NOt to trouble my selfe much with those impertinencies, in the beginning of your Preface; where you most rashly and im­piously set our blessed Saviours name in the stile of this unchristianlike designe, calling it the businesse of Christ Jesus his Kingdome: And as you transgresse against Piety there, so against Charity too in the same clause, as if your malice were not active enough, if you did not in the same breath and sentence blaspheme God and injure man. You stile the good and obedient people of the Land by that scornfull title of The squint eyed multitude, as if every eye were asquint that is not bloudshotten like yours. And to let passe your slighting of those bookes that have beene set forth. [Page 2]which you say have had their answers, though I could tell you that all have not beene answered that we know of. And for those answers of yours and some others to Doctor Ferne, whom you bite in the margine, their answers have had replyes too: nor yet to insist upon your vaine promises of delivering the sense of the whole in that of Rom. 13. He that resisteth, &c. which it may be you were afraid to speake out, lest your owne pen should transcribe your sentence, and allot unto you that judgement or damnation which the Apostle there denounceth against resisters of the higher powers; and in that of the Evan­gelist, resist not evill, &c. And to give you leave to passe over, and let goe Fathers, Councells, the Doctrine of our owne Bi­shops, since they are so little for your turne. I leave all these upon your score, and come to observe upon your Observations which you commend unto your Reader.

And first in the Theologicall consideration, you observe thus:

1. That the King must command not onely according to Gods Law, but mans also.

Answ. It is most true, That the King is bound in duty to regulate his commands by the rules of the Law of God and the Kingdome, and if he doth otherwise he sinnes, and is answera­ble to God for it. But it doth by no meanes follow that he is answerable unto the Subjects, or corrigible by them, for all cor­rection is to proceed from a Superiour; and the King who is acknowledged to be supreame, hath no Superiour on earth to judge him.

2. That if he doe not so command, the resistance is not a resi­stance of power but will.

Answ. Though the King doe exceed the limits of his duty, yet the resistance may be a resistance of his power; for they that judge not superficially of things may easily discerne, That a Kings power is larger then his duty: And he may exceed his duty in commanding, and yet his authority may injoyne the Subject to obey. Pharoah exceeded his duty in commanding the Israelites to make brick without straw. And Casar's Offi­cers exceeded the limits both of the Law of God and man, [Page 3]when against the liberty of the Subject they require tribute of our Saviour, yet wee have examples of obedience in both. There are somethings unlawfull for a Governour to command, which are not unlawfull for the Subject to obey, as in the ca­ses before named, and in all tyrannous and frivolous commands; in such cases we may petition, and some admonish and reprove the King, with reverence, and put him in minde of his duty: or in case he will not heare, we may use the weapons of the Church, Preces & lachrymas, we may complaine to God who is above the King, and the sole Moderator betwixt Him and Subjects, but we must obey and remember that such commands are the Governours sinne, but our punishment. Indeed, if the Governour command the Subject to doe that which the Law of God forbids him to do, he must not yeild active obedience, but obey God rather than men. But yet he must not resist by taking up Armes or the like, but patiently submit to suffer the punishment. Otherwise, I pray you resolve me, why the three children yeilded their bodies to the furnace, when Nebuchad­nezzar commanded them, against the Law of God, to wor­ship the golden Image, if they had held it lawfull to resist, they might as well have looked for assistance from Heaven to have made good their party against the Tyrant, as that God should preserve them in the midst of the fire? But the Text notes it of them, that they yeilded their bodies, which implyes a voluntary submission. And yet the command was against the Law of God; and Nebuchadnezzar aswell as King CHARLES ought to have commanded, not onely according to the Law of God, but of man also. If you are wise and peaceable, you ought to consider, that as the Kings duty is to regulate him, upon paine of Gods displeasure; so his power is to regulate us; some­times where he exceedes his duty; and if where he transgres­ses the Law of God, much more where he transgresses the li­mits of humane Lawes, which notwithstanding he is bound in conscience to observe.

3. That to say such a resistance must be onely defensive is non-sense, for so a man may be resisting ever and never. Resist like the silly women, of whom the Apostle saith, They are ever learning, and never attaine the truth.

Answ. Nor never are like to doe, unlesse they meet with better teachers than you appeare to be; for indeed here you speake the plainest falshood of any the most impudent advo­cate, that for ought I know hath pleaded in that cause you are fee'd in: and we are to thanke you for your plaine dealing, it is honestly done however that you will speake your minde; if all men should doe so, I am perswaded we should have a spee­dy end of the businesse. I was in doubt the people should have beene borne in hand, that this warre against the King had beene onely defensive, but you have drawne the curtaine, and will justifie it seemes the legality of it as an offensive warre. That it is lawfull to set up an offensive resistance against the King, in case he command either against the Law of God or man. And your reason indeed drawne from non-sense, Argu­mentum ab absurdo it is I confesse; it is non-sense say you, to hold that we may in such case resist the King, onely by a de­fensive resistance. This if any is the sense of your Observati­on, and how doe you make this good? Why thus, an't please you; for so say you a man may be resisting ever, and never resist. Indeed I confesse that is plaine non-sense to say, that a man should be ever resisting and yet never resist; as well you may be ever a good Subject, and yet never obey your Prince. Yea, indeed upon the point it is the very same, to be ever resi­sting and never resist; as to be ever resisting and yet to be a good Subject: since not to resist is essentiall to a good Subject. And therefore in stiling this non-sense you accuse your selfe, since that is the maine businesse. You are about to make us be­leeve that resistance and subjection may well stand together: so that if that be non-sense, as you stile it, there is but little sense in the maine attempt of your discourse. And I can see no more rea­son for you to say, that it is no more sense to admit of desensive resistance without an offensive, then to say a man may ever and never resist. Or is there no difference betweene a shield and a sword: nature and reason allowes a servant to save his head if he can from his masters cudgell, and I know no Law either of God or man that forbids it. But yet you must take heed how you allow a servant to deale offensively against his master, lest [Page 5]you set houses on fire as well as the common-wealth. It is no non-sense to admit of one thing with the denyall of another, in assertion or discourse, which may and ought sometimes to be done without the other, in action and performance. But it seemes there is no sense, reason, nor religion, that doth not comply with your purposes. Those are the onely rules of truth and falshood, good and evill; yet methinkes you might have done well to have spared the Apostle, for you seeme to be very bold in quoting that saying of his, nay of the Holy Ghost, as a parallell to that which you call non-sense, as if the Apostles saying of silly women (such as your faction leadeth away) That they are ever learning, and never attaine to the truth, were no better sense than for a man to be said to be ever resisting, and yet never to resist. It is no wonder that you are over-bold with Gods Substitute, when you are so sawey with God himselfe. Remember you have something to answer another day for this: your calling might have admonished you to have dealt more reverently with the Scripture, then to have brought in any part of that as an instance or parallell of non-sense: but howsoever we may know your meaning by this, that if the people please to quarrell at the Kings government, or to conceive any of his commands to be against, or not according to the Lawes of God or man, they may not onely defend their owne rights or persons by force and armes, but even offer violence to his Sa­cred Person in a vindictive way, and in allowing an offensive resistance without any restraint or limitation, you lay a faire ground, for ought any man can see, even for killing the King, either by force or treachery, for this without all question lyeth within the generality of an offensive resistance: it was pity you did not live, or were not better knowne in the beginning of King James his reigne, you would have made an excellent Chaplaine to Guy Faux, or the rest of the Gunpowder-Tray­tors. What though they were Papists, that had beene no great matter: They whose stomachs can digest such iron principles as these, like enough would not have been very squeamish in point of religion. But for your Argument, Assertion, Obser­vation, or what you will call it, truely it scarce deserves an an­swer; [Page 6]yet the wise man may seeme to admonish me to give you one, lest you should be wise in your owne conceit: And therefore I tell you, that the Apostle forbids that any resistance at all should be made against the higher power; and the higher the power is the more wicked the resistance: and therefore to resist your Prince, which is your Supreame, is the most wicked of all resistance. And the Apostle gives you a reason, because it is the ordinance of God; and it is shewed before, that resi­stance even in such case where the Magistrates commands are not according to the Law of God or man, is a resistance of the power as well as of the will of the Magistrate, and therefore is not to be undertaken sub poenâ [...], under paine of judge­ment, or damnation; and they that like the wages let them set up the worke. Besides, this is to put a sword as it were into every offenders hand, to provide for his owne life or freedome, even by the ruine and destruction of the King or Magistrate, if he can but have faith enough to perswade himselfe that he is condemned contrary to the Law either of God or man; and certainly he had a very dull braine that could not finde colour enough for such a perswasion, in the worst case almost we can imagine, especially if that old note be true, Quod quisque vult id ipsum putat. There needs no great strength of argument to perswade a theefe or murderer that hee ought not to be hang'd, but I doubt I shall take too much paines with you. There's an end of your three Observations of the businesse, as it is look't on, as you say, in a Theologicall consideration: and for ought I see, the people may looke asquint still for any thing you have yet applyed for the rectifying of their sight.

