THE ORIGINAL OF Kingly and Ecclesiastical GOVERNMENT.

By T. B. Dr. in Divinity.

Mat. 22.21.

Da Caesari quae sunt Caesaris.

King Jame's Bas. Dor.

Sublato Episcopo tollitur Rex.

Printed for Robert Clavell, and William Hensman, 1681.

THE CONTENTS.

  • CHAP. I. GOd himself was the first founder, and the first that instituted the Office of Kings.
  • Chap. II. The people cannot make an Anointed King.
  • Chap. III. The meaning of the Anoint­ing of Kings.
  • Chap. IV. The reason why they are called the Lords Anointed.
  • Chap. 5. Bad Kings are the Lords Anointed as well as good.
  • Chap. VI. It is not lawful upon any pretences whatsoever to depose, or so much as touch the Lords Anointed.
  • Chap. VII. What is meant by touching the Lords Anointed.
  • Chap. VIII. That Kings now adays are to be had in the same veneration and [Page] esteem as the Kings of Judah and Israel were, notwithstanding our Christian liberty.
  • Chap. IX. That a King failing in his duty, and not performing those things which he hath sworn unto at his Coro­nation (so solemnly) yet the people are not dis-obliged in their obedience unto him.
  • Chap. X. Touch not mine Anointed, Psal. 105. meant by Princes, and not otherwise.
  • Chap. XI. The Objection of the ten Tribes revolting from Rehoboam, answered.
  • Chap. XII. The Objection of Jehu slay­ing his Master Joram, and taking the Kingdom upon him, answered.
  • Chap. XIII. A Discourse concerning the necessity and excellency of Monarchy.
  • Chap. XIV. That there is no such thing as a free State in the World.
  • Chap. XV. A Discourse concerning Episcopacy, proving it to be Jure Di­vino.

To the Reader.

Good Reader,

WE have lived to see our profession of Christianity, to have yielded some men arguments for their taking up Armes against their lawful Soveraigns and Goverment, certainly there hath been some violence used by them herein, or else this holy Religion could never afforded them such a Topick. Submission to our lawful Governours, not only for Wrath, but also for Conscience-sake, is the great duty and glory of our profession, whilest evil Religions prompt men to rapine, blood, and violence, Religio Christiana nil suadet nisi justum & lene. The Original and power of Kingly Government hath of late been much disputed, whether it be (as our Saviour spake of St. John's Baptism) from God or from men; this Author (I think) hath evinced the former, and if so, subjection is our duty; tis not male ad­ministration or persecution (as some men call it) can ever warrant the Subjects Arms against his Prince. The Christian Church gives no Example, nor our Re­ligion any precept for such undertakings; [Page] If it then be Religion (as some men would have us think) they fought for, why do they use unlawful weapons? must prayers and tears be turned into Pike and Musket because a Nero is thy Go­vernour? The Church of God knows no such usage, the legal dispensation it self, which will be acknowledged some­what harsh in respect of the Gospel, will not permit a holy David, tho a man after Gods own heart, to build his Tem­ple, for that he was a man of battel and his hands were bloody; peace, meekness, charity, and submission to our lawful Government, are the effects and true signs of real Christanity, the other is but spu­rious and Apocryphal. To inform our Reader of the rise of Kingly Govern­ment is the design of this pious Author, and to perswade us to subjection to our Civil as well as Ecclesiastick Governors, is the main intention and scope of his undertakings; which I hope (good Reader) by a due perusal of this small Book may be well attained as the thing it self is well made out by the Author, and so I leave thee to the use of the Book.

THE ORIGINAL OF GOVERNMENT.

CHAP. I. Who was the first Founder, or the first that instituted the Office of KINGS.

VVEE, say some People, were the first that desir'd them, and moved for them, and had them, and chose them. And all the people went to Gilgal, and there they made Saul King before the Lord in Gilgal. 1 Sam. 11.15. 1 Sam. 8.5.

Soft and fair, good people; do not mistake your selves; you desired, and moved for, and would have, and had a King, but God gave him you: I gave thee a King, O Israel, in mine anger, and I took him away in my wrath, Hosea 13.10, 11. According to this we read Acts 13.21. They desired a King, and God gave unto them Saul, &c. [Page] And for your making of a King at Gilgal, your making was but approving, and applauding him, that was made already; for Saul was both made a King, and confirmed King, and executed his Office, before the people are said to have mad [...] him King in Gilgal: He was anointed King over Israel, 1 Sam. 10.1. he was confirmed by signs, 1 Sam. 10.2, 3, 4, &c. he executed his Office, 1 Sam. 11.7, 8.

God first, sent.

And s [...]condly, shewed.

And thirdly, chose.

And fourthly, anointed.

And fifthly, found them out a King, before ever it is said, they made him.

First, God sent him; I will send thee a Man out of the Tribe of Benjamin, and thou shalt anoint him to be Captain over my people.

Secondly, God shewed him; for neither the people, nor any of the Saints, nor the Elders of Bethlehem, no, nor Samuel himself, knew not where to find this first of Kings, 'till God said, This is he, he shall reign over my people, 1 Sam. 9.17.

Thirdly, God chose him himself; and Samuel said to all the people, See him whom the Lord hath chosen, 1 Sam. 10.24. If the people had made him themselves, or could make him, what needed they to have come unto Samuel, to bid him, make us a King to judge us? 1 Sam. 8.5. and to say, give us a King? Which deprecation was indeed no otherwise, than as if they should have desired Samuel to have asked a King for them of the Lord; for so it seems by the sequel, [Page 3] for immediately hereupon Samuel went unto the Lord, and declared their importunity, and the Lord said, that he should hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they said unto him, verse 7. and this most certain and agreeable unto 1 Sam. 1. where Samuel tels the people; Ye have this day rejected your God, &c. and have said unto him, set a King over us

Fourthly, God anointed him; Samuel took a violl of Oyl and poured it on his head, and kissed him, and said, is it not because he hath anointed thee to be Captain over his Inheritance, 1 Sam 10.1.

Fifthly, God found him out for them, where he was hidden from them; for when all the Tribes of Israel were come together, and the Tribe of Benjamin was taken, and the families of that Tribe drew neer; and the family of Matri was taken out of those families, and Saul the son of Kish from thence: 1 Sam. 10.20, 21. (the smal­lest Tribe, the least family, the poorest Benjamite, as shewing us that Kings were not to have deri­vation from the mighty people but from the al­mighty God: 1 Sam. 9.21.) the people sought him but they could not find him, so that they were fain to enquire of the Lord for him, and the Lord shewed them where he had hid himself in the stuffe; 1 Sam. 12.22. so that all that the people of Israel had to doe, either in the Election, In­stitution, Nomination, Creation, or Invention of their first King, was (when God had done all this) to shout, and say, God save the King, 1 Sam. 10.24, and for their making a King, after all this in Gilgall, [...] it could be no otherwise than [Page 4] their approbation of him, who was thus made by God already.

Neither was God only the founder of the first King of the Jews, but of all the rest also: He was Davids founder too, I have found David my servant, with my holy Oyl have I anointed, him, Psal. 89.20. It was well for David, for he should have been but a poor King, if he had been but of the peoples finding; and it may be they would not have known what to have made of him when they had found him. David was not silius populi, but Dei, the son of God, not of the people: Psalm 89.26. He was neither exalted of the p [...]ople, nor chosen of the people, I have exalted one chosen out of the people, said God, (vers. 19.) but the exalta­tion was Gods, and the choice not of, but out of the people.

Kings are not children of the most voices, but children of the most high, Psal. 82.6. yet the ap­probation of the people may serve ad pompam, but not ad necessita [...]em; it may ad [...] something to the solemnity, but nothing to the essence of the constitution; what was divinely given, may be humanely received, and so are Kings.

Neither will we speak of the King, or the first of the Kings of Iudah or Israel, but we will go along with the first King that e're was read of (if there be not Books ancienter than the Books of Moses) and that was Melchisedec King of Salem: this Melchisedec is said to have neither Father nor Mother; it could not be said so in re­gard of his person, for we all know who he was, and who his Father and Mother were; he [Page 5] was Sem, the eldest Son of Noah, but it was said so, in respect of his Office; shewing us, that Kings, they are not the off-spring of men, but an emanation from the Deity, and teaching us, that as Kings are not of the Peoples making, so they ought not to be of the peoples marring, and as they are not the founders, so they ought not to be the confounders of them; cujus est in­stituere, ejus est abrogare, they that institute, may abrogate, they that make, may unmake, what thou buildest thy selfe, thou maist lawfully pull down; thou maist diruere edificare mutare, quadrata rotundis, but if thou destroyest that which another hath built, thou maist chance to be sued for dilapidations: If a Limner draw a picture, he may alter and change it, and if he dislike it, race it out at his pleasure; or if a

Carver or Ingraver mislike his one handy-work, he may destroy it when he pleases; but if God makes a man after his own Image, and creates him, after his own similitude, we offend God in a high degree, when we cut off, or deface the least part, or member of his handy-work.

Now Kings are lively representations, living statues, or pictures, drawn to the life, of the great Deity; these pictures, for their better continuance, are done in Oyl, the colours of the Crown never fade; they are no water colours; as Kings with their own statues will not be angry, though time and age devour them, yet they will not suffer them spite­fully to be thrown down, or shot against; so [Page 6] God, though he will suffer Kings to die like men, and fall like other Princes; yet he will not suffer his Character, spitefully to be raced, or his Image defaced; but though he will have them dye like men, yet he will have them live like Gods. And if all this be not proof suicffi­ent, you shall hear God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost affirm as much. God the Father plainly affirms▪ John 10.34. Dixi dii estis, I have said ye are Gods; but if the stroke had been in the People, then it should have been, Nos diximus dii estis, we have said ye are Gods. God the Son told Pilate, Thou shouldest have no power except it were (data desu­per) given from above; but if the people had given him that power, then it should have been, Thou shouldest have no power, except it were (data de­subter) given from beneath; and I am sure the Holy Ghost tels us, per me Reges regnant, by me Kings reign; but if they reigned by the suffrage of the People, then it should have been per nos, according to the modern dialect, they Reign by us, and as long as we think fit, and when we think it fit no longer, they shall reign no more; they received their authority from us, and we may recall it when we please, and depose them when we list; for they are but proxies and Atornies, of the people, see Buch. de jure Regni, Fickerus, & Renecherus, &c. little thinking how by this powerfull doctrine of theirs, they (quite contrary to the word of God) destroy the higher powers, and give the whole Trinity the lie at once: and if these testimonies are not [Page 7] sufficient, I know why they are not, because they never were confirmed by Act of Parliament

CHAP. II. Whether the People can make a King or not.

IF the Question be asked, whether the people doe make the King or not? I could no more grant it, then I should grant, that the people made heaven; but if you ask me, whether the people can make a King (such a one as they use to make) if they have not one already of Gods making, they may; such are Kings and no King; not Reges but Regentes ad placitum: Kings by Election, are allways Kings upon condition, an [...] where the condition is so little worth, the obligation is the lesse, and but small security will be required: for my own part I should be ashamed to ware a Crowne on my head, when the people must raigne, and the King stand under the penthouse: an [...] I had as live they should make me a jack a lent, for ap­prentices to throw their cudgels at me, as to make me a King to be controuled by their Masters, and every Tribune of the People; for as an invitation to a dinner where there is no meat, is but a distastfull banquet, so the name of a King without its adjuncts, is but a favourless renown; and in deed such as they are not Actu Reges, they do but agere Regem, they are not [Page 8] actual Kings, they doe but act the part of a King, and J hold him that acts the part of a King an hour upon the stage, to be as real a King for his time and territories as the b [...]st King by election, who is chosen but for his life; herein consists the difference, as the one must act his part as the Poets please, so the other must act his part as the people please; they must have their parts given them, they must act it accordingly▪ they must not so much as tread the Stage awry; their subjects are both spectators and judges, and it lies within the favour of the next society, whether or no the Son shall come to act the Fathers part. Such Kings as these the people may make, but to make a sacred and Anoynted King, an established and successive Monarch, a King that hath this Hereditatem in him, a King that hath this Noli me tangere about him; whose Writs were alwaies termed Sacri apices, whose commands divalis jussio, whose pre­sence Sacra Vestigia, whose Throne is the Lords, whose Scepter is his Rod, whose Crowne is his favour, and whose representation is of himselfe; the People can no more make such a deity then so many tapers can make a glorious Sunne, or so many sparks of sprey and faggots, can make a firmament of Stars▪

CHAP. III. What is meant by Anoynting of KINGS.

ANointing, in severall places of Scripture, betokens some spirituall grace, as Jam, 5.14 Call the Elders of the Church, and let them pray over the sicke, anoynting him with oyl in the name of the Lord: which the Roman-Catholicks call extream unction, though now adays, we only make use of the extremity and leave out the unction: and therefore some will have the anoynting of Kings to signifie some spirituall grace also, which shall inable them with Re­ligion and aptness to govern well; which when they cease to doe, their anointing falleth off, and they cease to be Kings; if they be not good, they are none of Gods anointed, and if they be not his anointed, they care not whose they are. This doctrine hath cause [...] the shedding of more bloud than there is now run­n [...]ng in the veins of living Christians; where­as the truth is, it is neither Religion, nor virtue, nor grace that is me [...]nt by this Royall Anointing; Cyrus was Chr [...]tus Domini ▪ as well as Josias, and Saul as well as David: If Religion were that that did the deed, then Cyrus had not been the Lords Anoyn [...]ed ▪ if vertue, then no Saul; if grace, neither: If Religion make Kings, then there should have been of old no Kings; but those of Iudah; and now no Kings, but those of Christendome. It is Jus regnandi that he meant [Page 10] by this Royal Anointing; and Ʋnction confers no grace, but declares a just title only; unxit in regem, he anointed him King, includes nothing but a due title, excludes nothing but usurpation; gives him the administration to govern, not the gift to govern well; the right of ruling, not of ruling right: Kings are anoynted with Oyl, to shew, that as they have Thrones to signifie that they are the Cistern of Iustice, and Crowns to sig­nifie that they are the Fountains of honours, and Scepters to signifie that the hands which hold them, are the Magazines wherein the whole strength & amunition of Kingdoms are reposed: So anointing is a sacred signature betokening soveraignty, obedience to the Throne, sub­mission [...]o the Scepter, allegiance to the Crown, and supremacy to the Oyl must needs be given, for Oyl will have it: pour Oyl and Wine, and Water, and Vinegar, or what other liquor you please together, Oyl will be sure to be up­permost: the three first ceremonies make him but high and mighty, and puissant, but the last on­ly makes him sacred, and therefore some have maintained that a King is mixta persona cum Sa­cerdote, whether he be so or no I will not here insist; but sure I am, that there is much divi­nity in the very name, and essence of Kings; which duly consi [...]ered and belived▪ that Kings are thus sacred (as we ought, and Gods word informs us) we would take heed how we touch, take warning how we tear and rend in peices, as much as in us lies (with those leaden Messengers of Death (with their gunpowder Commissions) [Page 11] to fetch the higher to the lower powers, and make the King a Subject to the subjects wills,) the sacred person of so great Majesty; whereas the cutting off but a peice of the lappe of [...]auls garment, hath checkt a greater spirit, then the proudest riser up against his Soveraigne: We would not speak so despicably of the Lords a­nointed; what is the King? he is but a man, he is but one he hath a soul to be saved as well as others; for though all this be true, yet the end for which all this is said, is most false and a [...]omi­nable, for though it be true that the King is but a man▪ yet it is also true, that that man is the light of Israel, 2 Kin. 8.19. We must take heed how we put it out. And though it be true, that such a piece of silver, is but a piece of silver, yet as it bears Cesars Image and superscription upon it, it is more significant; and if thou either pare or impare it a jot, if thou art found either clipping, or diminishing of it in the least degree, thou dost it to the prejudice of thine own life; so though a King be but a man as in himself, yet as he bears representation of God, and hath his character stamped upon him, he is some-what more, if you will beleive him that said Ye are Gods, Psalm 82.6. and therefore we must take heed how we debase or detract from them who represent so great a Deity, who by reason of their proximity and nearnesse unto God in some respects are most commonly of more discerning spirits then ordinary men: for Mephibosheth, when his servant had so grieviously slandred him to David, he makes but a short complaint. [Page 12] My servant hath slandred me; but (as if he should say, I need not tell thee much, thou hast wisedom enough to find it out) My Lord the King is as an Angel of God, doe therefore what is good in thine own eyes: Therefore because thou art as an Angel of God, and thy selfe art a good intelli­gencer, as all Angels are, do what is good in thine own eyes; as if he should have said, if thou doest only that which seemeth to be good in other mens eyes, it may be they will perswade thee that the thing was true, wherein my servant slandred thy servant poor Mephibosheth, and he huffer wrongfully. I am of opinion that God gives to every King to whom he communicates his name and authority, this extraordinary gift of discerning; but because they do not some times make use of it to the end it was bestowed upon them, viz. (the better goverment of their severall Dominions) but are contented to see and discerne with other mens eyes; and to have false spectacles put upon their noses, whereby many a good man suffers: God in his justice gives them over▪ that in their own particular, and wherein their own greatest good is chiefly concerned, they shall make least use of their own judgements and advice, and wholly give themselves to be overswayed by the advice of those, whose judgements perhaps is not so good as their own, and whose intentions (it may be) are no better then they should be.

