paid by the King himself, as well as by the Subjects, and that not as a debt or dutie, but a Composition or Tribute, most unjustly imposed and exacted by a usurping forraigne greedy enemy.
Thirdly, it was extorted by Force and Violence, not by Law or Right.
Fourthly, it was paid by the joynt composition and agreement both of King and people, not imposed on the people by the Kings absolute power. This is evident by Florentius Wigorniensis, and Matthew Westminster; who record, that Anno 983. Danis omnes portus regni infestantibus, dum nesciretur ubi cis occurri deberet, DECRETUM EST A VIRIS PRUDENTIBUS, ut vincecerentur argento, qui non poterant ferro, Itaque denom Millia librarum soluta, Danorum avaritiam exploverunt. Anno 991. Quo audite, datum cis tributum 10000 l. PER CONSILIUM Siricis & aliorũ Nobiliũ Regni, ut a crebris rapinis, cremetionibus, & hominum cœdibus quæ circa maritima agebant, cessarent An. 994. Tunc Rex Æthelredus CONSILIO SUORUM dedit eu pensionem de tota Auglia collectam 16 millium librarum, ut a rapinis & cædihus hominum innocentium cessarent. Anno 1002. Rex Æthelredus CONSILIO PRIMATUM SUORUM Danis pro bono pacis tributum 24000 l. soluit. Wigorniensis. Anno 1007. Hoc Anno, Rex Anglorum Æthelredus CUM CONSILIO PRIMATUM SUORUM nuncios ad Danos legans, eis nunciare mandavit, quod sumptus & tributum co tenore illis dare vellet, ut a rapinis desisterent, & pacem cum eo firmam tenerent: Cujus postulationi, consenserunt, & ex eo tempore de tota Anglia sumptus illis dabatur, & tributum quod erat 36 millia librarum persolvebatur. Anno 1012. Dux Edricus Streone, & OMNES ANGLIÆ PRIMATES utriusque ordinis ante Pascha LONDONIÆ congregati sunt, & ihi tamdiu morati sunt, quousque tributum Danis promissum quod erat 48000 l. persolveretur. By all which it is most evident, that this Tribute was imposed, not by the Kings absolute Power and Will, but by the Parliament, and common consent of the Peers, and all the Realme.
5.Fiftly, it was paid to save and ransom their lives, goods and liberties from a conquering enemy, not to a Gracious Prince to secure them from an enemy.
6.Sixtly, it was then thought and called by all our Historians an intollerable grievance and oppression, which (saith* Speed and others) emptied the Land of all her Coyne, the Kingdome of her glory, the Nobles of their courage, the Commons of their content, and the Soveraigne of his Wonted respect and observance: Therefore in all these respects, no warrant at all of the lawfulnesse of this Tax, but a strong argument against it; to prove it both an intollerable grievance, and unjust exaction.
2.The second Tax, called Danegeld, (intended in the Objection) is thus defined in King Edward the Confessors Laws, c. 12. and by that famous grand Inquest of twelve of the principall men out of every County in England, appointed by William the Conquerour in the fourth year of his raign, recorded in Houeden, p. 603. Danegeld was first of all enacted to be paid by reason of Pirates; for infesting the Countrey, they ceased not to waste it all they could. To represse this their INSOLENCY, IT WAS ENACTED, that Danegeld should be yearly rendred; to wit, 12d out of every Plough Land thorowout England, to hire those who might resist and prevent the invasion or eruption of Pirates. The Black Book of the Eschequer, l. 1. c. 11. thus describes it; To repulse the Danes IT WAS ENACTED by the K. of England, (to wit, in Parliament) that out of every hide of Land, by a certain perpetuall Right, 2 s. should be paid to the use of valiant men, who diligently viewing and continually guarding the Sea Coasts, should represse the force and assaults of the Enemies. Because therefore this Rent was principally instituted for the Danes, it is called Danegeld.
But this President of this second sort of Danegeld, (most insisted on) is so farre from warranting the lawfullnesse of this present Tax, that in truth it is an unanswerable argument against it, if duely considered.
1.For, first, it was not imposed on the Subjects by the Kings absolute Prerogative, as this is; but granted and imposed by Parliament, with the peoples consent, as Tonnage and Poundage hath been since. This is evidence,
First, by the Lawes of Edward the Confessor, c. 12. Danegeldi redditio propter piratas1. primitus STATUTA EST, &c. Ad eorum quidem reprimendam reprimendam STATUTUM EST Danigeldum annuatim reddi, &c. If therefore at first ENACTED to be paid; yea, ENACTED to be paid yearly, namely, twelve pence out of every hide of land to hire men to guard the Seas and Sea Coasts, against the Danes and Pirates, then certainly granted and enacted thus by Parliament, since the King alone by his absolute Power (much lesse by such a Writ as now issues) could make no such Act or annuall Law, nor impose such an yearly charge.
Secondly, by the Black Book of the Eschequer, l. 1. c. 11. Ad hos igitur arcendos, a Regibus2. Anglia (to wit, in* Parliament, where the Kings of England onely are said to Enact Laws, and the Laws there Enacted, are said to be the Kings Laws and Acts, because the peoples and his assent unto them makes them binding) Statutum est, ut de singulis hydis JURE QUOD AM PERPETUO, duo solidi argentei solverentur, ad usus virorum fortium, &c. Hic igitur ANNU A LEGE [Editor: illegible word] indegenis Regibus solvebatur. If then ths Tax were ENACTED BY A CERTAIN PERPETUALL LAW. as this Eschequer Record avers it was certainly by vertue of an Act of Parliament.
Thirdly, by the addition to the Lawes of King Edward the Confessor, c. 12. recited in3. Hoveden likewise, Annal. pars posterior, p. 603 which saith, That every Church, and the Lands belonging to every Church, where-ever situated, were exempted from this Tax, untill the dayes of William Rufus, because they put more confidence in the prayers of the Church, than in the defences of Arms: Donec codem A BARONIBUS ANGLIÆ AUXILIUM REQUIRENTE, ad Normanniam requirendam & retinendam de Roberto suo fratre cognomine Cortahose Jerusalem proficissent Concessum est ei, non Lege sancium neque firmatum; sed hac necessitatis causa ex unaquaque hida sibi dari quatuor solidos, Ecclesia non excepta. Dum verò collectio consus fierct,* proclamavit Ecclesia, suam reposcens libertatem; sed nihil prefecit. By which exemption of the Church and Church Lands from this Tax, at first; and this request of W. Rufus of it, to regain and retain Normandy, (which they did then GRANT UNTO HIM, onely for the present necessitie, but did not annually ESTABLISH NOR CONFIRM THE GRANT OF 4s. AN HIDE LAND BY A LAW, as Danegeld was first granted) and that upon the Lands of the Church; it is most apparent, that Danegeld, (or this Tax then suceeding in liew of it,) was first granted by Parliament, and that no such Tax could then be imposed by the King, even in times of Warre and necessitie, to regain and preserve his proper Inheritance, but by* consent onely in Parliament.
Fourthly, by Sir Henry Spelman his authorized Glossary, London, 1626. Title de Danegeld, p. 200, 201. and M. Selden in his Mare Clausum, London, 1636 (dedicated4. to your Majestie, and published by your speciall Command) l, 2. who both incline to this opinion, that this Danegeld was not imposed by Royall Authority, but granted by the Peoples full consent in Parliament, and that the Taxes which succeeded it, were not annually granted or paid, but onely in times of War, &c. Consultis etiam Magnatibus Regni & PARLAMENTARIA DEMUM AUTHORITATE, and that by the advice of the great men of the Realm, and BY AUTHORITY OF PARLIAMENT. If then this Tax of Danegeld to defend the Seas, was granted and imposed only by Parliament, with those Taxes also that succeeded it, not by the Kings Royall Prerogative without a Parliament; this Tax if Shipmoney also ought to be thus imposed, and not otherwise, even by this Presidents example.
3.Secondly, this Danegeld was not imposed or exacted in times of Peace, but of Warre onely, being granted solely for this purpose, to defend the Seas against the Danes invasions during their Warres and Piracies; so that when the Warres ceased, this Tax also ceased in point of Law and Justice, according to the Lawyers and Philosophers rule, Cossante causa, cessat effectus. That this Tax lasted, was granted and lawfully taken onely during the Wars of the Danes, is most apparent, by the forecited words of Edward the Confessors Law, c. 12. Houeden Annulium Pars posterior, p. 603. by the Black Book of the Eschequer, l. 1. c. 11. forecited; which addes moreover, that when the Land had paid this Tax under William the Conquerour, Noluit hoc ut annuum solvi, quod fuerat URGENTE NECESSITATE BELLICÆ TEMPESTATIS EXACTUM; nec tamen omnino propter inopinatos casus dimitti. Raro igitur temporibus ejus, vel sucessorum ipsius solutus est, hoc est. CUM AB EXTERIS GENTIBUS BELLA VEL OPINIONES BELLORUM SURGEBANT. Which Sir Henry Spelman in his* Glossary seconds in the same words. If then this Danegeld, though granted by Parliament, was due, and of right collected of the Subjects onely in times if forraigne Wars, not in dayes of Peace; it is no President at all to prove this annuall Tax of Shipmoney lawfull in these times of generall peace, when we have neither open Wars with, nor any imminent fear of Wars from any forraign Nations, but a direct president against it, being now in peace with all our neighbours.
3.Thirdly, this Danegeld, though granted by Parliament, when it began to be usurped, as an annuall duty by the Kings of England, and that in times of Peace as well as Warre, was complained of as an unsufferable grievance, and thereupon for ever released to the subjects by four severall Kings.
1.First, by that good and gracious Prince King Edward the Confessor, of whom Jugulphus our ancient Historian, p. 897. Mr Selden in his Mare Clausum, l. 2. and Sir Hen Spelman in his Glossary, Tit. Danegeld with others. (out of him) write thus. An. Dom. 1051. When the carth yeelded not her fruits after her accustomed fertility, but devoured divers of her Inhabitants with famine, insomuch that many thousands of men died for want of bread; most pious King Edward the Confessor, moved with pity towards his people, Tributum GRAVISSIMUM quod Danigeld dicebatur OMNI ANGLIÆ IN PERPETUUM RELAXAVIT; For ever released to all England that most grievous Tribute called Danegeld.* Some (addes he) report, that this most holy King, when his Bedchamber-men had brought the Danegeld then collected into his Bedchamber, and carried him in thither to see so great an heap of Treasure, that the king was agast at the very first sight thereof, protesting that he saw a Devill dancing upon that great pile of money, and triumphing with over much joy; whereupon he presently commanded it to be restored to the first owners; Et de tam FERA EXACTIONE, ne jota unum voluit retinere, And would not retain one jot out of so cruell an exaction: (an excellent president both of Justice and Charity for your Majesty now to imitate in these dayes of plague and penury) Quin IN PERPETUUM* RELAXAVIT, but released it for ever, to wit, in the 38 year from the time that Suanus King of the Danes, commanded it to be yearly paid to his army in the Raigne of King Ethelred his Father.* Higden in his Polychron, l. 6. c. 24. Fabian in his Chronicle, part, 6. c. 210. p. 282. Matthew Westminster, and Florentius Wigorniensis, Anno 1051. Capgrave, Surius, Ribadenira and Holinshed in the life of Edw. the Confessor. Graston in his Chronicle, p. 180. Speed in his History of Great Brittain, lib. 8. c. 6. Sect. 7. p. 410. with others record, That this Edward the Confessor discharged Englishmen of the great and most heavy Tribute called Danegeld, which his Father Egelred had made them pay to the Souldiers of Denmark; so that after that day (saith Fabian) it was no more gathered. This good King therefore for ever releasing it to all England, as a most grievous, cruell, heavie exaction, and restoring the money collected by it, to his eternall honour; we hope your Majestie, his gracious Successor, neither can, nor will now, (after almost 600. years discontinuance) revive and exact it by your Prerogative, as a lawfull duty, but rather remit and repay the money recollected, as he did.
Secondly, it was released by William the Couquerour, who taking and requiring it,2. or rather the like Tax for a time, and imposing a Taxe of 6 s. upon every hide Land towards the payment of his Souldiers, as a Conquerour, which caused a Rebellion against him in the Western parts, (as Polychronicon, l. 7. 1 3. Fabian part. 7. c. 219. 222. p. 300, 308 with* others, attest) did at last release this Tax of Danegeld likewise, but onely in times of War, as appears by the Black Book of the Eschequer, l. 1. c. 11. which writes thus. Ipso namo Regnante tam Dani, quam cæteriterræ marisq prædones, hostiles cohilebant incursus; cum crgo diu solvisser, terra sub ejusdem Regis imperio, NOLUIT hoc ut annuum solvi quod fuerat urgente necessitate Bellicæ tempestatis exactum; nec tamen omnino propter inopinatos casus dimitti. Rarò igitur temporibus ejus (or rather never, for ought appears by our Chronicles or Records) vel successorum ipsius solutus est; Hoc est, cum ab exteris Gentibus bella, vel opiniones bellorum insurgebant. This Conquerour therefore releasing the annuall payment of it in times of Peace, as unjust, unreasonable, yea, against the Primitive Institution of it, and demanding it onely in times of Warre, (and then by grant in Parliament to) your Majestie coming to the Crown onely by lawfull Succession and Inheritance, not by an absolute Conquest, as he, ought much more to release, and by no means to demand any such Tax in times of Peace.
Thirdly, it was released by King Henry the first, who as he in the beginning of his Raigne,* took away all unjust exactions, where with the Realm of England was unduly oppressed, and exempted the Citizens of London, and all Knights, by his great Charter, from Danegeld, and all Gelds or Taxes, reserving a Tax called Danegeld, to wit, of twelve pence every hide land, out of other lands, (which Tax it seems by his Laws, c. 16. was granted to him by Parliament;) So he made a vow, that he would release the Danes Tribute for seven years. Polychronicon, l. 17. l. 7. Spelmanni Glossarium, p. 200. 201. And it seems he was as good or better than his word; for Fabian, part, 7. c. 239. p. 327. and Grafton, p. 40. Story, That he released unto Englishmen the Danegeld (that was by his Father and his brother renewed; to wit by grant in Parliament, as appears by Edward the Confessors Laws, c. 12. which he ratified; the Laws of Henry the first, c. 16. Hoveden Annal. pars posterior, p. 603. Spelmans Gloss. p. 200, 201. And he releasing it then also, we hope your Majestie cannot in justice renue it or the like Tax now.
Fourthly, it was for ever released by King Stephen, both at his Coronation, and in a Parliament hold at Oxford. For* Matth. Paris. p. 73. Polycronicon, l. 7. c. 18. f. 283 Fabian, Part, 7. c. 232. p. 333. Hoveden, Annalium Pars prior. p. 482. Grafton. p. 41. Spelman. p. 201. record, That when King Stephen was Crowned, he sware before the Lords at Oxford, that he would forgive the Danegeld as King Henry before him had done. And that Anno. 1136. coming to Oxford, he confirmed the Covenane which he had made to God, the people, and the holy Church in the day of his Coronation; the last clause whereof was this, Quod Danegeldum, id est duos solidos ad hidum, quos antecessores suos accipere soliti sunt IN ÆTERNUM CODONARET; That he would for ever release Danegeld, that is, two shill of every hide land, which his Ancestors were accustomed to receive. And though Hoveden lay this brand of perjury on him, Hæc principaliter Deo vovit, & alia, sed nihil horum tenuit; yet we neither finde nor read, either in our Records or Chronicles, that this Tax of Danegeld, or any of like nature was ever since that time imposed by him, or any of his Successors, but by the advice of the great men of the Realm, Et Parliamentaria demum Authoritate, And by Authoritie of Parliament; So that learned Antiquary Sir Hen. Spelman concludes in his Glossary, p. 201. Being therefore thus for ever released, as an intollerable grievance and exaction, by these four severall Kings, and discontinued full 500 years, and not revived; we humbly conceive, that this antiquated, this so oft, so anciently released exaction, or any other of like nature, ought not, cannot, either in point of Honour, Law or Justice, be renued, or imposed on us by your Majestie now; and that this Tax thus successively released as a grievance, though at first granted by Parliament, can be no president to prove the lawfulnesse of this present Tax, but a most pregnant evidence against it, having no countenance nor allowance at all from any Parliament.
4.Fourthly, admit this Tax of Danegeld not imposed by Parliament, but onely by Regall Power, and that lawfully in those ancient times, as is pretended, (all which we have manifestly disproved;) yet it is no argument at all, to prove the lawfulnesse of this present Tax of Shipmoney; and that in these severall respects.
1.First, this Danegeld then was first imposed in times of War and distraction, before the government of the Kingdom was setled by good Laws; therefore no president for this Tax in times of Peace, or in this setled Estate of the Realm, so long continued by wholsome Laws.
2.Secondly, it was before any extant Statutes made against the imposing of any Tax, Tallage, Ayde, or Benevolence, without common consent of the Lords Spirituall and Temporall, and Commons in Parliament. This, after divers forecited Acts of this nature against it, and those ratified by your Majestie in the Petition of Right.
3.Thirdly, it was before any Subsidie of Tonnage or Poundage granted to guard the Seas, or Sea Coasts; and in truth, it was the Tonnage and Poundage of those times; this after Tonnage and Poundage granted to guard the Seas, to exempt the Subjects from this, and all other Taxes for that purpose.
Fourthly, it was certain; first, 12 d. after that 2 s. every Hide Land, and that certainly limited by Parliament; this arbitrary and uncertain, not rated by any Parliament.
Fiftly, that was onely charged upon lands, not goods; this on Goods, and on those who have no Lands.
Sixtly, All Clergie-men,* all Lands of the Church, together with divers Corporatians, all Sheriffs, with all Officers of the Eschequer, were exempted from Danegeld, as appears by Edward the Confessors Laws, c. 12. Wigorniensis and Matthew Westm. An. 1014. Hoveden, Annal. Pars posterior, p. 603. John Salisbury de Nugis Curialium, l. 8. c. 21. Polychronicon, l. 8. c. 16. Fabian, Part, 1. c. 200. p. 203. the Black Book of the Eschequer, l. 1. c. 11. and Spelmans Glossary, p. 200. with others: But none of all these are exempted from this Tax of Ship-money.
Seventhly,* It was not alwayes annually paid, but rarely, and that onely in times of7. Warre; this now for three years together, in times of Peace.
In all these respects therefore we humbly conceive, that this principall president of Danegeld, is no warrant at all, for the lawfulnesse of this Tax of Ship-money, but a most clear undeniable authoritie against it; in answering whereof we have defeated, cleared most other subsequent presidents.
The next Presidents that are objected out of ancient Stories, are theses Matth. Westm.President. Anno 874. writes of King Ælfred, that when the Danes invaded the Realme with two2. Navies, King Ælfred, parato Navigio, having prepared a Navy: set it to Sea, took one of the enemies Ships, and put six more to flight. Anno 877. the enemies increasing in all parts, this King commanded Cyulas & Galeas, id est longas Naves fabricari per regnum, ut navali prælio Hostibus adventantibus obviaret, impositisa pyratis in illis vias inaris custodiendas commisit. That, Anno 997. King Ælfred appointed Gardians in severall parts of the Realm against the Danes, Quo etiam tempore fecit Rex Ælredus longas Naves, quas Cyulas sive Galeas appellavit, fabricari; in quibus armatis impositis, jussit maria semitas observari, ut tam navali quam terrestri prælio regni sui tranquillitati, & subjectis sibi populis provideret. That, Anno, 1008 King Ælthered jussit parari ex 300 & decem Hydis navem unam, & ex octo hydis galeam unam & loricam. Rex Anglorum Æthelredus, de 310 cassatis unam trierem, de novem verò loricam & cassidem fieri, & per totam Angliam naves intente præcepit Fabricari, (to wit, in Maritine Towns) writes Wigorniensis; Quibus paratis electos in eis milites cum alimentis posuit, & ut ab exterorum irruptionibus fines regni defenderent illas ad Sandicum portum congregavit. That, Anno 1040. Hardeknute, unicuique remigi suæ classis octo marcas, & fingulis rectoribus decem Marcas, de tota Anglia pendi præcepit; (unde cunctis qui ejus adventum prius optaverant exosus effectus est) is added withall. These Kings then imposed Ships and Shipmoney on their Subjects, therefore your Majectie may doe the like.
To these Presidents we answer; first, that they were all onely in times of Warres,Answ. 1. and invasions by enemies, for the Kingdomes necessary defence, not any of them in times of Peace.
Secondly, the three first of them, are onely, That the King provided a Navie, and commanded2. Ships to be built thorowout the Kingdom to guard the Seas, and encounter the enemies, as well by Sea, as by land; but speake not, that this was done at the subjects own charge, or that any Tax was laid upon them to do it; or that this command of his was without the peoples consent in Parliament, or was obeyed; or that he might lawfully impose such a charge on his subjects without their common consent. The fourth of them, Anno 1008. saith, that King Æthelred commanded one Ship to be provided out of every 310 Acres, but saith not, that this command was by the Kings absolute power onely, (for it might be by common consent in Parliament first agreed upon, for ought appears;) or that it was then held just and lawfull; neither doth it inform us, that these Ships were built; Indeed Florentius Wigorniensis, Anno 1008. addes, that they were accordingly prepared, and that the King put choyce Souldiers in them, with Victuals, that they might defend the Coasts of his Kingdom from the eruptions of Forraigners; so that the subjects were onely at the charge of building the Ships, the King of the Victuals, Provision, Souldiers wages; and in truth, when all was done, they had but bad successe, for the same Historian tels us, That a great storm arose, which tare and bruised the Ships, and drave them ashore, where Walnothus burnt them; Sicq totius populi maximus labor periit. But this President, though the nearest of all, comes not home to the present Cause.
1.First, because it was onely to build Ships in case of necessitie, for the defence of the Realme, when there wanted Ships to guard it; but now (thanks be to God) there are ships enough already built to guard the Seas against all the world.
2.Secondly, every 310 Hides was to build a ship, (of three Ores, unam trierem, writes Wigorniensis but not taxed so much money to build one, as now; and it was onely in Port Towns, as Henry Huntindon writes, Hist. l. 6. p. 365. la dicbus illis redditæ fuerunt 16. puppibus ab unoquoque porfu 8 marce argenti, ticut Patris sui tempore, &c.
3.Thirdly, the ships built were set out, not at the subjects, but Kings cost: therefore no president for this Tax, to set out ships built upon ours, but onely upon you Majesties expence.
4.Fourthly, this charge was certain and equall, every hide land being equally charged; This altogether uncertain and unequall.
5.Fiftly, this was after the Danegeld was first set on foot, therefore done, not by the Kings absolute power, but by common consent in Parliament, as we have proved Danegeld to be granted.
6.Sixtly, this president proves onely, that such a thing was then commanded to be done by the King, not that the King did, or might lawfully command it, or enforce the subjects to do it without the Commons consents.
7.Seventhly, this was no annuall charge then put on the subject, as this now, but extraordinary, and not drawn into practise, for ought appears; therefore different from the present case of Shipmoney.
8.Eightly, no Corporations or Goods were then charged, but onely lands, and all men rated onely by the land they held; therefore this extends not to justifie this Tax of Shipmoney, which is laid on Corporations, Goods, and such as have no lands at all.
9.Ninthly no man was injoyned to this under pain of imprisonment, nor his Goods distrained or sold if he refused, for of this there is not a syllable; therfore no president to warrant the present imprisoning or distraining of those mens Goods, who now refuse to pay this Tax.
For that of Hardeknute, it appears to be no just or lawfull, but an illegall and Tyrannicall Act, which (saith the* Historian) made him odious and hatefull to those who desired him for their King before. Florentius Wigornienfis, An. 1040. writes, that it was such a Tribute, that scarce any man could pay it: Quapropter omnibus, qui prius adveatum ejus desider abant magnopere, factus est exorsus summopere:* William of Malmsbury calls it, Tributum inexorabile & importabile, quod dum importunius per Angliam exigitur duo infestius hoc munus exequentes a Wigorniæ civibus extincti sunt: Daniel, p. 22. stiles it, A generall grievance to the whole Realme, which made him very execrable to the people. And shall such a grievous unsufferable Tax as this was then reputed (imposed by no native Hereditary Prince, but a forraigne Danish Tyrant, who died drunk amids his Cups very shortly after, as all our Historians record) be made or deemed a just, a lawfull President for your Majestie now to follow? God forbid. Besides,* Hen. Huntingdon, Speed, and others, are expresse, that this Tyrant made the subjects pay his land souldiers, as well as Mariners; Hujus Anno secundo redditus est census exercitui Danorum scilicst, 21000. l. & 89. lib. & postea redditæ fuerunt 32 puppibus, 11000. & 48. lib. And then by this reason, president, you may as well enforce your subjects to maintain an army by Land, as Sea, which no man will grant you may compell them to do by Law, without common consent in Parliament.
Thirdly, we answer, that all these presidents were before the government of this3. Kingdom was setled, before Mag. Charta, and other Statutes against Taxes, Tallages, Lones, Aydes, Benevolences without common consent in Parliament, enacted, before Tonnage and Poundage granted; therefore impertinent to the present case.
Fourthly, neither of these presidents was ever adjudged, law full against the subject:4. therefore not binding, Cook 4. Report 93. 94. SL.des case. Cook 6. 75. a. and they are very ancient, rare, if not obsolete.
Fiftly, all these were during the time of Danegeld, and involved in it; what5. therefore we answered to that of Danegeld, is applicable to all, to each of these, and that making clearly against, not for this Tax, as we have manifested; these presidents also must doe the like.