The next survey you are pleased to take of the matter, is to correct the errours of the people in their Historicall view of it: you conceive their complaints to be groundlesse, when they conceive and say, Never such times, such taxations, such presi­dents, such a warre, &c. never? Yes, you can tell them of the twentieth part, fifteenth part, seventh part, as in the reigne of King John, and others. And you cite the Chronicle too of Edw. 2. in the margent: truly I have scarce leisure for the present to examine the Chronicle to confute you. We reade [Page 7]indeed of a sixth penny levied of temporall mens goods, in the time of Edw. 2. and what others you have found out in your Historicall translations, it makes no great matter if they be of the same stampe. But can you finde a president of a twentieth part imposed by an Ordinance of the two Houses of Parliament, without and against the King, and for the maintenance of so unnaturall a warre? can you finde any president for those legall robberies, that authenticall thee very under the name of plunde­ring and that working of iniquity by a Law? But however you seeme to take the people for pretty easie and tame fooles, while you would perswade them to lie downe whil'st they are loaded, because their forefathers perhaps have gone before them in suffering the like or more grievous pressures. What? doe you meane to prescribe for tyranny and oppression? But to come to your Observations, you will have those that are willing to learne, to know,

1. That if some be taken away, it is to preserve them and the rest.

Answ. That's more then you can assure them: rather it may seeme to be for the destruction both of themselves and the residue of their estates, since it is but oyle cast into that fire, which is likely if not quenched, to expose all unto desolation. And if those mad-men that have hitherto fed that flame with the expence of their estates, were they not jurati in insaniam, they have had experience enough to have beene as good as a Bedlam to them, and make them now at length to grow wiser, and e'en let that goe which is already gone, untill the publique faith shall come to her lands, and make much of that wit they have received for interest. and shut up their hungry purses and coffers with that motto of the Poet, Scelus est post omnia perdere naulum: That they may at least keep something to bury them. Yea, it may prove a great blessing if those purges they have re­ceived of that over-much fulnesse, which hath made them swell so much with pride, to the disturbance of the State, may now leave them in a more healthfull temper of humility, to the quieting thereof. This would enrich them much more in their mindes, then they are impoverished in their estates, and be an [Page 8]excellent recompense for all their losses. But little doe you thinke what an excellent Observation this of yours might have beene, had you vented it but two or three yeares sooner, for the justification of Ship money. And yet I doubt it would scarce have gone for weight then, and we had best looke well to the scales, e're we accept it for so now, lest if this once goe for currant, it be made a common colour for the greatest op­pressions, and most injurious and perpetuall taxations of the people, though (if it be possible) more illegall than that of the imposition of the twentieth part, if it be enough to beare the people in hand; That if some be taken away, it is to preserve them and the rest. But what an age of fancies doe we live in? can you tell the people who it is that would take away either their estates or their lives; or if you could, is there any hone­sty in it, That you should take away the peoples goods with­out Law, and please them by telling them no body else should robbe them? Or to perswade them to throw their estates into the fire, to keepe them out of the hands of theeves; small com­fort in this. What is the next Observation to make the mat­ter faire in the Historicall prospect?

The second Observation is by way of question,

Whether they had rather part with it to the Parliament, or that and their lives too to the Cavaleirs?