It is written that the hearts of Kings are in the hands of the Lord, and he disposeth them as seemeth best to his heavenly wisdome; cer­tainly [Page 13] I would take a little advice from that heart, that is so directed by that hand; the Kings head never plotted treason against the Crown, and no man can wish better to his Majesty then the King. I speak not this in derogation either of the Great or Privy Councel (for it is written, in the multitude of councellors there is safety) but in defence only of these sons of Oyl, who are Supreme in both. And as it is true that the King is but one man, so it is also true, that one man is worth ten thousand of the people; Thou art worth ten thousands of us (though all his worthies were in place) 2 Sam. 18.3. And though it be true, that the King hath a soul to be saved as well as others, yet it is also true, that he should have no body to be crucified by his Sub­jects, out of their dis-esteem of his person, the ceremonies of State (as Anointing, sitting in Thrones, holding of Scepters, and coro­nation it self) being to be exploded now a days; and who look'd for it otherwise, when the lawful and decent ceremonies of the Church were called reliques of Popery, and raggs of the whore of Babilon: was it other­wise to be expected, but that they would call these ceremonies of state, theatrica pompa: Note: See Buch. de Jure Reg. Stage plays, Toyes: tush say they, what need all these Popperies, a Kings Throne is his [...]ustice, his Crown his Honour, his Scpeter and heifest strength, the peoples hearts; his holy Oyl is his Religion, [Page 14] and zeal to Gods Glory; and so it is, what then? may we not have the signs, and the things signified also? because the true receiv­ing of the Communion, is the receiving of the body, and blood of Christ by faith; therefore shall we have no bread and wine? Or because that true Baptism is the washing away of original sin, with the la [...]er of regeneration; therefore shall we have no water powred on the Child? we have Scripture for these cere­monies, and I am sure we have no Scripture for the abolishing of them, but rather Scrip­ture for their continuation for ever. Reges in solio collocat in perpetuum: God establishes Kings upon their Thrones for ever, Job. 36.7.

CHAP. IV. Why they are called the Lords Anointed.

THe Lords Anointed, is as much as to say the Lords Christ, and Christi signifieth Anointed ones: In the Hebrew you shall read it, who shall lay his hand upon the Lords Messiah? for the Lords Anointed. 1 Sam. 26.9. In the Greek, who can lay his hand upon the Lords Christ. Kings are taken into the society of Gods name, Dixi dii esti [...], I have said ye are Gods; and here into the society of Christs name, and all to terrifie subjects from lifting up their hands against the Lords Anointed, as much as if he were God or Christ himself.

Again, Kings are not termed uncti Domini (for that were no prerogative to them at all) [Page 15] but Christi Domini, for not only persons, but things also, were Anointed under the Law; not only Kings, but Priests and Prophets like­wise; neither did it rest there, but it extended to the Tabernacle it self, and ran down to the vessels thereof, even to the very Fireforks, Ashpans, and Snuffers: but unto whom said he any time, tu es Christus meus, Heb. 1.4, 5. but unto Christ, and Kings? to Christ once, Luke 2.26. to Kings thirty two times through­out the Bible; four times by God himself; Kings are called Christi mei, mine anointed; six times to God, Christi tui, thine anointed, ten times of God, Christi ejus, his anointed; twelve times in terms terminant, Christi Do­mini, the Lords anointed: and therefore the ol [...] Translator observed it rightly, when in the same word, in the Hebrew, and the Greek, he speaks of the priest, he translates it unctus; but when of the King (always) Christus.

And as they are not uncti, but Christi, so they are not Christi populi, but Christi Domini; not the peoples Anointed, but the Lords Anoint­ed; there may be a master of the ceremonies, but there must be no master of the substance; they are the Lord's Christs, and they hold their Kingdoms under him, in Kings service: neith [...]r are the Kingdoms of the Earth any bodies else but Gods: The Kingdoms are Gods, Dan. 4.17. neither are they at any mans dis­posing but his, He giveth them to whom he pleaseth, (loco citato) therefore for whose they are, they [Page 16] are the Lords; and for what they are, they may thank him and none else.

Secondly, They are the Lords, because that by him, an [...] in him, and through him, th [...]y have their Dominion, and regiment; from him they have their Crowns; from his hands their Coronation: Di [...]dema Regis in manu Dei, Esay 60.3. The [...]oyal Diadem is in the hand of God, and out of that hand he will not part with it so much, as for another, to place it upon the Kings head; but it must be tu posuisti (tu Domine) Thou, O Lord, hast set a Crown of pure Gold upon his head, Psal. 21.3.

The Emperours used to stamp their Coyn with a hand coming out of the clouds, holding a Crown, and placing it upon their heads; We have no such Hierogliphicks in our Coyn, as a hand coming out of a cloud; but we have grace from Heaven, D [...]i gratia, so that there is not a King but may say with the Apostle, Gratia Dei sum qui sum, by the grace of God▪ I am that I am; and indeed Kings are Kings, as Paul was an Apostle, not of men, neither by man, but by God.

Thirdly, they are the Lord's Christs; be­cause, not only their Crowns are in the hands of the Lord, but he puts the Scepter into theirs: nay, the Scepters which Princes hold in their hands, are Gods Scepters, being there, virga D [...]i in manibus ejus, It is Gods rod that is in their hands, Exod. 17.9. and therefore right is the Motto (and reason is it that they should be esteemed the Lords Anointed▪) [Page 17] DIEV ET MON DROIT, GOD AND MY RIGHT; none else have to do with it, the Scepter of a Kingdom, in the hands of a King, is the livery and seisin which is given him by God, of the whole Mili [...]ia, within his Do­minion: they that take away that, put a reed into the hand of Christs Anointed: and why should it be expected that they should deal otherwise with Christs Anointed, then they did with Christ himself, first put a Reed in his hand, and afterwards a Spear into his heart.

Fourthly, Kings are the Lords Anointed, because they sit upon his Throne: sedebat Solo­mon in Throno Dei, [...]olomon sate upon Gods Throne: 1 Chro. 29.23. but if Solomon should have lived in these our days, instead of his six steps to his great Throne of Gold, and Ivory, he should have six steppers to his Throne, for the Gold and Ivory sake; instead of having a foot-stool of Gold under his feet, he should have much ado to keep a Crown of pure Gold upon his head: instead of hands to stay his throne, he should have hands enough to pull it down, and cast it to the ground: and instead of two, and twelve Lyons fixed on cach side as a guard unto his Throne, he should have found many Lyons, without regard, running up and down, seek­ing how they might destroy him.

Lastly, Kings are the Lords Anointed, be­cause they are Anointed with his own oyl▪ Oleo sancto meo, with my holy Oyl have I anointed him, Psal. 89.20. It is not with any [Page 18] common, or vulgar Oyl, or Oyl that any lays claim to but himself: but it is Oleo meo, my oyl, neither is it oyl, that was fetch'd out of any common Shop, or Warehouse, but it is Oleo sancto, with holy oyl, oyl out of the Sanctuary: And no question but this is a main reason (if they would speak out) why some have such an aking tooth at the Sanctuaries, because they maintain in them, oyl for the anointing of Kings; but if the Alablaster box were broken, the ointment would soon be lost: If they could persuade the King out of the Church into the Barn, they would soon pull a Reed out of the thatch, to put into his hand instead of a Scepter; or if they could get him to hear Sermons under a hedge, there would not be materials wanting to make a Crown of thorns to plat it on his head. Thus you see the reasons why Kings are called the Lords Anointed, because the Lord hath appro­priated them unto himself, not in a common and general way, but in a particular and exclusive manner: my King, my Kingdom, my Crown, my Scepter, my Throne, my Oyl, where is there left any place for claim? Pride may thrust down Angels out of Heaven, and vio­lence may crucifie the Son of God; But (all these things considered) who can stretch forth his hand against the Lords Anointed, and be guilt­less? 1 Sam. 26.9.

CHAP. V. Whether bad Kings be the Lords Anoint­ed, or not.

THey are: for they are of the Lords sending, and appointment as well as the good. I will set an evil man to rule over them (saith God) and I gave them a King in mine anger, Hosea 13.11. which King was Saul, which Saul was a Tyrant, which Tyrant was the Lords Anointe [...] when he was at the worst. You cannot have two better witnesses then David, and the Holy Ghost, 1 Sam. 26. Cyrus was a Heathen Persian, and one that knew not God, yet for all that, Haec dicit Dominus, Cyro Christo meo, Thus saith the Lord to Cyrus mine Anointed; Esay 43.4. Nero was no good Em­perour, but a Monster of man-kind, yet Saint Peter, in whose days he wrote his Epistle▪ commanded all Christians to submit to him▪ 1 Pet. 2.13.

Hasael, whom the Lord fore-saw, and fore-shewed unto his Prophet Elisha, to be the destroyer of his people of Israel, and one, that should make them like the dust by thres [...]ing, 2 Kings 13.7. one that will set their strong holds on fire, slay their young men with the sword, dash their chil­dren against the wall, and rip up their women with child; insomuch that it made the Prophet weep to foresee all the miseries that should happen, [Page 20] 2 King. 8.12. insomuch that it made Hasael himself (when he was told thereof) cry out, is thy servant a Dogg, that he should do all these things? vers. 13. yet for all this, Go [...] will have him to be King, and it be put to scourge his people, the Lord hath shewed m [...] that thou shalt be King over Syria▪ vers. 13.

Julian when from his Christianity, he fell to flat Pagani [...]m, yet this Anointing held, no Christian ever sought, no Preacher ever taught to touch him, or resist him in the least degree; for whilst the cruel and bloody Emperours were persecuting the poor Christians, they were fitting their necks for the Yoke, and teaching one another postures, how they might stand fairest for the stroke of Death. And this was not quia deerant vires, because they could not help it; for the greatest part of Julians Army, and the most part of his Empire were Christians: For saith Tertullian in his apologetical defence of the Christians of those times, una nox pauculis faculis, &c. One night with a few firebrands will yield us sufficient revenge, if we durst, by reason of our Christian obligation, and shews how they neither wanted forces, or num­bers and that neither the Moors, or the Persians or any other Nation whatsoever, were more mighty, or more populous than they: and how they filled all places, Towns, Cities, Imperial Palaces, Senates, and Seats of Judgment; and that they could do any thing, in their revenge, if it were any thing lawful; but this Anointing was the thing that kept the swelling down, and hindred the [Page 21] corrupt humours from gathering to a head: And therefore it is not as Stephanus Junius, Franciscus Hottomanus, Georgius Buchananus, Ficklerus [...] Renecheru [...], with the rest of the pillars of the Puritan Anarchy, do answer (being gra [...]el'd at the practice of the primi­tive Chri [...]tians, an [...] those precepts of the holy Apostl [...]) that the Church then (as it were swathed in the bonds of weakness) had not strength enough to make powerful resistance; and therefore, so the one taught, and the other obeyed, but if this doctrine were allowable, then would inevitably follow these two gross absu [...]dities.

1. That the pen of the holy Ghost (which taught submission even to the worst of Kings) was not directed according to the equity of the thing, but the necessity of the times.

2. That either the holy Ghost must turn Politician, and become a timeserver, or else the Church must lose the means of its being, and substance. Whereas we know the contrary so well, that when Acies Ecclesi [...]e, was so far from its bene ordin [...]ta, that w [...]en all the Soul­diers fled, and the Life-guard [...]outed, the Lord of [...]ost (the General himself) taken Prisoner, yet then, like the Sun looking biggest in lowest estate, so the son of righteousness, think ye not that I can pray unto my Father, and he will send Legions of Angels; and rath [...]r than Gods chil­dren shall be oppressed by a company of Egyptians (if it be his pleasure to deliver them) he can, without the drawing of one Sword, [Page 22] turn Rivers into blood, produce an Army of Froggs to destroy them: and rather than they should be necessitated for lack of means, send swarms of Flies, that may serve them in the stead of so many rescuing Angels, and there­fore it was not any necessity, that the Church was, or could be in, that procured in the Apo [...]tl [...]s, or the first Christians, either that doctrine, or that use; it was not disability, but duty; not want of strength, but a reve­rend regard of the Lords Anointed, that wrought these effects in both: Let the people be never so many and mighty, and the Princes of the people never so wicked and cruel, mos gerendus est, we must obey them; not in the performance of their unjust commands; but in submission to their just authority; if not by our active, yet by our passive obedience: if not for their own sakes yet propter Dominum, for the Lords sake; if not for wrath, yet for conscience sake, Rom. 13.5. If it goeth against thy conscience, say, as the people were wont to say, when they fell down before the Ass that carried the Image of the God [...]ess Isis, upon his back, non tibi sed Religioni; if thy con­science condemns thee, God is greater than thy conscience, and we must look what he com­mands, as well as what she dictates; the one may be mislead, the other cannot mislead; sacrifice may be either pleasing, or displeasing to the Lord, but obedience was never faulty; thou maist offer the sacrifice of fools, when thou thinkest thou doest well: but upon how [Page 23] sure grounds goes he, who can say with the prophet in all his actions, If I have gone a stray, O Lord, thou hast caused me to erre? never devi­ating from the express of his word. Now God gives us express command, that we should not touch his Anointed what condition soever they are of: Nolite Tang [...]re Christos meos, touch not mine anointe [...]; an [...] where Gods rules are general, we must not put in exceptions of our own; for the wickedness of a King can no more make void Gods ordinance, of our obe­dience unto him, then mans unbelief can frustrate Gods decree in us, Rom. 3.3. Let Saul be wicked, an [...] let wicked Saul be but once Anointed, David states the question neither concerning Saul, nor▪ his wickedness, but whether he being the Lords anointed (there's the business) it is lawful to stretch forth a hand against him (Who can stretch forth his hand against the Lords Anointed and be guiltless? 1 Sam. 26.9.

CHAP. VI. Whether upon any pretences whatsoever it be lawful to depose, murder, or so much as to touch the Lords Anointed.

Note: 1 Sam. 24.5.THere was the first time that ever it was put to the Vote, whether a King might be put to death or not, but it [Page 24] was resolved upon the question in that Parlia­ment; Ne perdas, destroy him not; it is well that David had a negative voice, or else it had been but a bad president for Kings; it is well that the men with whom David had this par­ley, would hearken unto reason, and let that sway them, otherwise David might have been forced to fly as fast away from his own men as he did at first from Saul: for there wanted no Lay-preachers then, to preach the destruction and slaughter of Princes, under the pretences of wicked Government and tyranny; who had the trick then, as well as now, to couch their foul meaning in good words and Scripture phrase, with a dixit Dominus, when the Lord said no such thing; as Davids Zealots, 1 Sam. 24.5. This is the day whereof the Lord said unto thee, I will deliver thine Enemy into thine hand, and thou shalt do unto him (what?) as shall seem good unto thee, that is thou shalt murder him, that was their meaning: though the word was a good word; and we do not read where the Lord said any such thing at all: So Abishai, 1 Sam. 26.8. God hath delivered thine enemy into [...]hine hand: what then? Therefore let me smite him; no such matter; David denies the conse­quence, as if he should have said, God hath de­livered him into my hand, but I will make no such bad use of his deliverance, I had rather hereby shew him his own error, and my in­nocency▪ then any way stretch forth my hand against him, for he is the Lords Anointed, and when sleep had betrayed Saul to Davids power [Page 25] in the trench, and made the King a subject for Davids innocence, he esteemed himself but as a Patridg in the Wilderness, when he might have caught the Eagle in the Nest: he pacified Sauls Anger, by inabling his power to hurt, sent him his spear (it seems he did not think it fit to keep the Kings Militia in his hands) and humbly beggs, Let not my blood fall to the earth; when, if it had not been for David, Abishai would have smiten Saul unto the earth at once, so that he needed not to have smitten him the second time, but David would not: destroy him not saith he, and his reason was, Quis potest? Who can stretch forth his hand against the Lords Anointed, and be guiltless?