The third president objected, (the first and most pertinent of all others, since that3. of Danegeld) is that of K. Iohn, Anno 1213. who being judicially deprived of his CrownPresident, 3. and Kingdom at Rome by the Pope, at the earnest sollicitation of that Arch-traitor* Stephen Langhton Archbishop of Canterbury, William Bishop of London, and the Bishop of Ely; these Prelates departing from Rome, went into France, and then conspiring with King Philip, and the Bishops of France against their own Soveraigne, they solemnly published this deposition and sentence of the Pope given against him at Rome, and then in behalfe of the Pope, they enjoyned as well the King of France, as all other men, as they would obtain the remission of all their sins, that uniting themselves together, they should go into England in an Hostile manner, and depose King John from his Crown and Kingdom, and substitute another worthy man in his stead, by the Popes* Apostelicall authority. Hereupon the King of France prepared a very great strong Army, Navy to invade England both by sea and land to depose King John, and get the Crown of England to himself. King John having perfect intelligence of all this, in the moneth of March commanded ships, excellently well furnished, to meet together out of all the Ports of England, that so he might with strong hand resist those who intended to invade England. He likewise raised and gathered together a very great Army out of all England and Ireland, and the places near adjoyning. Thus Matthew Westminster, Anno 1214. p. 9. relates the Story.* Matthew Paris addes this thereunto, That the King being certified of all that the Prelates, and others, plotted against him beyond the Seas, caused all the ships of the Ports thorowout all England, in the moneth of March, to be imbreviated by this Writ, Which he directed to all the Bailiefs of the Ports, in these words: Johannes Rex Angliæ &c. Præcipimus tibi, quatenus statim visis literis istis, eas in propria persona una cum Bailivis Portuum, ad singulos Portus de Bailiva tua, & facias diligenter imbrevierc, omnes Naves ibi inventas, quæ possunt ferre sex equos vel plures, & præcipias ex parte nostra magistris ex omniuro navium illarum, & illis quorum naves sunt, quod sicut se & naves suas, & omnia sua diligunt, habant islas apud Portesmue in media Quadragisima, bene adornatas bonis & prabis Marinellis & bene armatis, qui ituri sunt in servitium nostrum ad liberationes no stras, & tunc habeas ibi memoriter & distincte imbreviatum, quot naves in singulis portubus inveneris & quorum ipsæ suat & quot equos quælibet ferre possit. Et tunc facias nobis seire, quot & quæ naves non suerint in portubus suis die dominica proxima post Cineres sicut præciperamus, Et habeas ibi hoc breve. Teste meipso apud novum Templum, tertia die Martis. These things thus acted concerning ships, the K. sent other Letters to all the Sheriffs of his Kingdome, in this forme; Johannes Rox Angliæ, &c. Summone per bonos Summonitores, Comites, Barones, Milites, & omnes liberos homines, & fervienter, vel quicunq, sint, vel de quocunque teneant, Dui Arma habere* debent, vel Arma habere possiat, & qui homagiū nobis, vel ligantiam fecerunt; Quod sicut nos, & seipsos, & omnia sua diligunt, sint apud Doveram ad instans clausum Pascha, bene parati cum equis & armis, & cum toto posse suo, ad defendendum caput nostrum, & capita sua, & terram Angliæ. Et quod nullus remaneat, qui arma portare possit, sub nomine Culvertagij & perpetuæ servitutis. Et unusquisq́, sequatur Dominum suum. Et qui terram non habent, & arma habere possint, illuc venient ad captendum solidatas nostras. Et tu omnem attractum victualium, & omnia mercata Bailivarum tuarum venire facias ut sequantur exercitum nostrum, ita quod nullum mercatum de Bailivis tuis alibi tencatur: Et tu ipse tunc sis ibi cum prædictis Summonitionibus. Et scias, quod seire volumus quomodo venerint de Bailivis tuis, & qui venerint, & qui non, & videas quod tu ita effortiatè venias cum equis & armis & hæc ita exequaris, ne inde ad corpus tuum nos capere debeamus. Et tu inde haheas rotulum tuum ad nos certificandum qui remanserint. These two Writs therefore being divulged thorowout England, there came together to the sea coasts in divers places which the King most suspected, to wit, at Dover, Feversham, and Ipswich, men of different condition and age, fearing nothing more then the reproach of Culvertage. But when after a few dayes there wanted victuals for so great a multitude, the chief Commanders of the War sent home a great company of the unarmed vulgar retaining onely the Knights, their Servants and Freemen, with the Slingers and Archers, neare the sea coast. Moreover, John Bishop of Norwich came out of Ireland with 500 Souldiers, and many horsmen, to the King, and was joyfully received of him. All therefore being assembled to the Battell, and mustered at Barhamdowns, there were among the selected souldiers and servants, strong and well armed, 60000. valiant men, who if they had had one heart and minde toward the King of England, and the defence of the Countrey, there had not been a Prince under heaven, against whom the Kingdom of England might not have defended it self. Moreover, the King resolved to joyn in battell at sea with the adversaries, that he might drowne them in the sea before they should land, for he had a greater Navie then the King of France; whence he conceived greatest security of resisting the enemies. Thus Matthew Paris, Histor. Angliæ, Anno 1231. p. 224, 225. whose words we have related at large, to clear and take of the edge of this prime President; in answering which, all since it will be cleared. From this Writ to presse and provide Ships then, some of your Majesties officers would inferre, the lawfulnesse of these Writs for Ships and Shipmoney now.
Answer.But under correction, we humbly conceive, that this president makes much against, nothing at all for these Writs now issued, and Tax imposed.
1.For, first, it was before Magna Charta, the Statutes against Taxes and Tallages, the Petition of Right, or any Subsidies of Tonnage and Poundage, granted to guard the Seas.
2.Secondly, it was onely directed to Port Towns that had ships, not to Counties and places, which had no ships, as these Writs are now.
3.Thirdly, it was onely to the Masters and owners of Ships, not to any other persons, who being exempted from all land-service, were to serve the King and kingdom at this pinch and extremitie, by sea; but these Writs reach to all, as well those that have no ships, as others.
Fourthly, it was onely to furnish out their own ships, then built, not to contribute4. money to the hire of the Kings or other, or to build new of other, or greater burthen than those they had; these Writs now are contrary to this in all these respects, at least in intention and execution.
Fiftly, here was no levying of money to be paid into King Johns Exchequer, or5. Officers hands to provide or hire ships, but every man was left to furnish his own ships, at his own best rates, with his owne provisions and marines. This now quite otherwise.6.
Sixtly, though the Mariners and owners of ships then, were by this Writ to furnish out their ships at their own proper costs, yet when they were thus furnished, the* King was to pay them both hire fraight, wages, as his Successors have ever since done when they pressed any of their subjects ships or Carts for warre, or carriage; This the words, Ituri in servitium nostrum ad liberationes nostras, ad capiendum solidatas nostras, implie, and the constant practice of all Kings since in like cases, (yea, of your Majestie, who now pay wages and fraight for all the Mariners and Merchant ships you presse) resolves: Therefore it makes nothing at all for this enforcing the subjects to set out ships to guard the seas, or serve your Majestie at their own proper costs and charges.
Seventhly this president makes it evident, that those who are bound by their tenures,7. lands and laws of the Land to serve the King, and defend the Kingdome by land, (as all the horse or foot Trained-Bands and Companies thorowout England are) ought not to be charged with any Sea-service; for here all the land-men are charged to serve the King and defend the Kingdome onely by land, and the sea-men onely by sea; neither of them inforced to serve, or to contribute to any service, or defence both by land and sea; for that had been a double, yea, unreasonable and impossible charge. Therefore none who are charged with land-service, by this very presidens resoution, ought now to betaxed towards the setting out of ships, but sea-men onely are to guard the seas with such ships as they have and no other, upon your Majesties pay. Therefore these writs which charge land-men to contribute towards the setting out of ships, are directly against this president, the Law, the practice of those times: Yea, against the Law of King Edward the Confessor, which our Kings are sworne to observe. Lambard. Archaion, fol. 35. Debent enim universi liberi homines secundum scodum suum, & secundum statum suum arma habere, & illa semper prompta conservare ad tuitionem Regni, & servitium Dominorum suorum, juxta præceptu Domini Regis explendu & paragendum. And of* William the Conquerour, lib. Rubr. Scacarij, f. 162. Statuimus & firmiter præcipimus, quod omnes Comites & Barones, & Milites, & servientes, & universi libri homines totius Regni nostri prædicti habeant se semper in armis Et Equis (not navibus) ut decet & oportet: Et quod sint semper prompti & bene parati ad servitium suum integrum nobis explendum, & peragendum cum semper opus affuerit, secundum quod nobis De feodis debent, et tenementis de Jure facere, & sicut illis statuimus per commune Confiltum totius Regni nostri prædicti, & illis dedimus & concessimus in feodo jure hæreditario. Therefore those who are thus obliged by their Tenures to serve the King, and finde horse and armes to defend the Realme by land, must necessarily be exempt from all services, and defence by sea.
Eightly, those Land-men that were not bound by their tenure and feof to finde armes, and yet were able to bear Arms, were to receive the Kings pay, and not to serve gratis; even in this necessary defence of the Kingdome, as these words, Ad capiendum solidatas nostras, resolve; therefore certainly the Mariners in those ships received the Kings pay too, and the Owners fraight, as they do now from your Majestie, and so the King, not subjects bore the charge of the shipping then;9. and if so in that age before Tonnage and Poundage, then your Majestie much more ought now to doe it, since Tonnage and Poundage taken for that purpose.
Ninthly, this Writ was in an extraordinary case, upon an extraordinary exigent and occasion; the King was here deprived of his Crown, Kingdom, by the Pope, and that most unjustly, at the instigation of his own Prelates, and both of them given to King. Philip of France; a strong Army both by sea and land was ready to invade his Realme, yea, to take possession both of his Crowne and Kingdom: This extrordinary sudden exigent put this King to these two unusuall Writs. There being10. therefore, (blessed be God) no such extraordinary occasion now, as then, this president being extraordinary, is nothing pertinent to the Writs now in question, nor any proof at all of the lawfulnesse of this Tax.
Finally, this president was onely in time of open, imminent Warre and danger, upon an invasion ready to be made upon the Realme by a forraigne potent enemy, both by sea and land; therefore no proofe of the lawfulnesse of the present Writs and Taxes in dayes of Peace, that being lawfull in many cases in times of War, which is altogether unlawfull in times of Peace. For instance.
1.First,* Mashall Law may be exercised by your Majesties Commission and Prerogative in times of War, but not in times of Peace; as was lately resolved by your Majestie and the whole Parliament in the Petition of Right.
Secondly, the Kings of England in times of Forraigne Wars, might by their Prerogative Royall, for the Kingdoms security, and better maintenance of the Wars, seize the2. lands of Priors aliens, (when extant in England) but thus they could not do in times of Peace. 27. Ass. 48. 38. Ass. 20. 17. E. 3. 2. 60. 18. E. 3. 38. 29. E. 3. 16. 40. E. 3. 10. 14. H. 4. 36. 22. E. 4. 43. 21. H. 7. 2. 12.
3.Thirdly, the Kings of England in times of open invasive Wars, may compell Traine souldiers and others to march out of their proper Counties to the sea coasts, or other parts, for the necessary defence of the Realm; but this can they not do in times of Peace. 1. E. 3. Stat. 2. c. 5. 4. H. 4. 13. 4. & 5. Philip & Mary, c. 3.
4.Fourthly, the Kings of England when they had offensive or defensive Wars, with Scotland, might and did lawfully demand and receive Escuage of their subjects; and so did other Lords of their Tenants; but in times of Peace they neither did nor could do thus. Littleton, Sect. 95, 97 98, 100, 101 102. and Cook ibidem.
5.Fiftly, Danegeld (when granted at first by common consent of the people in Parliament) was due onely in times of War, not of Peace, as appears by the premisses.
6.Sixtly, Subsidies and Ayds in former times, were never demanded by Kings, nor granted in Parliament by the Subjects, but in times of War, or to defray the debts of the Prince contracted by the Wars, not in times of Peace. 14, E. 3. c. 20, 21. 15. E. 3. c. 1, 2, 3. Stat. 2. Stat. 3. c. 1. 25. E. 3. Stat. 7. 11. H. 7. c. 10. 32. H. 1. c. 23. 37. H. 8. c. 14. and other forecited Acts.
Seventhly, the goods of alien enemies may lawfully be seized by the King or his Subjects in times of open War, not in dayes of Peace. Magn. Charta 13. 14. E. 3. c. 2. 2. R. 3. 2. Brook Denizen. 8. 7. E. 4. 13. 14. Brook Fresh-suit. 8. Forfeiture 57. 22. E. 4. 45. a. 22. E. 3. 16, 17. 36. H. 8. Brook Property. 38. Plomden 364.
Eightly, by the custome of Kent, and the Common Law, not onely the Kings of England,8. but their subjects too, may justifie the entring into another mans ground, and the making of Bulworks and Intrenchments therein, for defence or offence against the enemies in times of Warre; which they cannot do in times of peace. 8. E. 4. 23. Brook Customs 45. and Trespasse 406.
Ninthly, In times of War, men may justifie the pulling down of Houses and Suburbs9. adjoyning to a Fort or Citie, for their better defence and safetie, but they cannot do it in times of Peace; 12. H. 16. b. Brook Trespasse 406. 9. E. 4. 35. b. Dyer 36. b. Fabian, part. 7. p. 355.
Tenthly, your Majesties Royall Progenitors might appoint Merchants and others in10. times of War, to make purveyance for their Armies or Forts, Without Commission, but not in times of Peace. 14. E. 3. c. 19. and so might Lords, Knights, and others, give Liveries in times of War, but not of Peace. 1. H. 4. c. 7. 7. H. 4. c. 14. 8. H. 6. c. 4.
By these ten Cases then (to omit others) it is apparent, that there is a vast and infinite difference in one and the selfe-same act, in times of Warre, and of Peace; that the same Act may be lawfull in times of Hostilitie, and yet utterly unlawfull in dayes of Peace. This president therefore (with all others of like nature that can be objected) being onely in times of Warre, is no argument of the lawfulnesse of this Tax of Ship-money, nor yet of pressing Ships (unlesse for carriage, or other speciall sevice upon Hire, and your Majesties own wages, not at the subjects cost, as Carts, Horses and Lighters are now oft-times pressed) in these times of peace, but a direct argument against it, as the ten forecited Cases evidence.
For any other pretended Presidents (or Records) that may be alleadged to prove the lawfulnesse of this Tax, we intend not here (for brevities sake) to trouble your Majestie with particular answers to them, they being all fully answered in those præobjected; which, though the prime and most pertinent that are extant in Print; yet now, as we have cleared them, are point-blanke against these Writs and Taxes of Ship-money.
These, most gracious Soveraigne, are the Grounds, Reasons, Authorities, on the one hand, and replies on the other, whereupon we humbly conceive these Writs and Taxes for Shipmoney, wherewith we have lately been, and yet are grievously burthened, to be directly contrary to the Laws and Statutes of this your Realme, the ancient, just, Hereditary Rights and Liberties of us your poore Subjects, and an intollerable grievance, oppression to us; all which we here in all humility submit to your Highnesse most just and mature consideration; not doubting, but your Majestie, however formerly mis-informed by some of your great Officers, of the Legalitie thereof, will now upon the serious perusall of this Our humble and dutifull Remonstrance (which we in all humilitie together with our selves, prostrate at your Royall feet) alter your Regall judgement in this great generall Case, and now become of the same minde, judgemeat with us your poore subjects; And we are almost fully assured, that the Lords of your Majesties most honourable Privie Councell, With your reverend Sage Judges of the Common Law, if seriously charged on their Alleagiance, by your Majestie, faithfully to deliver to your Highnesse, without fear or flattery, what they really conceive of the lawfulnesse of these Writs and Taxes, will, upon the consideration of these our Reasons and Answers to the objected Presidents, (at least-wise upon the fuller hearing of the Arguments of our Councell learned in the Law, readie to debate it more amply, if this our Short Remonstrance be not satisfactory; which our Councell, we humbly desire, may be fairly, indifferently and fully heard in all your Majesties Courts of justice, where this point shall be drawne in question by us, if occasion so require;) truly informe your Majestie, that they concurre in judgement with us in this, That these Writs, Taxes are against the Laws and Statutes of this your Realme, the just ancient Rights and Liberties of us your subjects, which we know and are assured, your most Gracious Majestie will inviolably preserve, according to your premised Oath, and Royall Protestations, not withstanding the mis-informations and false suggestions of any your greatest Officers or Projectors to the contrary: The rather, because it was your late Royall Fathers Speech, of blessed memory, to all his Nobles, Commons, and people in the Parliament House, Anno 1609. (twice Printed, for an eternall monument of his goodnesse and Royall Justice, by his speciall command, both by it selfe, and in the large Volumes of his Peerlesse Works;) That a King governing in a setled Kingdom, leaved to be a King, and degenerated into a Tyrant, as soon as he left off to rule according to his Laws. Therefore all Kings that are not Tyrants, or perjured, will be glad to bound themselves within the limits of their Laws; and They that perswade them to the contrary, are* Vipers and Pests, both against them and the Common Wealth.
Upon tender consideration of all these premisses, we most humbly beseech your Most Excellent Majestie, out of your Princely goodnesse and justice, (since* by the great God of Israels command, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God; and we all know and beleeve you Majestie to be such a Ruler,* Sitting upon Gods own Throne over us your people, for this very purpose, to do judgement and justice to all your loyall subjects in all cases what soever, especially such as are most publike and of greatest consequence, to your peoples woe or weale) to exonerate us your poor true-hearted dutifull Subjects, from these your Royall illegall Writs and heavy Taxations, which we neither can, nor dare any longer obey or contribute to, for the premised Reasons.
And we, as our common dutie ever obligeth us, shall persevere to pray for your Majestie, long and long to continue a most just and gracious Prince over us, to our joynt, our severall comforts, your own eternall honour, in the surviving Monuments and Annals of your Fame.
The Edict of King Knute for his Subjects ease from oppression and unjust Taxes, in Will. Malmesb. De Gestis Reg. Angl. l. 2. c. 11. pertinent to the Tax of Shipmoney; Obtestor & precipio meis Consiliarijs, quibus Regni Consilia credidi, ne ullo modo, aut propter meum timorem, aut alicujus potentis personæ favorem aliquam injustitia, à modo consentiant, vel faci ant pullulare in omni Regno meo. Præcipio etiam omnibus Vicecomitibus & Præpositis universis Regni mei, ficut meam volunt habere anticitiam aut suam salutum ut nulli homini, nec diviti, ute pauperi, vim injustam inferant, sedomnibus tàm Nobilibus, quam ignobilibus sit fas justa lege potiundi, à qua, nec propter faborem kegium, nec propter alicujus Potentis personam, Nec propter mihi congerendam pecuniam, ullo modo deviant; quia nulla mihi necessitas est, ut iniqua exactione pecunia mihi congeretur.
Shires | Ships | Tonnes | Men | Money |
Berkshire | 1 | 400 | 160 | 4000 |
Bedfordshire | 1 | 400 | 120 | 3000 |
Bristoll | 1 | 200 | 180 | 3000 |
Buckingham-shire | 1 | 450 | 180 | 4500 |
Cambridgeshire | 1 | 350 | 140 | 3500 |
Cheshire | 1 | 350 | 140 | 3500 |
Cornwall | 1 | 650 | 260 | 9000 |
Cumb. and Westmer. | 1 | 100 | 40 | 2000 |
Derbyshire | 1 | 350 | 140 | 3500 |
Devon shire | 1 | 900 | 360 | 9000 |
Durham | 1 | 200 | 80 | 2000 |
Dorsetshire | 1 | 550 | 220 | 5000 |
Essex | 1 | 800 | 320 | 8000 |
Glocestershire | 1 | 550 | 220 | 5500 |
Hampshire | 1 | 600 | 260 | 6000 |
Huntingdon shire | 1 | 200 | 80 | 1000 |
Hertford shire | 1 | 350 | 140 | 3500 |
Hereford shire | 1 | 400 | 160 | 4000 |
Kent | 1 | 800 | 320 | 8000 |
Lancashire | 1 | 350 | 140 | 3500 |
Leistershire | 1 | 450 | 180 | 4500 |
Lincolnshire | 1 | 800 | 320 | 8000 |
London | 2 each | 800 | 320 | 1600 |
Middlesex | 1 | 550 | 220 | 5500 |
Monmouth | 1 | 150 | 60 | 1500 |
Norfolk | 1 | 800 | 320 | 8000 |
Northumberland | 1 | 500 | 200 | 5000 |
Northamton shire | 1 | 600 | 240 | 6000 |
Northwales | 1 | 400 | 160 | 5000 |
Nottinghamshire | 1 | 350 | 140 | 3500 |
Oxford. shire | 1 | 350 | 140 | 3500 |
Rutlandshire | 1 | 100 | 40 | 1000 |
Salop. | 1 | 450 | 160 | 4500 |
Southwales | 1 | 490 | 200 | 4900 |
Stafford | 1 | 200 | 80 | 2000 |
Suffolk | 1 | 800 | 320 | 8000 |
Somersetshire | 1 | 800 | 320 | 8000 |
Surrey | 1 | 400 | 160 | 4000 |
Sussex | 1 | 500 | 200 | 5000 |
Warwickshire | 1 | 400 | 160 | 4000 |
Wiltshire | 1 | 700 | 290 | 7000 |
Worcestershire | 1 | 400 | 160 | 4000 |
Yorkshire | 2 each | 600 each | 240 | 12000 |
Sum. tot. | 45 | 20450 | 9830 | 221500 |
THE OPENING OF The Great Seale OF ENGLAND.
Containing certain Brief Historicall and Legall Observations, touching the Originall, Antiquity, Progresse, Vse, Necessity of the Great Seal of the Kings and Kingdoms of England, in respect of Charters, Patents, Writs, Commissions, and other Precesse.
Together with the Kings, Kingdoms, Parliaments severall Interests in, and Power over the same, and over the Lord Chancellour, and the Lords and Keepers of it, both in regard of its New-making, Custody, Administration for the better Execution of Publike Justice, the Republique necessary Safety, and Utility.
Occasioned by the Over-rash Censures of such who inveigh against the Parliament, for Ordering a new Great Seale to be Engraven, to supply the wilfull absence, defects, abuses of the old, unduely withdrawne and detained from them.
By William Prynne, Utter-Barrester of Lincolns Inne.
Esther 8. 1.
Write ye also for the Jews, as liketh you, in the Kings name, AND SEAL IT WITH THE KINGS RING: for the Writing which is written in the Rings name, AND SEALED WITH THE KINGS RING, may no man reverse.
It is this fifteenth day of September, Anno Dom. 1643. Ordered by the Committee of the House of Commons, concerning Printing, that this Treatise, intituled, The Opening of the Great Scale of England, be forthwith Printed by Michael Sparke Senior.
John White.
LONDON.
Printed for Michael Spark Senior. 1643.
To THE READER
COurteous Reader, having copiously answered, refuted all Royalilists, Malignants, Papists, clamorous Objections and Primitive Exceptions, against the Proceedings of this present Parliament, in FOUR severall Treatises, lately published, concerning The Soveraigne Power of Parliaments and Kingdoms; which have given good satisfaction to many, and silenced the Penns, the Tongues of most Anti-Parliamenteers, who have bin so ingenuous as seriously to peruse them: I yet finde a New grand Objection lately started up, and much insisted on among these Opposites, by reason of the Commons late Order for making a New Great Seal (now almost finished) to supply the wilfull absence, defects, abuses of the old, to the extraordinary prejudice, dammage, danger, of the Houses, Kingdom, and delay of publike Justice; which, though sufficiently answered in the generall by sundry passages and Histories scattered in the former Treatises; yet because not so particularly or fully debated, as the consequence of this extraordinary weighty Act, and the querelousnesse of the clamorous Opposites, require; I have therefore (upon the motion of some friends) to stop up this New-Breach and Clamour, speedily collected and published by Authority, these ensuing Historicall and Legall Observations, concerning the Originall, Antiquitie, Progresse, Life, Necessity of the Great Seal of the Kings and Kingdome of England; with reference to Sealing of Charters, Patents, Writs, Commissions, other Processe; and given thee a summary account of the Kings, Kingdoms, Parliaments, severall Interests in, and Power over the Great Seal, (and the Lords Keepers of it too) both in respect of its New-making, Custody, Administration, for the better execution of publike Iustice, the Republikes necessary safety and utility, clearing all contrary Objections of moment; which I here submit to thy charitable Censure and Acceptation; imploring thy Pardon and Direction, in case I have casually erred, out of Ignorance or Humane Frailty, in tracing this Untrodden dangerous narrow Path, wherein I finde no Footsteps, or onely very obscure ones, to direct my course. Farewell.
THE OPENING OF The Great Seale OF ENGLAND.
NOt to enter into any impertinent tedious Discourse of the Antiquitie or use of Seales in generall, which were very anciently used both by the Nations and Kings of the Jewes, Persians, Medes, Babilonians, and others, (as is manifest by(a) sundry Texts of Scripture, to omit prophane Stories;) it is a question much debated among Antiquaries, Historians, Lawyers, How ancient the use of Seales hath beene among the Kings of England, & in what age, upon what occasion, by what degrees they grew to be abselutely requisite for the ratification of Charters, Patents, Writs, Commissions, and other Processes?
The first originall, Antiquitie of Seals among our Kings, is very uncertain; for it is apparent, past all contradiction,(b) that our ancientest Kings Charters, Patents had no Seals at all annexed to them, being ratified onely with the Signe of the Crosse, (oft-times in golden Characters) the subscription of our Kings names, with the names of divers Bishops, Abbots, Nobles, Clerks, and others, under them, as Witnesses; who all made the signe of the Crosse, before or after their subscriptions; as is most evident by sundry ancient Charters of our English Saxon Kings, yet extant in old Leger Books of Abbeys, in Sir Robert Cottons Library, and by the printed Copies, of them in the Histories of Ingulphus, Malmesbury, Hoveden, Matthew Paris, Matth. Westminster, Holinshed, Mr. Fox, Mr Cambdens Britannia, M. Seldens Titles of Honour, History of Tythes, Notes to Eadmerus, Sir Henry Spelmans Councils and Glossary; Sir Edward Cooks Preface to his 4 and 6 Reports, his Institutions on Littleton, and Magna Charta, Joannis Pitseus, Relatio. Histor. de rebus Angl. Cl. Reynerus Apostolatus Benedictinorum in Anglia; M. Lambard his Perambulation of Kent and Archaion, Bishop Ushers Britannicarum Ecclesiarum Antiquitates, with others; which Charters, though without a Seale, have(c) ever been reputed as valid, firme in point of Law from time to time, and so admitted by our Judges, Kings, Parliaments, as any punier Charters sealed with our Kings Great Seals. To give you some few instances of the ancientest Charters of our Kings before the Conquest, which I finde not sealed, but thus subscribed. King(d) Æthelbert, Anno 605. made two Charters, the first to the Church of Saint Pancras, the other to the Monastery of Peter and Paul to be erected at Canterbury; which are thus confirmed with the Signe of the Crosse, not sealed;
maltese: Ego Æthelredus Rex Anglorum, hanc donationem meam Signo Sanctæ Crucis propria manss confirmavi.