Answ. Truely this is a hard question. A pittifull necessity that the poore people are brought into: it were worth the while to consider who they are that have shut them up into such an uncomfortable Dilemma, and what is the cause that they are so concluded: and sure it is no hard matter to discerne. Wee can yet remember that there was a time not long since, when there was no necessity of either of these, when the Roy­all Authority of His Majestie, and the knowne Lawes of the Kingdome were in force, and yeilded the due protection to the Subjects; and they returned their due obedience unto them, till these hedges were broken downe, under the pretence of mending the gaps in them: there was no roome for so sad a question. And therefore the people may know whom they have to thank for it, even those that for the bringing to passe of [Page 9]their owne ambitious and turbulent designes, have removed those ancient land-markes, and demolished those knowne and certaine bounds and fences, and instead thereof brought in a new ambulatory, uncertaine Government by Ordinances of the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament, in opposition to the ancient and setled sundamentall Lawes of the Kingdome, and without and against the Royall Authority of the King. And now it seemes the people (if you may be Judge) are left onely to this lamentable choyce, from whose hand they shall receive their ruine: or whether they will undergoe a voluntary slave­ry on the one side, or an enforced one on the other. This is not much unlike that miserable choyce that David was put un­to, in the 2^d of Samuel, 24. chapter, and the 13. and 14. ver­ses. Whether the sword, or the famine, or the pestilence should be the reward of numbering of the people. That Da­vid was indeed to submit unto, (though as he saith he was in a great strait) because it was sent unto him by God, by the Pro­phet Gad, a Prophet of the Lord. And David wisely makes it his choice to fall into the hands of God, and not into the hands of men. And truely the strait that you put the people into, me thinkes is worse in some respect than Davids. They must needes it seemes by you fall into the hands of men. And in­deed I confesse we doe well deserve it, because the hand of the Lord in the plague and pestilence, which hath beene so long and so often upon us of late in this Kingdome; and I thinke scarce yet removed, though it is as it were drowned in a grea­ter judgement, hath done so little or no good upon us. But what Divinity is it, I beseech you, that sent you upon this errand upon the people, or who made you to be a Prophet Gad unto them, to circumscribe them within the limits of so hard an ele­ction? Or how long have they beene Gods, into whose hands you would have them fall? Or what doe you meane by those strange unheard of monsters, the Cavaleirs, that you make such bugbeares to fright the people with? Or how comes this name of honour and dignity to be made by you, and others of your party, a name of reproach and disgrace? I pray you tell us what this strange word signifies, that we may know these hor­rid [Page 10]creatures by their names: let me tell you, it little becomes one that is a pretender to learning, to give his vote to so foolish a denomination, to so injurious a debasement and misacception of an innocent and honourable terme. Foolish it is, let whose will be the Nomenclator, for names or titles are imposed for di­stinction, and to set forth unto us the nature of things as they differ from others; and that either according to the importance of the word or title, which doth in the etymologie or sense of it represent the thing entitled thereby; or else according to a customary received use and acception of the word or stile, whereby it is by usurpation drawne from that which it pro­perly signifies to represent some other thing, either by limiting the signification thereof, or diverting it to something that hath some resemblance or analogy unto the proper signification, or perhaps through meere ignorance of barbarisme, or a blinde and wilfull prescription of custome, embraced by the people at all adventures; which notwithstanding when it is once growne currant, it is no wisedome in any to contradict, so that it be but an harmelesse absurdity: or else sometimes names or stiles are imposed upon individuals which are of that multitude, and their personall properties so obscure, that they can hardly be all knowne, or designed by proper attributes, upon such some­times, and indeed most commonly, unlesse by some extraordi­nary providence they are imployed by those that have the pow­er, ex instituto, of meere voluntary choice of the imposers, without any regard unto any similitude or proportion that the name beareth unto the person, upon which it is imposed as a meere voluntary marke upon them, to distinguish them from others; or sometimes they are imposed as common markes up­on those that are of the same stock and kindred, either by ori­ginall descent, or by translation, or engraffing, as by matrimo­niall contract, adoption, or the like. But this stile as you have no ground at all to make this a stile of ignominy unto any, in­deed as a name of honour, so it hath been used as Eques which is a Cavalier in Latine, was an ordinary and almost the onely usuall word to signifie a Gentleman, or Nobleman amongst the Romans; and so you may plead the usage of the word to ap­ply [Page 11]it to His Majesties Army, where you may finde almost all the Gentry, and the greatest part of the Nobility of the King­dome, whom you may not amisse in this sense stile the Cava­liers, in opposition to that Rabble of the meaner sort of discon­tented people, that make up the Bellum servile on the other side. So indeed it is very proper to designe forth those noble and honourable Commanders of His Majestie, whose veines are full of Princely and Noble bloud, that can admit of no taint of disloyalty, in opposition to those right honourable Button­makers, and the rest of those right famous mechanicke Com­manders, who are of late become intolerable fumblers in this strange and new trade of warre, to the great danger of their forgetting of their occupations. But how than doth it be­come a name of reproach amongst you? surely wee may well guesse what care you have, and the rest of your party, to main­taine the honour and dignity of the State, when you goe about to make the very termes of honour to become contumelies and reproaches. Is it not enough for you to put confusion into the frame of the State, but you must also confound the language of the Common-wealth. But indeed you may be excused perhaps in point of policy, for you were somewhat hard driven to finde out a stile for the designation of that party whom you oppose; and therefore it is no wonder if in so great necessity you take the boldnesse to make a force upon the language, as well as the estates and liberties of the Subject, by drawing the one by vio­lence from their proper signification, as well as the other from their proper possessours; for indeed what should we call them. Rebels? Surely that might have done well, but it seemes your consciences could not digest so great and palpable a misappli­cation: you know well to whom that stile did properly be­long it's like, and you could not be so injurious unto them, as to make so unjust an alienation of their property. What than? should you call them the Royalists, or the Kings party? No. There was no policy in that, for it was nece [...]y for you to use His Majesties name, that you might not fright the people with a bare-fac't rebellion; but therein indeed you doe exceedingly discolour it, and in going about to hide it, you lay the wicked­nesse [Page 12]thereof so much the more bare unto any discerning eye. The very stile of your warre condemnes the very action of it, and declares you to be ashamed of your owne enterprise, since you are faine to maske over the face of it with an empty vayle of a pretence of loyalty, and therein you fulfill that saying of our Saviour; He that doth evill hateth the light, neither com­eth unto the light, because their deedes are evill. Oh that you durst be but so honest, so ingenuous in your wickednesse, as to averre that you doe in plaine termes. Surely this sculking un­der false colours, and hiding of your selves behind a thred, makes but little for the credit of your designe, if you dare ju­stifie what you doe speake plainly; and let the people know it, lest hereafter when they finde how they have beene decei­ved, they fall to curse you for your collusion, when they shall lie weltring in their owne bloud, and shall expire in the votes of your damnation. But it is the nature of vice to be so con­scious of its deformity, as not to dare to come abroad but under the name of vertue. Treason dares as well be hang'd, drawne, and quartered, as be seene abroad without a disguise. And therefore however you (I speake not of you all) may seeke the ruine of His Majesties Person or Government, yet you will pro­test to maintaine His Majesties Person, and His Honour and Estate too: And your stile must be for the King and Parliament, wherein indeed you let us know if we had eyes, that you ought to be for the King, and in being against him, your owne title confesseth you to be —. But I pray you by the way, why is not for God and the King as good, as for the King and Parlia­ment? I pray you tell us why you unsheath'd you swords a­gainst those that come under that motto into your hands, is it because you are against God? or against the King? or are you for them severally, or against them when together? Me-thinks such a conjunction should make no separation. Well, but how­ever you are for the King: you durst not trust the queazinesse of the peoples stomacks without this allay of His Majesties name upon that hard diet you prescribe them. But indeed we may thanke them for it, for had they beene but of so strong a constitution as you could have wisht, it's probable they should [Page 13]ne're have had that sawce unto their meat, but the name as well as the authority of His Majestie should have beene forgotten amongst you, unlesse sometimes you had thought good to talke of him in reproach, or so. I remember a pretty tryall that was once made upon the people unto this purpose; perhaps it was not so well noted by all men. When that strange Ordinance of the Militia was to be put in execution in the County of War­wick, by the late Lord Brookes, and some others that were put in commission for that purpose, the Warrants for the drawing together of that County, were first sent abroad without His Majesties name, to feele the people, as it may seeme, whether they would digest it or no; and if it had passed for currant, it's a great question whether the King should have beene heard of any more in the businesse. But when the Commissioners found the dislike of the people, and that the Warrants were excepted against as invalid, for want of the mention of the Kings Autho­rity: they could readily then pretend it as an over-sight, and mi­stake in the drawing of the Warrants, and it was presently mended. And ever since the Kings name (if I may so speake) hath beene taken in vaine, and is set as a lye unto the whole bu­sinesse. But, I pray you, give me leave a little, is there any likely hood that that was an over-sight? did they imploy men of no better trust and discretion in the transcribing and sending abroad of their Warrants, that none of them could discerne the errour? or could they be so strangely constant in a mistake in a matter of so great moment, as to let it passe through such a mul­titude of Warrants, as were then sent abroad into that County, and no man amongst them all so wise as to reforme it in any one of them? Things that are done by mistake and over-sight are commonly found but rare and inconstant: but when the same errour goes through a whole businesse, it leaves a dangerous conjecture that it was purposely committed; and then certain­ly that had more of the Foxe, than of the Lyon. But what a strange unlucky thing it was, that they could light upon no er­rour but that, that they must needs leave out the principall si­new of the Warrant? Surely a man may doubt the King and his authority was but very slightly fixed in their thoughts, that [Page 14]they could not so much as dreame of him in the writing out of so many Warrants. What confidence can the people have, that the great businesse they looke after shall be well mannaged in the hands of those that are so apt to over-see? They had need to take heed how they follow them at a venture, or how they commit their consciences unto their guidance. But sure if it were an over-sight, it would make a man guesse that there was Digitus Dei in it, to make them speake plainly their inten­tions against their wills, and that God suffered them in their haste to send the hagge abroad undrest, and without her vaile. That the people, if they would not be wilfully blinde, might see what a beautifull businesse they were invited to admit into their embraces. And that they might behold this rebellion in its owne colours, and learne to hate and abhorre it with their soules, for surely the face is the same still, though the maske be on; and they that are so easie as to beleeve otherwise, are doubly abused, and made at once not onely Rebels, but even starke fooles and Idiots. But the people disliked it naked, and so the vayle was quickly put on againe, and all was well. Now they must beleeve there is nothing but beauty in it: the Kings stile walkes fairely in the front of the businesse, and they must rebell against the King, for the King and Parliament. And so they must by no meanes call them that are truly for His Maje­stie, the Kings party, or by any name like unto that; but the name of Cavaliers must be their stile, and, though without sense or reason, their contumelie and reproach too. But a man of your learning should not have subscribed to such an absurd and sense­lesse injury, done unto a harmelesse and honourable terme.