Another most Notable demonstration of Davids innocency, and subjection, unto a hard Master, a most tyrannical King, cruel Saul; we have, 1 Sam. 24. When in the Cave of Engildi, David might have cut off Sauls head; like precious oyntment, he descends only to the skirts of his garment, and with a Quid feci? checks himself, and beshrews his heart that he had done so much, and upon a little looking back of Saul (as if he had put on rays of Majesty) David bows, and stoops with his face to the earth to him, when he might have laid his honour in the dust; call'd him my Father; when that Father came to sacrifice him upon the mountains, and (Isaac-like) nothing but See my Father, when he could see nothing but fire, and sword, and himself also the lamb, ready for the sacrifice, A true Isacc (though [Page 26] many young men staid behind with the Ass) will after his father, though he have fire in the one hand and a knife in the other, ready for to sacrifice his follower; A right David, and he that is a man after Gods own heart, though he could bite to death, and knaw into the very bowels of his Soveraign, yet he will assume no farther power to hurt, than to the biting of a Flea; after whom is the King of Israel come out? After a Flea? Afte [...] whom doth Saul pursue? After a dead Dog? When he might have caught the Lion in the toyle. I could easily be endless in instances of the like nature, as our Saviour Christs obedience to the death, under the raign of Tiberius; his Disciples un [...]er Nero, Claudius and Caligula, whose govern­ments were opposite to the propagation of the Gospel, as themselves were enemies to the propagators of it; yet we see they neither attempted the alteration of the one, or the destruction of the other; yet Christ could do much if he pleased, and if the Napkins of Saint Paul, and the shadow of Saint Peter could cure diseases; if a word out of their mouths could strike men and women dead in the place; if an oration at the Bar, could make a King tremble on the Bench, then surely you will confess that his Disciples could do something: Yet nothing was done or at­tempted against those wicked, cruel, and pagan Emperours, one instance shall suffice for all: what mischief or injury could be done more to a people, then Nebuchadonozer King of Babylon [Page 27] did unto the Jews, who slew their King, their Noble, their Parents, their Children, and kinsfolks; burn [...]d their Country, their Cities, their Jerusalem, their Temple, and carried the residue (who were left alive) Captives with him to Babylon. And now behold (then) Nebu­chadonozers good subjects: will you hear what advice the Prophet Daniel gives them for all this? Baruch 1.11. Pray you for the life of Ne­buchadonozer King of Babylon, and for the life of Balthazer his son, that their days may be upon earth, as the days of Heaven, and the Lord will give us strength; (what to do? to wage War against him?) and lighten our eyes (what, with new Revelations how they may be reveng'd? O no) that we may live under the shadow of Ne­buchadonozer King of Babylon, and under the shadow of Balthazer his son, and that we may serve them many days and find favour in their sight, truly shewing that a King is Alkum, Prov. 30.31. one, against whom there is no rising up; that is, not upon any pretences whatsoever: there can be no pretences whatsoever more fair and specious; then those of defending the Church, and redressing the Common-wealth. For the first; if Religion be any thing pushed at, think you that Rebellion will keep it up, or that it ever stood in need of such hands? when God refused to have his Temple built by David, because he was a fighter of the Lords Battels; think you that he will have his Church de­fended by fighters against the Lords Anointed? to defend Religion by Rebellion, were to defend [Page 28] it by means condemned, by the same Religion we would desend; an [...] to reform or redress the Common-wealth, by Insurrection and Re­bellion, were to rectifie an errour with the greatest of all mischiefs; no government worse than a Civil War, and the wor [...] Go [...]ernour is always better than the best Rebellion: Re­bellion is as the sin of witchcr [...]ft, and stubborness is as Idolatry: and how perilous a thing it is, for the Feet to judge the Head, the subjects to chose wha [...] government and Governours they will have; to condemn what, and whom they please, to make what pretences and sur­mises they have a mind to, this Kingdom by woful experience hath had sad resentments. Imbecillities and weaknesses in Princes, are on arguments for the chastisements, deposing, or murdering of Kings; for then giddy heads will never want matter or pretences to cloak their Rebellion: Shall Moses, because Pharaoh was an oppressour of Gods people, and had hardned his heart, and would not let the Israe­lites depart, therefore inflict punishments upon Pharaoh, or so much as depart without his leave? Though Moses could inflict punishments upon the whole Land, yet his Commission never went so far, as to touch Pharaoh, in the least degree; though swarms of Flies came into the house of Pharaoh, and Frogs entred into the Kings chamber; yet we read not that they seized on Pharaohs person; there were Lice in all their Quarters saith the Psalmist, and there became Lice in man and beast, upon the smit­ing [Page 29] on the dust, but none were smitten of the person of the King: Boyls and blains were upon all the Egyptians and upon the Magicians, so sore, as they could not [...]and in the presence of Pharaoh, but they were not on Pharaoh, that he could not stand himself; Pharaoh his eldest son may die, but Vivat Rex, Pharaoh must not b [...] touch'd. Did bsalom do well to conspire again [...] his Father, though he defiled Ʋriahs bed, and cloaked adultery with murther? should the Priest, Peers, Prophets, or People, offer to depose Solomon, because he had brought strange Wives into the Land, and as strange Religion into the Church? shall Elias entice Ahabs subjects to Rebellion, because he suffered Jezabel to put Naboth to death, and killed the Lords Prophets? shall Peter take vengeance upon Herod because he put him in prison, be­headed John the Baptist, and killed James? shall Reuben be no Patriarch, because he was unstable as water? shall Simeon and Levi lose their Patriarchal dignity, because they were brethren in iniquity, and instruments of cruel­ty, because in their anger they slew a man, and in their self-will digged down a wall? shall Judah be depose [...] from his rule and go­vernment for making a bargain with an Harlot upon the high way? shall Issachar not be numbred amongst the other twelve, because he was none of the wisest? no reason; they were Patriarchs as well as the rest, which was the immediate government before Kings; and (indeed) were princes themselves: Princeps [Page 30] Dei es inter nos, Gen. 28.6. Thou art a mighty Prince amongst us: and thus much shall suffice (and I hope sufficient) to shew, that no faults or pretences whatsoever, can make it lawful to depose, or so much as to touch the Lords Annointed.

CHAP. VII. What is meant by touching the Lords An­nointed, or stretching forth the hand against the Lords Anointed.

NOt dare to touch the Lords Annointed, is an awfull reverence, and a supposed difference to be kept, between every subject and his Soveraign; esp [...]cially in point of violence. A Mother doubting the discretion of her Chil­dren, and being to leave some curious looking▪ glass in a place, doth not comand her Children they should not break it, but that they should not touch it; knowing full well, that if they have the liberty to meddle with it in the least degree, they make break it before they are aware, and destroy it when they think least of any such matter. So God is very chary of his King, wherein he beholds the representatio [...] of himself, and [...]nowing him to be but brittle and though the most refined Earth, yet bu [...] glass: he commands his people that they [Page 31] should not touch his Anointed; knowing that if they were permitted but to tamper with him in the least degree, their rude hands may break it in pieces, when they do but think to set it right.

A touch is but of one man, though but with one of his fingers, yet this must not be; Nolite tangere, it is not said ne tangere, wherein only the act of touching is forbidden, but No­lite tangere, whereby the will is also prohi­bited: how wary should we be in touching, when the Lord is so cautious in his prohibi­tion?

Now stretching forth the hand may signifie a combination of many into one confederacy, the hand being a part of the body, composed of five members (one and all) but this must not be: a most unhappy instrument is that hand that turns it self into the bowels of its own body; if the head break out by chance, the hands must not presently be in the head clawing, with invenomed nails, the corruption there, lest that itching desire, turn into smart in the end▪ lest when the peaceable day springing from on high, shall happily visit you, that now sit in dark­nesse and in the shadow of death, we then see our bloody hands, and this (once happy) kingdom, the only pillow, whereon peace had laid her head, streamed (like the Egyptian River) all with blood. In a word, by touching the Lords Anointed, or by stretching forth the hands a­gainst him, is meant any kind of violence that is used against sacred Majesty, and the signifi­cation [Page 32] thereof is of a large extent▪ for we stretch forth our han [...]s when we do but lift up our heels in scorn against him; Who so lifteth up his heel, Psalm. 41.9.

Secondly, We stretch forth our han [...]s again [...]t the Lords Anointed, wh [...]n we do but raise up Arms in our own defence; Whoso­ever resisteth the power, resisteth the Ordinance of God, and draweth Damnation upon himself. Rom. 3.

Thirdly, We stretch forth our hands a­gain [...]t the Lords Anointed, when we stretch not our Tongue and Voice, when we hear of any Traiterous plots or conspiracies against the Lords Anointe [...], and so bring such con­spiracies to light: It is a foul thing to hear the voice of conspiracy, and not to utter it: Lev. 5.1. as good lay thy hand upon the Lords Anointed, as lay thy hand upon thy Mouth and conceal the T [...]eason.

Fourthly, We stretch forth our hands a­gainst the Lords Anointed, when we do not stretch forth our hands for the Lords A­nointed, when we see him assaulted with any danger, or Traiterous opposings. Should a man see his Father fiercely assaulte [...], and should not presently run to his rescue, but should suffer him to be slain before his face, would we not equally exclaim against him with the murtherers, Qui non Vetat peccare Quum potest, jubet; he bids, that doth not forbid with all his power (like a true son) [Page 33] such outrages and violences, to be committed against the Father of his Country.

Fifthly, We touch the Lords Anointed, when we touch his Crown and Dignity; intrench upon his Regalia; hol [...] or with­hold his sons or daughters, kill or take pri­soners his men of War▪ We must take heed of [...]efacing the garment, as well as of hurting the person, for they are both Sacred; the precious Oyn [...]ment, wet not Aarons head alone, but it ran down upon his Beard, and down unto the skirts of his garment, making all Sacred that was about him; such touch­ings t [...]erefore are worse, than when we touch the person with the greatest violence; for then the Ano [...]nte [...] are mo [...]t touche [...], w [...]en they are touch [...]d where the Anointe [...] is, which is their [...]tate and Crown, dearer to them than their lives; touch bot [...], [...]e mur [...]er of the per­son, is but a consequence to the d [...]posement of the dignity.

Sixthly, we touch the Lords Anointed, when we take away h [...]s re [...]enue and li [...]el [...] ­hood from him, the Devil thought that he ha [...] stretched forth his hand excee [...]in [...]ly again [...]t Job, touch'd (and touch [...]d him to the quick) when he had procured Gods per­mission, that the Sabeans and Caldeans should take away his Oxen and Asses, his S [...]eep and Camels, and plundered him of all he had; God called this a destraction unto Jo [...], Job 2.3. and that before ever a hand was [Page 34] stretched forth to touch either his bone, or his flesh.

Seventhly. Is there no stroke but what the hand gives? Yes, the tongue can strike as well as the best: Jer. tells us so, Venite percuti­amus cum lingua: come let us smite him with the tongue, Jer. 18, 18. and David said, His tongue was a two edged sword: There is, (saith Solomon) that speaketh (and that waiteth too) like the piercing of a sword: It is bad enough in any, or against any man, but worst of all again [...]t the Lords Anointed; for it is said Thou shalt not re­vile the Gods, nor speak evil of the Ruler of the People: Saint Paul, but for calling of a High Priest, painted wall, (though) when he caused him to be smitten Contrary to the Law, yet he eat his words and confessed his error; and now many, that would seem to be followers of Paul, are revilers of Kings and make no bones there­of. The same God that commanded Laban, in respect of his servant, Vide ne quid lo [...]uare durius, see thou give no ill language, certainly expects that [...]ubjects should set a watch before their mouths, to keep the door of their lips, lest they offend with their tongue, in speaking ill of Princes.

Eighthly, As the tongue can strike without a hand, so the heart can curse without a tongue: Eccl. 10.2. Curse not the King, no not in thy heart, for a Bird in the air shall carry the voice, and that which hath wings shall [...]ll the matter. The hand implies both; [Page 35] never was the hand stretched forth to any evil act, but the h [...]art was th [...] p [...]ivy Coun­sellor, and the tongue the chief p [...]rswader unto such enormities; therefore it is goo [...], obstare princi [...]iis, to cru [...]h the cockatrice egg, kill it in the hea [...]t, lest those pravae cogi [...]ati [...]es want room, and then out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh, and per­swades the hand to be the destruction of the whole body: If hand, and heart, and tongue, and pen where thus regulated, we need not long look for peace, or despair of an accom­modation, but whilst the hand is up, and the heart is set at liberty, and the tongue saith, Our tongues are our own, we, ought to speak, who is Lord over us? and every pen is a ready writer in matters pertaining to the King: in vain it is to seem Christians, whil [...]t we are such Antichrists: the Bible under our arm, falls to the ground, whil [...]t we stretch forth our hand against the Lords Anointed: why do we take Gods word into our mouthes if we let it not down into our hearts, to do as that directs us? Christian liberty never cut the string, that tied the tongue to those observances. Of these things there might be applications made, but lapping as they go along is best for doggs, where there are Crocodiles in the River.

It seems by the story, that Kings may be coursely dealt withal if men make no bones of being guilty; they stand like the forbidden Tree, in the midst of the Paradise of God, m [...]n [Page 36] may touch them, but they had better let them alone; if God had placed (at the first) Cheru­bims, and a flaming sword, turning every way to defend the tree, how could there have been a trial of Adams obedience? So if God by some instinct, had chained the hearts of men, and tied their hands, and bound them to the peace, so that they could neither in thought, word, nor deed, have committed violence against his Vicegerent, how could there have been a trial of the Subjects duty? the Tree had no guard, nor fence about it, but only, thou shalt not eat thereof, if thou doest, thou shalt surely die the death, Princes have no better security for themselves, than the Almighties command for their preservation, [...]olite Tangere, &c. Touch not mine Anointed; to break the First, was but death, the second is damnation; if thou resist the higher powers, you resist the highest God, and he that resi [...]teth shall be damned, Romans 13.2. The commandment concerning the Tree of Paradise, was only thou shalt not eat thereof; but we are forbidden to touch so much as a leaf of our forbidden tree, much less to shake down all his fruit; there is hopes of a tree, saith Job, that if it be cut down, yet it will sprout again, but not only a finger, a hand, but an axe must be laid to the root of the tall Cedar of our Libanus; yea, they must be root­ed up like the names of Taronius; they will not leave so much as a stump of Nebuchadnez­zers tree chain'd to the earth; up must all root and branch, till all the royal branches lie like [Page 37] sprey upon the ground: these men had rather be destroyed themselves, than say the Lords Anointed is not to be destroyed. Go ye blind Zelots, hearken to your Wives, and let them perswade you to disobedience, and the Devil them, as Eve did Adam, and the Devil her: behold the objects she presents unto your view; how good they seem, how fair they look, how pleasant they are to thine eye, how wise you think you sha [...] [...]e, how full of knowledg, when poor wretches, you shall find all these promises tu [...]ned into Fig-leaves, to hide your naked­ness: all these golden Apples of Palestine once toucht, evaporated into stench and blindness, and that your disobedience hath given you nothing but curses, and brought you nothing but sorrows and Death upon your selves and children, and profited you nothing but the turning of an Edom into a Wilderness, till you be glad to eat the herbs of the field, and by the same fault, fall into the same punishment with our neighbours of Germany, dye with grass in your mouths. These things fell upon Adam for his disobedience unto God, and the like will fall upon us (the sons of Adam) for our disobe­dience unto Gods Anointed. O then let us not by any means lift up our hands against the Lords Anointed, lest (like Adam) we fall from our state of innocence, and be guilty: guilty of all the blood that hath, and shall be spilt upon this Land, guilty of the tears of so many fatherless children and widowes: and if we will not be obedient unto a Prince of men, [Page 38] guilty of all the eternal thraldom and sub­mission unto a Prince of Devils: take then the advice of the wise Solomon, Prov. 30.32. If thou hast done foolishly in lifting up thy self, or if thou hast thought evil, lay thy hand upon thy mouth: Fear God, honour the King, have nothing to do with them that are subject unto charge, for their destruction commeth suddainly; and so will yours. Let no man deceive himself, he who is not good in his particular calling, can never be good in his general calling. He is no good man, that is no good servant, and if he be no good subject, he is no goo [...] Christian, he that honoureth not the King, doth never fear God; and except he obeys both, he obeys neither.

CHAP. VIII. Whether Kings now adays are to be had in the same veneration and esteem, as Kings were under the Law, by reason of our Christian liberty.

CErtainly the murmuring of Co [...]ah, Da­than and Abiram, with their complices; Thou seekest to make thy self altogether a Prince over us, the Lord is among us, we are all alike holy unto the Lord, (and therefore Moses and Aaron must be no more excellent than the rest of the people) was no prophesie to be fulfilled in these [Page 39] our days; for if it had, surely our Saviour would never have paid tribute for himself and Peter, Mat. 17.27. which was a symbole of their subjection to heathen pagans; for this cause pay ye tribute, Rom. 13.6. we have those who are apt enough to mak [...] arguments with our Sa­viour, bearing this conclusion, then are the Children free, Mat. 17.26. but few that will imitate his peaceable example, to fish for money, rather than offend the higher powers, Mat. 17.27. And if you conjecture that our Saviour did this meerly for quietness sake, behold the question [...] rightly stated▪ Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar or not? Mat. 22.17. seriously propounded (Master we know that thou art true (an [...] therefore we hope thou wilt not deceive us with a lye) and teachest the way of God in truth (and therefore thou wilt not cause us to err through the deceiveableness of unrighteousness) neither carest thou for any man (and therefore thou wilt not be afraid to speak the truth) thou regardest not the persons of men) therefore fearing only God, thou wilt boldly, and faithfully without partiality, or fear, plainly tell us, whether it be lawful or not) clearly deter­mined and concluded upon; Da Caesari quae sunt Caesaris, Mat. 22.21.