After which follow divers other witnesses, who confirm it with the same signe. There is extant a Bull of Augustine, the first Bishop of Canterbury, of an exemption granted by him to this Monastery, with a Leaden Seale annexed to it, the forme whereof you may view in(e) Sir Henry Spelman, who suspects both these Charters, with Augustines Bull and Seale, (the sealing of Buls being not so ancient, and Leaden Buls being first brought in by Pope Adrian, about the year of our Lord, 774. as Polydor and others observe) to be meer Counterfeits, upon good grounds. There is another Charter of the same King, of Lands given to the same Monastery, dated, An. 610. subscribed as the former. The next ancient Charter I finde, is, that of(f) Withred King of Kent, dated, An. Dom. 695. who the same year confirmed the great Councell of Becane(?)idæa with the signe of the Crosse, & such subscriptions as are aforesaid. To these I shall adde the (suspected) Charter of(g) King Kenred and Offa. Anno 709. with the Charters of Egwin Bishop of Worcester, Anno 709. The Charter of(h) King Eth. lbald, An, 718. made to Saint Guthlac, and the Abbey of Croyland, with his Generall Charter of Priviledges granted to all Churches and Monasteries, dated, Anno 749. The Charter of(i) King Ina granted to the Abbey of Glastenbury, (supposed to be spurious) Anno 725. Of(k) King Offa to the Abbey of Croyland, Anno 793. The(l) Decree of Ardardus Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Councell of Clovesho. An. 803. The Charter of(m) King Kenulphus to the Abbey of Croyland, Anno 806. The(n) Decrees of the Synod of Clovesho, under King Beornwulfe, Anno 824. and of the Council of London under King Egbert, Anno 833. The Charter of(o) Witlasius King of Mercia, to the Abbey of Croyland, Anno 833. The Charter of King Bertulphus to the same Abbey, An. 851. with the(p) Canons of the Councell of Kingesbury, confirmed and subscribed by this King, and others the same year, with the signe of the Crosse. The Charters of(q) Æth lwulphus to the Abbey of Croyland, Anno 855. and to all Churches and Monasterics, which he offered up to God upon the Altar of Saint Peter at Winchester, where the Bishop received it, and sent it to ali Churches to be published. The Charter of(r) Brorredus King of Mercia, to the Abbey of Croyland. Anno 860. of* Queen Æthelswith to Cuthwulfe, An. 868. of king(s) Edmund to the Abbey of Glastenbury, An. 944. of(t) king Edred to the Abbey of Croyland, An. 948. the charters of(u) king Edgar to the Abbey of Croyland, An. 966. 970. 974. to the(x) Abbey of Glastenbury, An. 965. 971. and to the Abbey of Malmesbury, An. 974. his charter of Oswelds Lawes, An. 964. his charter to his new Monastery of Winchester, An. 966. and another charter, An. 964. the charter of(y) King Æthelred, An. 995. to Ulfric. with(z) his charter of priviledges granted to the Church of Canterbury, An. 1006. the(a) charter of king Knute, or Carutus, to the Church of our Saviour at Canterbury, An. 1018. and to the Abbey(b) of Croyland, An. 1032. of Thorold to the Abbey of Croyland, An. 1051. and of King Edward the Confessor to the same Abbey about the yeare 1050. All these ancient Charters of our Kings before the Conquest had no seales at all annexed to them, but were only ratified with the signe of the Crosse subscribed by the Kings themselves, and these who made them, together with their names, and with the names and crosses of the witnesses. And it is observable, that all or most of these ancient charters of our kings, which granted any lands or priviledges to Abbeys or Churches, were made in full Councels and Parliaments, with the unanimous consent and approbation of the Bishops, Prelates, Abbots, Dukes, Earls, Lords, and great men therein present, who commonly subscribed them; the reason was, because none of our ancient kings (as I have proved) had any power to grant or alien the lands of the Crown (which they enjoyed only in the kingdoms right, and for its use) to any, without the consent of their Nobles, and people in full Parliament: and in most of these Charters, Abbeys and Church-lands were exempted from all taxes, tallages, and temporall services whatsoever, except the repairing of high wayes, bridges, and castles, for the common good: and(c) thereby were anciently exempted from Danegeld, as I have elsewhere manifested.
Which of our kings first used a seale, is not certainly determined: Sir Edward Cook in his Institutes on Littleton, fol. 7. a. records, that the charter of King Offa, whereby he granted Peter-pence, doth yet remaine under his seale; Now this charter, as(d) Sir Henry Spelman, and our(e) Historians generally in his life, accord, was dated in the yeare of our Lord 793. or 794. and is the first charter sealed (if true) by any of our kings. There is another(f) Charter of King Edwin, of certaine land called Iecklea in the Isile of Ely, bearing date Anno 956. sealed with his owne seale, and with the seale of Elswin Bishop of Winchester. I read in Francis Thinne his Catalogue of Chancellours, and in Sir Henry Spelman his Glossary. fol. 126. 132, that our Saxon kings Æthelstan, Edmund, Edred, Edgar, and Æthelred, had their severall Chancellors; but whether they had any seales or not, is uncertaine: if they had any, it is certaine (writes(g) Sir Henry Spelman) that they scarce used them at all, or very rarely, most of their charters having no seales at all, but only crosses, or subscriptions of these Kings names, and witnesses. The very(h) first of all our Kings who used a large broad seale, was Edward the confessor, who, being brought up in Normandy, introduced that, with some other of the Normans Guises with him, and had three Chancellors: Under this(i) seal he granted a Charter of sundry liberties and priviledges to the Church of Saint Peters in Westminster, Anno Dom. 1066. which was sealed by his Chancellor Reynbaldus, as is evident by this his subscription to that deed; Ego Reynbaldus Regis CANCELLARIVS relegi & SIGILLAVI. This is the first Charter, for ought appears, that ever was sealed with a Royall broad Seale, or by a Chancellor. But that all this good Kings charters, or any of his writs, or commissions were thus sealed by this great seale, or that the Chancellor then had the custody of the seale (which the Chancellors in the reigne of Charles the great, and Ludovious Pius, had not in France, as Sir Henry Spelman proves in his Glossary, p. 127. out of Capit. l. 2. c. 24. and Egolismensis in vita Caroli, p. 15. and the passage of Ingulphus concerning the office of the Chancellor in his time, cited in Spelman, seemes to disprove) is a non liquet unto me. The exact forme of this Kings great seale you may behold in* Iohn Speed, together with the various effigies of all our succeding Kings broad seales, prefixed by him before their severall lives.
Two things there are, which in this enquiry after the originall use of our Kings great seales, seeme somewhat dubious unto me. First, when, how, and by what law or meanes it came to passe, that our Kings Charters and Patents ought of necessity to be sealed with the great seale, contrary to the primitive usage in former ages, or else to be reputed invalid, and meere nullities in law? Secondly, when, and by what law or grounds, and in what Kings reigne, Writs, Commissions, and other Processe of law, began to be issued out under the great seale, or else to be disallowed as illegall? it being evident unto me, that Charters, and Patents were usually sealed by some of our Kings, before any of their writs, commissions, or legall processe issued under their seales.
These two doubts, I confesse, are beyond my skill exactly to assoile; yet this I conjecture as most consonant to truth; That(k) Edward the Confessor being trained up in Normandy, and addicted to the customes of the French, which he introduced with him, did first of all bring in the sealing of deeds; which I gather from the words of(l) Ingulphus Abbot of Croyland, who flourished in his reign, and writes thus of him: Cœpit ergo tota terra sub Rege, & sub aliis Normannis introductis, Anglicos ritus dimittere & Francorum mores in multis imitare: Gallioum idioma omnes Magnates in suis Curiis tanquam magnum Gentilitium loqui; CHART AS ET CHIROGRAPHA SVA MORE FRANCORVM CONFICERE, & propriam consuetudinem IN HIS, & in aliis crubescere. Now the French Kings long before his dayes, used to seale their charters with golden Bulls, as(m) Franciscus Rosierius, and Sir(n) Henry Spelman testifie; there being divers charters of King Dagobert, Sigebert, and Pipin yet extant under golden Bulls, as they record: and Charles the Great, descended of Pipin, was the first Emperour of the Romans which sealed charters with a golden Bull, as(o) Polydor Virgil attests,(p) Flodoardus also recording, that Charles the Bald An. Dom. 867. sealed with a Bull of his name, Bullasui nomints figillavit. In imitation of whom(q) Edward the Confessor, as it is probable, caused a great Seale to be made (which none of his Predecessors used) and therewith sealed two of his three Charters of priviledges and Donations granted to the Abbey of Westminster (to which he was a speciall benefactor) the copies of which you may read in(r) Sir Henry Spelman: witnesse this close of his second charter; Chartamistam conscribi, ET SIGILLARI IUSSI, & ipsam mann mea signo sanctæ CRUCIS impressi, & idoneos testes annotari præcept ad corroborandam: After which his owne subscription with the signe of the crosse followes, and the subscriptions and crosses of sundry Bishops and Abbots: after them, Ego Raynbaldus CANCELLARIUSmaltese then follow the subscriptions of Dukes, and other the Kings Officers, with this conclusion, Acta apud Westmonaster, quinto kal. Ianuarti, die sanctorum Innecentium, Anno Dominicæ Incarnationis 1066. Indictione tertia. Anno Regni serenissimi Edwardi Regis 25. Swyergarius Notarius ad vicem Reynbaldi Regiæ dignitatis Cancellarii, hoc Chartam sortpsi & subscripsi, in Dei nomine sœliciter, Amen. With this close of his third Charter dated the same year and day; Ut ergo hæc auctoritas nostris & futuris temporibus, circaipsum sancium locum perenniter firma & inviolata permaneat, per omnia tempora illesa custodiatur at que conservetur, & ab omnibus Optimatibus nostris, & Iudicibus publicis & privatis, melius ac certius creditur Manus nostræ subscriptione subter eam decennius roborare, & idoneos testes annotare, AT QUE SIGILLO NOSTRO IUSSIMUS SIGILLARI. maltese.
Ego Edwardus Deigratia Anglorum Rev, hoc privilegium jussi componere, & compositum, cum signo Dominicæ CRUCIS confirmando impressi. maltese: then follow the subscriptions of divers Bishops and Abbots with crosses: next to them, Ego Reynbaldus Regis CANCELLARIUS relegi ET SIGILLAVI. maltese: next ensue the subscriptions of some Dukes, Officers, and Knights, with crosses: next the date of the place, day, yeare of Christ, and the Kings reigne; with Ego Alfgeatus Notarius, ad vicem Reynbaldi Regiæ dignitatis Cancellarius, hoc privilegium scripsi & subscripsi, In Doinomine sœliciter, Amon.
From which Charters and Subscriptions we may observe,
First, That this King Edward, though he added his great Seal to his Charters, yet he retained the ancient forme of confirming them with the signe of the crosse, and the subscription of his owne name, and the names of witnesses; which continued long after, till Edward the first his reigne, if not longer, though since discontinued.
Secondly, That the Chancellor in his dayes, though he subscribed his name after Prelates and Bishops, yet hee did it before Dukes, Earles, and all other temporall Lords; therefore hee was then, no doubt, the chiefest temporall Officer, and hath so continued ever since. What the dignity and office of the Chancellor was in this Kings reigne and before, appeares by Ingulphus his history of Turketulus((s) Chancellor both to King Æthelstan, Edmund, and Edred successively, and the second Chancellor we read of in our Realme) who was then PRIMVM, PRÆCIPVVM ET A SECRETIS FAMILIARISSIMVM. This(t) Turketulus (writes he) descended of the blood royall, being Nephew to King Edward the elder, who for his merits would have matched him to divers rich Noblemens daughters, but he refused them, leading a single life: After which he would have promoted him to a Bishoprick for his learning and holinesse proffering him first the Bishoprick of Winchester, and afterwards the Archbishoprick of Canterbury very often, and to preferre him before all his other Clerks; but he rejected those dignities with various excuses, and utterly abhorred them all his life, tanquam tendiculas Sathanæ ad subvertendas animas, As the snares of Satan to subuert seules: Such were Lordly Bishopricks esteemed, even in that blinde age: which may be further ratified by this monkish story, related out of the Promptuary of the Disciple, and Arnoldus in(u) the Flower of the Commandements of God; That a Monk of Clervaulx was chosen to be Bishop, the which refused it, against the oth of his Abbot and of the Bishop, and soone after died: Who appearing after his death to his familiar, he demanded of him, if the disobey sance before said had noyed him? he answered, that nay, and afterward said, If I had taken the Bishoprick, I had beene damned and said moreover an horrible word, The state of the Church is come unto this, that she is not digne to be governed But of ill Bishops, &c. But to returne to our story. Turketulus refusing the glory of this terrene dignity and transitory honour of a Bishoprick; the King at last made him his Chancellour: ut quæcunque negotia temporalia vel spiritualia Regis judicium expectabant, illius consilio & decreto (tam sanctæ sidei, & tam profundi ingenii tenebatur) omnia tract arentur, & tract at a irresragabilem sententiam sortirentur. Consilio ergo illius, multa bona opera &c. effecit: After which he addes, he was a man of greatest power and authority with these three Kings, both for his incomparable wisdome and valour, he had sixty Mannors of his own (six whereof he gave to God and the Abbey of Croyland where he became Abbot, and there sidue to the King) and vast treasures of jewels and money, yet in all this greatnesse his Title of Chancellour was his highest dignity, as Ingulphus manifests: Therefore it was then, no doubt, the most eminent office.
Thirdly, that in those times(x) it was one chiefe part of the Chancellors office, by himselfe or his Notaries and substitutes, to dictate and write all the Kings Charters, Patents, Writs, and to subscribe them as a witnesse: whence Turketulus when he was Chancellor, writ or dictated most of the Kings charters made to the Abbey of Croyland: Rex Edredus dedit Monasterium Croyland per Chartam suam, dictatam ab eodem Turketulo, writes Ingulphus, p. 874.
Fourthly, That the Chancellor in his reigne, sealed the Kings charters with his seale; yet(y) whether he only did it, or had the sole custody of the seale, is uncertaine.
But though King Edward the Confessor(z) first brought in the great seale; yet the custome of sealing charters, patents therewith, with other mens sealing Deeds, grew not common, universall, or necessary,(a) till the latter end of the Conquerours reign; at(b) Ingulphus in these direct tearms avers, from his own experimentall knowledge: Et non tantum hunc morem (of making Knights) sed alias etiam consuetudines (William the Conquerour and his Normans, of whom he writes) immutabant; nam chirographorum confectionem Anglicanam, quæ antea Usque ad Edwardi Regis tempora, fidelium præsentium subscriptionibus cum Crucibus Aurets, aliisque sacris signaculis firma fuerunt, Normanni condemnantes, chirographa chartas vocabant; Et chartarum firmitatem cum cerea impressione per uniuseujusque speciale sigillum, sub instillatione trium vel quatuor testium astantium (whereas ancient charters had twenty or more witnesses) conficere constituebant. Conferebantur etiam primo multa prædia nudo verbo, absque scripto, vel charta, tantum cum Domini gladio, vei galea, vel cornu, vel cratera; & plurima tenementæ cum calcari, cum striguli, cum arcu, & nonulla cum sagitta. Sed hæc initio Regni sui; posterioribus annis immutatus est iste modus. Tantum tunc Anglicanos abominanti sunt, &c. So that by this Historians expresse testimony (a man of great eminency in that age, being Abbot of Croyland, and much frequenting the Court, yea taking more paines to search out and preserve ancient Charters then any in that age) William the Conquerour and his Normans (who(c) endeavoured to reduce the English to the customes lawes, and ceremonies of Normandy, especially in all matters of government, law, and justice, his charters being of farre other tenour, forme, and brevity, then those before or since in use(e) were the first who introduced, by insensible degrees, the French custome of sealing charters and deeds with seales; and this King, with his Officers (as all our Historians complaine) being extraordinary covetous and oppressive, using sundry new devises to fill their owne purses, by exhausting the peoples; it is very likely (as Ingulphus words import, and(d) others insinuate) that he and his Chancellors (of which I finde(e) nine in his reigne) to make a benefit and project of his great seale, did in his latter dayes ordaine, that all charters, patents should be thenceforth sealed with his royall seale, or else be reputed invalid in law. Three charters of his I find recorded in our writers: The first, made to the Abbey of Croyland at the sute of(f) Ingulphus who registers it, subscribed by some witnesses, without mention of any seale of his thereto annexed. The second, to the Abbey of Battle, sealed with his great seale, and subscribed by soure or five Bishops, which Patent & Seale to you may view in(g) Mr. Seldens Notes on Eadmerus. The third, to the City of London, granted at the sute of William their Bishop, written in the Saxon tongue, confirmed with greene wax, whereas the Saxons before used only to signe with gilt crosses; the copy whereof you may read in Lamberts perambulation of Kent, Holinshed, and(h) Speed. As for that charter of his, recorded by Iohn Stow, and Speed in his life, out of the Book of Richmond:
- I William King, the third yeare of my reigne,
- Give to thee Norman Hunter, to me that are both leefe and deare,
- The Hop and the* Hopton, and all the bounds up and downe,
- Vnder the earth to Hell, above the earth to Heaven,
- From me and mine, to thee and to thine,
- As good and as faire, as ever they mine were:
- To witnesse that this is sooth, I bite the white wax with my tooth,
- Before iugge, Maud, and Margery, and my youngest sonne Henry,
- For a Bow and a broad Arrow, when I come to hunt upon Yarrow.
I deeme it either a forgery, or a charter granted only in merriment; which Rast all in his Tearmes of the law, f. 80. attributes rather to King Edward the third, then to the Conquerour; concluding, that sealing was not commonly used till the reigne of Edward the third: which if true perchance of deeds betweene private persons, yet not of Royall charters. King William Rufus, Henry the first, Stephen, and Henry the second, had all their severall great seales (the portraytures whereof you may behold in Iohn Speeds History before every of their lives) and their severall Chancellors too, whose names you may read it(i) Francis Thinns Catalogue, and(k) Spelman; which Chancellors, as is most likely, kept their seales, sealing both Patents and charters with them.
I read, that(l) King Henry the first, in the first yeare of his reigne, granted a Charter of Liberties to his Subjects (according to his promise and Oath, before and at his Coronation) much like to Magna Charta, subscribed with Witnesses: ET SIGTLLI SVI TESTIMONIO ROBORATVM, as Eadmerus, and others write: To this Charter he set both his hand AND SEALE, commanding as many copies as there were Counties in England to be transcribed, and kept in the Monasteries of every Province: he was made a King by right of Election, not of Succession, his brother Robert being right heire. In this Kings reigne, I finde one Writ to Anselme Archbishop of Canterbury (who used(m) a seale wherewith he sealed his letters written to this King) with(n) Teste Walricho CANCELLARIO apud Merlebergam. And another* Writ directed to him to resist the consecration of Thomas Archbishop of Yorke till Easter, SIGILLO REGIS INCLVS AS; the first Writ I, to my remembrance, finde sealed with any Kings Seale, though Patents were commonly sealed before this time.(o) King Stephen, comming to the Crowne by the Nobles Election, not by right of inheritance, as next heire, vowed to confirme their Liberties by his Charter and SEALE; which hee did at Oxford in the first yeare of his Reigne: this Charter you may read in the Marginall Authors, being like to Magna Charta in substance. That King Henry the second used to seale his Charters and Patents, I finde apparent testimonies in our Historians. For his Oath of Purgations which he made concerning the death of Thomas Becket (registred at large by(p) Roger de Hovedon) was put into writing in forme of a Charter, and then sealed with his Seale, and the Seales of the Cardinals, as this Authour attests. Et ut hæc in memoria Romanæ Ecclesiæ haberentur, Rex Pater FECIT APPONI SIGILLUM SUUM SCRIPTO ILLI, in quo superdicta capitula continel artur, und CUM SIGILLIS prædictorum Cardinalium (Theodine and Albert. Ample ut in memoria Romanæ Ecclesiæ firmiter habeatur, SIGILLVM VESTRVM PRÆCIPISTIS APPONI.(q) Anno Dom. 1177. Sancho King of Navarre, and Alphonso King of Castile being at variance, about breaches of Articles in a former truce, referred their differences to the determination of King Henry the second: who calling his Nobles and Parliament together, made these kings Embassadors to put their differences in writing, and then to sweare to stand to his, and his Councels arbiterment: which done, he made a Charter of his award, subscribed with the names of many Bishops, Nobles, Clerks, & Laymen, as you may read at large in Hoveden, which Charter questionlesse was sealed with his seal, though it be not expressed.(r) The same year, on the 7 day of October K. Lewis of France, and king Hen. 2. made a finall concord and league for mutuall offence and defence, which was put into writing, sworn to, subscribed by many witnesses of note and SEALED; witnesse the words of Hoveden (who records it at large.) Et ut hos statutũ firmiter teneatur, & ratum permaneat, scripto commendari, ET SIGILLI SVI AVCTORITATE CONFIRMARI FECIT. And the same yeare Audebert Earl of March selling his Earldom to King Henry, made a Charter thereof, registerd in(s) Hoveden, which concludes thus: Ne autom hæc mea venditio solemniter celebrata aliqua posset in posterum malignitate divelli, EAM SIGILLO MEO MVNIVI: after which many Bishops, and other witnesses subscribed it. In this Kings reigne it is apparent, that the great Seale remained in the custody of the Chancelor; for I read(t) that this king making his Chancelor Thomas Booket, Archbishop of Canterbury, he thereupon, An. Dom. 1162. (contrary to the kings good liking and expectation, who was then in Normandy) sent messengers over with the Seal, Cancellariarenuntians ET SIGILLUM RESIGNANS, renouncing the Chancellorship, and resigning up the Seal unto him; Because he could not attend the Court and Church at once: so as the Chancellor then kept the seale of England with him here, when the King was absent in Normandy, for the better execution of publike justice. This will yet more plainly appeare by the ensuing passage of(u) Hoveden, and Writ of King Richard the first; Richardus Dei Gratia Rex Angliæ, &c. William de Sanctæ Mariæ Ecclesia, & Dugoni Bardulphe salutem, sciatis quod judicimus quod in morte Pairis Master sine præcepto suo, & conjoyntia, habuerunt literas DE SIGILLO SVO Gautridus de Muscamp de habendo Archidiaconatu de Cliveland, & Willielmus de Stigandebi, & Magister Erardus de præbendis habendis in Ecclesia Eboracensi, quæ tum vacabat, & erat in manu nosira: Et ideo Præcipimus, quod præfatos ab Archidiaconatu & Præbendis dictis sine mora dissaisietis, repetentes ab eis quicquid ex inde percepertent, postquam illos redditus ita fraudulenter & per surreptionem sunt adepti. Teste meipso tertio die Kovembris apud Mamerz. Proh pudor!
- Turpe est doctori cum culpa redarguit ipsum.
Idem enim* Archiepiscopus dum adhuc esset CANCELLARIUS REGIS Patris sui, SIGILLVM ILLVD IN CVSTODIA HABVIT, per quod præfatus Archidiaconatus, & præbendæ illæ datæ fuenant prænominatis personis.
By which passage and writ it is apparent: First, That the Chancellour in Henry the seconds Reigne, had the custody of the great Seale. Secondly, That presentations to Churches, Archdeaconries, and Prebendaries, were then granted under the Great Seale. Thirdly, That Chancellours did sometimes fraudulently grant and seale Patents without the Kings privity; and that these Patents, when discovered, were reputed fraudulent and voyd. Fourthly, That writs at Common Law were usuall in Henry the second his Reigne; which appeares most plentifully and irrefagably by Ranulphus de Glanvilla, chiefe Iusticiar under this King, his, Tractatus de Legibus & consuetudinibus Regni Anglis, tempore Regis Henrici secundi compositus: wherein most Originall Writs of the Common Law, and the Proceedings upon them, yet in use, are collected and registerd for the benefit of posterity. In this Kings time, I conceive, our Writs of Law were reduced by this Ralph Glanvill and his fellow Iustices, into a set forme, and began to issue forth under the Kings Seale, to avoyd forgery; but whether under the Great Seale, or speciall Seale of every Court (as Sir Edward Cooke in his Institutes on Magna Charta, pag. 554, 555, 556. conjectures) I cannot certainly define. In his Reigne I first finde, that the counterfeiting of the Kings Charter was reputed Treason; as Glanvill expresly declares it, lib. 1. cap. 2. & lib. 14. cap. 7. Illud tamen notandum, quod si quis convictus fuerit de Charta falsa, distinguendum est, Visum fuerit CHARTA REGIS, an privata. Quod si CHARTA REGIA, tunc is qui super hoc convincitur, condemnandus est, TANQVAM DE CRIMINE LESÆ MAIESTATIS. Si vero fuerit charta privata, tunc cam convicto mitius agendum est. Now that which he tearmes counterfeiting the Kings Charter,(y) Bracton,(z) Britton, aud the Statute of 25. E. 3. of Treasons, stile, counterfeiting the Great Seale, or Privy Seale of the King: and therefore this of Glanvill relates principally to the counterfeiting of the Kings Seale annexed to his Charter. I finde in(a) Roger Hoveden, a Charter of William, King of Sicily, which hee made to Ioan daughter of King Henry, touching her Dower, dated Anno Domini 1177. Mense Februarii Indicti: decima, subscribed with the names of divers witnesses, Subjects to King William, and among others. Ego Mattheus, Domini Regis VICE-CANCELLARIUS: Which Charter concludes thus: Ad hujus autem donationis & concessionis nostræ memoriam, & inviolabile firmamentum; privilegium præsens per manus Alexandri, notarij nostri scribi, ET BULLA AUREA NOSTRO TYPARIO IMPRESSA, ROBORATUM NOSTRO SIGILLO, jussimus decorari. In quo familiares nostri, & aliæ personæ præcepto nostro se scripserunt hoc modo; the Forme of which Kings great Seale you may behold ingraven in Hoveden, p. 553.