At least a man of your calling should have beene wary how you had contributed to the present and future distempers of the people, by setting your hand to the passe of an odious terme. that serves for nothing, as it is now used, but to maintaine ran­cour and hatred amongst those that you should endeavour to unite in the bosome of the same Church, and in the body of the same Common-wealth. For my part, I beleeve those two names of Cavaliers and Roundheads, as they are now in use a­mongst some, were the inventions of the Arch-enemy of man­kinde, [Page 15]to blow the fire of division withall amongst us, and to nurse up an irreconcileable variance in this Nation. And there­fore I could wish there were a Law made for the utter abolish­ing of both those names, as they are now used for names of op­position, least the Devill and his complices under the one cast an odium upon the service of God, and under the other upon loyalty to our Prince. For my part I will endeavour to keepe them both out of my mouth in any such odious acception, sith I conceive them to be full of uncharitable non-sens. And I am sure you did not well to become the Devils fueller, by con­tributing to the passage of that odious title as it is made, where­by you here entitle the Kings Subjects: it were more proper worke for you to quench fires, then to foment them. But we know well enough who you meane, and is it necessary then that we must be devoured by the Cavaliers, as you call them; or the Parliament? Is our great expectation of the redresse of our grievances come to this? Is this the fruit of two yeares consultation? Is this all the advantage that hath beene made unto the poore abused people of the Land, of all those large and happy opportunities, that have beene afforded this Parlia­ment for the procurement of the good and safety of Church and State: that out of our feares and doubts we should be now concluded and shut up unto an unavoidable ruine? Sure if it be so, we must needs conclude, that the wisedome of humane Counsels is not omnipotent; and that the Argos eyes of the greatest politique bodies may be sometimes so charmed asleepe, as to betray their charge unto danger, especially when they intercept the free entercourse betwixt themselves and the head, and that there is no confiding even in Parliaments them­selves. And it may be God is now about to teach us this les­son, That we may learne to rely upon none but him; and that he hath now suffered us to faile of our hopes, that he may in­struct us by experience to place them better, than upon the wisedome or power of any concurrence of humanity, even upon none, but upon that indefeatable power, and that incorruptible wisedome that is in God himselfe. And indeed this lesson if it be well learn't may be worth more to us than any other good that we gaped for, since there can be no greater strengthening [Page 16]unto a Nation or People, then to teach them to deny all strength in the creature, and to cast themselves totally upon God. I confesse for my owne part I once thought with the rest, That the calling of a Parliament had beene almost that Pan­chreston, that [...], that universall medicine, that would have brought with it a cure for all our diseases. Yea, and I yet thinke, that if we take a Parliament in the right and genuine sense, as it is, or ought to be, an entire body, unmaymed, un­mangled, and undivided, it is one of the best grounds for a confidence to rest on, that the sphere of mortality can yeild us. And therefore if we be not altogether indocible, the Lord hath hereby taken the most absolute and summary course, to beat off our dependance upon any earthly thing that wee can almost possibly imagine; since he hath hereby shewed us the fayling of that, which of most things that the world can affoord, was most likely to yeild an all-sufficiency to our hopes. But I could wish, if it had pleased God, that we might have learn't this do­cument by some more gentle meanes, and that we had not de­served to have such a curse sent upon that which we tooke for the greatest of our blessings, as to be put into such a miserable strait betweene the devouring jawes of two inevitable destru­ctions, like the poore Israelites betweene the Egyptians and the Sea; or like the miserable Brittaines infested by the Picts, betweene the slaughter of the enemy, and the devouring of the waves, when they sent that lamentable complaint unto the Ro­mans, To Agilius thrice Consull the sighs of the Brittains. The enemy drives us to the Sea, the Sea drives us backe againe to the enemy, so betweene both we are either drowned or slaine: but yet we hope better for all your Augury, God can open a passage where you can see none, for the escaping of both these dangers. To conclude this point, we have two Answers to your Observation. First, it is but your groundlesse presumption and surmise, or rather it may be your excogitated pretence; That if those you speake of should yet be so just as to let men alone with their propriety and liberties, they should then ne­cessarily be made a prey both in their goods and lives unto those you stile Cavaliers. Nay, we doe firmely beleeve, that if they [Page 17]might be suffered to retaine their owne, and not forced or per­swaded by you and your like, to contribute to that unjustifiable designe which is on foot, they might have a farre more comfor­table enjoyment of their estates and lives too, by the protecti­on of His Majesties goodnesse and justice, then you can promise them by that course you advise them to: whether it be that you would have them be content to be plundered, or willingly to offer up their rights. Neither doe those that have experience of them finde the Cavaliers (as you stile them) such ravenous beasts as you would make them, I could name some places where they have most to doe, where the people enjoy both their lives and goods farre more peaceably and quietly upon the termes and obedience and subjection to their Prince, then as we beleeve you in London can boast of, or any other places where your party hath long setled. Witnesse Oxford, Worcester, and the rest. We heare not in those places of any such violence of­fered to men in their estates and liberties, as you have so fre­quent amongst you in other places.