If Christian liberty, should loose the reigns of Civil Government, then Christ would never have acknowledged Pilates power to have been of God, John 19.11. If subjection unto Kings were a hinderance to the propagation of the Gospel, then Saint Peter would never [Page 40] have exhorted the Christians to submit them­selves to every ordinance of man. 1 Pet. 2.9. We have too many submitters now-adays unto every Ordinance of men, but they are not unto such Ordinances, whereof the King is Supreme, 1 Pet. 2.13.

Object. It is better to obey God than man, and therefore for his sake we cannot obey every ordinance of man.

Sol. The Apostle doth not in this place discourse of obedience, but of submission: obedience is to be given to things, only law­ful; submission is to be given to any ordinance whatsoever, though not for the things sake, which is commanded, yet propter Dominum, for the Lords sake who doth command, so absolute submission: where God commands one thing, and the King comman [...]s another thing, we may refuse his will, and there is perfect obe­dience; when God commands one thing, and the King commands the contrary, we may not resist his authority, and therein is true sub­misson; and this the Apostle doth not only assure us to be the will of God, but puts this well doing in the stead of knowledg and wisdom, whereby the ignorance of foolish men may be put to silence, 1 Pet. 2.15. when fre [...]dom stan [...]s on tiptoes, her coat is too short to cover her maliciousness, therefore the Apostle exhorts us to behave our selves As free, but not using our liberty, as a cloak for maliciousness, 1 Pet. 2.16.

[Page 41]If Christian liberty did break the School of civil Government, then Saint Paul would never have been such a School-master to the Romans, Rom. 13. Let every Soul be subject to the higher powers: an excellent rule for our obedience, every soul, no exemption by great­ness, or holiness, or any by-respect whatso­ever, but if he have a soul, let him be subject to the higher powers: if two powers clash one against another, here we know which to stick to in our obedience, that is, which is highest (and that Saint Peter plainly t [...]lls us is the King, whether to the King as Supreme, 1 Pet. 2.13.) There is no power but of God, the powers that be, are of God, whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God, and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation, v. 2. What Christian then can have his conscience so misled, as to resist those powers out of con­science, when the Apostle plainly tells us, v. 1. We must needs be subject, not only for wrath (that is, for fear of them) but also for conscience sake, because God commanded it.

There were Anti-monarchists, and Anti-dignitarians even in the Apostles time, but if it had been laudable, or agreeable to Chri [...]tian liberty, then Saint Jude in his Epistle v. 8. would never have called the despisers of Dominion and evil speakers of Dignities, filthy dreamers and defilers of the flesh (as he put them, so we find them both together) he never would have compare [...] them to bruit beasts, v. 10. he never would have pronounced woes unto [Page 42] them, as unto the goers into the ways of Cain: greedy runners after the error of Balaam, for reward; and perishers (as in the gain-saying of Corah) v. 11. he would never have compared them to clouds without water: carried about with wind: to fruitless wretched Trees, twice dead, plucked up by the roots: to raging waves of the Sea, foaming out their own shame: wandring stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever, ver. 12.13. he never would have de­scribed them unto you so fully, to be Murmurers, Complainers, walkers after their own lusts, wide mouth'd, speakers of great swelling words, having of mens persons in admiration, by reason of ad­vantage, separatists, sensual, (and though they pretend never so much unto it) having not the spirit, v. 16.19.

Christian liberty frees from the ceremony of the Law, not from the substance of the Gospel: whereof we see submission and subjection unto Kings, is a great part thereof. The Roman yoke, and the Romans hands which held the plough ploughing upon the Christians backs, and made long furrowes, and for a long time, were both adverse to the propagation of Christs Gospel; yet during all that time, neither Christ, nor any of his Disciples, ever attempted either the change of the one, or the displaying of the other; and shall we think our selves more wise than he, who is the wisdom of the Father? Or better advised than by him, who is the everlasting councellour? Or that any mans doctrine can [Page 43] settle us in more peace and quietness than he, who is princeps pa [...]is, the Prince of peace? will you have more Orthodox Fathers than the Apostles? or the Children of this generation to be wiser than the Fathers of old? Christ and his Apostles with all the antient Fathers taught, and subscribed to this doctrine. First, Christ, Da Caesari quae sunt Caesaris: then Saint Paul, Render to all their due, tribute to whom tribute is due, custom to whom custom, fear to whom fear, honour to whom honour, and all to Caesar: Then St. Peter, submit your selves, &c. Fear God▪ honour the King, &c. Sic passim in Scripturis.

Dear Christians, are we better pleased with the glittering tin [...]el of a painted Baby from a Pedlers shop, than with the rich, and inestimabl [...] Jewels of Divine truth? will we suffer our s [...]lves to be cozene [...] with the g [...]lded slips of error? and what Enthusi [...]smes every pretended spirit, if not ev [...]ry [...]obler, Weaver, Groom, or Coach-man, shall dictate, who are but velut ign [...]ae, and velut status, as it were of fire, or as it were a mighty an [...] [...]ushing wind, but nothing sensible, some hot exhalations of the brain set on fire, by th [...] continual motion, an [...] agitation of the tongue. Goo [...] God, have we thus learnt Christ? Is this the fruit of so clear a Gospel? and the retu [...]n of all our holy mothers care, and pains for Education? shall we take Gods word into our mouths and preach Sedition, Rebellion and Insur [...]ection, contrary to that word which we pretend to [Page 44] preach? to maintain Religion by Insurrection, is to maintain it by means, condemned by the same Religion we would maintain.

CHAP. IX. Whether a King failing in his duty and not performing those things, which he hath sworn unto at his Coronation (so solemnly) the Peo [...]le are not disobliged in their obedience unto him, and may, thereupon, depose or put him to death.

IF Kings held their Crowns by Indentures from the People, then were the People disobliged to their obedience unto him, upon his failing (in those things whereto he hath been sworn) on his part, but if they receive their Crowns immediatly from God, and that by him alone Kings Reign (as hath been hereto­fore proved at large) then all the failings that can be in a King▪ can but make him a bad King; but still he must remain a King; the Oath assures us of his being a King, not of his being a good King; for he was King before he took it: Coronation is but a ceremony, and his Oath is but at his Coronation; the issue of ceremony, must not dis-inherit the right heir, of all that substance: King and Kingdom, are like man and wife, whose marriages are made [Page 45] in Heaven, who are betrothed by God himself; Now as in the ceremony between man and woman, the husband in the presence of God and Angels, and all the Congregation pro­miseth (which is as solemnly binding as any Oath) that he will live together with her after Gods holy Ordinance in the sta [...] of matrimony, that he will love and cherish her, maintain and keep her, and forsaking all other, keep him­self only unto her: Now if he perform all these things, he doth well, he is both a good husband, and a good Christian (considering the vow that he hath made) but if he doth not live with her according to Gods holy Or­dinance, nor love, nor cherish her as he should, nor maintain and keep her as he ought; Shall it be lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? Mat. 19.3. much less can it be lawful for the wife to put away her husband upon every distaste; It was God that made them male and female: Mat. 19.4. and there­fore it is fit they should continue together so; They twain are but one flesh; Mat. 19▪5. there­fore they cannot be divided; God joyned them both together: Mat. 19.6. therefore no man can put them assun [...]er. Now to apply this to the King wedding himself to his People at his Coronation; the King (solemnly) takes his Oath at his Coronation before all the People, that he will live tog [...]ther with them according to the Laws of the Land, that he will protect and defend them to the uttermost of his [...]ower, with all other protestations contained in the [Page 46] said Oath; which if he doth perform, he doth well, and is both a good man, and a good King; but if he should not govern them ac­cordingly to the Laws of the Land, and if he should not cherish and defend his People, shall it be lawful for his wife [...]o make away this husband? God forbid! God made him King, them Subjects, therefore they must con­tinue so, like man and wife, for better for worse, they two are both one, the head may not be divided from the body, and quae Deus con­junxit, nemo separet; there have been Bills of divorcement given unto these King-husbands in former times: but of those Bills, I may say, as our blessed Saviour said of the Bills of di­vorcement which Moses commanded; it was propter duri [...]iem cordis, Mat. 19.7. Deut. 24.1. for the hardness of mens hearts; and then again, this durities cordis, never went so far as that the woman might put away her husband, but only the husband his wife▪ and that only in the case of Adultery; and if it had been otherwise, it had but a late beginning, a bad foundation: for our Saviour saith, Mat. 19.8. In principio autem non erat sic, It was not so from the beginning; and a hard heart is but a bad foundation for a good Christian to build upon. I will con­clude this application with words not of my own, but of Saint Paul, which words are a commandement, Neither is it I (saith the Apostle) 1 Cor. 7.10. but the Lord, that gives you this commandement, Let not the wife depart from her husband; no, if she be an heretique, [Page 47] or which is worse, a heathen; If the woman hath a busband which believeth not, i [...] he be pleased to dwell with her let her not leave him: 1 Cor. 7.13. If I would resist my Soveraign in any kind, it should be for my Religion, but when my Religion tells me that I must not resist him in any case; then I think I should but do (in doing so) like the boasting Jew, Rom. 2.13. who boasted of the Law, and dishonoured God through breaking of that Law, which he had boasted of: What if some did not believe, shall their unbelief make the faith of God of none effect? saith Paul▪ Rom. 3.3. God forbid: no more can the wickedness of a King, make void Gods Ordinance of our obedience unto him: our obedience must look upon Gods command, not upon the Kings good behaviour; God doth not command things because they are fitting, but it is fit that we should obey, because he commands them; neither ought we to have respect so much unto the goodness, as unto the Authority of a King; for Kings do not consist in this, that they are good, but in this, that they are Kings; for as it is possible for one to be a good man, and a bad King, so it is often seen, that a bad man may be a good King; and it is an observation here at hom [...], that the best Laws have been made by the worst of Kings. It is an observation, that divers King­doms have long continued in peace and hap­piness under bad Laws, and worse Governours. Well observed; when unwarrantable attempts to better both, and inconsiderable courses to [Page 48] mend all, hath brought all to ruin and con­fusion. He that sets a Kingdom in combustion, to advance his own opinion, and prefer his private judgment, doth but set his house on fire to roast his Eggs.

God makes Kings of several conditions, sometimes he gives a King, whose wisdom and reach in Government is like Sauls, head and shoulders higher then all the People: And then when we have wise Kings, and learned Judges, Psal. 2.10. we shall be sure to have all those Breakers of their bonds asunder, and those casters away of their cords from them; v. 5. to be bruised with a Rod of Iron, and broken in pieces like a Potters vessel; v. 9.

Sometimes God will send us a little child, sometimes a child in years, otherwhile a child in understanding, which of both it be, Vae regno (saith Solomon) cui puer dominabitur; wo to the Kingdom, over which a child Reigns, for then the whole Kingdom is sure to be put upon the rack. Sometimes God in his judgment sends a Tyrant amongst us, I will set an evil man to rule over them, saith God himself, and then we are never in hope to be from under the lash; and sometimes in mercy he sends meek and mild Princes (like Moses) who carried his People in his bosom, one that shall only make use of his Prerogatives, as Christ did of his miracles in cases of necessity; one who shall say with the Apostle Saint Paul, I have no power to do hurt, but to do good, to edification but not to destruction: one who shall continue his [Page 49] Reign, as Saul began, Videre ne quid sit populo, quod fleat, who will hear and ask why do the People cry? deserve well and have well; shall we receive good from the hands of the Lord, and shall we not receive evil Princes? though they be amarae sagittae, yet when we consider that they are e dulci manu domini emissae, we should not refuse them, but be contented with whomsoever his mercy or his justice sen [...]s▪ or throws upon us: Never was there a bad Prince over any People, but he was sent by our hea­venly Father for a scourge to his chil [...]ren; and shall we kiss, or snatch the Rod out of our Fathers hand? To conclude, there is nothing can disoblidge the people from their King, be­cause bis Authority over them is a domino, from the Lord, but their obedience towards him is propter dominum, for the Lords sake; though in himself there be all the reasons that can be given to the contrary, many will be glad to hear the Father of their Country, say, I and the Lord will go, and to be sole elect, and to hear his Father tell him, deus providebit, as Abraham said to his Son Isaac; but if he takes fire and sword in hand threatning his follower, how many followers will he have? I had rather, with Isaac, follow my Father I know not where­fore; and with Abraham, obey my God, con­trary to my own nature, and beyond all hope, then to serve so great a God and his Vicegerent by rules drawn by my own fancy and reason.

CHAP. X.

Psal. 105.15.

Touch not mine Anointed, meant by KINGS.

BY the words, Touch not mine Anointed, is meant Kings and Princes: neither can any other interpretation, whatsoever, be ob­truded upon this Text, without a great deal of impudence and ignorance; If there were no other argument to be used but this, to a modest man, it were sufficient, viz. That not any Church, nor any Church-men, nor any Chri [...]tian, nor any Father, nor any Expositor whatsoever, did ever give it any other inter­pretation, before such time as the Jesuit and the Puritan, and they both at a time, and that time bearing not above an hundred yeers date neither, began to teach the world that it was lawful to murther Kings; and no marvel if this found some querk or other to turn the stream of Scripture sence, out of its proper channel, and constant course; the two Birds of a Feather, persecutors of one another, like two fighting Cocks who quarrel amongst themselves, being both of the same kind, and yet both agree in taking counsel together against the Lord, and against his Anointed: or like Pilate and Herod, they could not agree [Page 51] but in the principles of condemning the Lords Christ.

But it is objected, that as a little child upon a Gyants shoulders, may see farther then the Gyant himself; so a weaker understanding comming aft [...]r those Fathers, and taking ad­vantage of such helps, getting up upon the shoulders of time and learning, may see more then they did, or hath been seen in former ages; and therefore it is no wonder, if a man with­out aspersing himself with the least immodesty, may pretend to see more, then all those who went before him had observed, and what hath this child pick-a-pocket spied? a Birds-neast can there be a simpler thing imagined▪ where­by to give impudence the chair, and throw all the Ancient Fathers flat upon their backs, then this so common, and so much approv'd of in­stance to usher innovation, not only into the Church, but also into the very soul of Scrip­ture it self? for what if it be granted, that a child upon a Gyants shoulders sees further then doth the Gyant himself, doth the child know better what he sees then doth the said Gyant? must not the child ask the Gyant what is what, of all that he beholds? must not the child be informed by the knowing Gyant, of the dif­ference between the mountains and the valleys, the water and the skie, a cock and a bull? if the child be thus ignorant, what doth the childs getting up upon the Gyants shoulders advantage the child in points of controversie? except it be such a child as Saint Christopher had [Page 52] got upon his shoulders, that was Judg of all the World: if the child be not so simple, but understands all these things; then believe me he is no chil [...] in understanding; but a Gyant himself in knowledge, an [...] so the similitude, the child, and the Gyant come tumbling all down together; seat a child n [...]ver so high, he is but a child still, and sits but at the feet of a Gamaliel, when he is upon the [...]houlders of a Gyant; no child was ever thought worthy to pose all the Doctors, but the Child Jesus.

Now to clear the Text from those blots and blurs that are thrown upon the words, going before this Text of Scripture, Touch not mine Anointed, viz. I have reproved Kings for their sakes, Ergo, the word Anointed could not be­token Kings, because Kings were reproved, for their sakes who were the Lords Anointed: now say they, the word Anointed must neces­sarily signifie the people of God, for whose sake these Kings were reproved, and so it doth; but yet my Corahmites, Dathamites, and Abira­mites, you must not think to be all alike holy unto the Lord, as that ye are all concern'd in this nolite tangere: There is no question but that in some sence the elect of God are anointed ones of the Lord, but not peculiarly the Lords Anointed: they are filii olii, sons of oyl, as the Prophet terms them, but not Christi mei, or Christi tui, or Christi ejus, or Christi Domini, which were attribut [...]s that were never given by the holy Ghost to any but to Christ, and Kings: the Priests who were anointed (really) [Page 53] never were term'd in Scripture the Lords A­nointed, an [...] the prou [...]e [...]t, and most rebel­lious people that ever [...]ere, whose arrogance claim'd an equality with, never (in sacris) strove to be above their Prie [...]s. Now if you expect clearness in the fountain, do not ye trouble the waters, an [...] you h [...] behol [...] the springs of truth arise; 'twas the elect and chosen of the Lord that were here meant by anointed, and it was the fee [...] of Abraham, and it was not Kings that were meant by this word anointed in the Text▪ But it was not all the elect of God, that must not be touch'd, it was not all the seed of Abraham who have this noli me tangere about them, but it was Abraham, Is [...]a [...] and Jacob, for whose sake God reproved Kings, as they are plainly nominated in the same Psalm, and none else; if there be mention made of the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were the seed of Abraham; who were else mentioned? and though we cannot comprehend these three under the notion of nominal Kings, yet we may be pleased to consider them as real Princes, Principi Dei es enter nos, as it was said to Abra­ham, thou art a mighty Prince among [...]t us, so Kings may be reproved for their sakes; they may be Kings too, and yet the Lords Anointed, for whose sake Kings were reproved: for we do not dispute about the name, but the thing. Now wheresoever you find this word nolite tangere, you shall find this word, saying, going before it, which of necessity must have some reference to some other place of Scripture to [Page 54] which it must allude, and in reference to which it must be spoken: for the word, saying, makes it rather a question of some Author, then the Psalmist's own, this allusion you may easily perceive, Gen. 26.11. where it is set down, how that God touched the heart of Abimelech King of the Philistims, in the behalf of Isaac, one of the three named in the Psalm; so that King Abimelech charged all his people, saying, He that toucheth this man, shall surely die: So Abimelech and King Herod were both reproved for Abrahams sake: Gen. 12.10. And to what place of Scripture can this nolite tangere be more aptly applyed, then to this, where we find the same words reiterated? Or what clearer testimony can be given of the Scrip­tures alluding to this saying, Touch not mine Anointed, then to Gen▪ 16.29. where totidem verbis, it is said to Abimelech in the behalf of Isaac, We have not touched thee thou blessed of the Lord; what difference between these words, And touch not mine Anointed.