In fine, this Henry the second, being(b) chosen King of Hierusalem (which Kingdome was wholly elective) and earnestly imporiuned by Heraclius Patriarch of that City, the Christians there, and by Pope Lucius his Letters, to accept that Honour; An. 1185.(c) He thereupon summoned a Parliament at London on the 10. of April; wherein hee charged all his Subjects with many adjurations, to advise and resolve him, what was best to be done in this case for the salvation of his soule; and that hee was resolved by all meanes, to follow their advice herein; Whereupon the Parliament conferring on the premises, resolved; that it was much more wholesome for the Kings soule, that he should govern his owne Kingdome with due moderation, and defend it from the eruptions of the Barbarous French, then to provide for the safety of those in the East in proper person. Which I onely note in the by (having omitted it in its due place:) First, to manifest what high esteem out Kings have had of the resolutions and advise of their Parliaments, to which they wholly submitted their owne judgements, acquiescing in their resolves. Secondly, to evidence the Soveveraigne power of Parliaments over our Kings then, who might not desert the Realme, not take any new honour or dominion upon them, without their previous consents and advice: Thirdly, to shew the dutie of Kings to their Subjects and Kingdomes.
King Richard the first succeeding his Father Henry the second, rather by Election, then Succession, (and(d) not stiled a King, by our ancient Writers, before his Coronation) was the first of all our Kings (as Our(e) Writers accord) who sealed with a Seale of Armes, all our former Kings seales, being but the Picture of the King sitting in a Throne, on the one side of the seale, and on horse-backe on the other side in divers Formes, with various inscriptions of their Names and stiles; which you may view in Speed; But this King bare two Lions Rampant combatant in a shield, in his first, and three Lions passant in his latter Seale; borne ever after by our Kings, as the Royall Armes of England. His first(f) Chancellour, was William Longchamp Bishop of Ely, Legate to the Pope, whom hee made His Vice-Roy and Iusticiar of England, when hee went to the Holy Land against the Saracens, committing the Kingdome to his Government, chiefely; who infinitely oppressed and tyrannized over it, as all our Historians evidence:(g) Matthew Paris gives this Character of him. Erat idem CANCELI ARIVS MAXIMVS inter omnes occidentales, REX ET SACERDO in Anglia, qui omnia pro nihilo ducebat, cum Episcopali tantum dignitate [Editor: illegible word] contentus nimis alta se sperare denotavit. In prima namque Literarum Suarum fronte, vanitatem & elationem expressit, cum dixit. Willielmus DEI GRATIA commonly used before, in, and since that age by and to Bishops, Popes, Abbots, in publique Writs, as well as Kings, as the(h) Marginall Authors manifest) Eliensis Episcopus, DOMINI REGIS CANCELLARIUS, totius Angliæ Iustitiarius, & Apostolicæ sedis Legatus, &c. Has autem dignitates, quos pretio obtinuerat, immoderato excessu exercuit, volens locellos, quas in earum impetratione evacuerat, reficere, &c. This Chancellour (as is probable) had the custody of one part of the Seale in this Kings absence, for the better administration of justice, though the King carried the other part of the great Seale with him into the warres, pretended to be there lost, as you shall presently heare. I finde divers of this Kings Charters, Letters, Writs, before and after his voyage to the Holy-land, recited in(i) Hoveden. These Charters, which questionlesse were sealed with his Seale, were subscribed by sundry witnesses; the Writs and Charters concluding with a Teste meipso apud Chinonem, &c. The Charter of the Manor of Sadburgh to Hugh Bishop of Durham, is thus dated. Datum anno primoregni nostri 18 die Septembris apud Eating at, per manum Willielmi de longo campo, CANCELLARII NOSTRI. During this King Richards imprisonment in Germany, Henry the Emperour sent Letters to the Nobles of England for this King, by William Longchamp his Chauncellour, AUREA BULLA IMBULLATAS in hac forma, sealed with a golden Bull in this forme. And soone after, this(k) Chancellor, William Briwere, and others, concluding a peace betweene this King and Phillip King of France, authorized thereto by the Kings Letters Patents; these Commissioners not onely sware to, but sealed the Articles of this truce, as this close of it manifests. Quæ omnia prædicta, ut rata permaneant & inconcussa, ego Willielmus de Rupibus, & ego Joannes de Pratellis, & ego Willielmus Briwere, per præceptum Regis Angliæ Domini nostri, SIGILLORUM NOSTRORUM ATTESTATIONE ROBORAVIMUS. Actum Meduneæ Anno ab incarnatione Domini 1193. octavo Idus Julii. And the very next yeere the(l) Letters and instrument of the truce made between these two Kings by Drogo and Anselme, and sworne by them in the French Kings behalfe, have this conclusion. Et nos ut omnia prædicta firma sint, & stabilita, universa prædicta SIGILLIS NOSTRIS ROBORAVIMUS. Actum inter Vernelium & Thilers, Anno incarnati verbi 1194. 23 die Iulii.
King Richard being released this very yeere (which was the sixt of his raigne) out of prison, and new crowned, among other oppressive projects to raise moneys to maintaine his warres (which made him an extraordinary oppressour of his people)(m) caused a NEW BROADE SEALE TO BE MADE; (the portrayture wherof you may view in Speed) pretending that the old was lost, when Roger his VICE-CHANCELLOR was drowned before Cyprus, and that his CHANCELLOR during his imprisonment, had abused THIS SEALE, whereupon he tooke it from him: requiring and comanding, that all persons as well Clergy men as Lay men, who had Charters or confirmations UNDER HIS OLD SEALE, should bring them in to be renued UNDER HIS NEW SEALE; and unlesse they did so, that nothing which had beene passed BY HIS OLD SEALE, should be ratified, or held good in Law. By which device he drew a great messe of Money to his Treasury; subscribing his new-Sealed Charters thus: This was the tenor of our Charter under our first Seale, which because it was lost, and at the time of our being captive in Almayne in the power of another, WE CAUSED TO BE CHANGED, &c. Which(n) Hoveden thus relates, Et imputans Cancellario suo, hoc per ipsum fuisse factum, ABSTULIT AB EO SIGILLUM SUUM & fecit sibi NOVUM SIGILLUM FIERI; tum quia CANCELLARIUS ille operatus fuerat inde minus diserete, quam esset necesse, tum quia SIGILLUM ILLUD perditum erat, quando Rogerus malus catulus, VICE-CANCELLARIUS SUUS submersus erat in mari ante insulam de Cypro: & præcepit Rex: quod OMNES, tam clerici quam laici, qui Chartas habebant, venirent AD NOVUM SIGILLUM SUUM ad Chartas suas renovandas: & nisi fecerint; NIHIL quod actum fuerat PER SIGILLUM SUUM VETUS, RATUM HABERETUR. Præterea Rex statuit, torniamensa furi in Anglia, & Charta sua confirmavit, &c. (making them also a money matter.)
By which passages it is apparent: First, that all these Kings Patents, Charters, were sealed with his great Seale. Secondly, that the abuse, losse or absence of the great Seale, is a sufficient cause to make a new one. Thirdly, that the profit made by the great Seale, and project of raising moneys by new Charters sealed with it, was the true originall cause all sealing of Charters and VVrits with this Seale, and making it simply necessary in Law; there being no publique resolution or declaration declaring Charters or Writs not sealed with the great Seale, to be voyd in Law, (for ought I finde) before this project; unlesse that forementioned, touching the Conqueror, passe for a Law, and judgement in this particular. Fourthly, that the Chancellour in this Kings raigne had the custody of the Great Seale; the indiscreet use and abuse whereof, was good ground in Law to deprive him of its custody.
What the Office and dignity of the Chancellour really was in that age, appeares by this description of it, written in or neere that time.(o) Cancellarii dignitas est, ut SECUNDUS A REGE in Regno habeatur; ut ALTERA PARTE SIGILLI REGII (QUOD ET AD EIUS PERTINET CUSTODIAM) PROPRIA SIGNET MANDATA. Vt capella Regia in illius sit dispositione & cura. Ut vacantes Archiepiscopatus, Episcopatus, Abbatias & Baronias cadentes in manum Regis ipse suscipiat & conservet. Ut omnibus Regiis assit consiliis, etiam non voeatus accedat. Vt omnia SIGILLIFERI CLERICI REGII sua manu fignentur, Item, ut (suffragantibus ex Dei gratia vitæ meritis) non moriatur nisi Archiepiscopus, vel Episcopus si voluerit. And by the blacke Booke of the Exchequer attributed to Gervasius Tilburiensis, par. 1. c. 5. Cancellarius sicut in Curia, sic ad Scaccarium MAGNUS est: adeo ut sine ejus consensu vel consilio, nihil magnum fiat, vel fieri debeat. Verùm hos habet officium dum residet ad Scaccarium. ADIPSUM PERTINET CUSTODIA SIGILLI REGII, quod est in Thesauro; sed inde non recedit nisi cum præcepto* Justiciæ; ab inferiori ad superius Scaccarium, à Thesaurario vel Camerario defertur, ad explenda solum negotia scaccarii. Quibus peractis in loculum mittitur; & loculus à Cancellario consignatur, & sic Thesaurario traditur custodiendus, &c. The custody therefore of the great Seale was then reputed an unseparable part of the Chancellors Office and honour.
(r)King Iohn succeeding his brother Richard by the Nobles and peoples election, rather then by discent, as(p) Matthew Paris, with others observe; had both a great Seale and(q) Chancellors who kept it, with which he sealed divers Charters. Among others one Letters Patents SIGILLO NOSRO MUNITAS to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Monkes, and other Prelates persecuted by him, restoring them to their liberties and possessions, which was dated the 13. day of May in the 14. yeere of his reigne. Another dated the 15. of the same moneth at the house of the Templars neere Dover (Chartam SIGILLO NOSTRO MUNITAM) of his most detestable resignation of the Kingdoms and Crowne of England to the Pope, delivered to Pandulph the Popes Legate (to whom he did homage for England and Ireland after this surrender) which Charter first sealed with Wax, and after delivered to Pandulph, was the same yeere, afterwards, in the Cathedrall Church of Saint Paul, before the high Altar, in the presence of the Clergie and people, AURO BULLATA EST, sealed with gold, and delivered to Nicholas Bishop of Tusculan, the Popes Legate, to the use of the Pope and Church of Rome, to whom he then did homage, to his eternall infamy; which so much discontented his Nobles, Prelates and people, that they tooke up Armes against him, and inforced him in an Assembly and Treaty at Running-mead, to grant them the great Charter of their Liberties, and Charter of the Forest, ratified with his SEALE, Oath, Witnesses, Subscriptions, the Bishops Excommunications, and Popes Bull; and then sent his Letters Patents to all the Counties of England, commanding the Sheriffs to sweare all the men within their Bailywicks, to observe the said Lawes and Liberties, thus granted and ratified, in the 17. yeere of his reigne. In briefe, the Charter of the truce betweene King Iohn and King Philip of France, registred in(s) Hoveden was sealed with his Seale, concluding thus, Quæ ut perpetuum robur obtineant, præsentem Chartam authoritate SIGILLI NOSTRI corroborandam, Anno 1200. mense Maii.
In this Kings raigne the Chancellors place (through the benefit of the Seale) became so gainefull,(t) that Walter de Gray (afterward Archbishop of York) profered the King 5000 Markes, pro habenda CANCELLARIA (which was then no Court, but the Office of making and sealing royall Writs and Charters) Domini Regis tota vita sua, & pro habenda inde Charta Dom. Regis; which great place he then obtained, or rather, purchased by his money, not merits.
King Henry the third, comming to the Crown (by the Lords and Commons(u) election, rather then by discent) when he was but nine yeeres and some odde moneths old, in the ninth yeere of his raigne, ratified(x) Magna Charta, and the Charter of the Forest in Parliament under His hand and Seale, with Witnesses thereunto subscribed; and commanding as many Charters to be engrossed as there were Counties in England, ET REGIO SIGILLO MUNITIS, and ratified WITH THE ROYALL SEALE, he sent one of the great Charters into every Shire, and one Charter of the Forest into every County where there were Forests, to be there reserved. But this unconstant King comming to age, within two yeeres after,(y) in a Parliament at Oxford (a fatall place for ill advice to our Kings) through all Councell, to the great discontent of his Nobles and Commons, annulled the Charter of the Forest, declaring it voyd, as granted in his non-age, when he had no power of Himselfe, NOR OF HIS SEALE, and so of no validity; and causing Proclamation to be made, that both the Clergie and all others, if they would enjoy those Liberties should renew their Charters AND HAVE THEM CONFIRMED UNDER HIS NEW SEALE (which he had then caused to be made, onely by way of project to raise moneys, as Richard the first had done;) For which they were constrained to pay, not according to their ability, but the will of the chiefe Iustice, Hugh de Burgh, to whom was laid the charge of this mischiefe: which procured him the generall hate of the Kingdome; and begat a new insurrection of the Lords and Commons, who taking up Armes hereupon, enforced the King to call a Parliament, and therein to new ratifie those Charters at his full age. In this Kings reigne all Patents, if not Writs and Commissions too, usually issued under the Great or Lesser Seale, of which there are divers presidents extant in Matthew Paris, and in the clause and Patent rolls of this King, to which I shall referre you. And such notice was then taken of the dignity and necessity of the Kings Seale to Charters and Writs, that Henry de Bracton, a famous Lawyer in those daies, writes expresly, That it was no lesse then Treason to counterfeit the Kings Seale,(z) Est & aliud genus criminis lesæ Majestatis, quod inter graviora numeratur, quia ultimum inducit supplicium & mortis occasionem; scil: crimen falfi, quod in quadam sui specie, tangit coronans Domini Regis. Ut si quis accusatus fuerit vel convictus FALSIFICATIONIS SIGILLI DOMINI REGIS, CONSIGNANDO INDE CHARTAS VEL BREVIA (Writs then were sealed with the Kings Seale as well as Patents) & apponendo signa adulterina; quo casu, si inveniatur inde culpabilis vel seisitus si Warrantum non habuerit, pro voluntate Regis judicium sustinebit. How the Lord Chancellors were elected, and the Great Seale disposed of by Parliamentic this Kings reigne, I have(a) elsewhere related, and shall touch againe anon.
King Edward the first comming to the Crowne, and proclaimed King during his absence in the holy Land, his(b) ‘Lord: and States without his privity, made both a new great Seale and Chancellor to keepe it; with which in the 25 yeere of his reigne he confirmed the great Charter and Charter of the Forrest, in Parliament. And in another Parliament, in the 28 yeere of his reigne, it was enacted: That the great Charter of the liberties of England, and Charter of the Forrest shall be delivered to every Sheriffe of England UNDER THE KINGS GREAT SEALE, to be read foure severall times in the yeere before the people, in the full County. And for these two Charters to be firmely observed in every point and Article (wherein no remedy was before at the Common law) there shall be CHOSEN in every Shire Court, BY THE* COMMINALTY OF THE SALE SHIRE, three substantiall Knights, or other lawfull, wise, and well disposed persons to be Justices; which shall be assigned BY THE KINGS LETTERS PATENTS UNDER THE GREAT SEALE, to heare and determine (without any other Writ but onely their Commission) such plaints as shall be made against all those as commit or offend against any point contained in the foresaid Articles, in the Shires where they be assigned, as well within Franchises as without, &c. Also,(e) That all the Kings Takers, Purveyors, or Ratours, FROM HENCE FORTH shall have their warrant with them UNDER THE KINGS GREAT OR PETY SEALE, declaring their authority and the things whereof they have power to make price or purveyance, the which Warrants they shall shew to them whose goods they take, before that they take any thing, And Chap. 6 There shall NO WRIT FROM HENCE FORTH that toucheth the Common law, goe forth UNDER ANY OF THE PETY SEALES.’
(c) (d)These are the first Statute lawes extant, prescribing, that the Kings Charters, Patents, Commissions, Warrants, Writs, should issue forth under the Great or Pety Seales, though they did so usually before his reigne, rather through custome, which crept in by little and little by degrees, from Edward the Confessours daies, unto this very Parliament, as the premises evidence, till it got the reputation of a received common Law and usage, and at last was thus established, as simply necessary, by these present Acts; which setled the law in point of necessity of sealing all Writs, Charters, Patents, with the Great Seale, and added such Majesty to the Seale it selfe, that Britton, an eminent Judge and Lawyer flourishing in this Kings reigne, (writing his booke, as in this Kings name) resolves expresly, c. 3. f. 10. & c. 8. f. 16. that the* counterfeiting of the KINGS SEALE IS HIGH TREASON; and that the Justices ought to enquire concerning the falsifiers of THE SEALE: Not only whether any have actually counterfeited it? but also, whether any have hanged ANY SEAL by an Engyn to any Charters without license; or having stollen or taken away ANY SEALE, or otherwise finding it, HAVE SEALED WRITS without other authority. And Chap. 48. Exceptions aur Brefe. f. 122. He writes, It is a good exception to abate a Writ si le Brefe ne suit unques enseale de nostre Seale; ou si le Ordinance et le Seal de nostre Chauncery ne soit point contenu. And Andrew Horne, another great Lawyer, living in, or neere this time; in his Myrrour of Justices, cap. 3. sect. 6. p. 191. Among Exceptions to the power of the Iudge, enumerates this for one: IF THE COMMISSION BE NOT SEALED WITH THE KINGS GREAT SEALE OF THE CHANCERY: Car al Privy Seale le Roy, ou al Seale d’ Exchequeur, ou Autre Seale, for qus Solement al Seale que est assigne dee conu d’ le Cominality del people & nosmement en Jurisdiction, & Bres Originals, ne estoit a nul obeyer des letes & usages del Royalme, si non solement pur le Roy. Ou elle puira ee victouse Pur le Seale counterfoit, ou anterment fausse: This sallifying of the Kings Seale to Writs. cap. 1. sect. 6 De Fausonners, pag. 28, 29. he makes a crime next to high Treason; which forging, he saith, may be in divers manners: As where a Writ is SEALED whereof the grosse and matter, or the forme is not avowable by the King, nor by the Law, nor by the rights and customes of the Realme. If a man seale after that the Chancellor, or other Keeper knoweth that he hath lost his Warrant, by death, or any other manner. When a Writ or Letter passeth the Seal against the Kings defence. When men seale with counterfeit Seales, or seale by ill art, or Warrants not avowable; and so it is falshood in those who seale and have no authority. And Chap. 4. Sect. 2. p. 233. Thus* OUR ANCIENTS ORDAINED A SEALE, AND A CHANCELLOUR FOR TO KEEPE IT, and to give remediable WRITS to all persons without delay. Then describing what manner of Writs must issue, he concludes thus, And now may Justices, Sheriffs, and their Clerks, withdraw, rase, amend and impaire them, without discerning or paine, for the Writs that are made close, to the abuse of right. Wherefore THE SEALE ONELY is the jurisdiction assignable to all Plaintiffs without difficulty. And to doe this; the Chancellour is chargeable by Oath in allegiance of the charge of the King, that he shall* neither deny, nor delay to render right or a Writ remediable to any one.
Thus have I given you a briefe Historicall and Legall Narration of the Originall, Growth, Progresse, Use, and Necessity of the Great Seale of England, and of the manner of making subscribing, and sealing Charters, Patents Writs, with other Instruments in our Realme from King Æthelberts first Charter, Anno 605. till the end of King Edward the first his reigne, when Seales and* sealing grew more common, and our ordinary Law-books (which recite few or none of the premises) begin to make mention of Seales and sealing; of whose antiquity, kinds, and present use in point of Law, if any desire further satisfaction, let them consult with Polydor Uirgil, De inventoribus Rerum, lib. 8. cap. 2. Henrici Spelmani Glossarium title, Bulla, Rastals Exposition of the Termes of the Law, title: Faits, Sir Edward Cookes Institutes on Magna Charta, pag. 554, 555, 556. his 11 Report. 1. 92. and Ashes Tables, title: Seales; it being not my intention to trouble the Reader here with triviall common things concerning Seales or sealing, but onely with such Antiquities and rarities as are not commonly knowne, nor mentioned in our Law Books.
The Kings and Parliaments Severall and joint Interests in, and power over the new-making, keeping, ordering of the Great Seale of England.
Having thus traced out the originall, progresse, use, and necessity of the GREAT SEALE, through the obscure paths of abstruce Antiquity, with as much Verity, Perspicuity, Brevity as possible; I shall in the next place summarily examine, What severall or joint interests the King, Kingdome and Parliament have in; what power or jurisdiction over the Great Seale of England, both in respect of the new-making, keeping, or using thereof?
For the better assoyling of which grand Question, now in publike agitation, I shall premise these three Propositions and Distinctions, which will much conduce to the clearing and resolution of this doubt.
1.First, that our Kings Great and Petty Seals when originally invented, and whiles the use of them was onely private, or meerely arbitrary, not simply necessary in point of Law, in the administration of Justice, or transactions of the publike affairs of the Realme, were proper and peculiar to themselves alone, and in their owne disposing power onely, as every private mans Seale now is, they using them onely as private, not as publike persons, in their naturall, not politicke capacities: But after that these Seals, by use and custome, became simply necessary for the publike execution of Justice and affaires of the Realme, and our Kings made use of them in their politique capacities, as Heads or supreame Governours of the body of the Realme, and publike Ministers thereof; the whole Kingdom and Parliament by this occasion, and upon this reason, came to gaine a publike interest in, and jurisdiction over these Seals as well as our Kings: (even as in all other inferiour Corrations, the Commonalty as well as the Majors, in Cities and Boroughs; the Chapters, as well as the Bishops or Deanes; the Covents, as well as the Abbots or Priors; the Wardens, Assistants and whole company, as well as the Masters; the Fellowes of Colledges, as well as the Presidents, have a publike interest in, and power over their severall Corporation-Seale, made onely for their common good and affairs;) as I shall manifest in the sequell. And in this respect, the great Seale came to be commonly called,* THE GREAT SEALE OF ENGLAND; in our Acts, as in 14. and 15. Hen. 8. c. 4. 34 and 35 Hen. 8. c. 26. 1 Ed. 6. c. 44. 3 and 4 Ed. 6. c. 12. 2 and 3 Phil. and Mar. cap. 20. 1 Eliz. cap. 1. 5 Eliz. cap. 1. 8 Eliz. cap. 1. 13 Eliz. cap. 6. 7. 9. 18 Eliz. cap. 2. 23 Eliz. cap. 14. 39 Eliz. cap. 6. 43 Eliz. cap. 4. 5 Eliz. cap. 18. An Act declaring the authority of the Lord Keeper OF THE GREAT SEALE OF ENGLAND (frequently thus stiled in this Act) and the Lord Chancellour to be one: 1 Jac. c. 23. 1 Car. c. 2. 16 Car. c. 1. with sundry other Acts, to omit Law-Bookes and Histories. And being thus become the great Seale of England, (the Parliament the representative body of the whole Realme of England) must necessarily have an interest in, and jurisdiction over it in all publike respects, even so farre as to new make it when there is need, and to dispose it for necessary affairs of Parliament and the Realme, when the old Seale (the proper Seale of the Parliament) is purposely substracted, yea, denied them for necessary publike uses.
Secondly, that after the great Seale became common and necessary to most publike2. affairs, in which regard the whole Kingdome and Parliament came to have a right in, and power over it; so in other respects the King still retained a peculiar interest and prerogative in it, in all arbitrary matters of royall grace and favour, to which he is no ways obliged in point of Law; in which respect it is called, The Kings Great Seale. As first, in cases of generall or particular Charters of pardon. Secondly, of Iudenization or Enfranchisment. Thirdly, of erecting new Corporations, or confirming old. Fourthly, of dispensing with some kinde of Lawes, Penalties, and Forfeitures. Fifthly, of conferring some kinde of lesse publike Offices, and Annuities for services persormed or to be executed. Sixthly, of granting new Liberties or Franchises of grace to Corporations or private Subjects. Seventhly, of creating or conferring new honours on deserving men. Eighthly, of Licences for mort-maines, impropriations, alienations, consecrations of new Churches or Chappels, &c. Ninthly, of publike collections for persons or townes distressed through fire, shipwrack, or other casualties. Tenthly, of private negotiations with forraign Princes, States, or Subjects, and some kinde of Protections, Commissions of grace rather then right or justice. In all these, and such like particulars of meere grace, or lesse publike concernment, the Kingdome and Parliament neither properly have, nor pretend to have any publike right or jurisdiction over the great or petty Seals, but leave them absolutely free to the King as if they were his owne private seales alone, so far forth as his Charters, Pardons, Grants, Licenses, Dispensations, Protections, Commissions of this kinde are consonant to the Lawes and Statutes of the Realme, and not repugnant to them.
Thirdly, the Parliament and whole Kingdom, as to all publike affairs of state and3. the administration of Justice to all the subjects, hath committed the making lawfull use, power and disposall of the great Seal of England in trust to the King, as to the supreame Magistrate and Justitiar: over which they never claime a constituting or disposing jurisdiction, whiles it is rightly managed according to Law. But if this Seale be either wilfully abused or substracted contrary to Law, or trust, to the prejudice of the Kingdome, the obstruction of publike Justice, or violation of the priviledges of Parliament, and not redressed after severall complaints and Petitions of the Houses to the King for reformation of this grievance; Whether the whole Kingdome, or Parliament in such a case as this, who have authority to remedy the grievances, the abuses, or wilfull absence of the great Seale, have not likewise a lawfull soveraigne power to make a new great Seale, and appoint a Keeper of it, for supplying the absence, regulating the abuses of the old, removing obstructions of publike Justice, filling up the Commons House by issuing Writs to elect Knights and Burgesses in the places of such as are dead or justly expelled (now denied;) sealing of Writs of Errour in Parliament and other such publike Parliamentary affairs necessarily requiring the presence of the great Seale (the proper Seale of the high Court of Parliament, which hath no other Seale but it) and Lord Chancellour (the ordinary Speaker of the Lords House, by vertue of his very Office in all ages,) and so his and the great Seales presence absolutely necessary, unlesse dispensed with by the House upon inevitable occasions of absence; is the sole question now in debate? And under correction, in this case, and for these publike ends alone, I humbly conceive, the Parliament both lawfully may cause a new Great Seale of England to be engraven, constitute a Chancellour to keepe it, and seale Writs for new Elections, Writs of Errour in Parliament, with other necessary Writs and Commissions with it, for the publike administration, expedition of Justice, the better transaction of all Parliamentary State affaires now obstructed, to which the great Seale is requisite.
This I shall endeavour to make good by Presidents, by reasons of Law and State-policy; beginning with the new making, and then proceeding to the keeping and ordering of the Seale, during the present differences and necessity.