But if the danger were as great as you would make it. In the second place it is but a poore miserable comfort that you offer unto the poore people, when you would have them give up their estates unto your party, that they may be free from the Cavaliers. Ne moriare mori is a strange kinde of medicine, you would not like such a recipe from your Physitian, I beleeve. This is in a sort to advise a man to drowne himselfe, and tell him it is a sure way to scape hanging: or to cast his goods in­to the Sea, to keepe them from a Pirat. Or as if one should meet me upon the high-way, and advise me to give him my purse upon faire termes, least another that comes after may take it by force: it is indeed to perswade the people to imbrace a certaine ruine to avoid a possible one. But thirdly, what justice is it in your party to take upon them to deprive the Subjects of their rights and liberties, under the pretence of preventing o­thers from doing them the like, or a greater mischiefe. That conscience walkes by no perfect rule that thinkes it lawfull to commit the least injustice, to prevent another from doing a greater. And therefore this your Observation is a very poore [Page 18]allay, either unto the peoples misery and oppression, or unto the guilt of those that act it upon them: and your question up­on the matter in the Historicall consideration, Whether they had rather part with it, that is, with their estates to the Parlia­ment, or that and their lives too to the Cavaliers, makes not a mite either to the comfort of their wretched condition, or to the justice of their illegall taxations, which yet we beleeve in all things considerable, is unparallelled in any History. And therefore notwithstanding all that you have said, they may still cry out, never such times, such taxations, such precedents, such a warre. And so I have done with your second sort of Obser­vations.

The third classis of your Commentations, is upon the busi­nesse in a legall consideration, wherein you offer some Proposi­tions to those your Malignants, as you call them, that are skil­led in the Law.

The first is, Whether you had better trust to your owne strength, or another mans favour for your defence?

Answ. This question I can scarce see how it is very perti­nent to the businesse in hand, but whilst you are obscure, you thinke perhaps that wee are bound to take you to be wise; but as it is you may take this answer to it. That it is not very good for you to trust either to your owne strength, or another mans favour for your safety: and I would advise you to write more divine like hereafter, then to build upon such suppositions of carnall considence. The best way is for you to trust God alone for your safety, and that you may have comfort in that, to live in that subjection and obedience to your lawfull Soveraigne, his immediate substitute, as the Lord requires at your hands; and that's the safest way for the people too; for they are like to find but little advantage to themselves, that goe about to worke out their owne security by resisting the divine ordi­nance: leave therefore these carnall contrivances, and if you are wise and honest, shew it in advising the people to live in that obedience unto His Majesty, that God, who hath placed Him over them, looks for from them; teach them without con­sulting with the flesh, to doe that God requires of them, who [Page 19]is best able to secure them against all dangers that can befall them in their duties unto Him: and yet let me tell you withall, that though wee must not trust upon the favour of any other for our safety, yet where God hath so ordered it in his provi­dence, and enjoyned it by his authority, wee must make use of the favour of another, or at least of the justice and authority of another for our defence and safeguard, and not altogether of our owne strength; or otherwise, what confusion would it not bring into the world, if every man must stand or fall by his owne strength, the weakest would be sure then to goe to the wall, and every man that were more powerfull then another, might be ready to build up his owne security by the danger and ruine of others that had lesse strength then he, though farre greater right; but you tell us what you meane here by strength, My strength (say you) is the Law, against which if the Govern­ment command, it does me wrong, if I obey, I doe my selfe wrong. To this I answer, that it is true in some sense, that the strength of the Subject is the Law under God; but yet this strength which is the law is not to be managed or inforc't by every pri­vate hand; but by him principally to whom God hath princi­pally given the charge of it, within this Kingdome is his Ma­jesty, whose authority and power is to give life unto the law, either immediately by himselfe, or by his subordinate instru­ments, unto whom authority is derived from him to that pur­pose: for the law is dead in a sort, but when it is in the Magi­strates hand, whose power is as it were the soule of the law, otherwise the law would quickly become destructive unto it selfe, if every private man might take upon him to set the force of it in motion. And therefore though private men know the law never so well, yet they may not ordinarily be their owne carvers by it, but must be content to receive the benefit thereof from the Magistrates hand, otherwise our Saviour might seeme to aske an impertinent question, who made me a Iudge or a Ru­ler over you? And therefore though the law be the strength of the people, yet the people must expect to receive this their strength by the dispensation of the supreme Magistrate and his substitutes, and not at their pleasure to carve it out unto them­selves, [Page 20]otherwise the office of a Magistrate were to little pur­pose in the Common-wealth. But yet this law is to be the rule of government, and as you say truly, if the Government command against, it does you wrong, if you obey, you do your selfe wrong: and why then doe you countenance those illegall Ordinances, and other commands that are now on foot, which are directly contrary to the knowne law of the Kingdome, and so clearely and directly injurious to the Subject? Or why doe you woo the people to obey them, and so to become accessaries to their owne wrong? And yet let me tell you, as for the su­preame Magistrate, who hath none above him upon earth that can authorize you against him, this will by no meanes inferre the lawfulnesse of a resistance, such a one as is now on foot; for though it be true that if he command contrary to the Law of the Kingdome, he therein doth the Subject wrong, yet hee is not accountable therefore unto us, but unto God, since he hath no superiour upon earth that hath corrective power over him; and therefore to his judgement we must leave him, who onely is above him, since he is acknowledged by Parliament to be su­preame upon earth in the government of his Kingdomes. That saying of one herein may seeme much to the purpose. Reges si aliquando potestate sibi concessâ abutuntur, non sunt à nobis gra­viter exasperandi, sed ubi sacerdotum admonitionibus non acqui­everunt, Domino judicio sunt reservandi: And therefore it is not in the power of any to take up Armes against him to force him to doe right, but we must learne of David to leave them unto God, 1 Sam. 24.12, 15. And though in some cases perhaps you may be said to doe wrong unto your selfe, if you should obey the command of the King contrary to the Law; yet it is not so in all cases, for we finde examples, and one most authen­ticall one, of active obedience unto the Magistrate, even com­manding contrary to Law and right: for we finde our Saviour paying tribute unto the Officers of Caesar, though they required it unjustly, and contrary to Law and right, and against the li­berty of the Subject, as our Saviour intimates, Matth. 17.25. First, there our Saviour shewes it to be a freedome belonging unto him. What thinkest thou Simon (saith our Saviour unto [Page 21] Peter) of whom doe the Kings of the earth take custome or tri­bute? of their owne children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, of strangers? Jesus said unto him, then are the children free. Where our blessed Saviour proves that Caesar could not justly require tribute of him, as is cleare unto any man of judge­ment. Well, what doth our Saviour doe then, doth he stand upon his termes, doth he send Peter unto them with an harsh denyall? or command him to draw his sword and set them packing? No, he condescends with a non obstante to his owne freedome, notwithstanding, (saith that blessed Master of obe­dience, to the silencing of all rebellious mouthes) least wee should offend them. What? Why he will have it paid, both for himselfe and Peter, and yet we doe not finde that so much was required, but onely of our Saviour himselfe, as if our Savi­our would even almost supererrogate in obedience: nay, hee will worke wonders but he will doe it. And he that would not doe a miracle to feed himselfe when he was hungry, by tur­ning a stone into bread; yet he will doe a miracle to give us an example of obedience, and to pay tribute to Caesar, though re­quiring it against right, by making a fish become his treasurer, to supply his wants for so good a purpose. The riches of the Sea shall be ransackt for it, rather than he will give the least coun­tenance to disobedience; and his watry Subjects shall pay tri­bute unto him that was King of Kings and Lord of Lords. That he being now in the forme of a servant, might pay it to his vas­sall an earthly Prince, Notwithstanding, least we should offend them, saith he to Peter, Goe thou to the Sea and cast in thy hooke, and take up the fish that first commeth up, and when thou hast opened his mouth thou shalt finde a piece of money, that take and give unto them for thee and me. Marke, I beseech you, though he might have pleaded his liberty, and so, as you speak, might seeme to wrong himselfe in condescending; yet (saith he) lest we should offend them: Ʋnicuique licet renunciare privilegio suo, and therefore hee will rather dispence with his owne priviledge, then give offence by causing a disturbance in the Kingdome, or by making the least shew or appearance of disobedience to Governours, thereby to bring a scandall upon [Page 22]the doctrine that he taught, or upon the Christian religion that he came to plant in the world: from whence for your con­version (if it may be) if not, for your confusion (I doubt it will be) I collect this Observation against yours, That wee may and ought to obey the Magistrate, though commanding against the Law; and so wrongfully, to our owne private injury, where the disobedience is like to be offensive, in causing a disturbance in the State, or scandall in the Church. Will you have the point clearely discussed, take it then thus. The question is, and indeed it is a maine one, how the Subject is to carry himselfe toward His Majestie, in case he command contrary to the Law? I hope I shall give you a right determination of this doubt in these severall propositions. First, I grant it clearely that the King in duty ought not to command any thing contrary to the Law; for the Law is unto the King as the Rule unto the Buil­der, the Compasse unto the Pilot, the Map or Card unto the Travailer, whereby he ought to gage and square out all his mo­tions and actions of regality and government; and whereso­ever his operations are disproportioned unto this rule, they are irregular.