Besides the Marginal notes of all our Bibles directs us to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, as to the Anointed of the Lord, and as the Princes of Gods people, which must not be touch'd and for whose sakes Kings were so much re­proved; the word, King, in the Text, doth not exclude those who were Princes, but it only in­cludes those Princes who were called Kings, and were reproved for their sakes who were Kings them­selves re, though not nomine: so that all the ground that will be gained hereby, will be, that [Page 55] one Prince was reproved for another, though not called Kings.

To conclu [...]e, as no Christians ever inter­preted this place of [...]cripture but of Kings and Princes, until Jesuits and Puritans, un [...]er­took that it is lawful to murther Kings: So no English Author ever interpret [...]d it otherwise, till within this seven or eight years; when Presbyters and Independents began to put this doctrin in execution: and if the former of these two would wash their hands in innocency, as relating to this last unparallel'd act of Re­gicide, let them remember CHARLES the Proto-Martyr of Gods Church, and People, His own words, in his Book of Meditations, wherein He tells them, ‘How vain is the shift of their pleading exemption from that asper­sion, to grant Commission for shooting of bul­lets of Iron and Lead in his face, and preserving him in a Parenthesis of words.’

CHAP. XI.

Objection.

REhoboam hearkened unto young men which gave him evil counsel, and would not hearken unto his sages which gave him good advice, but answered the people roughly; wherefore they renounced the right they had in David, and the inheritance they [Page 56] had in the son of Jesse, fled to their Tents, and Crowned Jeroboam King: Ergo, we may do the like upon the like occasion, having a president from the word of God, and warran­table, because God said, This thing was from the Lord, 1 King. 13.8.

Answer.

All this proves only that such a thing was done, not that it was well done; for if it be a sufficient proof to prove out of Scripture, that such a thing was done▪ and thereupon conclude that therefore we may do the like, then this is as good an argument as the best, Judas betrayed Christ, therefore it is lawful for a servant to betray his Lord and Master; first, the Scripture blames him in a most pathe­tical climax, 1 Kings 11.26. Jeroboam the son of Nebat, the servant of [...]olomon, whose mo­thers name was Zeruah, even he lifted up his hand against the King, shewing how he had desper­ately run through all those obligations, and tyes that were upon him; Secondly, he and all his adherents are called Rebels for their pains, not only by Abijah his enemy, but also by the holy Ghost, who is enemy to none who are not Gods enemies, 2 Chron. 10.19. And Israel Rebelled against the house of David unto this day; his adherents were termed in Scripture vain men, and sons of Belial, they were pu­nished with a destruction of five hundred thou­sand of them, which was one hundred thou­sand [Page 57] more then there were true Subjects for the slaughter; the Scripture saith, God smote Abraham, v. 5. If it be objected, that the thing could not but be well done, because God saith, 1 Kings 14. I exalted thee from among the people, and made thee Prince over my people Israel, and rent the Kingdom from the house of David, and gave it thee: then it could not but be well do [...] [...]nts of Rehoboam (by the same reason) to ans▪ the people as he did: for it is written, that Rehoboam hearkened not unto the people, for the cause was from God, that he might perform the saying which he spake by Abijah unto Jeroboam the son of Nebat, 1 Kings 12.15. Both were passive, and neither of them could resist the will of God; but these places of Scripture are often times mistaken, and misapplyed, and interpreted either by those who are not well acquainted with the nature of Scripture language, or else by those who wilfully, [...]nd wickedly layed hold of such a meaning as the Scripture may seem to give them leave, for all these and the like places of Scripture we must not take as Gods bene placence or appro­bation, but only for his permission; for other­wise we should make a mad piece of work of it, for God said, 1 Sam. 12.11. I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house, and I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them to thy neighbour, and he shall lye with them in the sight of the sun: doth this justifie Absolom for lying with his Fathers wives and concubines in the sight of all Israel? Is there any evil that I have [Page 58] not done it, saith the Lord? therefore did the Citizens do well to do evil, because the Lord said, I did it? God did it, that is to say, he caused it to be done, as the evil of punishment, not as the tolleration of evil, so this thing was from the Lord, that is to say, the Lord suffered such a thing to come to pass as a punishment of Solomon for his Idolatry on his posterity, and yet [...]ay no way approve of any such Rebellious courses: neither was Rehoboam so much to be blamed for his answer, as may be supposed, nor the people justified in their Rebellion neither, for they grounded their discontents upon a false ground, for the people complained when there was no cause, and deman [...]ed that which was not reason; hear the whole grie­vance, and consider it a little, 1 Kings 12.4. Thy father made our yoke grievous (that was false) do thou make it light: (no reason for that) for the people never lived happier neither before nor after, then they did in this Kings Fathers time, and might have done in his time, if they had known when they had been well, and Gods judgments would have suffered them to have seen it. For,

1. They were a populous Nation, as the sand on the Sea for multitude, 1 Kings 4.20.

2. They liv'd merrily, eating and drinking, and making merry.

3. The Nation was honoured abroad, for Solo­mon reigned over all the Kings that were round about him, v. 21.

[Page 59]4. They lived peaceably, they had peace in all sides round about them v. 24.

5. They liv'd securely and quietly, every man under his own Vine, and under his own fig-tree.

6. They had much Trading in his days, and much merchandize, 1 Kings 10.15.

7. He was very beneficial to those Merchants, for he gave Solomon, not only large wisdom, but largeness of heart, and let those Merchants have commodities from them at a price, v. 28.

8. He maintained a brave fleet at Sea, 1 King. 4.21.

9. He made silver and gold to be in Jerusalem as plentiful as stones, and Cedars as Sicamore-trees, 2 Chron. 1.16.

10. These felicities were not only in the Court, or among the Nobility, or between the Citizens, but they were universal, even from Dan unto Beersheba.

11. They were not for a spurt and no more, or at one time and not at another; but all the days of Solomon.

O me prope lassum juvate posteri.

Neither doth the Scripture make any men­tion of any such hard yoke at all, only the margent of the Bible directs us from the com­plaint of the people, to look upon the first Chapter of the Kings, v. 7. and there you shall only find how Solomon had twelve Officers over all Israel, which provided victuals for the King and his houshold, each man his month [Page 60] in a year, but here is but a very slender ground for a quarrel, when the immediate verse after the naming of those twelve officers tells us, that the multitude of people as num­berless as the sand upon the [...]ea shore, were as merry eating and drinking as the King, and this place unto which we are directed (and no other) to find out this grievousness, appears by the context of the same Chapter, to be mentione [...] as an expression of Solomons glory and wisdom, rather then of any tyranny, or polling of his people: for the whole rela­tion ends with an expression that as the people were as the sand of the Sea for number, so the largeness of the Kings heart extended as the largeness of the Sea for bounty, all were partakers of it, 1 Kings 4.29. Pardon me therefore if I think that Rehoboam had more reason to answer the people as he did, then the people had just reason to complain. O alti­ [...]udo! O the unsearchable ways of God! where God suffers his people to be a rod to visit the sins of the fathers upon the children, he per­mits them to take a wrong cause in hand, that he may also cast the rod into the fire.

I pray God the Merchants of London be not too like those Merchants of Jerusalem, who Traded so long, until they brought over, toge­ther with other Merchandize, Apes and Pea­cocks, and the Traders begin to be too like their traffique, Apes for manners and beha­viour, Peacocks for pride, and rusling until [Page 61] the Apes grow to be so unhappy, as to be brought to their chains, and the Peacocks, so vain-glorious, as to loose their feathers: and so I leave them both, tasting the fruit of their own follies.

CHAP. XII. The Objection of Jehu slaying his Master Joram, Answered.

Objection.

THus saith the Lord God of Israel, I have Anointed thee Jehu King over the people of the Lord, even over Israel, and thou shalt smi [...]e the house of Ahab thy, Master, that I may avenge the blood of all the servants of the Lord at the hands of Jezebel: Ergo, if a King, be thus wicked, we have Gods warrant, for the deposing and putting such a one to death.

Answer.

But stay until you have this warrant, and then we will allow it to be lawful; for though every one is apt enough to be a Jehu in his own case, yet every one is not a God-almighty, we must not clap his Seal to our own [...]arrants; what God commands at one time, we are not to make it our warrant to do the like at all [Page 62] times, this is a prerogative of the Almighty, no priviledg of a Subject; God may command Abraham to slay his son▪ but we must not go about to murther our children; God may com­mand the Israelites to spoil the Egyptians, but we must not Rob and Cosen our n [...]ighbours; Christ may give order for the taking away of another mans goods, because the Lord hath need of it, but we must not make necessity our pretence for Arbitrary power; these acts of the Almighty are specially belonging unto him, and we must have his special warrant before we go about any such thing.

But setting all such plea aside, I utterly deny that either Jehu did, or that God gave Jehu any such authority as to slay King Joram, Jehu slew Joram, but Jehu did not slay the King, for Jehu by the Lords immediate appointment was King himself, before ever he laid hand upon Joram; Joram was but then a private man, for in the verses going before, it is set down how that Jehu was Anointed King, how he was so proclaimed, and accordingly how he took the state of a King upon him and executed the Office. 2 Kings 12.13. before ever any mention is made of Jehu slaying Joram, v. 14. therefore here is no regicidium, as yet here is but plain man-slaughter, and a lusty warrant for that too: again, we must not only take heed of unwarrantable actions, but of false warrants, the private spirit is no sufficient warrant to lay hold on such a publique Ma­gistrate: as there are false Magistrates so there [Page 63] is a false spirit: for an erroneous spirit may as well con [...]emn a good Magistrate as a bad Ma­gistrate may be condemned by a good spirit: but there may be a higher mistake then all this, and I wish it were not too common amongst us now adays, to mistake the works of the flesh, for the fruit of the spirit: Let us compare them both together, as the Apostle hath set them in order.

The works of the flesh.
  • Adultery, Fornication,
  • Ʋncleanness Laciviousness,
  • Idolatry, Witchcraft,
  • Hatred, Variance,
  • Emulations, Wrath,
  • Strife, Seditions,
  • Heresies, Envyings,
  • Murders, Drunkenness,
  • Revellings.
The fruit of the Spirit.
  • Love,
  • Joy,
  • Peace,
  • Long suffering,
  • Gentleness,
  • Goodness,
  • Faith,
  • Meekness,
  • Temperance.

By which of these two was CHARLES the First's Head cut off?

CHAP. XIII. Of the Necessity and Excellency of Monarchy.

A Jove principium. Let us begin with Heaven, and behold its Monarchy in the unity of the blessed Trinity; though there be three persons, yet there must be but one God: for the avoiding of that which we are fallen into, a confounding of p [...]rsons, and dividing of substance. Descend lower, and consider the Angels, and you shall find one Arch-angel above the rest, as the Angels Monarch. Lower yet, to those senseless and inanimate Rulers of the Day and Night, the Sun and Moon, and you shall not find (or so much as the appearance of such a thing) more Suns or Moons in the same firmament then one; without a prodigy or portent, of some dire, and direful event. Come down to the Regions and you shall find in the head of the highest Region a Prince of the air. Come to the lowest, and you shall find amongst the wing [...]d inhabitants thereof, the Soveraign Eagle, as the King of Birds. Come amongst the Beasts of the field, and the Lion will soon let you know, that there is a King of Beasts. Run into the Sea, and their is a King of Fishes. [Page 65] Descend into Hell and there is a Prince of Devils: and shall only man be Independent? Do we not observe the d [...]lving Labourer what pains he takes to joyn house to house, and land to land, till th [...]re be no more room for any competitor within his Dominions; and when he hath wrought his petty dunghils into a mixen, he thinks it Law and Reason, that the place should not a [...]mit the Dominion of more Cocks then one, this man dies a Monarch in his own thoughts, and his son lives to in­large his fathers Teritories, but at last dies big with thoughts of a principality, his son lays hold of all the advantages that may help him to the accomplishment of his hereditary desires, Iuno, Lucina fer opem obsecro, he is a Prince, Coelo timendum est Regna ne summa occupet qui vicit ima, he must be an Emperour, Divisum imperium cum Iove Caesar habet, he must have all or none, none but Iupiter must share with him. Mundus non sufficit un [...]s, when he hath all, and when all is done, the Empire after that it hath disimbogu'd an [...] incorporated into it self, all the Kingdoms of the earth, terminates in an everlasting Kingdom, that shall never be destroyed; quam primum appro­pinquaverit regnum Coelorum, as soon as the Kingdom of Heaven shall be at hand: and what's all this but to shew us that not only nature, but God himself, who is the God of Nature, affects Monarchy. The further off any government is to Monarchy, the worse it is, the nearer the better, the reason's thus, that [Page 66] Government which avoids most the occasion of differences, must be most happy, because most peaceable; and peace only consi [...]ts in unity: now where there are many Governours there must be differences: where there are few, there may be differences: where there is but one, there cannot.

The Romans ▪ when they shook off their Government by Kings, and were distasted with their Government, for their Governours sake; tried all the contraverted Governments of the world, of two by their Consuls, of three by their Triumvirat, of ten by their Decemviri, of ten thousand by their Tribunes: when they found that the farther off they departed from Monarchy, the Center of all Government, the more they lost themselves in the circum­ference of their own affairs, they began a little to look back upon the Government from which they had deviated all the while, but yet with squint eyes; first, a King, and no King, a thing that was like a King, but not a King; a thing that was so re, and tempore, but not nomine; he must be only so, pro una vice, uno (que) anno, such were their dictators: at last this sucking Government gathered strength, and grew to be perpetual, which perpetuity in one begot an everlasting Monarchy in all ages, which is to continue unto the end of the world▪ for the Proph [...]t Daniel tells us, that at the end of the la [...] and fourth Monarchy, which was the Roman, Christ should sit upon his everlasting Kingdom that should never be destroyed; [Page 67] therefore my Enthusiasticks, must either leave dreaming of pulling down all Kingdoms, and Empires in the world, or else think themselves the Kingdom of Christ, that we have pray'd for all along.

Neither is it unworthy of your observation, that as soon as ever this Monarchy was re­stored, there was universal peace over the whole world; and the Saviour of the world, who was Princeps pacis, vouchsafed not to come into the world, under any of the fore-men­tioned governments; but Imperante Augusto natus est Christus, who was the first Emperour of the Romans. He who affects parity, let him begin it in his own house, and as he likes it in the model, so let him attempt it in the fabrick: for my part, I have read their argu­ments, and am so far from being evinced by any of them, that I do not believe that there is any such thing: [...] have been in all the Com­mon-wealths in Europe, and I could not find any such thing as a Free State, I could find the word Libertas, fairly written over their Gates, but within their Walls the greatest Bondage and arbitrary power that could possibly be imagined in any part of the world, but no Liberty at all that I could find, but only some few there were, who had liberty to do what they would with all the rest. Geneva may of six, Genoa may have seven, Venice may have eight, the Hollanders nine or ten, England may have five Members or Leading-men as they call them; but what's all this but taking the [Page 68] Government from off its shoulders, and put­ting it in some hand? And when you have done, it's ten to one but you shall find one of the fingers longer then all the re [...]t, and if you please you may call that King, and all the rest subjects; what's this but a change from a Mo­narchy with one Crown, to a Tyranny with so many heads? If it were so that all Free-States, as they call themselves, had all equal power, it would be so much the worse, all these kinds of Government have their con­tinuation and subsistance upon this only ground, viz, that necessity and craft drive them to come so near to Monarchy, and sometimes to an absolute Monarchy, when you reckon your Hogan Mogan only by the pole, and not by the polar star, that commonly is fixed amongst them, about which, all the rest move and turn. But what do we talk of Monarchy or Aristo­cracy or Democracy, behold a well regulated Parliament, such a one as ours might have been, and ought to be; hath the benefit and goodness that is in all these three kind of Governments, of Monarchy in the King, of Aristocracy in the Peers, of Democracy in the House of Commons, where the acerbities of any one is taken away by their being all three together, but if one will be all, then all will be nothing. This stupendiously wise▪ and Noble way of Government had its dissolution by inverting the course it took in its original. When the first William had conquered the Na­tion, t [...]e Normans would not admit that any [Page 69] Laws should be observed, or rules obeyed, but only the will of the Conquerour; and why so? but because thereby the Conquerour might take away the Estates of any English-man, and give them to the Conquering Normans; But in pro­cess of time; when these Normans became English, they began to insist a little upon meum and tuum, and would know the what that was belonging to the King, as a King, and to them­selves as Subjects; for by the former rule the King might as well take away the Estates from one Norman, and give it to another, as he did formerly from the English, and give to his Normans; wherefore they would have no more of that, but joyntly and unanimously Petition­ed the King to the same effect, the King thought it reasonable, condescends to their desires, consultation was about the premises, the result of the Consultation was, that the King should issue out Writs to the Lords Spiri­tual (who in those days were thought the wisest and most Conscientious) to reason with the King, and advise with him, as well concerning the bounding of the Ocean of Soveraignty, as bridling in the petty Rivers of private in­terest. These Spiritual Lords thought it a work of too high a nature for their private undertakings, wherefore they supplicated his Majesty, that the Lords Temporal might be also summoned by Writ, and joyn with them in the same Authority; 'twas done accordingly; being done, they both thought it a business so transcendent, and of so universal concern­ment, [Page 70] that they found a way to involve the whole Nation in a joynt consent, which was, that all Free-holders in the Kingdom, in their several precincts, might by the election of two in every County, disembogue all their suffrages into theirs, and to remain the Countries prox­ies, to Vote for, and to be directed by their several Countries; and thus the Commons were brought in: but behold the Viper, that eats through the sides of its own Parents be­hold the Asses foal, who when she hath done sucking, kicks her own dam.