1.First, there are two memorable Presidents in our Histories and Records, of making a new great Seale by the Lords and Commons in Parliament, without the Kings actuall assent, which will over-rule our present case: I shall begin with the ancientest of them;* King Henry the third departing this life, whiles his sonne Prince Edward, was militating in the Holy Land against Christs enemies; hereupon the Nobles and States assembled at the new Temple in London, the day after the Kings funerall, proclaimed Prince Edward his sonne King, ordained him successor of his Fathers honours, though they knew not whether he were living; ET FACTO SIGILLO NOVO, writes Matthew Westminster. And CAUSING A NEW SEALE TO BE MADE (so Daniel) they appointed faithfull Ministers and KEEPERS for the faithfull custody both of the Seal Kings Treasure and Kingdoms peace. Loe here a new great Seale made by the Lords and States in the Kings absence, without his privity, for the necessary execution of justice, either in an assembly out of Parliament (as some suppose this meeting was;) or at least wise in a Parliament, assembled, held, yea ordaining a new great Seale, new Officers of King and State, without the Kings presence or privity, and then it is our present case in effect: For if this Assembly of the States, even out of, or in Parliament, in this case of necessity, during the Kings inevitable absence, might lawfully make both a new great Seale, Chancellour, Treasurer, Judges, Justices of peace, and other Officers of King and State (as they did, and conceived they might justly doe, none then or since disavowing or censuring this Act of theirs, for ought I reade, but all approving, applauding it as legall,) then certainly this Parliament assembled and ratified by the King himselfe, being the greatest soveraigne power, and having farre more Jurisdiction then any Councell or Assembly of Lords out of Parliament, may much more justly and loyally cause a new great Seale to be engraven, and appoint a Keeper of it, during the wilfull absence both of the King, Keeper, and old great Seale from Parliament (contrary to all Law and former Presidents) for the better expedition of Justice, and transaction of the affairs of the Parliament, being the Parliaments proper Seale, and anciently appointed by it, as Hornes* preceding words import.
The second president is, that of King Henry the 6, his reigne, who being but an* infant of 9. moneths age when the Crown descended to him there* issued forth a Commission in this Babes name, to Humfry Duke of Gloucester, his Uncle, then Protector, to summon and hold a Parliament in his name; which being assembled, Num. 14. The Bishop of Durham Lord Chauncellor to Henry the 5th. resigned up the old Seale of England to King Henry the 6. in the presence of divers credible witnesses, and the Bishop of London, Chancellor of the Dutchy of Normandy. resigned up also the seale of that Dukedom to him. After which Num. 15. It was enacted and provided by the Lord Protector, Lords and Commons in that Parliament; That for as much as the inheritance of the Kingdomes and Crownes of France, England, and Ireland were now lawfully descended to the King which Title was not expressed in the Kings SEALES, where by great peril might acerue to the King, if the said Inscriptions were not reformed according to his Title of inheritance; that therefore IN ALL THE KINGS SEALS, as well in ENGLAND, as in IRELAND, GVYEN, and WALES, this New Stile should be engraven: Henricus Dei Gratia, Rex Franciæ, et Angliæ, er Dominus Hiberniæ, according to the effect of his Inheritances; blotting out what soever was formerly in them superfluous, or contrary to the said stile. And that COMMAND should be given to All the Keepers of the said seales of the King, to REFORME them WITHOVT DELAY, according to the FORME AND EFFECT OF THE NEW SEALE aforesaid, Num. 16. The Lords and Commons in this Parliament constitute and ordaine a new LORD CHANCELOVR OF ENGLAND, Lord Treasurer and KEEPER OF THE PRIVY SEALE; granting them severall Letters Patents of these Offices in Parliament in the Kings name. And Num: 17. The Liberties, Annuities, and Offices granted by King Henry the 5. and his Ancestors to Souldiers in foreigne parts, were confirmed in Parliament, and their Parents ordered TO BE SEALED WITH THE KINGS NEW SEALES, with out paying any Fee.
Here we have nor onely the Great, but Privy Seal, yea all the Kings Seales in England, Ireland, France, Wales, Resigned. Altered, Ordered to be new made, and the Chancellours and Keepers of them expresly Created by the Lords and Commons in Parliament, without any Personal actual consent of the King, (then an Infant) for the necessary administration of Iustice, and great Affaires of the Realme; No man ever questioning, much lesse censuring this Act of theirs, as illegall, or treasonable, within the Statute of 25. E. 3. of counterfeiting the Kings Seale; but all approoving it as just and necessary. Therefore, doubtlesse the present Parliament may doe the like in this unparallel’d case both of the Kings. L. Keepers, the great and privy Seales wilfull absence and substraction from the Parliament, of purpose to obstruct all proceedings in Parliament, and the course of common Iustice.
These two famous Presidents are not singular, but backed with the Authority of Iudge Horne, fore-cited, p. 15. and many other of like nature, and reason, even in printed Statutes.
The Statute of Acton Burnel made in the 13. yeare of King Edward the first, for the more speedy recovery of the Merchants Debts, gives the Mayors of London, Yorke, and Briftoll, authority to take Recognisances of Debts before them to be made by the Clerke appointed for that purpose: whereunto the SEALE of the Debtor shall be put, with THE KINGS SEALE, THAT SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR THAT PVRPOSE; the which SEALE SHALL REMAINE IN THE KEEPING OF THE MAIOR and CLERKE AFORE-SAID. And THE KINGS SEALE shall be put unto the sale and delivery of the goods devisable for a perpetuall witnesse. Wee have here a New Seal of the Kings, with speciall keepers of it, appointed for Recognisances, and the uses thereof limited, by a speciall Act of Parliament: confirmed in another Parliament, touching Statute Merchants, made the same yeare; 13. E. 1 which further enacts, That ANOTHER SEALE SHALL BE PROVIDED, that shall serve for Faires. And that the same shall bee sent unto every Faire, under THE KINGS SEALE, by a Clerke sworne, or by the Keeper of the Faire. And of the Commonalty of London two Merchants shall be chosen, that shall sweare, and THE SEALE shall be opened before them, and one peece shall be delivered unto the foresaid Merchants, and the other shall remaine with the Clerke. 13. H. 8. c. 6. 2. & 3. E. 6. c. 31. second those Acts. 27. E. 3. Parl. 2. c. 1. 9. enact. That the Mayor of the Staples shall have power to take Recognizances of debts, which a man will make before him, in the presence of the Constables of the Staple, or one of them. And that in every of the said Staples BE A SEALE ORDAINED, remaining in the CVSTODY OF THE SAID MAIOR of the Staple, UNDER THE SEALES of the same Constables: which is againe enacted. 15. R. 2. ch. 9. &. 8. H. 6. c. 18.
The Acts of 12. R. 2. c. 3. &. 7. ordaine, That A SEALE OF THE KINGS shall be made, assigned, and delivered to THE KEEPING of some good man of the Hundred, Rape, or Wapentake, City, or Burrough, after the discretion of the Iustices of Peace, to be kept to this intent, to make Letters Patents to Servants, Labourers, Vagabonds, Pilgrimes, who shall have occasion to depart out of the Hundred, Rape, or Wapentake where they lived, to serve or dwell else where, &c. And that ABOVT THE same SEALE shall bee written, the name of the County, and OVERTHWART THE SAID SEALE, the name of the Hundred, Rape, or Wapentake, City, or Burrough. And 14. R, 2. c. 11. enacts That SEALES BE MADE FOR THE SERVANTS, and DELIVERED UNTO THE KEEPING OF SOME GOOD MEN OF THE COVNTY, after the purport of the said Statutes: Here the Kings new Seale, forme of it, and keepers too, are ordered by Parliament.
The Statutes of 27. E. 3. c. 4. 3. R. 2. c. 2. 15. R. 2. c. 10. 17. R. 2. c, 2 prescribe A NEW SEALE to the Kings Aulnegeors and Collectors of Subsidies, wherewith all cloathes shall be sealed before they be sold, under paine of forfeiture, 1. H. 4. c. 19. & 9. H. 4. c. 2. It was enacted; That certaine Cloathes should not bee SEALED by them for three yeares, 4. H. 4. c. 6. enacts, That one sufficient man should be assigned by our Soveraigne Lord the King, to SEALE the Clothes that shall be wrought and fulled in London, and the Suburbs of the same, WITH A SEAL OF LEAD, as of old time was used in the said City and Suburbs, 11. H. 4. c. 6. ordaines, That A NEW SEAL, HAVING A SIGNE and MARKE DIFFERING FROM THE OLD SEALE of the Office of the Kings Aulnegeor, SHALL BE MADE and DELIVERED TO THE AVLNEGEORS. And that after the same so NEWLY MADE and delivered, Proclamation shall be made in the West and in other places through the Realme, that no Cloathes shall be sold (of such sorts mentioned in the Act) before the Aulnegeor or hath searched and measured them and set THE NEW SEALE OF HIS OFFICE TO THEM, which is confirmed by 13. H. 4 c. 4. This Scale by 11. H. 6. c. 9. is stiled, THE KINGS SEALE thereunto ordained, and prescribed to be put to Cloathes, So 18. H. 6. c. 16. a line, is prescribed to bee sealed for the measuring of cloath. 8. E. 4. c. 1. enacts, That broad Cloathes shall bee SEALED by the Kings Aulneger, or sealed with the SEALES of the Subsidy and Aulneger therefore ordained, AND IN WAX. And 4. E. 4. c. 1 That for Kersies and short Cloathes A SEALE OF LEAD SHALL BEE ORDAINED, and by the Treasurer of England for the time being provided, and hanged at the lower part of the edge of the said cloath: And that the Treasurer of England for the time being, shall have power and authority to make SUCH, and so many KEEPERS OF THE SAID SEALES as he shall thinke necessary; so that no stranger born be made any of the said Keepers, 17 E. 4. c. 1. 1. R. 3. c. 8. and other Statutes enact the like, 25. H. 8. c. 8. 27. H. 8. c. 3. & 4. E. 6. c. 2. 5. E. 6. & 6. 2. &. 3. Phil. and Mary. 12. 4. & 5. Phil. and Mary, c. 5. 8. Eliz. c. 12. 23. Eliz. c. 9. with other Acts, prescribe divers sorts of SEALES of LEAD, to seale cloathes withall, conteyning the length, or length and breadth of the said Cloathes; some of the seales for ill cloathes, to have FAULTIE engraven in them; others, that are dyed and madered, the letter M. and the like; some to be kept and affixed by the Aulnegers, others by the Searchers appointed in every County, Towne, or Burrough; Such variety of Seales, and Keepers of them have these severall Parliaments prescribed onely for cloath, which yet they stile THE KINGS SEALES; though neither made, kept, disposed of, not the forme prescribed by him, but the Parliament. See the like for Leather, 5. Eliz. c. 8.
The Statute of 11. H. 6. c. 6. makes mention, of SEALES assigned to the Customers Office, and punisheth the abuses of them, set to blanke scrowls, with forfeiture of goods, as in case of Felony.
12. Ed. 4. c. 3. The statute of Tunnage and Poundage for guarding the Seas; enacts, cloath of Gold, Silver, Baudkin, Velvet, Damaske, Satyn, Chamlets, Silkes, &c. brought from beyond the Sea shall be sealed in one end thereof before it bee sold, with THE SEALE or marke ESPECIALLY TO BE ORDAINED FOR THE SAME, whereof the Collectors of that Subsidy shall have the one part, and the Comptroller the other part, severally in their custody: which is confirmed by 4. H. 8. c. 6. & 21. H. 8. c. 21.
14. & 15. H. 8. c. 3. appointes a severall Warden of the Worsted-makers in the Townes of Yarmouth, and Lynne, to be annually chosen and serve to surveigh and search the Worsteds there made; and that the Warden of Yarmouth so elect and sworne, shall ordaine and appoint A SEALE with the letter Y: and the Warden of Lynne A SEAL with the letter L, to be engraven in the same SEAL: and to seal in Lead with the SAME SEALES so to be appointed and engraven, and none other, all Worsteds and Flannins within these Townes and their Suburbs: 14. & 15. H. 8. c. 5. ordaines a speciall common Seale for the Corporation and Colledge of Physicians in London.
27. H. 8. c. 27. Which establisheth the Court of Augmentations, and prescribes the severall Officers in it, with the Oathes they shall take; enacts likewise, That this Court shal have ONE GREAT SEALE, & ONE PRIVY SEALE, to be ingraven and made after such forme, fashion, and manner as shall be appointed by the Kings Highnesse; that the Chancellour of this Court shall have THE KEEPING OF THESE SEALES, which shall REMAINE and BE ORDERED as in that act as at large declared. The statute of 33. H. 8. c. 39. which crects the Court of Surveighers, prescribes a particular SEALE for that Court, the person by whom it shall be kept, and how it shall bee used, together with all the Officers of that Court, their Oathes and Fees. So 34. H. 8. c. 26. enacts; that there shall be severall Originall and judiciall SEALES MADE for the severall Counties and Circuits of Wales; prescribes the severall parties that shall keepe these seales, what Writts and Processes they shall seale with them, and what Fees they shall take for them; as you may read at large in the Act. In like manner the statutes of 32. H. 8. c. 46. & 33. H. 8. c. 22. enact the Court of Wards & Liveries, to be a Court of Record; and that they shall have ONE SEALE to be engraven and made after such form, fashion, and manner as shall be appointed by the Kings Highnesse, which shal remaine and be ordered as is afterward declared in those Acts; prescribing who shall keepe it, how it shall be used, and what Fees shall be paid for it: And 32. H. 8. c. 45. ordaines a particular SEAL for the Court of first Fruites and Tenthes, which it erects, with the Officers that shall keepe it, their Oathes, and Fees for sealing with it. True it is, these Statutes leave the forme and fashion of these Seales last mentioned to the Kings appointment (which they might have likewise prescribed, as in the former Acts) being a matter of no great moment; but the Keepers, use, ordering, and fees of all these Seales, are punctually limited by the Parliament, and not left arbitrary to the King.
And to trouble you with no more Acts of this nature, the statute of 1. E. 6. c. 2 enacts, That all Arch-Bishops, and spirituall persons, under the paine of a Premunire, even in the Kings Ecclesiasticall Courts, shall make out all their Processes in the Kings name, with the Kings stile, as it is in Writs originall and judiciall at the Common Law, and shall from the first day of luly have IN THEIR SEALES OF OFFICE, THE KINGS HIGHNESSE ARMES DECENTLY SET, with certaine Carects under the Armes, for the knowledge of the Diocesse, and shall use NO OTHER SEALE OF JURISDICTION, but wherein his Majesties Armes be engraven. Here the expresse forme as well as use of these seales is prescribed by the Parliament, and not lest Arbitrary to the King or Bishops.
If then our Parliaments in all these cases have thus prescribed New Seales of the Kings for his Courts and Officers, together with the forme, custody, use and fees of them in these severall Acts; why they may not likewise enjoyed the making of a Newbroad Seal to supply the absence of the old, in the cases fore-mentioned. I cannot yet discover, it being the Parliaments Seal, and GREAT SEAL OF ENGLAND, and so commonly stiled in sundry printed statutes, as well as the Kings, in respect of the publike justice and affaires of the Realme of England, and Parliament which represents it; If the Major, Bayliffes Bishop, Dean, President of a Colledge. Mr. of a Company, Abbot or Prior, or chief Justice shall detaine or withdraw the common Seales of their severall Corporations or Courts; the Common Counsell, Aldermen, Chapter, Fellowes, Livery-men and Courts, may doubtlesse lawfully make new Seales without, yea against their consents, and use them too for their common affaires, without injury of forgery: And why the Parliament then may not in such cases, make a new great Seale of England, by like reason without the Kings consent, when the old (their onely Seal) is purposely withdrawne, and kept from them to hinder their proceedings, I cannot yet discerne.
If any here object; First, that it is High Treason both by the Common and Statute Law to counterfeit or make the Kings great Seale without his privity or consent,Object. 1. as is evident by Glanuil, Bracton, Britton, here forecited. 3 E. 1. c. 15. 25. E. 3. Stat. 5. C. 2. of Treasons. 5. H. 4. C. 15. 27. H. 8. C. 2. 1. E. 6. C. 12. 1. Mar. Parl. 1. C. 6. Stamford, L. 1. C. 1. Brooke, Treason. 3. 13. 17. Cromptons Iurisdiction of Courts. 69. and generally all our Law-bookes. Therefore for the Parliament, or any else by their command, to make and use a new broad Seale.
I answer:Answ. 1 That this is true onely of private men who make a broad Seale by their owne particular Authority, in deceite of the King and Kingdome, not of the Parliament, or any imployed to make or use it by their Authority; The Parliament the Supreamost Power of all others, being uncapable of Treason, and out of the words and intention of these and all Acts concerning Treason, as I have(a) elsewhere proved at large; to which I shall referre you. Secondly, the King hath his great Seale of England, not in his owne particular, but the Kingdomes and peoples right alone, as their publique Minister and servant for their use and benefit, the Kingdome, and Parliament which represents it, being the(b) Proprietors of this Seal, which upon the Kings decease is ever surrendred to the successor King, as belonging to the Kingdome, as the seales of other Corporations goe to the Mayors, Bishops, Deanes, Abbots, Presidents, Succesors, not their Heires, Executors, or Administrators, as other mens Seals doe. The Kingdom and Parliament therefore being the true Proprietors of it, as it is the publique Seal of the Kingdome, not the King, may lawfully give order for the new making of it even without the King in case of necessity, when it is unduly withdrawn, with-held. Thirdly, the Forging of the great Seale is high Treason onely, as it is the(c) Kingdomes common Seale, not the Kings private and particular Seale; and an offence against the Kingdome, and King himselfe only in his politick publike capacity, as head of the Kingdome, not in his private: whence counterfeiting of the Kings signe manual, privy signet, or privy Seales were no high Treason at Common Law, (being no publike, but rather private Seales of the Kings) till they were made so by 27. H. 8. c. 2. since repealed by. 1. E. 6. c. 12. 1. Mariæ selt. 1. c. 1. Rastall Treason, 13. and so no Treason at this day: even as the compassing of the Kings death is no Treason, considered onely as he is a private man, but as a(d) publike person, invested with his politick Royall capacity. If then the Parliament (the representative body of the Kingdome, against which all treason in counterfeiting the Great Seal are principally committed & the true proprietory of this seale) shall order a New great Seale to be made, or used, for the service of it selfe and the Kingdome in this case of necessity, it cannot possibly be high Treason in them or their Agents, for then they should be Traytors to and against themselues, and suffer for an Offence against themselves and the Realme, done by their owne Votes, and assents in Parliament. Fourthly, the counterfeiting of the Great Seale, mentioned in those Law bookes and Statutes, is that onely which is secret, fraudulent, traitorly in deceit of the King, Kingdome, Subjects (f) like to counterfeiting of false mony, (ever joyned with it) by private persons, as our Law Bookes, and all cases of this nature adjudged High Treason, attest; whence it is stiled, Crimen falsi: falsificatio sigilli, &c. by (f) Bracton and others, and such like offenders, Fauseors des sealx: and the Inditements must be that they did it PRODITORIE: neither of which can be intended of, or applyed to the new making of a great Seale by authority of Parliament, for the necessary administration of Iustice and benefit of the Realme, when the great Seale is substracted, as now. Fiftly, the Lords and Parliaments making a new great Seale in the absence of Edward the 1: and infancy of Henry the 6 without their privity or consent, to supply the defects of justice, which else would have ensued, was never reputed Treason, but a lawfull Act: Therefore the present making of a new Seale, to remedy the willfull absence of the old, without the Kings consent, (who withholds it and the Keeper from the Parliament* against all Law and former Presidents) can be no Treason but a lawfull Act. And since the Parliaments or England in the absence, infancy and dotage of their Kings, have usually of right made Lord Protectors; and Chancelours, who had power over the great Seale (as I haue(e) elsewhere largely proved) they may by the selfesame reason, make a new great Seale likewise, to supply the willfull absence of the old. Finally, all the objected Statutes and Law bookes adjudged it high Treason, to counterfeit the Kings mony as well as his Seale, and joyne them both together in one clause. But the Parliament hath a long time coyned money at the Tower, and made new stamps to doe it, when the old were broken or worne out, without any charge or taxe of Treason: therefore they by like reason may make a New great Seale without Treason.
If any secondly object: That to make a new great Seale (of England) is all one in effect, as to make a new King of England.
(g)I answer 1. that to deface the Kings old Seales and Signets, by publique Acts of State, as the Hollanders did the King of Spaines, when they cast off his Government for his Tyranny (which they,(h) and Popish Authors held they might lawfully doe,) and to appoint new Seales in every Province onely with the names and Titles of the private Governours and Provinciall Consuls of every Province, without the name and Title of the King of Spaine, whose authority they abjured with a solemne Oath; would in truth be to set up a new King, and government; But to make a New Seal, onely like, or not much different from the old, to supply its absence, with the Kings owne Picture Armes, stile and Title onely is no wayes to impeach, but confirme his Royall Authority, being done in affirmance, onely, not disaffirmance of it, as Lawyers speake. Thus their making of a new Seale in Edward the 1. and Henry the 6. his Raigne forementioned, was the highest confirmation of their Authorities, and the greatest expression of the subjects Loyaltyes that might bee; And why the Parliaments making of a new great Seale to supply the absence & defects of the old, should be deemed a setting up of a new King against his Majesty, more than the Parliaments frequent constituting of Lord Protectors, in former times to supply the infancy absence, dotage, or imperfections of our Kings (of which I have cited you many Presidents elsewhere) which all esteemed to be a ratification, not nullification or alteration of their Royall Authority, (or the coyning new money now, to supply the want of old,) transcends my understanding to apprehend: since those who may lawfully make a Vice-Roy to represent the Person, or execute the Soveraignty of a King in his name and right, may with as good reason and authority to, make a new great Seale, to supply the defects and affected absence of the old, the Seale being lesse than the person and Soveraignty of the King, and the proper seale of the Parliament.
2. This will further appeare by considering in the second place, what power and Authority our Parliaments have claimed and exercised as of right, over the Custody and disposing of the Great Seale of England. First, they have usually chosen and nominated the Lord Chauncellour, and Keepers both of the great and privy Seale of England, together with the Lord Protectors, Lord Treasurers, privy Counsellors, and other great Officers of the Realm, as I have(i) elsewhere plentifully manifested, and committed) the Great Seale to the Chancellours custody onely. Secondly, They have ordered,(k) that the Chancellour should not be put from the custody of the Seale, nor the Seale taken from him without the common Counsell and consent of the whole Realme in Parliament; upon which ground, Ralph Nevill Bishop of Chichester, Anno. 1236 when King Henry the third upon a displeasure, earnestly demanded the Great Seale of him, being then Lord Chancellour, absolutely refused to deliver it to the King; saying, That he could by no meanes doe it, seeing hee had received it BY THE COMMON COVNSEL OF THE REALM, and THEREFORE he neither could, nor would resigne it WITHOVT THE COMMON COVNSELL OF THE KINGDOME, to wit the Parliament: Yea the(l) Parliament, An. 28. of Henry the third, to prevent the abuses of the Great Seal which the King then began to take from the Chancellour into his owne custody, abusing it to ill ends) Voted; That if the King by any intervement occasion should take away the Great Seale from the Chancellour (who should alwaies be chosen by the Parliament, or its assent,) whatsoever should be sealed in the interims should be reputed VOYD & FRVSTRATE, till restitution of it were made to the Chancellour: After this, the(m) Parliament in Richard the second his Raign, disposed both of the Chancellours place and the great Seale; and Henry Scroope, made Lord Chancellour by it, refused at first to deliver up the Seale to the King, who demanded it of him; and when hee extorted it from him, the whole Kingdome were much displeased, and murmured against it.
Thirdly, The Chancellour of England(n) hath resigned up his Office and Great Seal of England, in and to the Parliament, who have disposed of it to a new Chancellour in Parliament, as you may read in the Parliament Roles of 4. H. 6. Nu. 14. 15. without the King. And the(o) Arch-Bishop of York L. Chancellour of England, when K. Edward the 4th. dyed, was much blamed, for delivering up the Great Seale of England to the Queen Mother: whereupon the Seal was taken from him, and delivered by the L. Protector to Dr. Russel, Bishop of Lineolne. In regard of which disposing power, both(p) of the Chancellour and Great Seale by Parliament; both of them are usually stiled in statutes, the Act for Triennial-Parliaments, histories,(p) The Chancellur and Great Seale of England. How the Parliament hath ordered and appointed the custody of the Kings other Seales from time to time, I have shewed in the fore-cited Acts, and will not repeat; but conclude That if our Parliaments have enjoyed such a power and Jurisdiction over the great Seal, the Chancellours and Keepers of it heretofore, when there was just cause; they may exercise the selfe-same power over them now, especially when both of them have bin purposely withdrawne, & detained from the Parliament so long, to retard, annihilate its proceedings contrary to Law, and the Act for its continuance.