2. The command of the King or supreame Magistrate may be said to be against the Law two severall wayes; either so as that it enjoynes me to doe something which the Law forbids me, or forbids me to doe that which the Law enjoynes me. Which is against my duty that I owe unto the Law; or else in that it commands me to doe or leave undone something, which the law gives me freedome not to doe, or not to leave undone, which is against the priviledge that the law allowes me: in the first case I ought not to obey him actively, for the law of the Kingdome is the declared and deliberate will of the supreme Magistrate, and therefore so to obey him, were to disobey him, since thereby (as one hath well sayd) I should disobey his deliberate will to obey his suddaine will, which is unreasona­ble. Yet in this case I must obey him passively, by submitting unto the punishment that hee shall inflict upon me, at least so farre as to forbeare all forcible resistance.

In the second case, I may and ought sometimes to obey him, [Page 23]since therein, though he indeed may seeme to breake the law in commanding, yet I doe not breake it in obeying, sith the law though it allow me, yet it doth not tie me to my privi­ledge, and therefore forgoing it, I doe not contradict my duty to the law, but onely forgoe the liberty that the law gives me, which I may and must forgoe (sometimes at least) that I may obey the command of the supreme Magistrate, in case it may make for the obtaining or preserving of some greater good, or for the prevention of greater evill, then the preservation of my liberty can recompence. As where the forgoing my free­dome or priviledge in my estate may preserve some greater good unto my selfe, or may make for the peace of the Com­mon-wealth, or for the preservation of some great and notable disturbance in the State, or where it may further the peace of the Church, or prevent scandall from our profession, or impe­diment from the preaching of the Gospell, or the like. I prove it thus; First, à fortiori, If I ought for these causes to depart from the liberty which the law of God allowes me, much more then ought I in such cases to depart from the liberty which I am invested in by the law of man; if from my christian liberty, much more from my civill liberty. But the former is cleere, much more then the latter; for there is no man that can rea­sonably deny but for peace sake, and to avoid scandall, I ought to dispense with my christian liberty; for this, wee have both precept and example, precept 1. Cor. 8.8, 9. Galat. 5.13. Rom. 14. from vers. 12. to the end. Examples wee have too, and those pregnant ones, as that of Paul dispensing with that liberty which he had in Christ from the ceremonies of the law, for peace sake, and to further the Gospell, and for prevention of scandall, and this wee have both in his practice and professi­on, in his practice, Act. 16.3. where wee find him circumci­sing Timothy for peace sake with the Jewes, and that the Gospell might not be hindered: and upon the same ground wee find him purifying himselfe, Act. 21.26. and that by the advice of Saint Iames and the Elders, his profession you may see also to this purpose, 1 Cor. 8.13. if meate make my bro­ther to offend, I will eate no flesh while the world standeth, [Page 24]lest I make my brother to offend; yea in Act. 15. in that fa­mous Apostolicall Synod, we finde the Apostles, for peace sake, and to avoid scandall, making a constitution for the abnege­ment of that freedome in meates and drinks which the Church had obtained in Christ, as you may see in that first and most au­thenticall decretall Epistle which is there recorded, sent from the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church, by the hands of Paul and Barnabas, together with Iudas and Silas, unto the brethren which were of the Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia, which examples and precepts if they were well considered, they would teach us more moderation and charity then is found in too many in these dayes, who are ready to turne the Church upside downe, upon every fancyed inconve­nience that they apprehend in the discipline or ceremonies of the Church, they cry up liberty, liberty, but in the meane time they make havock of the Church in that that more neerly con­cernes us, which is peace and unity; whereas the Apostles teach us both by precept and example, that wee are rather to part with liberty then peace, and that many other inconve­niences, even as great ones as Circumcision was after Christ, may be admitted, rather then the peace disturbed, or the preaching of the Gospell hindred. And if wee may and ought upon such termes to part with our christian liberty, then surely it is most reasonable that upon the like termes, (i. e.) for the peace of the Common-wealth, to prevent disturbance, to avoid scandall, or to make way for the Gospell, wee ought to depart from our civill liberty; for sicut se habet libertas chri­stiana ad pacem Ecclesiae, sic se habet libertas civilis ad pacem reipubl. And therefore in such case the command of the su­preme Magistrate is to be obeyed, though it be contrary to the law, in that that concernes the priviledge or liberty of the Sub­ject. Secondly, this is more precisely confirmed here by the example of our Saviour, who to avoid scandall, obeyed Caesars Officers, and made Peter joyne with him therein, although it were against his liberty and priviledge, as our Saviour seemes to intimate. So it appeares cleerly that our Saviour was free by the law or custome of that Nation, and yet to avoid scandall [Page 25]or offence, he obeyed Caesars Officers requiring tribute of him, though contrary to the liberty of the Subject; and Christi a­ctio nostra instructio, you cannot walke more safely then in the footsteps of Christ in those things that concerne either your civill or spirituall conversation: this will be a farre more au­thenticall guide unto the people, then any rules you can pre­scribe against it, especially in those things which he did of or­dinary dispensation, as this which was not a matter of power but submission, &c. And therefore I may aske, did Christ well or no in paying tribute against the liberty of the Subject, and so in obeying Caesars Officers command against the law of the Kingdome? I doubt not but you will answer, yes, (unlesse you are out of love with him too because he is a King) but here he presents himselfe to us as a subject, well, why than I say unto you, and to every other man, as our Saviour once in another case, [...], the demand of tribute against the law was sinfull in the Officers, but our Saviours obedience was good and laudable, (as he did all things well) and therefore imitable by us. Thirdly, this will appeare by the rule of reason in three conclusions, which I hope you will not deny: the first is this, That wee may and ought to dispense with our pri­vate right, where it cannot likely be preserved without a pub­lique ruine; nature teacheth the arme to expose it selfe to a blow to save the head and the whole body; for the generall safety is alwayes to be preserved afore the particular, though never so neere us.