The King brings in the Lords Spiritual, the Lords Spiritual bring in the Lords Tem­poral, both bring in the Commons, the Com­mons destroy both, both destroy the King. Neither was Kingship (as they call it) and Episcopacy better rewarded, for being the principal, and so zealous Reformers of the Gospel, to have both their Crowns and Miters broke in pieces by the same hammer of refor­mation; and the walls of their Pallaces ming­led with Abby dust, casting thereby such a blot upon the very name of Reformation, that it will scarce be legible by Christians, except what went before, and what may follow after, may help the future ages to the true sence and meaning of the word: thus Rivers run back­wards and drown their own Head; thus the monsterous Children who are born with teeth in their mouths, bite off the nipple, and starve themselves for lack of sustenance; thus blind [Page 71] Sampsons revenge themselves upon their ene­mies, by pulling down the house upon their own heads; thus the forms of the most glorious government of a Church and State, are wounded to death through the sides of Refor­mation: If you are not, I am sure you will ere it be long be satisfied, that all the specious pretences of popular Goverment, Free-State, Liberty of the Subject▪ are but figments and delusions of the people, obtruded by vain-g [...]orious and haughty men, who knowing that they could not be that one Governour of all the rest, yet they hope to be one of many; thus foolish children set their fathers barns full of Corn on fire to warm their hands, when they are ready to starve for lack of bread: who had not rather live under a Government wherein a man is only bound to submit to him, whom it is honour to obey, then to live under a Government where every man is a slave, because every one is a Master? Finally, my opinion is this, I had rather have my liberty to kneel before a Throne, then to be the tallest man in a crowd, and should think it more for my ease and honour.

CHAP. XIV. That there is no such thing as a Free-State in the World.

IF by a Free-State, you mean a people who have shook off their Allegiance to their Prince, there are many such Free-States to be found, but a beggars-bush, or a company of Gipsies (who propound to themselves new Laws) renouncing the old, and yet chuse a King and Queen amongst themselves, pleasing one another with a self-conceited opinion of a thing they call Liberty, which is no other­wise then an ignoble bondage of their own choosing, preferring the correction of a bundle of rods (because their own hands have made them) before the sway-meant of a Scepter, which God himself hath put into their Sove­raigns hand) is as good a Common-wealth, or Free-State as the best: but if you mean by a Free-State, a freedom from Tyranny, you will be as far to seek for any such thing in rerum natura, as for a reason why tyranny may not be in many, as well as in one: But if you mean by freedom an exemption from all such tyrannical oppressions as are expressed in the Petition of Right; I see not why such a Free-State may not be under a Monarchy: certainly [Page 73] I have seen such Petitions, and insistan­ces, during the late Kings Reign, as ha­ving relation to Freeborn people of Eng­land, and should think that the Magna Charta defended by one, who had power to make it good against the infringement of many breakers, and by a Parliament of many, authorized to the same purpose against the pessundation of it by any one, be it by the highest, may not be as good a way to make, preserve and keep a Na­tion free, as well as the intrusting of a Nations freedom into the hands of a few, whose Independency deny all remedies to be either above them, or below them. It may be it will not be thought tedious, if I entertain your eye and consideration with some Observations of my own, in those Free-States of Christendom (as they call themselves) wherein I have been. I shall begin with the Free-State of Genoa, wherein I have been resident some time, and the rather, because whilst England was a Kingdom, they could not have the face to stand in any competition with us; but now the Kings arms were cut off as well as his head, how should we do to make a distinction between them and us? for both the State of Genoa, and the State of England give the very same Coat of Arms, and St. George is both our patrons: Certainly England must give the Half­moon as the younger brother; and why [Page 74] should not the Moon Crescent follow after, now the Turkish Alcoran is come be­fore?

When the overspreading Roman Monar­chy, like Nebuchadnezzars over-grown and lofty Tree was brought only to a stump chained to the ground, and when the Keys of Heaven and Hell had so well fitted the locks belonging to the Gates of Rome, as to give way to the enterance of that high Priest into the Imperial seat, then was Genoa a lop of that great fall: and soon after it was wrought into a bundle or faggot of a Common-wealth, until such time as Charles the Great reco­vered all his Right in Italy, saving only the Holy Land, whose Princely sword could never strike at the already cloven Miters, but at Helmets.

Amongst other Counties whose subdue­ments, acknowledged Charles to be the Great, Genoa was one; which City was no less happy then famous, in affording a man who honoured her Walls, with ma­king it known unto the World, that he came out of them under the name of An­dreas Dory a Genose; this famous Andreas Dory was a zealous Common-wealths-man, and one of the new Gentlemen, as they call'd themselves, (for you must under­stand, [Page 75] that when these States-men had shook off the yoke of Soveraignty, they expelled all their Gentry or Nobility; which no sooner done, but they made a new Gentry or Nobility amongst them­selves) and being a deserving man, the Emperour Charles the fifth, will'd this Andreas Dory to aske and have what he desired of all that he had Conquered: he asked Genoa, the Emperour gave it him, to do with it what he pleased, he gave it the Citizens, together with all their Li­berties, and former Freedoms upon this conditions, That they should recal the old Gentry in again, and settle them again in all their rights and priviledges, which being assented unto, Genoa became a Free-State again; but behold the Freedom, or rather the power and bonds of love and gratitude, neither the old or new Gentry, nor the Common people, would allow of any thing that was said or to be done, but what this Dory should command or say: nor was there a more absolute and power­ful Monarch upon the earth then he; and whilst he liv'd he did continue so, because the people would obey: who being once dead, the people soon found they did obey, because they must: Yet still it must be a Free-State, because Libertas was written over the Senate-House, and City-gates, but neither within their Senate, or their [Page 76] Walls, was there ever such Tyranny over the common people, or the Citizens, then hath been all along, and is at this day practised by some few, who spit Monarchy in the face, and make no bones to swallow down all its adjuncts? Exercising their several Tyrannies with this justification, that they are the Supreme Authority, whilst they deny Supremacy; gulling the people into a scotish belief, that they are not suppressed by one hand, because it hath many fingers.

I shall instance unto you one particu­lar, which was done whilst I was there, whereby you may easily Judge in what Free-state their Commons live: There was a substantial Citizen, between whom, and a Noble Genoese there was some grudge, this Senator studies a revenge, and thus he intends it to be put Execution.

He gives command to one of his Braves (for so they call their Executioners) to kill this Citizen: this Slaughter-man (be­ing by reason of some former Obligations) struck with some remorse of doing so high an act of ingratitude to one, who had so well deserved at his hands; discovers the whole plot to his so much acknowledg'd patron, who very much ackowledges [Page 77] and commends the ingenuity of this dis­coverer; bids him to follow him where [...]e leads him over a trap, where the leader knew full well how to order his steps, so that he might advance safely over the place, but the followers (ignorant of these Observations) must needs fall down a precipice, no less terrible, then destru­ctive; the poor man is slain: this per­sidious murderer watches his opportunity of meeting this designer of his death, in the Merc [...]ato, and gently takes him by the arm, and desires him that he might speak a word with him; they withdraw them­selves out of the walk to a private cor­ner: the Citizen tells this Noble-man that his servant had betraid him, in dis­covering his design to him on whom it should be Executed; in detestation of which, perfidiousness, he had given him the reward of a Traytor (declaring the manner and form as is expressed) and desired in all humility that he would be pacified and that whatsoever differences were between them, that he would be­pleased to be his own Judge whereupon they both became friends, no less satis­faction being acknowledged by the one, then ingenuity on the other party.

[Page 78]Such shifts as these, are these Free­born people fain to make to appease the wrath and fury of their Lords and Masters: In a word, as their Territories is no otherwise then a continued breach of three hundred miles along the sea-shore, so the Inhabitants live no otherwise then do the fishes in the Sea, the greater fishes devour the less so where there is no King in Israel, every man doth that which is good in his own eyes: it cannot be other­wise.

From thence I went unto the Free-state of Lucca, and there I found the Free-men to have six Princes every year; and the Senate chusing six men, whose elect a Prince for the Common-wealth every two months; this Prince ascending his Throne up these six steps, acts what he pleaseth: nor have the common people any more liberty, then the most rigid Calvinist will allow a Papist, free-will: Neither is their any other difference between this Government of the Free-State of Lucca, and the Em­pire of Germany; but that the one have so many Prime chusers, and the other so many Prince Electors, the one keeps it within the House of Austria, and the o­ther keeps it out of the House of the Medices.

[Page 79]I went from thence unto the ancient Common-Wealth of Venice, whose Government (if in any) I should approve of, because they never revolted from a better: but yet I must tell you, that at my first entrance into that City, I found the peo­ple full of complaints, of the heavy Taxes, exor­bitant Power, and Arbitrary Government, which seized upon all their Plate, and what other goods of value they had, for the use of State, toward the maintenance of a War, which was both foolish­ly begun, and most carelessly run into by their Trustees, or Representatives; for the Pope of Rome had certain intelligence that the Turk was preparing to make War against some part of Chri­stendom, the Pope sends to all the Frontier Prin­ces of Christendom, advising them they should all agree as one man to make it their own case, and that they would assist one another, on what part of Christendom soever the storm should fall, and that the several Embassadours would take it into consideration, about proportioning every Prince or State according to their abilities, for their several supplies of men and money; to which they all soon condescended, except the Ve­netian, who told the rest, that there was a League between the Grand Seigniour and the Venetians, and therefore they were not to fear any such War to be intended against them; to which it be­ing demanded that if the Turk prevailed against other parts of Christendom round about the Ve­netian [...], whether they though the would let the Venetians alone at last? or whether the Venetians thought so or no, whether they di [...] [...] think [Page 80] themselves bound in honour, and Christianity to defend their neighbour Christians against so com­mon an Enemy? To which it was answered by the Venetians, that the very entring into such a league and covenant with them, were enough to break the Peace between them and the Turk, whereupon the Juncto was dissolved, and every tub was fain to stand on his own bottom; but it fell out that (by the Machiavillianism of the Card. Richlieu, who taught and perswaded the Turk to break the League between him and the Venetians, because he would not have the Venetians to lend the Em­perour so much money, but would find them waies how to disburse it otherwise) the Turks wa­ged War only against the Venetians, and none else, whereupon they were fain to endure the whole brunt of the War themselves, and had no body to help them: this being so grievously found fault with by the common people, and their goods taken away ad placitum, their persons prest de bene esse, whe [...]her they thought so or no: I would fain know what liberty these people had, who could find such faults without remedies, and lose their goods without redress? what liberty is there in having freedom in the State, and none in the condition? I shall part with my children with tears in mine eyes, and through the same water behold the word, Libertas, written upon the Rialto; what am I the better for this free­dom? Am I robbed of all my money, because one thief takes it away? and am I not rob'd because six or seven lay hold upon me? believe it, I ne­ver heard such complaints [...]either in the King or [Page 81] Parliaments time, of oppression and tyranny, as I heard in this City during the time that I was there; and this not only during the War, but al­so in the times of Peace, five or six men Rule the whole State, and it may be the Prince none of them neither. I shall relate unto you a story of one Loridan a Noble Venetian, who keeping a Courtisan, on whom he was intended to bestow a favour, he went into a rich Shop for to buy her some cloth of gold to make h [...]r a Gown, the Prentice was only in the shop, whom he com­manded to cut out so much of such a piece as the Taylor gave directions, which done, he will'd the Prentice to tell his Master that he would be accomptable to him therefore; the boy excused himself, he being but a servant, and not having a­ny such directions from his Master, not doubting, but that if his Master were there, he would wil­lingly trust him for what he should be pleased to command; the Noble Venetian takes his leave, willing the Boy to tell his Master, that he should rue the day that ever he kept such a [...]awcy Boy to give him such an affront, and so departed in g [...]eat fury: the Master of the Shop presently com­ing in, and hearing the relation of what had hap­pened, tore his hair, wrung his hands, s [...]ampt up­on the ground, and like a mad-man cryed out, that the Boy had undone him, and all his poste­rity; takes the whole piece with him, follows this Noble Venetian to his Curtisans, offers to bribe the Curtisan with the whole piece, if she would intermediate for him which with much difficulty, and many pleadings she so appeas'd his [Page 82] wrath, that he was satisfied: and this was as com­mon for a Senator of Venice to do, as for a Parlia­ment man to pay no debts.

Neither is their any Law or Justice to be had against any of these Statesmen: There was a No­ble-man who was an Austrian both by Birth and Family, who being a Traveller, chanc'd to cast his eyes upon a fair and vertuous Lady, who in every respect were deserving of each other: This Noble-man had no sooner made his mind known unto his Paragon f [...]r beauty, but he was soon ob­structed with a corrival, who was a Nobile Veneti­ano; who perceiving his Mistress affections to this Stranger to be more liberally expressed than unto him, contrives his death, and soon eff [...]ct it, she loving her Martyr more than either others conceived, or she her self could brook, so great a cross concerning them, studies revenge, and being an Italian, found her self easily prompted by her own natural inclination, she pretends much love, that she might the better put in execution her grea­test hatred, she gets him into a Chamber, where she prays him to rest himself in a Chair, wherein he was no sooner sat but his arms and thighs were caught with springs, and being thus fastened, she murders him with her own hands, and flies for sanctuary to the next Nunnery within the Popes Dominions, leaving behind her, by the murdered, these words, written with her own hand in a piece of paper, Because there is no justice to be executed against a Noble Venetian, I have been both Judge and Exe­cutioner my self. Men may talk what they will, and fancy what they please, but there is no more [Page 83] difference, in point of freedom between a Mo­narchy and a Free-State (as they call it) than there is between a High Sheriff of a Shire, and a Com­mittee of a County; Utrum horum mavis accipe

Now for the Free State of our Neighbour Ne­therlands, otherwise called the States of Holland (who have sprung up (as all other Free-States will do at last) from the submissive and humble sti­lings of the distressed, to the High and Mighty). The particulars which occasioned their revolt from their Soveraign the King of [...]pain, I shall not insist upon, but refer you to the Spanish and Netherland Histories; only I shall hint upon the main inducements to their Rebellion; viz. Reli­gion and Freedom.

For the first, There is not a People amongst whom the name of God is known, to whom Re­ligion is a greater stranger, than unto these stilers of themselves, Reformed Protestants, for if this Free-state, who allow all Religions both of the Jews and Gentiles, whose several Churches own, in Capital letters over their doors, the several sects of Religions, to which each Libertine is in­clined, be Religious, than the Pantheonists were as truly Reformed and Religious as the Amsterda­miams; but as he, who sacrificed to all the Gods in general, must needs have sacrificed unto the true God, and yet know him not, because he joyned others with him, who was to be worship­ped alone: So that Country which embrace [...]h all Religions, happily may have the true Religion amongst them, and yet have no Religion, because they admit of many, being there is but one: This [Page 84] I speak in reference to the Country, not to par­ticular men. Neither is there a sort of Christians in the world who are less servants unto Christ, if it be enough to make them so, to be the greatest prophaners of his day: for the Sabbath is only distinguished from other daies, by a Sermon in the Church, and the Ale-house being full of Me­chanicks, drinking and carousing from morning until night; the shops are open, and buying and selling all the day long, excepting half the win­dow, which is to distinguish the day, but the door is open to let in the buyers, and the other half of the window is open to let in the light: and wonderfully strange it is, and remarkable to con­sider how these people, who shook off their Alle­giance to their Prince upon pretences of Refor­mation, should be so besotted, as to fall into such a strange and unheard of prophaneness of him, and the day whereon Christ himself is to be wor­shipped, as in their Metropolls, or chief City, to have a dog-market kept to the utter scandal of true Religion and Christianity it self, this is no more than what I have seen, and if it were not true, it were easily returned upon my self as the greatest impudence that could be imagined; but O the partiality of the Picture-drawer, when he receives large wages for a similitude! he insults over his own work only because it is like, when the face it self is most abominable.