Thirdly, The Parliament hath exercised a power over the great Seale, and other Seales of the King; as the Dutchy Seal, Exchequer Seale, Seate of the Court of Wards and Liveries, of the Court of Augmentations, of first fruits and Tenths, Staples, Surveyors, Seales of cloth and other Merchanaize, safe conducts, Customes, Ecclestasticall Courts, and the like; in prescribing what Patents, Charters, Commissions, Protections, Warrants, Grants, Writs, Pardons should bee passed under them or any of them, and what not; And where the great and privy Seale shall be used to promote right, and where not used to stay right or justice in any case whatsoever. This is evident by the severall Statutes of 13. E. 1. of Acton Burnell, and statute Merchants, 25. E. 1. c. 1. 28. E. 1. c. 1. 2. 6. 20. 18. E. 2. Statute E. 1. Prses. 2. E. 3. c. 8. 4. E. 3. c 4. 5. E. 3. c. 2. 14. E. 3. c. 14. 15. Stat. 3. c. 1. & Stat. 4. 15. E. 3. c. 3. 18. E. Stat. 2. c. 1. 36. E. 3. c. 2. 42. E. 3. c. 9. 1. R. 2. c. 6. 5. R. 3. c. 9. 10. 14. 6. R. 2. c. 4. 18. R. 2. c. 1. 12 R. 2. c. 8. 13. R. 2. c. 2. 13. R. c. 2. Stat. 2 c. 16. R. 2, c. 6. 2 R. 5-c. 4. 5. H. 5. c. 7. 10. H. 6. c. 7. 15. H. 6. c. 3. 20. H. 6. c. 1. 31. 13. Eliz. c. 7. 14. Eliz. c. 6. H. 6. c. 2. 1. E. 4. c. 1. 3. H. 7. c, 1. 4, H. 7. c. 14. 14. & 15. H. 8. c. 4. 1. H. 8. c. 16. 17. 20. 23. H. 8. c. 7. 25. H. 8. c. 19. 21. 22. 27. H. 8. c. 2. 5. 11. 15. 16. 27. 34 & 35. H. 8. c. 16. 21. 26. 1. E. 6. c. 2. 5. 8. 12. 14. 3, & 4. E. 6. c. 8. 39. Eliz. c. 5. 43. Eliz. c. 4. 11. 12. 5. & 6. E. 6. c. 1. 1. Eliz. c. 5. Eliz. c. 1. 4. 2 & 3. Phil. & Mar. c. 20. Above all by* the Act for the preventing inconveniences happening by the long intermission of Parliaments, made this Parliament when fullest by his Majesties and both Houses unanimous assents; with infinite other Statute. And as the Parliament hath thus ordered and limited the use of the Kings own Seales, so likewise the Seales of Sheriffes, Coroners, Corporations, Mayors of Staples, Iustices, Iudges, Searchers, and other Officers; together with the Seales of Jurors, Electors of Knights Burgesses of Parliament and sundry other persons, as to publike uses. Witnesse the Statute of Rutland. 10. H. 1. 13. E. 1. the Statute of Acton Burnell, and of Statute Merchants. 13. E. 1. c. 13. 31. 39. The Statute of Quo Warranto 18. E. 1. 1. E. 3. c. 8. 2. E. 3. Stat. 3. c. 5. 5. E. 3. c. 2. 10. E. 3. c. 3. 14. E. 3. c. 16. 25. E. 3. Parl. 5. c. 1. 5. 21. 27. E. 3. Parl. 2. c. 4. Parl. 3. c. 1. 9. 42. E. 3. c. 3. 43. E. 3. c. 1. 12. R. 2. c. 7. 8. 13. R. 2. c. 11. 18. 1. H. 4. c. 19. 2. H. 4. c. 17. 4. H. 4. c. 6. 7. H. 4. c. 13. 9. H. 4. c. 2. 11. H. 4. c. 6. 1. H. 5. c. 9. Parl. 2. c. 5. 3. H. 5. c. 3. Stat. 2. 6. H. 6. c. 4. 8. H. 6. c. 18. 9. H. 6. c. 10. 11. H. 6. c. 9. 16. 15. H. 6. c. 6. 18. H. 6. c. 19. 33. H. 6. c. 7. 1. E. 4. c. 1. 4. E. 4. c. 1. 8. E. 4. c. 1. 1. R. 3. c. 8. 14. & 15. H. 8. c. 3. 23. H. 8. c. 7. 25. H. 8. c. 19. 26. H. 8. c. 14. 1. E. 6. c. 14. with other Acts. Therefore the Parliament may by the same, or a like reason, exercise a Iurisdiction in making a new great Seale, and directing the use of it for the common good, to supply the absence of the old.
Fourthly, the Parliament hath caused this new Seale to be made, principally to compleat the House of Commons by sealing Writs for new Elections of Knights and Burgesses, in places of the old who are dead, or justly expelled: and what power the Kingdom and Parliament have anciently exercised in this, or the like cases, I shall give you a briefe account. First, the Lords and Commons have sundry times in former ages, not onely enforced our Kings to summon Parliaments against their wills, when necessary, but likewise sent out Writs to summon a Parliament, and elect Knights and Burgesses, under the great Seale of England in our Kings names, without their privity and assent, as I have* elsewhere manifested by sundry Presidents: And by the very Act for the* Trieniall Parliament, (assented unto by His Majesty, and all the Lords and Commons who are, or were with him at Oxford; this very Session of Parliament) it is expresly provided, ‘That in case the King refuse or neglect to summon a Parliament every three yeeres, next after the last day of the last Parliament preceding it, by Writs under THE GREAT SEALE OF ENGLAND (so frequently stiled in this Act;) that then every Lord Chancellour of England, the Lord Keeper of the great Seale of England, and every Commissioner and Commissioners for the keeping of the Great Seale of England for the time being, within sixe dayes after the tenth day of September in every such third yeere, shall in due forme of Law, without any further Warrant or direction from His Majestie, His Heirs or Successors, SEALE, issue forth, and send abroad severall Writs of Summons to the respective Peeres of the Realme, and Writs of Election to the Sheriffs of the severall Counties, Cities and Boroughs of England and Wales, &c. for the electing of Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses to serve in Parliament: prescribing, that every Lord Chancellour, Keeper, and Commissioner aforesaid, shall take an Oath, truly and faithfully to issue forth and send abroad all Writs of Summons to Parliament for both Houses, at such time and in such manner as is expressed in this Act; under paine of being disabled ipso facto from their places, in case of refusall or neglect. And then the Lords are ordered to meet at Westminster without Writ or Summons, and any twelve of them are enabled, to grant out Writs of Summons under their hands and Seales, to all Sheriffs of Counties, Cities, and Boroughs, which shall be of the same force to all intents as the Writs of Summons to Parliament under the great Seale of England. And in case the Lords neglect or refuse to issue such Writs, then the Sheriffs, Majors, and Bailieffs of Counties, Cities, and Boroughs, without any Writ at all: and in their default or neglect, the Free-holders and Citizens of each County, City, and Borough, are enabled to elect Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses, without any Writ at all, and the Election and Parliament to be as effectuall, as if summoned under the great Seale of England. If then a Parliament may be thus summoned by the Lord Keeper himselfe, by a Writ under the great Seale, without the Kings privity, or contrary to his Command; or by a Writ under the Lords Seals only; or without any Writ at all, in some cases, and that by expresse provision of an Act made this Parliament: why this Parliament may not, by as good or like reason (now it is assembled and perpetuated by another Act) make a new great Seale to seale Writs of Election, or grant out their Writs without the great Seale, by an Ordinance of Parliament onely, to compleat the Houses, now the great Seale hath beene so long absent, and such Writs refused to be issued under it, though oft desired (without any danger of Treason, or derogation to the Kings Prerogatives) I cannot yet discerne. It being farre lesse, for a sitting Parliament in this case, to make a new great Seale, or issue out Writs of Election without the Kings privity (now in Armes against it) to recrute its own Members, then for the Chancellour, Keeper, Lords, or Commons themselves out of Parliament thus, either with, or without Writ, to summon and hold a Parliament, without, yea against the Kings assent, his Proclamations or Inhibitions to the contrary. And those fundamentall principles of Law, State-policy, with that soveraigne power of the Parliament and Kingdome, above our Kings, which induced both Houses thus to make, and his Majestie readily to assent to this late Act, for the common benefit and safety of the Realm, in case of His Owne or the Lord Keepers wilfull neglect, or refusall to doe their duties; will doubtlesse inable the Houses now sitting, to make a new great Seale, or issue out Writs of Election, Errour, and the like, either under it or without it, during the voluntary absence of the King, Lord Keeper, and great Seale from the Parliament (contrary to Law, Custome, Duty, Oath) of purpose to compleat the Houses, and expedite publike Justice, obstructed by their absence. And the rather may the Parliament doe it in case of Writs of Election, because such Writs, with the Elections made by vertue of them, have usually beene ordered, formed, issued out, determined, judged onely by the Parliament; and Writs for new Elections (by reason of death or removall) have constantly issued out, of course, by Order or Warrant from the Speaker or Commons House onely, without speciall Warrant from the King himselfe without refusall or deniall, as is evident by the Statutes of 5 Rich. 2. cap. 4. 7 Hen. 4. cap. 15. 11 Hen. 4. cap. 1. 8 Hen. 5. cap. 1. 6 Hen. 6. cap. 4. 8 Hen. 6. cap. 7. 10 Hen. 6. cap. 2. 23 Hen. 6. cap. 11. 32 Hen. 6. cap. 15. 8 Hen. 8. cap. 16. 35 Hen. 8. cap. 11. Br. Parliament 7. Dyer f. 60. Cromptons Iurisdiction of Courts f. 3, 4, 16. Neither can they be denied, or the Houses kept incompleat against their wills by his refusall, without apparent breach of the priviledge of Parliament, yea, of Magna Charta it selfe, as the Lords resolved, An. 1256. in Henry the third his reigne, and the whole Parliament since 1 Hen. 4. Rot. Parl. num. 21, 22. as I have* elsewhere proved.
From all which Authorities I humbly conceive, the Parliament may lawfully in the case fore-stated, both make a new broad Seale and Keeper of it, to fill up the Houses, and redresse the obstructions of Justice, of Parliamentary proceedings, occasioned by the great Seales absence.
To these authorities I shall annex the ensuing Reasons both of Law and State:
First, the Parliament the supreame power and Judicature in England, having the chiefe interest and propriety in the GREAT SEALE OF ENGLAND, in respect of its publike use, may lawfully new make and use that Seale which is it own in respect of property and use; and the Kings only as their publike Minister.
Secondly, that the Parliament being the chiefe State-physician of the Realme, may, and ought by Law to redresse all publike grievances: therefore the grievances and obstructions of Justice, occasioned by the old great Seale and Lord Keepers absence, or abuse, by making new.
Thirdly, the Parliament may and ought to supply all defects, defaults of State Officers, Laws Affairs, prejudiciall to the Realme: Hence it alwayes hath supplied the Minority, Dotage, or Absence of our Kings by constituting a Vice-Roy of their own election to exercise all royall Authority; the absence of the Lord Keeper or Speaker of the lower House, when sicke by substituting others to supply their places; the defects of the Common Law by new Statute-Laws; and providing new Laws Courts, Seale, against new mischiefs, not remediable by old Acts. This appeares most lively by the Act for Trieniall Parliaments forecited, wherein the wilfulnesse and negligence of the King, is ordered to be supplied by the Lord Keeper; the Lord Keepers, by the Lords; the Lords, by the Sheriffs of Counties, Majors, and Bailiffs; and theirs by the Freeholders, Citizens, and Burgesses. The Councell of Basil, and others* forecited are to like purpose: and the Statute of 25. Hen. 8. c. 21. which Law abolishing the Popes authority, enables the Archbishop of Canterbury, to grant all Ecclesiasticall Licences and Dispensations here, which the Pope alone formerly granted at Rome; and then provides, that in case the Archbishop should wilfully and obstinately refuse to grant such Licences and Dispensations to those who demanded them without a just and reasonable cause; that then an Injunction should issue out of the Chancery under the great Seale to him, commanding him to grant them; and if he then wilfully refused to doe it, that then the King upon every such default and wilfulnesse, should grant a Commission under the great Seale to any two Prelates or spirituall persons that would grant them, by an instrument in writing under THEIR SEALES. The Parliament therefore now summoned and sitting, by like reason lawfully may, and is bound in duty to supply the present wilfull absence of the Lord Keeper and great Seale, (treacherously carried from it beyond expectation, contrary to promise, and so long detained thence) by constituting New ones in their places. It was one principall Article preferred by* the Parliament against Cardinall Wolsey, That when he was sent Ambassadour into Flanders, to the Emperour, he carried the Great Seale with him without the Kings consent; for which he was displaced and fined. Much more then may the Parliament displace the Lord Keeper, for carrying away the great Seale (the onely Seale of this high Court) in a surreptitious manner from them, contrary to his duty, without and against their consents, and make a new great Seale and Keeper in lieu of the old.
Fourthly, the Parliament is bound to take care, That publike Justice (according to* Magna Charta (and other Acts) be not delayed nor denied to any Subjects that desire or neede it, being the supreamest Court of Justice, to punish all offences, neglects, supply all defects in the highest Officers of Justice: Therefore to provide a new broad Seale and Keeper of it, since publike Justice is denied to most, obstructed, delayed to all, by the unlegall wilfull absence of the old great Seale and Lord Keeper from the Parliament, and Courts at Westminster.
Fifthly, The Houses of Parliament, in point of honour, trust, duty, more especially since their late Protestations and Covenants, are bound universally to preserve their own just Priviledges, Rights, and Liberties; whereof these are indubitable ones. That the Lord Chancellour & Keeper of the Great Seal of England, together with the Seal it selfe remaining in his custody, ought alwaies constantly to attend the Parliament and be present with it. First,(x) because the Lord Chancellor or Keeper of the Great Seale is alwaies a necessary member of the Upper-House, and the Speaker of it, by vertue of his very Office. Secondly, because not onely constant custome, but(y) sundry Acts of Parliament, require the Chancellours, and Keepers speciall presence in Parliament, in direct termes. Thirdly, because the Chancellour, and Great Seale are, and ought to be necessarily present in Parliament, being the onely proper Seale of this highest Court, for divers publique ends. 1. To issue out Writs(z) of summons and new elections, for summoning the Members of both Houses, as oft as there is need, to keep the Houses compleat. 2. To seale Writs of(a) Error, brought in Parliament. 3. To Seale(b) Writs of Priviledge for members of Parliament, or their meniall servants, when there is cause. 4. To issue and Seale such(c) new Writs as shall be devised in Parliament, upon new occasions. 5. To issue out and seale such(d) Commissions as shall be necessary upon publique imployments, Trials criminall or judiciall, Taxes or Subsidies, appointed in and by Parliament. 6. To seale such(e) Patents and Charters of Honours, Lands, Priviledges, Offices, and the like, which shall be thought meet to be granted in Parliament, as most old Charters were. 7. To seale Parliament pardons and all Proclamations, exemplifications of private Acts of Parliament, and such Acts as are to be proclaimed, to such who require them, 2 H. 5. c. 4. 1 R. 2. c. 6. 1 H. 7. f. 23. 25. Corone 49. 33 H. 6. 17. Parl. 1. 21 E. 4. 56. Dyer. 135. Cooke l. 8. f. 7. 8. 28. 43 E. 3. c. 5. 2 H. 5. c. 46. 1 H. 6. c. 2. 26 E. 3. c. 16. Ashes Tables Proclamation. 39.
In all these respects, with others, the Lord Chancellours, Keepers, and great Seales presence being simply necessary in Parliament, (where by Law and custome they ever have beene, and ought to be, till this late president,) The House lawfully may, and in point both of honour and justice, ought, for the maintenance of their owne undoubted priviledges, to constitute a new great Seale, and Keeper of it, if the old be not returned to them speedily, having beene wilfully, above twelve moneth space, withdrawne, detained from them, on purpose to dissolve the Parliament, retard or frustrate all its proceedings, and stop the common course of justice, contrary to all Law and Justice.
In few words, this Parliament, without any exception of King, Courtiers, Malignants, or any other I have yet heard of; have made a new master of the Mint, at least restored an old one to his place, who was dispossessed; coyned money, and made new stamps for that purpose, where the old were broken or worne out, without the Kings consent, or any tax of treason, or disloyalty: Therefore, by the selfesame Law and reason, they may lawfully make a new Great Seale, and Lord Keeper of it for the ends aforesaid, to supply the absence, defects, and prevent the grosse abuses of the old, without any Treason or disloyalty.
The Votes of the House of Commons, together with their reasons for the making of a new Great Seale of England, presented by them to the Lords at a Conference, Iuly 4. & 5. Anno 1643.
Resolved upon the Question. (June 14. & 26.)
- 1. THat the Great Seale of England ought to attend the Parliament.
- 2. That the absence of it hath been a cause of great mischiefe to the Common-wealth.
- 3. That a Remedy ought to be provided for these mischiefes.
- 4. That the proper remedy is, by making a New Great Seale.
The mischiefes occasioned by conveying away the Great Seale from the Parliament (represented to the Lords at a Conference Iuly 5. 1643.) are these:
1. IT was secretly and unlawfully carried away by the Lord Keeper, contrary to the duty of his place; who ought himselfe to have attended the Parliament, and not to have departed without leave; nor should have beene suffered to convey away the Great Seale, if his intentions had been discovered.
2. It hath been since taken away from him, and put into the hands of other dangerous and ill affected persons; so as the Lord Keeper being sent unto by the Parliament for the sealing of some Writs, returned answer, That he could not Seale the same, because he had not the Seale in his keeping.
3. Those who have had the mannaging thereof have imployed it to the hurt and destruction of the Kingdome sundry waies. By making new Sheriffes in an unusuall and unlawfull manner, to be as so many Generals or Commanders of Forces raised against the Parliament. By issuing out illegall Commissions of Array, with other unlawfull Commissions, for the same purpose. By sending forth Proclamations against both Houses of Parliament, and severall Members thereof, proclaiming them Traitors, against the Priviledges of Parliament and Lawes of the Land. By sealing Commissions of Oyer and Terminer to proceed against them, and other of His Majesties good Subjects adhearing to the Parliament, as Traitors. By sending Commissions into Ireland to treate a peace with the Rebels there, contrary to an Act of Parliament made this Session. Besides, divers other Dangerous and illegall acts have been passed under the Great Seale, since it was secretly conveyed away from the Parliament, whereby great calamities and mischiefes have ensued, to the Kindomes prejudice.
The mischiefes proceeding through want of the Great Seale.
1. THe Termes have been adjourned; the course of justice obstructed.
2. No originall Writs can be sued forth without going to Oxford; which none who holds with the Parliament can doe, without perill of his life or liberty.
3. Proclamations in Parliament cannot issue out, for bringing in Delinquents impeached of High-Treason or other Crimes, under paine of forfeiting their estates, according to the ancient course.
4. No Writs of Error can be brought in Parliament, to reverse erronious judgements; nor Writs or Election sued out for choosing new Members, upon death or removall of any; whereby the number of the Members is much lessened, and the Houses in time like to be dissolved, if speedy supply be not had, contrary to the very Act for Continuance of this Parliament.
5. Every other Court of Justice hath a peculiar Seale; and the Parliament, the supremest Court of England, hath no other Seale but the Great Seale of England; which being kept away from it, hath now no Seale at all; and therefore a new Seale ought to be made.
6. This Seale is Clavis Regni; and therefore ought to be resident with the Parliament, (which is the representive body of the whole Kingdome) whiles it continues sitting; the King, as well as the Kingdome, being alwaies legally present in it during in Session.
Errata: & Omissions.
IN the Humble Remonstrance, p. 6. l. 2. 5. R. 2. c. 2, 3 10 E. 4. c. 3. omitted p. 21. l. 26. Sancitum, p. 25. l. 37. Acres, r. Hydes. p. 27. l. 21. And. p. 29. l. 9. Mariners. p. 31. l. 7. nee.
In the Opening, &c. p. 5. l. 4. hoc, r. hanc.
Psa. 27 1, 2, 3, & 3, 6, & 118. 6. Jsa. 51. 12
Jsa. 18. 2, & 31. 3, & 28, 7. 8.
Psa. 33 & 119, 5. 7. Ioh. 20. Revel. 1. 5
Psal. 37. 7.
Jsa. 41. 10. 13. 14 & 40. 31
Revil. 2. 13, & 3. 8. Psal. 119. 167. 168.
Psal. 116. 8.
Goodwins Catol. of Bb. Dr. Bast. Bastwicks answer to the information: the 2, & third parts of his Letany
Revel. 12. 7, & 14. 4, & 15. 3, & 20. 4.
Revil. 18. 4.
Psal. 2
1. Cor. 7. 9. 30. 31, & Ich. 2. 15. 16.
Matth. 10. 37. 38. 39.
Mark. 13. 13. Joh. 15. 9, & 16. 2. 3
loh, 14. 16, 17, 18, 27, & 16. 33.
Psul. 37. 16.
Psal. 119. 67. 71, 75.
Mat. 19. 21, 22, 23, & 16. 24, 25. Luke, 14, 26, 27.
Mat. 10, 23. Luke. 12, 8, 9.
Jsa. 5, 2. 1 1. 1 Cor. 6. 17. Revel. 14
Revel. 14, 9, 10, 11 & 17, 8, & 19, 20.
Heb. 6 1. 10. 1, 7. Rev. 1, 5.
Rom. 3. 37.
Rev. 19. 1. 4.
Psa. 34 1, 2, 3, 4, & 10 3, 1, 2
Psal. 119, 141.
Jsa. 4, 1, 3, & 26, 4, 5.
Psal. 27, 13.
Psal. 31, 5, & 119, 94.
Psal. 119, 10, & 66, 34.
119, 112, 118, 157.
Philip. 1, 6.
See 2. Cor. 8. 23.
See Gen 14. 12. &c.
וִּלְחַצְתֶּם Et opprimetis, vel opprimite Arias Mont. Comprimit Jun & Trem.
Si enim [Editor: illegible character] hostes ex ertos, no tantum vindices occultos, agere vel lemus, de esset nobi vis numerorum & cop[Editor: illegible character]rum —Externi sumus, & ve stra omni implevimus, urbes insulas, ca stella, municipia, conciliabula, castri ipsa, &c.—Cui bello non idonei, nonprom [Editor: illegible character] suissemus, &c. Tertul. Apolog. Cap. 37.
Revel. 13. 10.
Doctumgenus indoctissimorum Hominam, vix ad Doroberniom usque docti. Erasmus.
Hosea 4. 1. 6.
Cari sunt parentes, cari liberi propinqui, familiares; sed omues omnium caricates Patria una complexa est; pro qua guil bonas dubiter mortem oppetere, si ei sit prosuturus? Quoest detestabilior idoium immanices, quilacerant omni celere Patriam, & in easunditus delenda occupati & sunt, & fuerunt, Cicero de Officiis l. 1. p. 614.
See all his Majesties Declarations and Proclamations concerning the Militia, Commission of Array, Hull, The Complaint against the Parliament.
See the Parliaments Remo. strances, & Declarations touching all these particulars, specially Nov. 2. 1642.
See Dr. Jones his Booke of Examinations, Printed by the Houses Order.
1 Sam. 8. 11 12. 20. c. 13. 2. to 17. 2 Sam. 8. c. 11. 1. c. 12. 19 30. c. 18. 1, 2.
Pcli. l. 3. & 5
Hist. l. 6.
De Offic. l. 2.
De Dignitate Regum Hispaniæ c. 18.
See Munsters Cosino. l. 2. c. 18, 19, 20. l. 4. c. 59.
See Grimstons Impe. Hist. Europi. Zenar. Velater. Polyb. hist. l. 6.
See the Bils for Tonnage & Poundage, and Subsidies of Temporalty & Clergy.
See their Petitions to this effect, and their Remonstrance, Nov. 2. 1642.
See the Remonstrance of the Lords and Commons Novemb. 2. 1642.
Archaion p. 135.
3 Edwa. 3. 6. 17. 19. E. 2. File Execution 247. 8. H. 4. 19. a. 3. H. 7. 1 c. Cookes Institutes on Magna Charta f. 193. 13. E. 1. c. 38.
Cooke Ibid. p. 558. 559.
Cooke Ibid. No. Nat. Bre. 163. 164. Register, part. 1. 177. 178. 28 E. 3. c. 6. Stamford l. 1. f. 51.
7. H. 4. c. 15. 8. H. 6. c. 7
Institutes on Magna Charta f. 174. 175.
Grafton p. 401.
Mat. Westm. Anno 1261. p. 310, 311. Fabian. Part. 7. p. 30. 71 Grafton p. 137. Speed p. 636.
Matt. West. best Ibid.
See Cookes Institute, on Magna Charta f. 538.
Speedi Hist. p. 785. to 790. See Walsingham Fabian, Speed, How, Stow, Grasier, in his life. Anno 1. & 5.
Walsingham. Hist. Angl. An. 1295. p 25. See Helinshed, Speed, p. 653. Grafton Fabian.
Grafton, p. 227. 222, 223.
Matth Paris, Anno. 1240. p. 561, 562, 563.
Pa. 562. 563.
Matthew Paris, An. 1248. p. 718, 719. 725, 726, &c.
Matth. Paris, An. 1256.
Nota.
Mat. Paris, An. 1258. p. 933, 934, 935.
Walsingham An. 1311. Hist. Angl. p. 71.
Walsingham Hist. Angl. p. 37 38, &c. Prodig Neustriæ, Anno. 1297. p. 83. 1087.
Matth. Paris, Annos 1205. p. 204.
Walsingham, Hist. p. 319, 320, 321, &c.
Walsingham, Hist. p. 332.
Grafton, p. 255, 256. Spe. p. 79.
L. 1. Rom. Hist. Dec. 2. 3. l. 5. Dec. 1. l. 8. Dec. 1. l. 9. D. 1.
Hist. l. 6.
Imperiall Hist. pass.
Numa Pompilius.
Commonwealth, l. 1. c. 10 p. 162, 163, 164.
Bodin. ib. l. 3. c. 1.
Bodins Commonweale l. 1. c. 10. p. 162 to 166.
Rerum Stoticarum. l. 9. p. 334. & l. 7. p. 234.
II. R. 2. c. 7. See Rastall, Taxes, &c. 25. E. 3. Stat. 9.
Abridgement of Stat.
1 E. 3. c. 7. 18 E. 3. c. 8. 25 E. 3. c. 8. 4 H. 4. c. 13. 11 H. 7. c. 18. 19 H. 7. c. 1, 2. 5 R. 2. c. 10. 1 H. 5. c. 9. 2. & 3 E. 6. c. 2. 4, & 5. Phil. & Mar. c. 3. 5 Eliz. c. 5. Littleton Chapter of Escuage; & Cooks Institutes on it f. 68. to 75. Fit. Nat. Bre. s. 83, 84. 7, H. 4. Fitz. Tenures, 44. 73. The Acts for pressing Mariners this Parliament 1 H. 6. c. 5. 18 H. 6 c. 18.
1 H. 4. c. 7. 2 H. 4. c. 21. 7 H 4. c. 14 8 H. 4. c. 1. 6. & c. 2. 19 H. 7. c. 14.
9 H. 9. c. 3. 4 H. 6. c. 2. 14 E. 4. c. 2. 8 H. 6. c. 13. Fitz. Brooke Tit. Protection, 11 E. 4. c. 1, 2, 1 H. 7. c. 6. 49 H. 7. c. 4. 7 H. 7. c. 1.
1 H. 6. c. 5. 14 H. 7. c. 7. 2 R. 3. c. 4. 5 R. 2. Stat. 2. c. 3.
13. R. 2 c. 20. 14 E. 4. c. 10.
2 R. 2 c. 4. 13. c. 5. 15 R. 2. c. 3, 5 R. 2. c. 3. Stat. 2. 2 H. 4. c. 11. 2 H. 5. c. 6. 18 E. 3. c. 3. 14. H. 6. c. 6 7, 8. 2 H 5. c. 6. 29 H. 6. c. 2. 4 H 5. c. 7. 14 E. 4. c. 4. 18 H. 6. c. 9. 28 H. 8. c. 15. 37 H. 8. c. 4.