Secondly, That the preservation of the Church from scan­dall, or the Common-wealth from division is the preservation of a publique good, and the prevention of a publique evill; and both these are in themselves full as good, or better then liberty, and therefore, especially, when they are enlarged by the ad­vantage of the gratuity of them in respect of a private free­dome: and this is according to the rule of charity; for as Mr Calvin well hath it, sicut charitas fidei, ita libertas subjici­enda est charitati: and therefore although it be granted, that where nothing else is to be considered, the Magistrate doth an injury in commanding you contrary to the law of the King­dome, [Page 26]and that you doe wrong unto your selfe in obeying such a command; yet if the command enjoyne you nothing that is contrary to the commanding part of the law of God, or the Common-wealth, but onely against the permissive part there­of, not against duty but priviledge, you ought to obey in such case rather then give occasion of scandall upon the Church, or bring reproach to your profession, or disturbance to the peace of the State wherein you live. And in such case, your obedi­ence is no wrong to your selfe, but your disobedience a wrong to the Church and Common-wealth.

Thirdly, By way of corollary to prevent an evasion, least any should object that the publique liberty is endangered by suffering entrenchments to be made upon the private. The third conclusion is this, that as publique good is to be preferred afore private, so amongst publique and private goods, peace is more necessary than liberty, as that which concerneth the very being of a body is more necessary then that which concerneth onely the well being: now that peace concerneth the very being of a State, our Saviour himselfe seemes to instruct us, when he tells us, That a Kingdome divided cannot stand. But we cannot say so of liberty, and therefore even the publike li­berty is to be dispens'd with for publike peace: we must dis­pense with commodities for preservation of essences. Besides that we have learnt by lamentable experience, that when li­berty is built up upon the ruines of peace, it cannot stand long upon such a foundation, but is quickly buried in the ruines which it hath made: Pax est custos libertatis, The peace of the Kingdome is the nurse and guardian of the liberty and free­dome of the State; and if you take away that to preserve this, it is as if you should pull downe the foundation to inlarge the building: or, as if you should send away the nurse for the pre­servation of the childe, or remove the fuell to maintaine the fire. And truly I conceive this rule may be well observed, for the discovery and prevention of one maine plot of the Devill, who hath beene ever and anon setting liberty against peace, and exposed this to ruine by the intemperate desire of that. This is the ordinary stratagem of Satan to set Schisme a-foot in the [Page 27]Church liberty; liberty hath cryed downe peace there. This is the very engine whereby he doth usually convey sedition and faction into the body of the State; liberty, liberty, it that po­pular voyce, together with a pretence of Religion, whereby the peace of the State hath beene so often demolished and cast downe: for my part I wish there may be a perpetuall contract betweene peace and liberty, but if one must goe, we had farre better part with liberty then peace. And therefore by the way we may note, that they are no better Polititians then they are Christians, that goe about to preserve or recover liberty by Se­dition; their first care should be to preserve the integrity of the body, and then that it may be fat and well-liking. And now it is very easie for me to bring it home unto you, since it is as clear as the light. That however the commands of His Maje­stie have been either with or against the Law of the Kingdome, as concerning matter of priviledge & liberty; the disobedience, and much more the active resistance of you and your party is most clearely, to the great disturbance of the State, yea even al­most to the destruction thereof, whither it is still drawing nea­rer and nearer by that meanes, and how foone it may come to that unhappy period we know not. And it is as cleare, that it hath beene very scandalous to the Church and our profession, and given as much or more occasion to the enemies of God to blaspheme, and exposed the Protestant Religion, yea the whole profession of Christianity, more to ignominy and reproach; and to an odium with interesse, than any action, that hath beene publikely carried by the professours of the Protestant Religion, since the Reformation, hath ever done: And therefore you must either professe your selves to be much more wise then our Saviour, which I hope you dare not averre; or to be much more wicked then becometh those that professe to be his Dis­ciples, which I doubt you will not admit. But, I pray you, what commands doe you finde enjoyned you by His Majestie, contrary to the Law of the Kingdome, as concerning the com­manding part thereof? or when against the priviledge or li­berty that he denyeth to them? If you should aske me the like question on the other side, I beleeve I could furnish you with [Page 28]store of instances. Since I take it, it may be easily proved, that the whole businesse, and the maine body of that designe which is now in hand against His Majestie, is a bastard issue, and can derive no pedigree from the Law either of God or man to make it legitimate. As for His Majestie, He desires nothing but that Authority to be acknowledged in Him, which the Law hath placed in Him: He desires to make the knowne Law of the Kingdome the onely rule of His rule and Government. But it is by no meanes so on the other side, if they can finde any co­lours from the Lawes that may put any plausible appearance of legality upon their businesse, well and good: but if not, let the Law cry never so loud, A monstrous headlesse vote of the dis­membred Houses of Parliament, or for a need of the House of Commons alone, without or against the King and the House of Lords, shall be countenance, though to set forward the prosecu­tion of their most illegall purposes. And to make good their Pro­testation for the maintenance of the true Protestant Religion, the Honour and Estate of His Majestie, the Priviledges of Par­liament, the Lawes of the Kingdome, and the Liberty of the Subject; The Protestant Religion must be scorned and re­proached, by Brownists, Anabaptists, and Atheists; The Ho­nour and State of His Majestie must be exposed to the con­tempt of the vilest of the people; The Priviledges of Parlia­ment must be perpetually trampled on at the pleasure of some few that are predominant in the Houses, by casting out the Members, by meere arbitrary Votes, for nothing but because they make use of that priviledge which the Law allowes, and the Houses themselves begged and obtained of His Majestie at their first entrance upon their consultation for a freedome of speech, (nay sometime a whole side as it were of the House of Lords, first forced out by terrour and tumult, and then voted out upon meere pleasure.) And the power and authority of the House of Commons, to a most palpable abusing and betray­ing of the trust reposed in them by His Majestie and the people of the Land, reduced to a close Committee of about 15 or 16 persons: some strange designe sure that they have in hand, that they must get into such corners, and have such cloudes over [Page 29]them to cover it. And they say the businesse is made a night-worke too, it seemes they dare not trust the Sunne with it, a fit time to consult about a worke of darkenesse. But they must re­member either now or hereafter, that there is a light over them that they see not, that discovers all their secrets. There is one still amongst them that they cannot vote out neither, to whom light and darkenesse are both alike, and the night is as cleare as the day. There is an invisible notary too that takes our records of all their determinations and plots; and truely they had best finde him out, and prevaile with him if they can to take an oath of secrecy: (which they can never doe) before they pro­ceed any farther in the businesse; for as sure as they live hee'le reveale all else, and a thousand to one will undoe all their plots by some counter-plot or other, and will be as bad as an Elisha to the King of Syria, to defeat and disappoint their most secret designes. They may guesse at some thing if they will by what hath already fallen out; they have had divers experiments how unprosperously their counsels thrive: And therefore methinks Master Pym might well propose that question, that the King of Syria did unto his servants, upon the severall defeats that hee observed to have befallen him in his enterprises against Israel. Will yee not shew me which of us is for the King? But to save him a labour, let him but the next time they meet reade the 12 first verses of the 139 Psalme, and a hundred to one that will be as good as any charme they can use to discover him who it is that doth thus secretly intrude into their counsels, and that doth thus defeat and make voyde all their most subtile contrivances, so that hitherto for the most part they have brought forth nothing but winde, though I confesse it hath beene a whirle-winde that hath disturbed and shaken the frame both of Church and State. Even the very same that defeated the Counsell of Achitophel against David; little doe they thinke how he sits and laughs at their most wise plots and con­trivances of wickednesse. Let them but looke into the second Psalme, and they may see him at it methinkes, if they could but put on the spectacle of the Psalmist. They may there see him as it were deriding at them, and laughing at their grave [Page 30]and prudent madnesse, whilest they with such confidence sit together, as if all the wisedome in the world were in their breasts, striving to breake off from themselves and others, the bonds and cords of the Lords Anointed. Little do they see how he blasts all their consultations? how he damps all their purpo­ses, even as fast as they give them issue: reade Is. 8.9, 10.