Now for the freedom from Tyranny and op­pression; if the Turks or Tartars had conquered them, they never would (nor never did where ever they extended their Dominions) impose such [Page 85] Taxes and Rates as they have imposed on one a­nother, incredible; even to the full value of the several commodities, which run through their natives hands; but you will ask me, how it is pos­sible they should live then? To which I answer you, by sharking and cosening of strangers: Let any forraigners come there and ask for a dinner, and for such a dinner as they may well afford for eight pence a-piece, they will ask you five shil­lings a man; find but the least fault with them, and they will demand twelve pence a piece more for fouling of linnen; and if you seem angry at that, you shall mend your self with the payment of six pence a-piece over and above for fouling the room: and seek a remedy, and you shall be told, the Prince of Orange himself if he were there could not help it: altom all, is all the reason they will give you; if in sadness you shall complain of such abuses to indifferent Judges, they will tell you, that the States do lay such heavy Taxes up­on the Inhabitants, that they are fain to flie to such shifts for their subsistance; thus men pleased with the itch of Innovation, are contented to scratch the blood out of their own bodies, till they feel the greatest smart; rather than their Physician should let out a little spare blood, to cure the disease, and preserve them in good health; but you will say, that for all this, they thrive and prosper abudantly, so do the Argiers men, but with what credit and reputation in the eye of the World? I believe both alike: It was not their strength or policy, which brought them to this height and flourishing condition: but it [Page 86] was our policy of State, in emulation to other Princes, which helped these Calves to Lions hearts, teeth, and claws, until the High and Mighty But­ter-boxes stood in competition with the Crown: and I am afraid the siding with such Rebels, hath turned Rebellion into our own bosoms, as a just judgment from that God who is a revenger of all such iniquities, they may call it the School of War, whilst wanting a good cause, it could be no otherwise than the Christians shambles: I should be sorry that Holland should be the English-mans Looking-glass: a spur for his feet, or a copy for his hand, I hope the hand of Providence will cure us, like the Physician, who cur'd his Patient by improving his disease, from a gentle Ague to a high Feaver, that he might the better help him:

CHAP. XV. That Episcopacy is Jure Divino.

IN this Discourse I shall not trouble my self, nor you with Titles, Names and words of Apo­stles, Evangelists, Arch-bishops, Bishops, Patri­archs, Presbyters, Ministers, Angels of Churches, &c. which were all from the highest to the low­est, but tearms reciprocal; and were often ta­ken in the Church of God, and in the Scripture it self, for one and the same; for if any man, though never so mean, a Minister of the Gospel converted any Nation, the Church ever called him, the Apostle of that Country; as Austin, though but a Monk, was every where tearmed the Apostle of England: and St. Paul, being an Apo­stle, stiles himself a Minister of the Gospel of Je­sus Christ: Paul bids Timothy being a Bishop, to do the work of an Evangelist; and therefore no wonder if Bishops and Presbyters be often men­tioned for one and the same: but it is a great wonder that any manner of men, should make this a ground for any argument against Episcopa­cy; these kind of arguments instead of striking fire that should light the candle, they do but pin napkins over our eyes, and turn us round, until we know not where we are; and then we grope for we know not who, and lay hold of we know not what: he that will cut down this over-grown up-start-tree of error, must first clear his way [Page 88] to the root, and brush away all those brambles, and briers, which grow about it; we must not leave any thing standing, that may lay hold of the hatchet, and deviate the stroke, turning the same edge upon the feller, that was intended for the tree: if we should insist upon names and titles, we should make but a confounded piece of work, and run our selves into a most inextricable laby­rinth and Mazes of error; where we might run and go forwards and backwards, and round a­bout, and ne're the near: Christs are Kings, Kings are Gods; God is Christ, and Christ is Bishop of our souls; Bishops are Presbyters, Presbyters are Ministers, a Minister is an Apostle, an Apostle is a Minister: and so if you will quite back again. I must put off these, as David threw away Sauls Armour, non possum incedere cum iis; I love to knock down this m [...]nstrum informe ingens cui lu­men ademptum, with a blunt stone taken out of a clear River, which with the sling of application may serve well enough to slay this erroneous Philistine, though he were far greater than he i [...].

In the first place therefore let us understand what is meant by Jus Divi [...]um; if any man means that Episcopacy is so Jure Divino, that it is un­alterable, and must continue at all times, and in all places, so that where it is left off, there can be no Church, he means to give much offence and little reason; for there is no question but the Church may alter their own Government (so that it be left to themselves to alter) as they shall think most convenient, as well as alter the Sab­bath [Page 89] from the seventh day to the first of the week, or as well as they chang'd immersion into aspersion of the baptised, and many other things which carried as much Jus Divinum with them as Episcopacy, and yet were chang'd. The Jus Di­vinum that is in Episcopal Government, doth not consist in the Episcopacy, but in the Government, be it Episcopal or what it will; but where the Government is Episcopal, no question but there Episcopal Government is Jure Divino, because a Government; and if it were otherwise, that Go­vernment into which Episcopacy degenerateth, would be Jure Divino, as well as it, provided that none touch this Ark of the Church but the Priests themselves; for if the hand which belongs to the same body, pull the hat from off the head, the man loses not his right, only he stands in a more humble posture, but he is in a [...] strong possession of his own right, as when 'twas on his head, but if another hand should chance to pull it off, the party stands disgracefully depriv'd of his highest Right and Ornament. So if Episcopal Govern­ment of the Church be put down, or altered by Church-men themselves, the Jus Divinum is but removed from the Supremacy of one, and fasten­ed in the stronger hold of many members, for this is a Maxim that admits no postern, power ne­ver falls to the ground, neither in Church nor State, but look what one lets fall, another takes up before ever it comes to ground, wherefore losing nothing, they keep their own; but whe­ther this power in Church or State in the point of convenience be better in the hands of one or [Page 90] many, let whose will look to that, that's not my work; neither the names of Governments nor the numbers of Governours shall ever be able to fright away this Jus Divinum out of the Church Government, be the Government what it will, bene visum fuit spiritui sancto & nobis, keeps in the Jus Divinum, be the Government never so alter­ed, whereas forbidden and improper hands, acti­ons, as unusual, as unwarrantable, lets out this Jus Divi [...] when they have changed it to what they can imagine, now whether or no it be proper for a Lay-Parliament, or a Representa­tive of Lay-men, by the power of the Sword, de­clining the Kings Authority, will and pleasure, who was appointed by God to be a nursing Fa­ther of his Church, to alter Church-Government, so Antient, so begun by Christ himself in his own person over so many Apostles, so practis'd by the Apostles over others, so continued all along, I mean Episcopacy, that is to say, one Minister constituted an Overseer of many, and to lay hold upon tumults and insurrections, to pull down these Overseers, and for men who in such cases should be governed by the Church, to pull down the Church-Government without any the least con­sent of the Church Governours; I leave it for the World to judge; only my one opinion is this, That any Government thus set up, or by such practices as these altered, must needs be so far from being Jure Divino, that it must needs be Jure Diabolico. But it may be objected, that if they should have stayed until the Bishops had altered themselves, they might have styed long [Page 91] enough; to which it may be answered, that had the Bishops been but as poor as Job, there would have been no such hast to change their cloaths. The Ark was a type of the Church, and whatsoe­ver was literally commanded concerning the type, must be Analogically observed in the thing typified; God sate in the Mercy-Seat that was over the Ark, the Ark contained within it Aa­rons Rod, and a pot of Manna, so the Church con­tains the Law and the Gospel, the killing letter and the reviving spirit; others interpret the Rod to signifie the Government and Discipline of the Church, as the Manna the Doctrine of Christ, and food that came down from heaven: I take it to signifie both, and both answers my purpose; if both be therein contained, neither must be touch'd but by the Priests themselves; neither must we confine this prohibition to the Priests of the Law only, but we must extend it also to the Ministers of the Gospel, both which were typified by the two Cherubims, or Ministring Angels of the Almighty: these Ministers or Angels, though opposite to one another, yet they both lookt a­like, and neither of them upon one another, but both of them upon the Ark that was between them, there was mutuality in their looks, and their wings touch'd one another; so though the Ministers of the Law and the Gospel seem oppo­site in the Administration of the same grace, yet they must come so near as to touch one another in the manner of the Administration; exempli gratiâ, as there was in the old Law High Priests, Priests and Levites, so in the new Law, Bishops, Pres [...]y­ters [Page 92] and Deacons; as none but Priests were to touch the Ark, so none but the Ministers should reform the Church.

Thus much for Government; Now for Epis­copacy; the question then concerning Episcopacy, will be, whether or no, Jure Divino, one Minister (which answers to all names and sorts of Church-men, and Church-Officers whatsoever) may not exercise jurisdiction and power over many Mi­nisters within such a place or territory? If this be granted, the Bishops ask no more: if it be de­nyed, how then did Christ Jesus, Bishop of our souls, give orders and directions to his twelve Apostles, and taught them how they should be­have themselves throughout this Diocese the whole World? How did St. Paul exercise jurisdiction o­ver Timothy and Titus, who were both Bishops? and how did these two Bishops exercise jurisdi­ction over all the Ministers of Creet and Ephesus? was not this by Divine Institution? If I find by Divine Writ, that Christ laid the foundation of his Church in himself alone being over all the A­postles, and if I find that these Apostles, every Apostle by himself (in imitation of our Saviour) accordingly exercised jurisdiction and authori­ty over many Ministers which were under them, and commanded others to do the like, as Paul, Timothy and Titus, and if I find the practice of the Church all along through the whole tract of time, to continue the like Discipline; shall not I be­lieve this Discipline to be Jure Divino, except Christ sends down a new conje deslier from hea­ven, upon the election of every new Bishop? [Page 93] Christ lays the foundation, we build upon it, he gives us the Model, we follow the Pattern, the Church is built; is not this by Divine Right, be­cause he doth not lay the several stones with his own hands? Christ promised that he would be alwaies with his Church, and that he would send his holy spirit amongst them, which should lead them into all truth, so that the gates of Hell should not prevail against it; but if Episcopacy [...]e Anti-Christian, then the gates of Hell have not only prevailed against it a long time, but all along. As all Judgments are given in the Kings Name, and all Records run Rege praesente, though the King be not there in person, but in power; so the universal and un-interrupted and continu­ed and generally received Discipline of his holy Catholick Church (which Church we are bound to believe by the Apostolical Creed) is Christo praesente (Ergo Jure Divino) though Christ be not there in person, but in power; which power he conferr'd upon those who were to be his Suc­cessours, which were called Apostles, As my Fa­ther sent me, so send I you: and he that heareth you, heareth me; and loe I will be with you alwaies un­to the end of the world: surely this Discipli [...] of one over many, call it what you will, is to descend and continue unto the end of the World.

Object. But it may be objected, How can you prove that Christ commanded any such thing, or that Christ gave to the Apostles any such power, as to make Successors in their steads, with a war­rant for it to continue from age to age?

[Page 94] Sol. Where do you find that Christ gave the Sacrament to any but his Disciples? drink ye all of this, but they were all Apostles to whom he said so? where did you find that Christ admini­stred the Sacrament, or commanded it to be admi­nistred unto any Lay-men, or women? therefore is not the Sacrament given unto them Jure Divi­no, because the words were left out in the con­veyance? When there grew a disputation con­cerning Divorcements, Christ sends us to the O­riginal, Sic autem non fuit ab initio, if Christs rule be good, then the Bishops are well e­nough, for they may say concerning Episcopacy, I mean one over many (and that safely too) sic e­rat ab origine. Some are very unwilling that this Episcopacy should be intail'd by Christ upon his Apostles and their successors, out of these words, Mat. 28.20. I will be with you alwaies to the end of the world; they will not have it to mean in their successors; but the meaning to be this, I will [...] with you alwaies unto the end of the world; that is to say, in the efficacy, and power of my word and Gospel, to all ages; why may it not signifie this, and that too: that it doth one, is no argument but that it may do both: God made all things, in number, weight, and measure, and will you slight his word? shall sensus factus thrust our sensus destinatus out of Scriptures? the first Mini­sters of the Gospel must be ad [...]equate to the first Minister of the Law, and behold the same Method observed in both their Institutions: what diffe­rence is there between Christ's words to his Disci­ples, I am with you alwaies unto the end of the [Page 95] world, Mat. 28.20. and Gods words unto Aaron at his setting him apart for the High Priests Of­fice? This shall be a Statute for ever unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, Exod. 28.43. Certainly if the Gospel be nothing else but the Law revealed, and the Law be nothing else but the Gospel hid­den; whatsoever is written or said of the Ministers of the one; must needs have reference to the Mi­nisters of the other: and I shall desire you to look a little back upon the words which God said to Aaron; when God speaks of the seed of Aaron, he only maketh mention of the seed af­ter him; but when he speaks of the Statute, he saith it shall be for ever: if I do not flatter my own judgment, that tells me, that this Statute of High Priesthood, or Episcopacy, call it what you will, must have heirs after the seed of Abraham is expired, and did not the Catholick Church all along call the receiving of the Holy-Ghost, the order of Priest-hood? did ever any record above seven years date, call it making of Ministers? and why are they angry with the word Priest? Is it because the Prophet Isaiah, Prophecying of the Glory of Christs Church tells us, we shall be na­med Priests of the Lord, but that men shall call us Ministers of God? Isa. 61.6. If the Ministration of the Law be glorious, shall not the Ministration of the Gospel be much more glorious, 2 Cor. 1.3. and shall the Ministers of the same Gospel be less glorious? When you see a man that cannot abide to see anothers glory, you may be sure he is no kin to him, or very far off; so you may be ass [...]red that these are no true sons of the Church, no [...] [...]o [Page 96] right Children, who think a Chair too great state for their Fathers to sit in. In the Apostles time these Bishops, or if you will, Superintendents (which are all in one signification, only a good Greek word chang'd by Mr. John Calvin, into a bad Latin word) were stiled Embassadors of the Almighty, Stars of Heaven, Angels of the Church, &c. but now these Embassadours are used like Vagabonds; these Stars, are not Stars but fallings; and the Angels are no where to be found but as­cending and descending Jacobs Ladder; whilst this reputation was given unto the Church, and its Officers, the Stones of its building were in unity, but as it is now, it seems no otherwise than as a Corps kept under ground seemingly intire, but once touch'd, soon falls to dust and ashes. Ne­ver was there such a Monster as this ruling, and thus constituted Presbytery, the Father of it Re­bellion, the Mother Insurrection, the Midwife Sacriledge, the Nurse Covetousness, the Milk Schism, the Coats Armour, the Rattle Drums, a Bloudy Sword the Coral, Money the Babies that it delights to play withal, it grows up to be a stripling, and goes to School to a Council of War, its Lesson is on the Trumpet, its Fescue a Pistol, its going out of School in Rank and File, its Play-daies the daies of Battail, and Black-munday the day of Judgment; it comes of age and is Married with a Solemn League and Covenant, it begets Children like it self, whose blessing upon them is the power of the Sword, and whose Imposition of hands are broken pates; This Monster cries down this truly Ancient Catholick and Aposto­lick [Page 97] power which the Bishops exercised; and then takes it up again, and uses it themselves in a higher nature than ever any Bishops or Apostles them­selves did or durst have done, even to the Excom­munication and Deposement of their Kings (to the delivering of them up unto Satan, and to Hang-men, if they stood but in their way) to whom the Apostles taught submission, (how faulty so e­ver they were) and if not obedience, yet submis­sion, to every one of their Ordinances, if not for their own sakes, yet for the Lords sake, and for Conscience sake: these men cry down the same au­thority as Popish, whilst they exalt themselves above all that are called Gods, in a higher manner, than ever any Pope of Rome ever yet did. We will begin with this Monster in the very place of its Nativity, and so observe him all along through the whole tract of time; we will consider how it dealt with the first Prince, under whose Domini­ons it pullulated, which was under the Prince and Bishop of Geneva, and these two were both nul­lified in the same person, as they were both here in England by the same Parliament; verifying that Maxim of ours (with that fore-running of theirs) No Bishop, No King; and then we will shew you how they dealt with our Princes here at home, where ever they had a power, viz. with Mary Queen of Scots, and James and Charles the First Kings of England and of Scotland both, and then usurp a power themselves, higher than Popes or Kings. Calvin with his gladiators, ha­ving expuls'd the Prince and Bishop of Geneva, set [...] up a Government so high and unexpected, [Page 98] that the people would have nothing to do either with him, or his Government: and thereupon they banished him the City; Calvin (in exile) bethinks himself how he might appease their fury, and give them satisfaction, and be invited in a­gain; Calvinus de tristibus thinks it his best course of endearing himself unto the people, to make them sharers with him in the Government, where­upon he invented his new fangle of Lay-Elders, and so all parties were agreed; In comes Mr. John Calvin (whilst he was scarce warm in his seat) I shall present you with a story of him and of his demeanour of himself towards the temporal Throne: There was a Noble-man of Italy, who liked the Reformation which he had begun so well, that he forsook his Religion and Country, sold his Lands and Fortune, converted all into money, and took Sanctuary in Geneva; as soon as he came there, great rejoycing and insulting there was, that their cause was honoured with so high a Convert: The grand Seigniour falls a building; directing his Masons, he found one of them something more sawcy than to what his Lordship (in his own Country) had been accusto­med, little thinking that where there was promi­sed so large a respect of souls, there had been so little respect of persons: this Noble-man hereup­on gives this Mason a gentle tap upon the head, the Mason flies upon him like a Dr [...] [...] shakes him by the [...]: my Lord not being used to such course salutations, stabs him with his Dagger, thinking nothing less, but that so high a provoca­tion would have pleaded his indempnity; no [Page 99] such matter, my Lord was soon laid hold on, and brought to his Trial: Calvin upon the Tribunal, not as a Temporal Judge in such cases (take heed of him) but only to be asked his opinion in cases of Conscience; the Delinquent pleads for him­self, tells them how insolently he was provoked, and wonders, considering such provocation, he should be questioned for so vile a varlet: Hereup­on Mr. Calvin soon starts up, and tells him, that with God (whose seat they held) there was no respect of persons, and for ought he knew, that man whom he despls'd to death, was as near and dear to God and his favour, as himself: their Laws knew no such distinction as Man-slaughter and Murder; but they were regulated by the Di­vine Law, that told them, that the man that sheds mans blood, by man shall his blood be shed; that there was no exemption by greatness, nor buying it off by favour; the Noble-man replyed, that he had not been long enough amongst them to be acquainted with their Laws; it was answered, that the Law of nature did forbid that, of which he could not be ignorant (all this was well enough.) My Lord told them how hard a case it would be that a man out of his love and liking to the place and manners, should seek to it as a sanctuary for his conscience, and so soon find it his grave: that he was heartily sorry for what he had done, and would give any satisfaction to his wife and chil­dren that the Court should order, or his estate allow; he intended the man no hurt, before such rough hands shook him out of himself, that he knew not what he did, and therefore he hum­bly [Page 100] begg'd their pardon, assuring them for the fu­ture, that his waies should be so directly answera­ble to those paths they walked in, that he would not by Gods grace hereafter step aside. The Temporal Judges, won with his humble and sub­missive behaviour began to relent, and desired Mr. Calvin to abate a little of his rigour, for the reasons before mentioned, assuring him that his case was no common case, and therefore it ought to have respect accordingly; hereupon there grew a hot dispute between the Spiritual, and the Temporal Judges: Calvin remained st [...]ff in his o­pinion, and would not be bent to the least mer­cy; the Noble-man thought to throw one grain of reason more into the ballance, that should turn the scales, and that should be taken out of a con­sideration had of their own good: for saith [...], if you shed my blood hand over head, without any the least respect had to my years, to my birth, to my education, to the little time I had of being acquainted with your Laws, nor to the provocati­on it self, nor to the suddenness of the action, nor to the surprize of all my senses, nor to the satis­faction I would have given, nor to the repentance of my very soul, who will come amongst you? what Lord or Gentleman will live within your walls? Wherefore if you will have no considerati­on of me, yet consider your selves; consider what a blow it will give to your Religion, how many this very thing will stave off from ever ha­ving any thing to do with you; by this time they were all prone to mercy, but Calvin alone, who stands up, and cries fiat justitia, ruat Coelum; neither [Page 101] could he be brought to give his opinion, that the Jury (as we call them) might not pass upon him; but out went the Jury, and contrary to their own Law, hearing the Noble-mans plea, and ob­serving well the inclination of the Bench in gene­ral, they brought in their Verdict, not guilty; whereupon the Noble-man was acquitted: here­upon John Calvin rises from the Bench, and whilst the rest proceed to their matters, calls all the Mi­nisters within the Walls and Liberties of Geneva, who appear before the Judgment Seat, with white Wands in their hands, which they laid down, telling them, that with those wands they laid down their Offices, protesting that they would never Preach the Gospel to a people whose human Laws should run contrary to the Laws Divine; and suddenly turned about and took their leave: which being acted with so much gravity, wrought so much upon the beholders, that they presently sent for them back again, and hanged the Noble-man. This story I have read in their own History in Geneva, than which my thoughts were then, as they are still, that never any Pope of Rome, did act as Pope of Rome, or so much as claim half that Authority over the Civil Magistrate, as this anti-Pope did virtually act; and yet was not ashamed to make lesser matters than this the ground of the quarrel with the Bishop, who also was their Prince, when in his own person he acts the part of both.