21 R. 2. c. 18. See Spelmans Gloss. Admiral Cookes instituon Littleton 260. 10 H. 6. c. 5. 4 E. 4. c. 11. 37 H. 8. c. 1. 23 Eliz. c. 4.
2 R. 1. c. 4. 18 H. 7 c. 18, 19. 7 H. 7. c. 1. 3 H. 8. c. 5 2 E. 6. c. 2. Phil. & Mary, c. 3. 5 Eliz. c. Dyer 211. Cooke 6. r. f. 17. 1
35 Eliz. c. 4 39 Eliz. c. 21 43 Eliz. c. 3.
7 R. 2. c. 16 15 R. 2. c. 7. 7 H. 7. c. 6.
2 H. 4. c. 12 18. 20. 28, 30, 31, 32, 33. 1 H. 5, c. 6, 7. 3 H. 5 c. 3. 4 H. 5, c. 6, 7. 7 Jac. c, 1. 15 R. 2. c. 7. 17 R. 2. c. 7. 4 H 5. c. 6. 1 H. I. c. 3.
2 H. 5. c. 6. 4 H. 5. c. 17. 14 H. 6. c. 7, 7. 29 H. 6 c. 2. 14 E. 4. c. 4
Common, wealth l. 1. c. 10
3 E. 1. c. 7.
15 R. 2. c. 7. 8 H. 6. c. 3. 14 H. 6 c. 8. 20 H. 6. c. 12. 23 H 6. c, 6 27 H. 6. c, 2. 12 E. 4. c. 3. 17 E. 4. c. 1.
See 13 R. 2. c 1. 27 E. 3 c. 17 1 H. 6. c. 5. 9 H. 5. c. 3. 4 E. 3. c 8
Polyb. hist. l. 6. Europies Munster, Grimston, Zenaras in the Roman Emperours lives, Seldens Tit. of Henor.
Arist, Polin. l. 3. & 5. I Sam. 8 11, 12. 22.
Walsingham hist. Ang. p. 458 Spe. hist. p. 1108 1109, 1120.
Graft. p. 647 Halls Chron. 39 H. 6. f. 182. Sp. 362. Holmshed, Stow, Martin, 38, & 39 H. 6.
See the Remonstrance of both Houses, Nov. 2. 1642.
See Littleton, sect. 378, 379. and Cooke Chid. Fitz. Nat. f. 113. a. Cooke 7. f. 5. 14 E. 3. c. 1. 11 R. 2 c. 1 42 E. c. 4.
Plowd. Com. f. 245. 221. 250 34 H. 6. f. 34. Cooke Instit. on Littleton. f. 15. b.
35 H. 6. c. 7. Fitz. Devise. 5. 1 H. 5. Executors. 108. 21 E. 4. 45. b. 21 E. 3. 39. 24 E. 3. 42. 11 H. 4. 7. Fitz. Quare Imp. 35. 53. 54. 115, 118, 189. Presentment ab Esglise, 11 Livery. 23, Cooke, l. 9. f. 97. 16 R. 2. c. 1. 4 1 H. 6. c. 5.
21 R. 2. c. 9. Cooke, l. 8. The Princes case. 28 H. 8. c. 7. 35 H. 8. c. 1. 1 H 6. c. 5. 25 H. 8. c. 22.
1 H. 5. c. 9. 31 H. 6. c. 7. 10 R. 2. c. 1.
14 E. 3. Stat. 2. c. 1. 5 R. 2. c. 3. All Statures that give Subsidies, Tenths, Tonnage or Poundage, See Rastall Taxes, &c.
See before Cooke 5. f. 15. & 14 E. 3. c. 1. 10 R. 2 c. 1.
See Fitz & Brooke Abbey Corporations, Deane & Chap. Parson.
Speed p. 419 Matth. Paris p. 2.
Mat. Paris hist. minor, Dr. Crakenthorpe; of the Popes temporall Monarchy, p. 252. 10 255. Grafton II.
Mat. West. An. 124 & p. 191 to 197. Walsingh. Ypodig. Neust. p. 60. Mat. Paris p. 646.
Hist. p. 868.
Walsingham, hist. p. 112. Damels hist. p. 220 Speed p. 688.
Graf. p. 401
1 H. 5 c. 9. 10 R. 2. c. 1. Graft. p. 90, 149 Mat. Par. p. 306 308. Sp. p. 597 Daniels hist. pa. 78, 79, 80, 123
7. E 4. 17. Dyer. s. 86. 283. b. 1. R. 3. c. 5.
See Rastal Wards, Præroga Regis c. 9. 10. 32. H 8. c. 46. Br. Idect. 2. 3. Cooke. 4 Rep. f. 126, 127.
7 H. 4. 17. b. 21. E. 3. f. 47. 7. E. 4. 17.
14. E. 3. c. 1 Stat. 2. 5. R. 2. c. 3. 10. R. 2. c. 1. 1. H 5. c. 9. 31. H. 6. c. 7.
12. E. 4. c. 3. 6. H. 8. c. 14. 1 E. 6. c. 1. 3. Mortæ c. 18. 1 E. 2. c. 20. 1 Jac. c. 23. and the Acts this Parliament.
Anno. 1625 p. 44.
Judge Cookes Argument, p. 1. 106.
Speeds Hi. p. 1213. 1219. 1220. Cambden Elizabeth, An. 1601. p. 205. 10 209.
15 H. 6. c. 3. See Master Seldens Mare Clausum.
See Master Seldens Mare Clausum, and Pontanus answer thereto, and Grotius his Mare liberum.
4 H. 6. c. 7, 8 2 R. 2. c. 4. 27 E. 3. c. 17. 2 H. 5. c. 6. 4 H. 5. c. 7 18 H. 6. c. 9. 20 H 6. c. 3. 4 E. 4. c. 5. Speeds Hist. p. 1195. Martinus Laudenfis de Repræfaltis & de Belle, 18 E. 3 c. 8. 3 E. 4. c. 2.
20 E. 3. Fitz Ayd. 2. & Ayde Le Roy. 43. 65 70. 57. 71. 76. 93. 98. Ass. 20. 11 H. 4 26. 2. H 4. [Editor: illegible word] 10. 14 H 4. 10. 19. 36. 44. E. 3. 16. 44. 21 E. 3. 24. 44. Quare Imp Fitz. 62. 68. 152 195. Col. 5. 57, 58: l. 7. 19. 22 E. 4. 44. 21. H. 1. 7. Ash. Alien. 7.
19 E. 4. 6. Magna Cart. c. 30. 14 E. 3. c. 2. 27. E. 3. c 2. 17. 2 R. 2. c. 1. 2 H. 5. c. 6. 4 H. 5 c. 7. 1 H. 6. 3. 18 H. 6 c. 9. See Speeds History p. 1213. 1219, 1220.
Cicero de Legibus.
Matthew Paris p. 251. 252. Daniel, Hist. p. 143, 144. 145.
Matthew Paris, Hist. p. 264, 265.
Judges 16. 8. 9 11. 12.
Math. Paris p. 940. to 965. Grafion, p. 138. 154. Speed. p. 634. to 642. Fabian Part. 7. f. 70. to 99. Matthew Westminster, Holinshead, and Daniel in his life.
Mat. Paris, p. 960. Marth. Westm. An. 1161 p. 306, 307.
Mat. Paris, p. 961. Dan. hist. p. 179. 180. Mat Westm. An. 1263. p. 311. 316.
Mat. Paris, p. 152, 153. Sp. p. 636.
Patt I. p. 8.
Hals Chron. An. 33. 39 H. 6. f. 168. 10 176. Stow & Howes Chron Edit. Ult. p. 400. 404. Grafton p. 627, 628, &c. Speed p. 855. 856, 857 Fahian part 7. p. 458, 10 468.
5 H. 7. b. Bir. 141. 22. E. 4. 35. b. Bir. 202. B. Fitz. Imprisonment, 6. 12. & Hist. 3. Compto de Pace, f 97 98. 113, 114. 132. 1. c. 38. 7 R. 2. c 6. 13 H. 4. c. 72. H. 5. c. 6. 8. 5 R. 2 c. 5. 17 R. 2. c 8. 19 H. Act. 7. c. 13. 3 E. 6. c. 5. 1 Maria c. 12.
Livi. Hist. l. 1. 2. 4. Polybius Hist. l. 6. Dienys. Hal. l. 2. c. 2. Bodins Commonweale l. 1. c. 10 l. 5. Sce the Appendix.
Polit. l. 3. c. 11.
De Rege & Regis Instit. l. 1. c. 8, 9.
Bodins. Commonweale, l. 5. c. 5.
Arragonensium Rerum Commentar. p. 588, 589. 723.
Ibid. p. 724.
Foris &in castis summum Imperium summum rerum be Hicarum administ rationem obtinet,
Nicholases 1 Sthuarnfus de Rebus Ungar. Hist. l. 6. f. 84, 85. Bodins Commonweale, l. 1. c. 10. p. 167. Levy, Rom. Hist. l. 31. 35. Bodin. Commonweale, l. 3. c. 1.
Bodin Ibid.
Bodins l. 1, c. 10.
Matthew Paris Hist. Angliæ p. 835.
Dinctbi Historia, Sletdan l. 8. 18. 22. Grimsten Imperiall History, in Rodulph 2. and Ferdinand, the second.
Lambard, Archaion, f. 135 De Heretochus.
P. 232 348, 349.
See Master Seldens Titles of Honour, p. 605.
Bodins Commonweale, l. 3. c. 1. p. 273.
Grimstones Imperiall Hist. p. 71.
Bodin. Com. l. 3. c. 1. p. 273.
Cookes instie. on Lit. f. 110. Cambdens Brif. p. 177 Holinsheds Description of England c. 8. p. 113. and Annals of Ireland, p. 120. to 130. Brooke, Crompton, Cowel, Minshew Tis. Parlem. Sir Thomas Smiths Commonwealth. l. 2. c. 1. 2.
14 H. 8. f. 3. b.
See Littleton Sect. 297. 314. 323. & Cookes Instit. ibidem.
See all his Majesties late Proclamations, Protestations, and printed Declarations of this nature.
Seneca de Clementia, l. 2, c. 2.
Lord Faulkland, L. Scymor, L. Digbey, L. Savil, Sir Jo. Culpepper, Sir Edward Deering, Mr. Helborne, Mr. Hide, &c.
See the Parliaments Remonstrance, Nov. 2. 1642.
Quid potest ab eo quisquam sperare, quem malum esse docuit: Non din paret nequitia, nee quantum jubetur, peccat. Sen. De. Clem. 1. 2. c. 26.
See; 3. Car. c. 6, 7.
Artic. Super Chartas, c. 12, See Cookes Institutes on it. Agricola apud Indos facri &arfuto &prada alieni Diodoms sic. Bib. Hist. 1. 2. n. 40.
Fitz. Corone. 192. 194. 258. 276. 261. 21 H 7. 39. 24. H. 8. c. 5. Stamford, f. 13, 14. Cooke l. 4. 91, 92. See Math. Paris Hist. p. 264, 265, 266.
See the Parliaments second Remonstrance concerning the Commission of Array.
See this fully proved in the Parliaments second Declaration.
Quæ alia vita esset, si leones ursique regrarent? Si serpentibus in nos, acnexissimo cuique animali daretur potestas? Illa rationis expertia, & annobis immanitatis crimine damnata abstment suis, & tuta est etiam inter feras similitudo: Apud Romanoi tantum, nec a necessaries quidem rabies remperat sibi. Sences de Clem. l. 2. c. 26.
Nulii Regi gloria est ex seva animadversione At contra maxima, si vim suam continet, si mulios iræ alienæ eripuit, neminem suæ impeudit; Senecade Clementia. l. 1. c. 17.
Isla frequens vindicts paneorum odium reprimit, omnium irritat. Regia crudelitas auget inimicocum numerum tollendo. Seneca de Clementia, l. t. c. 8
The Relation of the taking of Cicester, and the Prisoners Relation.
Quanto autem non nasci melius fuit, quam numerari inter publico malo natos? Sencea de Clementia l. 1. c. 18.
The Kings Letter on Saturday, April. 8. 1643 to the houses.
De Clementia l. 1. c. 24.
See the Parliaments Declarations and Parliament-mens Speeches to this effects
1 Kings 11. 1 to 12.
See the Parliaments Remonstrances & Declarations to this effect.
See Doctor Iones his book of Examinasons published by Order of both Houses.
An the end of the Petition of Right.
Concerning the breaking up of the Parliament, and before the 39. Articles of Religion.
Mat. Paris Hist. p. 243. to 256 Daniel p. 143. 144. 845.
Mat. Par. Hist. Angl. p. 240. 421. 430. Dum. Hist. p. 157, 158.
Mat. Par. An. 1252. 1838. 839. The Stat. enlarge. Dan. Hist. p. 169. Speed p. 28. Mat. Westm. Holinshed, Fab. Graf. An. 1253.
Daniel, p. 169.
Math. Paris p. 839.
Psal. 146. 3; Psal. 62, 9.
Math. Paris p. 815. 816. speea p. 627. 628. Daniel p. 167. 168.
Mathew Paris. p 826. 827. Daniel p. 168,
See Constit. Concil. de Reding. cap. de sentent. excom. public. in Iohn de Aton. s. 131.
Daniels History p. 260.
5. E. 3. c. 9. 15. 15. E. 3. Stat. 1. c. 2, 3. 25. E. 3. Stat. 5, c. 4. 28. E. 3. e. 3. 37. E. 3. c. 8. 38. E. 3. c. 9. 42 E. 3. c. 3.
The Revocation of this Statute made 25. Ed. 3. in the Statutes as large.
Hist. Argl. p. 371.
Seneca De Cienteutia l. 1.
See the Remonstrance of the Lord and Commons, May 26. 1642 and Novem. 2. 1642
See Pluter Numa Pom: Pilius, Livie, l. 2. Bodin com Weale l. 3. c. 1.
Prov. II. 14. c. 15. 22. c. 24. 6.
Eccles 4. 9. 10 13.
See 7. H. 4. c. 2. 26 H. 8. c. 22. 28. H. 8. c. 7. 35. H. 8. c. 1. 1 Eliz. 2. cap. 1: Cooke 8. Report: The Princes Case.
Novem. 2. 1642, and May 26. 1642.
De Clementia l. 1. c. 29.
Object. 3.
See his Majesties Answer to the Parliaments first Propositions, with other Declarations and Treatises on his part.
De Laudibus Legum Argliæ c. 13. 14.
Livy. Hist. l. 1. 2. 3. Dionyso Hal. Antiq. Rom l. 2. & 3. Polybius Hist. l. 6. Bodin, Commonwealth, l. 1. c: 10.
Arist. polit. l. 2. 3. 5. Xenophon. de Lacedam. Republica; Diodoras sic. Brb. Hist. l. 1. 3.
3.
Croke Ibid. 284. 3. c. 6. No, Nat. Br. 163. 164. Register part. 1. f. 177. 178. Stamford. l. 1. c. 5 1. f. 49. Brooke Corporations Kitchin. f. 47. 48.
See Antiquit. Eccle. Brit. Godlyins Cat. of Bishops and Antiquities, Eadmerus Hist. Novell. p. 34. 36. 50. 76. 97. 109. 111. 112. 131, 132. Maxims de Gestis, Pontif.
25. E. 3. Par. 6. 9. H. 4. c. 8. 13 R. 72. stat. 2. c. 2.
15 E. 3. c. 3. 4. 5. Stamford juris of Courts, f. 1. to 10. Raslat Parl and the Statuts there cited.
Mr. Saint Johns Speech against Ship-money, p. 33. Speed, p. 762, 763. Halls Chron. f. 10. 11. 12. Fabian-part 7 p. 173. to 179.
Stamford Ibid. Modus tenendi Parliamenium, Combdens Brit. p. 176. 177. Sir Tho. Saiths Common-wealth, l. 2. c. 1. 2. Holinshed & Voel Description of England, c. 8. f. 173. Chron. of Ireland, f. 117. 128. Minsh. Dist. Tit. Parli. Cookes Instit. on Litt f. 109. 114. & 9. Report. Epist Dedicatori.
39. H. 6. c. 1. Hals Chron. 39. H. 6. f. 182. Graftons Graftons 647.
25. E. 3. Stat. 3. 4. 5.
See the Prefaces of most ancient Statutes in Ed. 1. 2. 3. 4. Rich. 2. H 4. 5. 6. & 7. reignes, Cremptons Iuris. of Courts. f. 1. 10. 7. The Writ of Election, 15. E. 3. c. 3. 4. 5.
See Mr. Saint Johns speech concerning Ship-money: 1640.
Chapter of Estates upon, Condition, sect. 378. 379. and Cookes Instit. f. 378. 379.
See Exiliam Hugonis le Despenser old Magna Charta part. 2. f. 50. 52. Cooke l. 7. Calvins case f. 114.
See Hoveden, Mat. Par. Mat West. Fabian, Polye. Graf. Speed, Holinshed and Nubrigenfis in the life of R. the 1. and Goodwin in this Bishops life.
Wals. Holin. Speed, Graft. in Ed. 1. and Cookes Instit. on Littleton. f. 133. a.
See Exilium Hugonis De Spencer, Wals. Fabian. Holin. Grast. Speed in the life of Ed. 2.
Saint Johns Speech against Ship-money. p. 22. 23.
12. R. 2. c. 1. to 107. Wil. Fab. Graf. Holin. Speed in 11. R. 2.
1. H. 8. c. 15 Holl, Speed, Graston, Stow Martin in H. 8. & Ed. 6.
Antiq. Ecclesiæ Brit. pa. 275. 281. 251. Walsing. Hist. p. 181 Ypodigm. Neust. p. 132. Caxton. part. 7. 46. E. 3 Grast. p. 317.
Antiqu. Eccles. Brit. pag. 21.
R. 2. c. 12. Grast. p. 352. 353 Walsing. Ypodig Neust. p. 146. 147.
Commonwealth. lib 1. c. 10 p. 167. 168.
De laud legum Angli, 1.9, 13, 14.
Bodin. Com.wealth, l. 1 ca. 10. Livy hist. l. 1 2. 3. 4. 7. Dionys Hal l 2. &3. Polib. Hist l 6. See the Appendix.
Arist. Polit. 1. a.c. 10. 1 3. c 7.
Hieronym. Blanca Aragonensium rerum Comment. p 588. 589. 590. 716. to 724. 747. to 762.
Munst. cos. l. 3. c. 22, 23, &c. Bodin. Com.wealth. 1. 3. c. 1. p. 252.
Bodin. Com.wealth 1 c 10. Nichol. Isthumanfus de rebus. Ungar . Hist. l 6. p. 84, 85. Anno 1517.
Bodin. l.[Editor: illegible word]; c. 10 and the generall History of Venice.
See Munster Pontanus, Olaus Magnut, and others.
Bodin. l. 1. c. 10. Cassiodor. l. 1. Epist. 6.
Mat. West. An. 1295. p. 399. Walsing. Hist. Angl. p. 28. &Ypodigma, p. 79.
Bod. l. 1. c. 10 l. 2 c. 5. Cassanæus Catalgloriæ mandi. cor sid 24.
Math. Paris p. 835.
Bodin. l. 1. c. 10.
Fabian part 7. p. 182. to 190.
Bodin. l. 1. c. 10.
Walsin. List. p. 235. 236. Fabian. part. 7. pag. 317.
Math. Paris Hist. An. 1214. 1215. p. 243. to 286. Math. Westin. Walsing. Ypudig. Polichron. Fabian Caxton, Grasion, Stow. Hollinshed Polydor. virg. An. 1412 Daniel, p. 143 144. Speed p. 578 to 567.
Fran. Thin his Catalogue of Protectors. Holinshed vol. 3. Col 1073.
Hist. Angl. pg. 305 Godw. Catalogue of Bishops, p. 385. Math. West. An 1222 pg. 113.
Math. Paris p. 456. Franc. Thin, his Catalogues Chancellors ’in Holinshed volum. 3. c. fol. 1175. Math. West. An. 1238. pag. 149.
Math West. An. 1248. pag. 229. 233. Math. Paris An. 1248. pa. 719. 720. 725 Math. Paris Hist. An. 1230 p. 415. Daniel. Hist. p. 157. Edit. 1634.
Math. Paris An. 1244. p. 619. to 623 Daniels Hist. p. 161. 162.
Mat. West. An. 1248. p. 219. 233. Mat. Paris, An. 1248. p. 719. 720. 725. See p. 410, 411.
These ill Councellours forgot, that there is a great vast difference betweene private Meniall servants of the king, and publike of the kingdome; so that their Argument is but a fallacy.
But the whole Parliament and kingdome which they represented were notin-feriour but above the king himself who was but the kingdomes Officer and publike servant; and so this reason made more against then for the king.
Mat Par. Hist. p. 740: Dan. p. 165.
Dan. p. 171: 172.
Mat. Par. p. 940 941. 932 960. Mat. West. An. 1258 to 1262 p. 277 278 300. 307. to 312. Fabian. part. 7. p. 64. to 73. Graf. p. 137. to 145. Speed p. 635. 636. &c. Holinshed Dan. Stow., and others.
See Francis Thin his Catalogue of Chancellors of England, Holinshead, vol. 3. Col 1275. Daniels History. p. 139. 195.
Exilium Hagonis De la Spenser: Magna Charta, part. 2. f. 50, Speed, p. 764, 675, 680. See Walsing, Fab. Holinshed in Ed 2.
Speed. p. 680.
Note this. And the like Law was enacted in. 1. H. 4. Fabian, part. 7. p. 376.
See the Preamble of this statute accordingly in the Statuts at large.
See the revocation of the Statute the same yeare by Proclamation; in the Statutes at large.
Walsin. Hist. Arg. p. 185. 186. 187. Fabian. part. 7. p. 260. Grest. p. 320. 321. Speed. p. 722. Hol., Ypodig. Neust. P. 134. 135.
Walsing. Hist. Angl. An. 1277. p. 187. Fran. Thin his Catalogue of Protectors. Holinsh. vol. 3. Col. 1076. 1077. Walsi. Ypodigina, Neust. p. 134. 135. 136. Dan. Hist. p. 257. 258. 259.
Walsin. Hist Ang. An. 1. R 2 p. 198. 199. Speed. p. 728.
Mat Paris Hist. p. 420. 421. D mid p. 157.
Walsing. Hist. Argl. p. 196. 197.
Walsin. Hist. Argl. p. 143. Fran. Thin his Cat. of Protectors. Holinsh, vol. 3. Col. 1077.
Walsing. Hist. Angl. p. 243. Fra. Thin his Gatal. of Chauncellours, Holinsh, vol. 3. Col. 1282.
Wal. Hist. p. 300. Holinsh, vol. 3. Col. 1182.
Hist. 737.
Note this.
Hist. Ang. p. 311. 312.
Walsi. Hist. Epi. 348. 349. 351 352. 353.
Walsigham Hist. p. 354.
Hist. Angl. p. 372.
10 R. 2. c. 1. 11. R. 2. c. 1. 2. 3. 21. R. 2. c. 12. 1. H. c. 2. 3. 4. See Wal. Fab. Holinsh. Grast. Speed, Trussell, in 10. & 11. R. 2.
10 R. 2. c. 1.
See Walfia. Fab. Speed, Grast. Holin. Stow, John Trussel & Sr. R. Baker, in 10. 11. 12. & 13. of R. 2.
Institutes on Lit. f. 234.
See 1 E. 3. c. 7. 8. 34. E. 3. c. 1. 38. E. 3. Stat. 2. c. 4. 4. H. 4. c. 18. 2. H. 5. stat. 2. c. 1. 8. R. 2. c. 3.
3 R. 2. Rot. Parl. Num. 11.
11. Hen. 4. Rot. Parl. Nu. 39.
Ibid. Num. 44.
Halls Chron. 5. H. 5 fol. 55. Grast. p. 464. Thin, and Hollinsh. vol. 3. Col. 1078.
Rot. Parl. 13. R. 2. num 9 num. 21 Mr. Seldons Titles of Honour, p. 503. 504. Walsing. Hist. Angl. 13. R. 2.
Walsingh. Hist. Ang. p. 459. Hall. Grast. Fabian. Speed. Trussel. 1. H. 6.
4. H. 6. f. 94. to 100
vol. 3, 4, H. 6, p. 590, to 600.
Fox vol, 1, p. 922, to 925, Speed, Fabian, Graston, stow, Trussel, in 4, H, 6.
Hals Chron: 4, H, 6. p. 100, Graston; p. 523. Holinshed, vol, 3. p, 1079: and Francis Thin, ibid, Howes, and Stowes Chron: p, 400, 404.
Hall, Graston, How, Speed An. 33. H. 6. & 34.
Hall, An. 38, and 39. H: 6, f. 176, to 183, Fabian, p, 470. Grasion, p, 643, to 648.
Speed history, p, 1108.
See Matth. Paris. p, 421.
14. E. 3, c, 7, 28, E, 3, c, 7. 42. E, 3, c. 9.
12, R. 2, c. 2, 1. R. 2, c, 11 Cookes Instit on Mag. Chart. f. 558; 559. 566,
1 E, 3. c, 16 14. E. 3. c, 7. and 12, R. 2. c. 2. 34, E, 3. c, 1 38, E, 3, stat 2. c, 4, 4 H. 4, c, 18, 2 H, 5, stat. 2. c, 1, 8, R. 2. c, 9. see Rastals Abridgment, Title, Iustices of Peace, Customers, &c.
Modustenendi Parliamentum; Holinsheds description of England c. 8, p. 173. and Annals, of Ireland, p, 127. &c. 1 Iac. c, 1. Mr. Hackwels manner of passing Bills.
See his Majesties Answer to the Lords and Commons Remonstrance May 26, 1642.
The Remonstrance of the Lords and Commons May 26, and Nov. 2, 1642.
See Ashes Tables, errour 65, to 70. 21, Iac. c. 13. Cromptons Jurisdiction of Courts, f. 1. to 20. Smiths Common wealth. l. 2, c. 1, 2. 15, E, 3. c. 2. 3.
Bracton, l. 1. c. 2. 2 E. 3. f. 7. Register. Fol. 271. Westm. 2. c, 28. 14. E. 3. c. 5. 27. E. 3. stat, 2. of these that are borne beyond the seas.
Magna Charta. c. 29. and Cookes Institutes ibid. 2 E. 3. c. 8. 14 E. 3. c. 14. 15 E. 3. c. 2. 3. 18 E. 3. stat. 3. 20 E 3. c. 1. 2. 1 R. 2. c. 2. 11 R. 2. c. 19.
Rom. 9. 15, 16. c. 11. 6. Nisi gratuita non est gratia August. De Natura & gratia. l. 1. c. 31. 36 E. 3. the Pardon. 43 E. 3. c. 4. 50 E. 3. c. 3. 7. R. 2. c. 10 2 R. 2. c. 7. 1 H. 4. c. 20. 4 H. 4. c. 1. 6 R. 2. c. 13. stat. 2. c. 1. and all generall acts of Pardon.
2 Sam. 3. 3. 2 Chron 9, 8. Ezek. 45. 8 9. Est. 13, to 22, Dan. 3, 29 2 Chron. 30. 1, 108, 23. 5 Chron. 13, 1. 107, Est. 9. 27. to 32.
see d before, Bracton, l, 1. c, 2. l, 3. c, 9. to c, 9. to 15. Cooke. l, 7. s. 5. 11. Calvins case.
Page, 5. 1. 40.
See, the Remonstrance of the Lords and Cormons Nov. 2. 1642 1642 35, 36, 37, 38.
See, Walsingham, Hist. Angl. 1 R. 2. P. 192, 103, 194. where the whole manner of his coronation is expressed at large.
lib. 1. c. 2. f, I. k
see Brook and Fitz. Herbert. and Ash. Title Custome. & Prescription. Cookes Instit. on Littleton f. 110. b. 113, b. 175. b.
Cookes Instit on Littleton f. 18. b. and the Bookes there cited, Register. f. 151. Briesede CONSVETV DINES & servises
Now Malborrough.
Westm. the first.
In the Statutes at large it is c. 48. but 51. in Mag. Charters.
The Prologue and 5,1
Register, part a. f, 7. c. 15. a.
ibid f. 10. 38. b. 127. b. 130. a.
ibid. f. 125. b, 126. 129.
ibid f. 42. a, 43. b, see f. 60. c. to 65.
Apol egm.
Plutarch. Apo. ibeg Laton p. 468.
Bract. l. 1. c. 8 l. 1. c. 16. l. 3. c. 9. Flet. l. 3 c. 3, 17. & f. 5. 7. Cook l. 11. f. 72, 74. l. 7. Fortes. c. 9. to 15. Ploud. 246. 247. 487. 21 E. 3. f. 47.
Plouden, f. 246. 247. & Ashes Table, Prerogat. 60. Iudge Crooks Argu. against ship-money, p. 58. to 65.
Pur co que tiel fait ne pose mye estre Preragative on nostre Seignour le Roy quest derogatif al execution de droit et iuffice
Ier. 38. 5.
Tit 1. 2. Heb 6. 18
Mal 3. 6. lam. 1, 17.
Den 18 25.
Dion Hist 4. Bishop lewels Defence of the Apol part c. 5. p. 363.
2 Tim 2. 13
Mat. Paris p. 561, 562, 563 718, 719, 725, 726, 933, 434, 935. Walsingham p. 98. 185. Speed p. 621 Danin l. p. 151, 157, 160, 161, 162, 164, 171, 256.
37 H.8 c. 24, 1 E. 6. c. 13. 7. E 6. c. 12. 13. see Iudge Crooks. & Huttons argum. against shipmoney.
Polit. l. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
e officiis l. 2
Hist. l. r.
Decivit Dei l 2. c. 21.
De Land. Leg. Ang. c. 9. to 15.
Xenoph. de Laced. Repub. p. 190 Hier Blanca, Rerum Aragenens. Comment p. 588, 589.
Xenoph. de Laced, &Athenionstum Repub. Plato &Cicero de legibus, lib. Aristot. Polit. l. 1, 2, 3, &(illeg.). Diodoruss c, Bibl, high. (illeg.) Lycurgus, Solon, Num, Pompilius.
Hieron. Blanca, Aragone. f. Rerum omni p. 588, 589. l/1o-a_nis Mariana De__ebus His p. l. c, (illeg.) Hier Pauli (illeg.) Regum Aragonen (illegibles) Hispani (illeg.) p. 849.
Cookes, Report, Calunis, c. lef. 10, 1.
See Littletons chap. of Attonment, and Cookes Instit., ibid.
Cooke l. 7. f. 36, _7, 37, H (illeg.), (illeg.) Brooke Charter de Pardon. 14, 5, report f, 50. 51.
Mag. Chart. 29.1 E, 3, 6, 8. 14 E 3. c, 14 (illegs.).
See Judge Crookes and Huttons arguments against shipmoney, &the books and Statutes therein cited.
1: H. 7, f, 12. br, Charter de Pardon, 76, 42, Ass Br. Com. 15, 16.
Mr. Hacknells passing Bills. p, 87, withothers fore-cited. Remonstrance of both houses, Nov. 2 1642. p. 27.
Polit. l. 3, c, 7.
1 Sam. 14. 38 to 4. c, 29, 1. to 12. 2 Sam. 13, 2, 3, 4, c. 19, 1. to 9, 1 Chron. 13. 1 to 6. 2 Chron, 30 2, 3, 5, 23. Esth. 1 13. to 22. Ier 38 4. to 28, Dan. 6. 4. to 20.
Sir Tho. Smiths Common wealth l; c 1, 2, Brook M ushaw. Cowell, Title Parliament Vowd Holish Camld. in their Discourses of Parliaments.
4. H. E. 3. c. 4. 36. E. 3. c. 10. & the Bill for Trienniall Parl.
Grafton, p. 401, 402, Trussell, p. 46.
Polit. l 4. c. 8.
Hyeronym, Blanca Arogonens. Rerum. Com. p. 768. to 772.
(illeg.), E, 1, 17, _2, E. 4, 7, 8, ass 5 43. E. 3. 12. brook Dures. 3. 3. 11, 17, 1_, _7, 18.
13. E. 1. Parque servitia 23. 37. 4. 6. 14, Br. Attonment. 2
See Math. Paris, p. 224. to 257.
Speed, p. 597 Mat. Par. p. 305, Daniel, p. 151.
31. H. 6. c. (illeg.) 3. H 7. 6. (illeg.) E. 3. c. 15. stat. 2. &stat. (illeg.). c. (illeg.). 1. R. 2, c 13. 5 R. 2. c 6, See Brooke &Astr. Title Duresse.
See Dr. Fullers late Serm. the last inauguration day.
And in Mr. Sellent notes in Eadmerum p. 190.
Matthew Paris, Hist. Angl, p. 47. See Holinshed, Speed, Daniel, Ann. 17 [Editor: illegible word].
See Cookes Instit. on Mag. Chart. p. 45. to 64.
See Cookes Instit. on Mag. Chart. p. 58. to 64. 326. to 560.
Cooke ibid. p. 58. to 64. Rot. Parl. 13. Hen. 4. n. 10.
See the fourth part of the Soveraign Power of Parliaments and Kingdoms. pag. 8.
Rot. Parl. 3 Hen. 5. n. 50. and Cookes Magn. Char. p. 61.
See the Acts this Parliament.
See Mat. Par. Hist. Ang. p. 420, 421, 562, 563.
Walsing. Hist. Angl. p. 199. 135, 218, 235, 236, 253, 255, 301, 309, 333, 335, 337, 348, 353.
Daniel p. 122, 122, 130, 134, 140.
See Cookes Magn. Chart. f. 58. to 63. 528, 529.
See Cookes Magn. Chart. f. 231. to 235.
See Cooke ibid. p. 58. to 63. M. Hacknels Argument against Impositions. 7 [Editor: illegible word]
11 H. 4 37. Br. Prerog. 15. 49. Ass. 8. 37 H. 6. 27. 3 H. 7. 15. 18 E. 4 7. 6 H. 7. 4. 5. 21 E. 4. 79. Br. Patents 25 51. 41. 53. 69. 73. 100. Discent 57. Denizition 9. Fitz. Toll. 2. Fortescue c. 9. 10, 36.
See rastals Abridgement title, Armour and Horses.
Marth. Paris anno 1213. p. 224. Marth. Wetsm. anno 1213. p. 91.
See the second Remonstrance of the Lords and Commons concerning the Cammission of Array, p. 31. to 35.
Made by King Henry 2. Hoveden. annal. [Editor: illegible word] [Editor: illegible word] p. 614.
Matth. Paris Hist. Angl. p. 53. Hoveden f. 614. Lamb f. 135. Littleton, sect. 97. to 101. Fitz. Nat Bre. 83. C. D. E. Cambd. Brit. [Editor: illegible word] edit. vit. p. 214 318, 325, 344, [Editor: illegible word] 400 519, 541, 563, 582, 589, 591, 592, 595, 602, 618, 626, 641, 649, 765, 787, 791, 794.
See Judge Crookes Argument in the case of Ship-money. p. 69. to. 74.
40 E. 3. 6. 2 E. 4. 2. 17 E. 4. 5. 10 H. 7. 22 11 H. 7. 26. 14 H. 7. 32. 15 H. 7. 2. 13 Cooke. I. 8. 82 83 See Ash. condition 29.
See 5. R. 2. c. 3. here, p. 4.
22. Ass 41. 2. H. 7. 11. Brook Fitz. Ash Action sur le case.
Magna Charta, c. 29 2. E. 3. c. 8 18. E. 3 Stat. 3. 20. E. 3. c. 1. 2.
History of Great Britain, l. 7. c. 44 sect 19. p. 14.
Matth. Paris Hist. Ang. p. 822 & 625. Si nunc iterum furet ti meri posset non immerite, ne ad consequentiam traberetur cum Binus actus inducat consuetudinem. Eo ipso resistendum est quod Franci contribuerunt. Binus enim actus inducit consutudinem.
Wigorniensis & Matthew Westm. Anno 871, 873, 983, 986, 991, 994, 1002, 1007, 1011, 1041.
Polychronicon. l. 1. c. 50. l. 6. c. 15, 16. Fabian, part. 6 c. 199, 200.
Holinshed. Groston, p. 162, 164, 165, 166, 178, Antiq. Ecces. Brit. p. [Editor: illegible word]
Speeds Hist. l. 7. c. 44 sict. 14, 22, 23. l. 8 c. 1. sict. 17 Malm [Editor: illegible word] de Gestis Regum Angl. l. 2, c. 11. p. 76, 77. John Salisbury de Nugis Cur. l. 8. c. 21. Spelmanns Glossarium p. 199, 200 Haveden. Annal. p. [Editor: illegible word] p. 482. Rastell Termes of the Law. Tit. Danegeld, [Editor: illegible word] Dictionary Tit. Danegeld. Damci. M. Selden, Matt. [Editor: illegible word] 2 2. Godwin in the life of Siricitas.
Hist of Great Brit l. 7. c. 44. sect 41.
See Sir Edw. Cooks Epistle to the ninth Report and Instituon on Magna Char. p. 58 to 64
Reclamavit
See p. 2. 3. 4. 5
Pag. 200.
Ribadenire in his Les Flours des vias les Sanots. Par. 1 p. 96. Capgrave in the life of Edward the Confessor subiect de vitis Sanctorum in Edw. Confessore.
To wit, by his forecited Law, p. 2.
Hoveden Anna p. 447
See here, p. 2. I. Seldon in Ead. Notæ, p. 190, 194, 195. Speed, p. 440, 441. Hoveden, p. 450.
Mathew Paris, Hist. Angl. p. 53. Spelmanns Glossar p. 200. Hoveden, Annal. pars prior, p. 468. See Hoslinshed, Speed, Graston in 1. Hen 1.
Matthew Paris, p. 73. tection vovit quod antecesso es ejus acciper consueverunt INT AE TERNVM SINGPLIS ANNIS CONDONAKET.
See all the Charters of our ancient Kings in Ingulphus, Malmesbury Spelman, Selden, and others made to our Abbots and Prelates.
Spelman, Glossary. 200.
Matth. Wasted An. 1040.
De Gestis Regum Anglorum, l. 2 c. 12. p. 76, 77. with whom speed, and Hollinshed. concur.
Hist. l. 6, p. 365.
See Antiquitates Ecclesiæ, Brit. and Goodwin in his life.
Wheres the Apostles [Editor: illegible word] never deposed any lawfull princes of their Crowns or Kingdoms but commanded all to fear and submit unto them. Rom. 13. 1, 2 1 Tin. 2 1, 2, 3. 1 Pet. 2. 13 14
Hist. Angl p. 224.
In regard of their Tenures. See Matth. Paris p. 53. Ad Eadmerum Notæ, p. 191. Haveden, p. 614. Littleton, chap. 4 of Knight service; and Cooks Instit. Ibid.
See here, p. 16.
I. Seldens ad Eadmerum Notæ, p. 191. Matth. Par. p. 53
See 5. R. 2 c. 15. Matth Paris, p. 152 153 Haveden, p. 668, 674 675
Note well these fitting Epithites for Projectors.
2 Sam. 23. 3.
3 King. 13. 9.
Gen. 38 18. 25 Exod. 28 21 c 39, 6. Deut. 31 43. Iob 14. 17. c 33. 16 c. 37 7 c. 38. 14 c 41 15. 1 King 21. 8. Neh 9 38 c. 12. 1. Esther 3 12. c. 88. 0. Ier. 22 10, 11, 14, 24, Cant. 8. 6. Isa 8. 16. Dan 6 17. c. 12. 4 9. c 9 24. Ezek. 28. Mat. 27 66 [Editor: illegible word] 3. 33. Rom. 4. 1 [Editor: illegible word] 1 Car 9. 2 [Editor: illegible word] 2 19 Revel. 5, 1, 5 9 c. 6 1, 3. 12. c 7. 1, 3 c. 8 1. c 9 4. c. 10. 4 c. 20. 3. c 22. 10 Polyd Virgil de [Editor: illegible word] 8 c 2, Hist. p. 901. Tonnes of the Law, Ti le falls, f. 94 Cooks Institutes on Littleton, f 7 est.
See Ingulp.
See 3. H. 7. 25. 26. Cookes Preface to the 4. Report Termes of the Law. Title Foits.
Spelman. Concil. Tom. 1. p. 118, 119. to 126.
Spel. Gloss. Tit. Bull. p 108. Pol. Virg. De Iuven. Rerum, l 8. c. 1.
Spelman. Concil Tom. 1. p 189 to 194.
Spelm. lb. p. 207, 208, 209, 210.
Ingulph. Hist. p 851, 852 Spelm Concil. p. 256, 257.
Spelm. lb p. 227, to 231
Ingulph. Hist. p. 853, 854.
Spel. Concil. p 324. 325.
Ingulp. Hist. p 854, 855.
Spel. Concil. p. 335 338, 339
Ingulph. Hist. p 855 to 857. 868. to 862.
Spel. Concil. p 346, 347.
Ingulp. Hist. p. 862. Matth. Westm. An 854, 834. Spel Conc. p 350, to 354. Malm Shurtensis. De Gest Reg. Angl l. 1 c. 2. p 41.
Ingulp. Hist. p. 863. 864.
Cooks Ep. to the 6 Report.
Malmesb. de Gestis Regum, l. 2. c. 7. p. 53, 54.
Ingulph. hist. p. 874. to 877. Spelman Concil. p. 428.
Ingulph. hist. p. 880. to 886.
Malms. de Gesiis Regum, l. 2. c. 8. p. 56, 57 Spelman Concil. p. 485. 486. 488. 489. 432. to 435. 1. Seldeni ad Eadmerum note p. 159, 160 Cooks Preface to the 4. Report.
Cooks Preface to the sixth Report.
Spelman Concil. p. 504. to 510.
Spelman p. 533.
Ingulph. hist. p. 893, 913, 914.
Remonstrance against shipmoney p:
Concil. tom. 1 p. 308, 310, 311, 312.
Huntindox, Antiquitates Ecclesiæ Brit. Fox Polychronicon, Holinsh. Grafton, speed, and others.
Cooks Instit. on Lit. f. 7. a
Glossar. p. 127 See Tearms of the Law, title Faits.
Speeds hist. p. 415. terms of the law, f. 94.
Spelman Glossar. p. 1268
Hist. of Eng. p. 409.
Tearms of the Law, Til. Faits, f. 94. Speed hist. p. 415.
Hist. p. 895.
In Apparatu a Stemmata Lintharogiæ.
Glossar. tit. Bulla anrea, p. 106, 107.
De Invent. Rerum, l. 8. c. 2. see Ioan. Zonara An. Tom. 3. f. 147. c.
Hist. Rhem. Eccl. l. 3. c. 17.
Speeds hist. p. 415. Tearmes of the law, f. 94.
[Editor: illegible word] Tom. [Editor: illegible word] 630 to 637.
Thins Catalog. of Chancelors in Holinshed vol. 3. col. 1160. &c. Spelman Gloss. p. 132.
ingulph. hist. p. 872. to 892. Spelman. Gloss. p. 126.
Fol. 227. printed by Winkia de word at London, An. 1521.
See Spelmanni Glossar. tit. Cancellarius p. 125. to 128.
Spelmanni Glog. p. 127, 128
Speeds hist. p. 415.
See Rastals Tearms of the Law, tit. Faits.
History p. 901.
Malmesbury Matthew Paris, Eadmerum Huntindon Hoveden Polycron. Holinshed, Speed, Daniel, and others in his life.
Speeds hist. p. 440, 450.
In Thinns Catalogue, and Spelman Gloss. p. 132.
History p. 912.
Page 165, 166. see the forme of his scale in Speeds Hist. p. 435.
History p. 450, 451.
I doubt Hoplands, hops and hop-yards were not then in use
Holinshed vol. 3. col. 1260 to 1280.
Glossarium, p. 132, 133.
Matth. Paris p. 53, 54. Eadmerus l. 3. p. 55. Malmes. de Gest. Reg. l. 5. Hoveden, Holinshed, Matth. west. Pabian, Polychron, Caxton, Graston Stow, Dan. el in 1 Hen. 1. Speed p. 407.
Delatæ Libeller repose in tuo Sigillo Eadme. l. 4. p. 86.
Eadmerus ibid. & p. 101.
Eadmer. Nov. l. 4. p. 101.
Malms. Novel. l. 1. p. 179. Huntind. Mitt. Paris, Hovedon, Mat, West. Speed Holinsh. Daniel, in his life, An. 1.
Annal. pars poste. p. 529, 530. see Matt. Paris p. 120, 121, 122, 124, 125.
Hoveden Annal pars posterior p. 560. to 566. Mat. Par. p. 127. see Holinsh and Speed in his life
Hoveden An. pars post. p. 570. 571. Mat. Paris p. 128. see Holinsh. Graston, Speed, Daniel, Fabian
Annal. pars most p. 572.
Matth. Paris hist p. 94. Antiquitates Ecclis. dirt. p. 122. Godwins Catalogue of Bps. in the life of Becket, pains Catalog. of Chancelors, Holinshed in Hen. 2.
Annal. pars best p. 748.
Geoffry.
Lib. 2. Tit. de Crimine lesÆ Majest.
Lib. 1. c. 8. f. 16. Stanfords Pleas lib. 1. c. 1.
Annal. part poster. p. 551, 552, 553.
Mat. Paris hist. Angl. p. 157. Hoveden p. 358. Fabian par. 7. p. 353, 354. Polyshron. l. 7. c. 24. speed p. 522.
Mat. Paris p. 47. 64, 69. Hoveden Annal. pars poster. with others.
Speed hist. p. 530.
Speed hist. p. 541. Daniels hist. p. 125. Cook Inslit, on Littleton s. 7. a.
See Hoveden, Mat. Paris, Nubrigen, Mat. Westm. Holinsh. Speed, Grafton.
Hist. Angl. p. 155, 156.
Eadmerus, hist. p. 12. 36. 201.
Hoveden, Annal. p. 459, 498, 504, 505, 509, 512, 513, 523, 524, 530, 538, 575, 643, 611, 670, 677, 707, 712, 718, 721, 741, 763, 766, 782.
Matth. Paris p. 106. Spelmanni Concil. p. 142, 395. Mr. Seldens Titles of Honour, p. 123. to 128. Register pars. 1: f. 286, 392. to 318: pars. [Editor: illegible word] 2. f. 3. p. 223. 30, 33, 35, 38, 44, 54, 55, 60, 62, part. 35. 22. 26. 29. 31. 35. 42. 47. Fitz. Nat. Bre. f. 132.
Annal pars. post. p. 658. 662. 667. 676, 698, 700, 726, 730, 732. 734. 743. 748.
Hoveden. Annal. p: 726, 729. 730.
Hoveden. Annal. pars. post. p. 741, 742. 743.
Hoveden. Annal. pars. post. p. 746, 785. Speeds Hist. p. 541.
Daniel p. 125. See Holinshead, Grafton, and others.
Annal. pars. post. p. 746, 785.
Spelmani Glossarium, p. 128.
Id est Capitalis Justiciarii Angliæ.
Matth. Paris Hist. Angl. p. 225, 227, 237, 246, to 254, Matthew Westm., Holinshed, Speed and others.
Hist. Angl. p. 189. 190.
See Spelmani and [Editor: illegible word]
Annal. p. 814, 815.
In dorio Rot. finium but Anni; & Spelmanni Glossarium, p. 131, 132 Thins Catalogue of Chancellors.
Fox Acts & Monuments edit. ult vol. [Editor: illegible word] p. 1334. Speed, p. 591.
Matth. Paris Hist. p. 311. Speed p. 599. See Polychronicon, Fabian, Holinshed, Magna Charta it selfe.
Matth. Paris p. 324, 325. Daniel, p. 151. 152. Holinshed, Speed, Grafton.
Bracton. l. 2. De crimine lese Majestatis, see Stamfords [Editor: illegible word] f. 2.
See the second part of the Soveraigne power of Parliaments p. 48. to 93.
Matth West. & Daniel. in 1. Ed. 1.
The people then had power so elect these their Judges and Justices even by Act of Parliament.
Chap. 2.
Confirmatio Chartarum, 25 E. y & Cookes Institutes on it Walsingham hist. Ang. p. 35 to 48.
Articuli super Chartas ch. 2 See Cookes Institutes on these Acts.
See 3 Ed. c. cap. 15.
To wit, in 1 Edw. 1. or when the great Seal was first introduced in Edward the Confessors dayes.
Magna Char. cap. 29.
See 9 Edw. 1. the correction of the twelfth Chap. of the Statute of Glocester. 20 Edw. 1. De Non tnendo in Assissis. 34 Ed. 1. cap. 6.
Our ancientest [Editor: illegible word] call it indefinitely The great Seale; as 2 Ed 3. Stat. 2. c. 8. with others.
Marth. West. An. 1272. pag 352. Hornes Myr. p. 233. Here. p. 15. Daniels Hist. pag. 185. See Walsing. Hist. Ang. p. 1, 2. Speeds Hist. p. 646. Walsing. Ypod. Neustr. p. 67.
Pag. 15.
Hall. Stow, speed, Hoslinshed Graston
1 H. 6. p. Rot Parl, 1. H 6 Num. 1, &c The second Part of the Soveraign power of Parliaments and Kingdoms (where I have transcribed these Records at large) p. 65 to 70.
Soveraigne power of Parliaments part. p. 107. to 112. part. 2. p. 25. 26.
Ibid. part. 2. p. 3. to 20. Appendix p. 163. to 171.
Ibid. part. 3. p. 7. 8. part. 2. p. 25. 26.
Ibid. part. 3. p. 7. 8.
Magn. Charta c. 29,
Soveraigne power of Parliament part 2 p. 41 to 87.
Grimstons History of the Netherlands P. 556. to 667 See the Appendix 184. 185.
Alvarus P. lagius De Plantiu Ecclesiæ L. 1. Art. 56. 62. F. 56. Sino rex præsumptione privato, sed authoritate publica et communi. Rex in Tyrannum conversus, vel asseniu Tyrannus destruction vel ejus potestas ipsa refrenetut, non est putanda tallis multitudo infidentes were Tyrannum destituens de si in perpetuũance ante a lib subject it quia hec ipse meruit in multitudinis regumne se non [Editor: illegible word] gerens, ut exigit. Regis officium, quod tu pactum a subdiets non servetur, & c. See the Appendix P. 137. 188.
See Francis Thin in Catalogue of l.c.d. Chauncellors of England: & The 2 Part of the soveraigne power of Parliaments. P. 41. to 73.
Matthew Paris, Hist. Ang, p. 415. Matth. West. Anno 1222. p. 113. Daniel p. 197 Godwins Catalogue of Bishops p. 386. Francis Thin Catalogue of Chauncellors Helinshed Vol. 2. p. 1275. The 2 part of the Soveraigne Power of Parliaments and Kingdomes p. 48. 49.
Matthew Paris Hist: Ang: p. 619, to 623. Daniel 161: 162: Soveraigne power of Parliaments part 2. p: 49. 56.
Walsingham Hist. Ang. p. 143. 300. 311, 312 See the Soveraigne povver of Parliaments part 2 p. 57. 58.
See the a part of the power of Parliaments p. 7074.
Speed Holinshed Grafton in 3. R. 5
See 5. Eliz. c. 18. 13. Eliz. c. 7. 14. Eliz. c. 6. The Act for Trienniall Parliaments.
16. Car. c. 1.
The soveraigne power of Parliaments part 1. f. 8. to 16.
16 Carol. c. 1.
See the second part of Soveraigne power of Parliaments. p. 7. 42.
The soveraign power of Parliaments part 1. edit. 2. p. 13.
Halls Chron. 2t. Hen. 5. c. 19. Graston p. 1191
9 Hen. 3. c. 29. 2 Edw. 3 c. 8.
See Medus Tenendi Parliament; Cambden, Holinsh, Vowel, and Sir Thomas Smith, lib. 2. cap. 2. in their Treatises of the Parliament of England, with all the Journals and Parliament rolls.
14 E. 3. c. 5. 15. E. 3. c. 4, 5. Stat. 1. 31. H. 8. c. 10.
Brooke Parliament. 7. Dyer. 60. a.
1 H. 7. f. 19, 20. Ashes Tables Error. 65.
Dyer f. 59. 60. 5 H. 4. c. 6. Br. Parl. 11. 1. Jac. c. 23.
Stat of Winchester, 13 E. 1. c. 24. 28. Register, f. 271.
14 E. 3. e. 5. and all Acts for Subsidies.
See the Soveraigne power of Parliaments, pars. 2. p. 25. 61, 66, 67, 68, 70, 71. & here p. 2. 3.