[Page 102]Now we will see how these kind of creatures have plaid the Masters of mis-rule among our Princes here at home. King James in his Dis­course at Hampton Court, tells us how the Pres­byterians became Lords Paramount in his King­dom of Scotland, and how they used his Mother the Queen of Scots, viz. Knox and Buchanan, and the rest of that gang, came unto Mary Queen of Scots, and told her, that by right, no Pope nor Potentate whatsoever, had any superiority over her in her own Dominions, either in cases Civil or Ecclesiastical, but that she her self was Supreme in both, and constituted by God as the only nur­sing Mother of his Church, within her Domini­on, and therefore conjured her to look about her, and not to let the Pope of Rome, or any of his agents, to have any thing to do within her Terri­tories, and to have care of Christs Evangel, as she would answer it at the dreadful day of Judgment; she gives them her ear, and at last her authority, they make use of it in the first place, to the pul­ling down of the Bishops, and exalted themselves in their room; when the Queen look'd for an ab­solute Supremacy, behold all the Supremacy that these men would allow her, was not so much as to have one private Chapel for her self, nor one Priest whereby she might serve God according to her own conscience; she finding her self so much deceived, labours to recal her Authority, they kept her to it; she takes up Arms, they oppose her, fight her, beat her out of her Kingdom; she flies into England, they follow her with inve­ctives, thrust jealousies into the Queen of Eng­lands [Page 103] bosom concerning her, she is imprisoned, and after a long imprisonment put to death. King James having related this passage in the foremen­tioned discourse unto Dr. Renolds, and Knewstubs and the rest, turns unto the Bishops, and closes his Discourse with this Animadversion; Where­fore, my Lords, I thank you for my Supremacy, for if I were to receive it from these men, I know what would become of my Supremacy. The shining light of the Gospel, and the burning zeal of the Ministers thereof, may fitly be com­pared to fire, which if it be not in every room confin'd to one hearth, and limited to one tunnel, that may convey out of this so comfortable and necessary a blessing, all that may be destructive, and offensive in it, up toward the highest region, but is suffered like wild-fire to run up and down the house, it will soon turn all to flames and high combustions; so the government of the soul seems to be of so transcendent nature to what the go­vernment of the body and goods is, that if it be not overtopt with superintendency or Episcopa­cy, and so disimbogued into the Supream autho­rity, this comfortable heat if limited, as it turns to our greatest benefit, so neglected and boundless, soon converts it self into a suddain destruction and ruine. If you will hear how these men dealt with King James, her Son, and Father to Charles the First, you shall find it in his Basilicon Doron, Crebrae adversus me in tribunitiis Concionibus Ca­lumniae spargebantur non quod crimen aliquod desig­nâssem, sed quia Rex eram, quod omni crimine pejus habebatur. Are these men good Subjects? did [Page 104] they not convene him diverse times before them, school him, Catechize him like a School-boy? did he not protest unto his Son Henry, that he mislik'd their proud and haughty carriage ever since he was ten years of age? did he not say that Monarchy and Presbytery agreed like God and the Devil? and have we not found it so, if we consider the behaviour of our new made Presbyterians in England, to Charles the first, his Son? O but the Presbyterians had no hand in it, they Pray'd and Preach'd, and Writ against it, tasted and pray'd for a diversion of all such inten­tions: but I pray, who took the Scepter out of his hand, in taking away the Militia, of which it was an Emblem, that should have defended him, was it not the Presbyterians? who cast down his Throne, by taking away his Negative voice, was it not the Presbyterians? who took off his Crown, the fountain of Honour from off his Head, by denying those honour on whom he had con­fer'd it without them, was it not the Presbyterian? Who took away his Supremacy, signified by the Sacred Unction wherewith he was Anointed, in not allowing him the Liberty of his own Consci­ence in the point of Episcopacy and Church-Government, was it not the Presbyterian? Who would not Treat a minute with their King before they had made him acknowledge himself guilty (as they say) of all the blood that had been spilt throughout his Dominions, was it not the Presby­terian? Who (notwithstanding all the Concessi­ons on his part that could be granted, even to the very grating his Princely Conscience, when [Page 105] he bid them ask flesh from off his bones, and he would not deny it them, if it might have been a benefit unto his people, prayed that he might keep his Conscience whole, it was the Queen Re­gent of all good mens actions, and he hoped there were none would force this Queen before him in his house, as Ahasuerus said to Haman) voted not satisfactory so long, until the Independent Army came from Edenborough, and surpriz'd and mur­dred him, was it not the Presbyterians? He that said the Presbyterians held him down by the hair, while the Independents cut off his Head, said true enough, they murdered him as a King, before ever they murdered him as a man; for what may the Independent say to the Presbyter, if you'l take off his Authority, we'l take off his Head; if you'l make him no King, we'l make him no Body: if you'l make him a man of blood, we'l use him accordingly; therefore at your doors, O Presbyterian Hypocrites, do I lay his innocent blood, it is but like the rest of your actions, com­mitted by your Ancestors to former Princes al [...] along.

One thing I pray you well observe; There was never any Reformed Church in Christendom, but when they shook off their Bishops, they made their Apologies to all the Christian World, how they were necessitated to alter that Ancient and best form of Government of the Church by Bi­shops, in regard that they could not be drawn off from their obedience and dependance on the Pope of Rome; and if possible they would retain that laudable Government as most convenient; [Page 106] but never were there any Reformers in the World, but ours, that ever held Episcopacy to be un­lawful and Anti christian before; and will you know the reason? which is only this, the Bishops what they receive they lay down at his Majesties feet, as acknowledging him to be Supreme in all cases, when they would have him to be Supreme in no case, as Buch. de jure Regni plainly tells us, that Princes are no more but the Proxies and Attorneys of the people; and yet for all this, the Authority which they hold, to be as Anti-christi­an in the Chair, they practise as most Christian on the Bench, and much improve it. These Monsters that they may the better cry down the Divine Right that is in Episcopacy, and descend­ed to them from the Apostles; tell us, that the calling of the Apostles was extraordinary, and died with them: to make answer to which asser­tion, we must consider how many waies a thing may be taken to be extraordinary, and if we find that it may be taken so many waies, if we can prove a thing extraordinary one way, we must not take it to be extraordinary in every respect; exempli gratiâ; Saul was extraordinarily called by God, because immediately by him, but this doth not make the calling of Kings to be an extra­ordinary calling, for that succeeded; so the Apo­stles were extraordinarily called by God, as not being called out of the Tribe of Levi, nor taken from the feet of Gamaliel, nor brought up in the schools of the Prophets, yet this doth not follow, that the calling of the Apostles should be extra­ordinary, for they had their successors: It may [Page 107] be extraordinary à parte ante; but not à parte post, only in regard of the manner of their election, but not in regard of the nature of their commission, they were called Apostles in regard of their Mis­sion, not in respect of their Commission, which which was no more but what Bishops had, nei­ther doth the word Apostle signifie so great Au­thority as doth the word Bishop, the one beto­kening but a Messenger, the other an Overseer, and therefore there is no extraordinariness hither­to, that they should not be extraordinary.

2. A man may be said to be extraordinary, in regard of some extraordinary gifts and endow­ments which God hath given unto a man, as un­to the Apostles the gift of tongues, of healing, &c. but this doth no way make the calling ex­traordinary, for then it would follow, that if God Almighty should give unto any ordinary Mini­ster, extraordinary gifts, then his calling should be extraordinary, or that the calling of Kings should be an extraordinary calling, because God bestows on some Kings the extraordinary gift of healing.

3. It may be further urg'd, the calling of the Apostles was an extraordinary calling, because they were pen-men of the Holy-Ghost, and in re­gard that the Holy-Ghost sat upon each of them; no, that doth not make it extraordinary quoad nos, that it should not descend, for other Divines and Evangelists, were pen-men of the Holy-Ghost as well as they, therefore what was not ex­traordinary to themselves, cannot be extraordi­nary to us.

[Page 108]4. For their receiving the Holy-Ghost, it is no otherwise but what all Bishops, Pastors, and Curates do receive, when they receive Orders, Receive ye the Holy Ghost, only the difference is this, they received it by the sitting of cloven tongues, and they by imp [...]sition of hands, but still the extra­ordinaries consist in the manner, but not the mat­ter of the thing received, so that all the while there is no reason why this calling of the Apostles should be so extraordinary, as that it should not descend: If Christ promised to be with his Apo­stles unto the end of the World, and they did not continue unto the end of the World, surely I should think without any straining at Gnats, or swallowing of Cammels, that the meaning of our Saviours words should be this, that he would be with those in the assistance of his holy spirit, that should succeed the Apostles in their Offi­ces of supervising his Church, and propagation of his Gospel, except I should see more reason than I do yet, why the Apostles calling should be so peculiar, that it must not descend, or that the Government of one over many, be so inconsistent with the Church her good in after-time, more than in the beginning, that Episcopacy should be so abominable.

Briefly I can compare these Presbyters pulling down the Bishops, to no other thing, than to a company of unhappy boys, who being not tall e­nough to reach the fruit, and wanting a Ladder, for the fruit sake, lay hold upon the branches, and break down a bow, making it thereby no part of the tree; so [...]hese men, wanting merit to [Page 109] taste the fruit of learning, and not having capaci­ty enough in themselves to reach those prefer­ments which the Church holds out to those who are deserving, they render that which was part of the Church, as sever'd from the Body, which is the highest kind of Sacriledge, not only in depri­ving the Church of part of its goods, but part of it self.

Lastly, if there be no other reason to be gi­ven, if not for the Divine Right of Episcopacy, yet for the lawfulness thereof, but this one topi­cal argument which I shall use, raised out of the continued practice of the Church in all ages, to men whose faces are not bra [...]'d so thick, that it were reason proof, it were sufficient in my under­standing, viz.

Suppose all the arguments which were for Episcopacy, were as weak as so many straws to support a cause, yet though four straws are not able to support a table, yet fourteen thousand bound up together in four bundles, will hold it up as firm as so many props of Iron; so though some few practices of some few men within some few places, are not able to make an argument for Episcopacy, that shall be evincing, yet the pra­ctice of the Church all along for fourteen hundred years, in fourteen hundred Dioceses, and through­out forty ages, makes good the argument a­gainst any few Jack Straws, or Wat Tilers what­soever.

Ob. But there were no Diocesan Bishops in the Primitive times.

[Page 110] Sol. Was not Christ a Diocesan Bishop? and was not the World his Diocess? were not the Apostles Diocesan Bishops, when the whole World, divided into twelve parts, were their twelve Diocess? were not Timothy and Titus Dio­cesan Bishops, when Creet and Ephesus were allot­ted to be their Diocess?

Ob. There were no Lord Bishops in those daies?

Sol. Those who ruled well were to be accoun­ted worthy of double honour, and will you not al­low them a single Lordship?

Ob. The Lords of the Gentiles exercised Do­minion, but so shall not you.

Sol. No, not such dominion as they exercised, there is a great deal of difference betwixt domi­nion, and domineering, betwixt Lordship, and lording it over God's Inheritance; a Paternal Government was never accounted intolerable but by unruly Children; if this were not to be allowed of, how did Christ rule his Apostles? Paul, Timothy and Titus? both these, all the Ministers in Creet and Ephesus?

Ob. St. Paul laboured with his hands that he might not be chargeable to the brethren.

Sol. So might the Bishops if they needed no more to study Divinity than did the Apostles, but if any Benefactor had bestowed large Reve­nues upon St. Paul, I see no reason why he might not be a keeper of Hospitality, as well as he ad­vised Timothy so to do: but now Julians perse­cution is reviv'd; Do not (saith Julian) destroy the Christians, but take away the maintenance of the [Page 111] Church, and that will bring their Ministers into contempt, and so destroy their Religion; and now they are at it; Libera me, domine (saith St. Augu­stine) ab homine impio, id est, libera me à me, so we had need to pray unto Almighty God, that he would save his Church out of the hands of her Church-men, for she now lies upon the ground like the tree that complained, that she was rent in sunder by wedges made out of her own body.

FINIS.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.