Oh that they would at length be wise indeed, and remem­ber that woe of the Prophet, Is. 29.15. Woe be to them that seeke deepe to hide their counsell from the Lord, and their workes are in the darke; and they say, Who seeth us? and who knoweth us? Surely your turning of things upside downe shall be esteemed as the potters clay. But is this to maintaine the priviledges of Parliament, to devest the Members of that power and trust re­posed in them by His Majestie and the people, and to commit the managing of the affaires of the Kingdome, to your new de­vice of a close Committee? And to make them not onely the Masters of the rest of the Members of the Houses, and them their slaves and shadowes; but to make them Lords Paramount over the King and the whole Kingdome, to require oathes of Allegeance unto them, as of late hath most insolently and im­piously beene done in London, (if wee are not mis-informed:) and to put the lives, liberties, and estates of all the people of the Land, into the disposing of a matter of 15 men, that have no such power given them either by King or Subjects; and those for ought we know, neither Angels, nor Saints, nor of the best sort of men, that they may sacrifice all at their pleasure to their passions; and no man must so much as aske a reason of them, for feare of pressing into a secret of State? Was there ever a Nation so befooled? Was there ever a people brought to such a passe? Is the famous and flourishing Government of this Nation, by the King and the States of the Kingdome under him, brought now to an Oligarchy, a meere usurpation, a most tyrannicall and arbitrary rule of 15 men, that are made as it were absolute Lords of the Lawes, the liberties, the lives and estates of the whole Nation? Sure they have played their cards well, they have shewed themselves excellent projectors; so handsomely and undescried, to set up a Monopoly in them­selves, [Page 31]both of Regall and Parliamentary power; a Monopoly upon the point of all the wealth and estates of the Kingdome. They have carried the businesse very cunningly, to bring things unto this passe, and when they have done to make such fooles of the poore people (whom they ride in the businesse, and like­ly enough laugh at them in their sleeves, to see how silly and simple the poore fooles are to be led so gently by the nose of them) as to get them out of conscience to undoe themselves, their wives and children, to furnish them with money, and to expose their lives unto the greatest dangers, to the losse of so many thousands of them: and all to make good their owne bondage and slavery to these Masters of the Close Committee. En quo discordia cives perduxit miseros! We have quarrelled our selves into a pretty condition. But shall we be mad still? Have the people of the Land abjured their senses and reason with their consciences? Will they never be weary of such a miserable slavery? Now for the Liberty of the Subject and the Lawes of the Kingdome, you may easily guesse what be­comes of them, when the Priviledges of Parliament are tram­pled on by their owne feet. Qui sibi nequam, cui bonus? if they make so bold with their owne, you may well imagine what they doe with ours. Or where, I beseech you, is the Magna Charta, is not that a Law of the Kingdome? When contrary to the very first words of that Charter, the liberties of the Church are professedly invaded, &c. Or what is become of the Petition of Right? which was so much talk't of hereto­fore, when at the pleasure of these men without any due pro­cesse at Law, the estates, nay, the lives of the Subject must be taken away by force and violence: witnesse the late murder of His Majesties Subjects at Bristol and at London by Martiall Law, (which no Law putteth into their hands, either without or against His Majesties Authority) for that loyall designe of theirs to have delivered up those Cities unto His Majestie. Or where is the Law for the Militia, or for the taking away of His Majesties Ships and Forts? Or where is there any Law to enable them to command any of the Kings Subjects to take up Armes against the King, whose Subjects they themselves con­fesse [Page 32]themselves to be in their language, though they do indeed most clearly deny it in their practise. Or is it subjection to seek the ruine of a Princes Authority and His life by open force and hostility; if this be subjection, I pray you tell me what is re­bellion? or why doe they dissemble with God and man in sti­ling themselves His Majesties most humble and obedient Sub­jects, when they are in actuall opposition against Him, and will neither obey Him nor the Law by which hee governes: if this be subjection, Jacke Cade had a great deale of wrong, and Wat Tyler too. And Percy and Catesby were a couple of fooles, that they would not come in to justifie themselves to be the Kings humble and obedient Subjects. But it seemes it is no wrong at all done by the people to themselves, when they obey the most unlawfull and most unreasonable commands of your party. But if you obey the King against the Law, you consent unto your owne wrong: but we cannot so much for­get our reason as to beleeve it. Or doe you meane to bring in a new reason, as well as a new religion? But I beseech you, what if I am not bound to obey him; nay, what if I am bound not to obey him, as in some cases I confesse I am, if His Ma­jestie should command me contrary to the Law of God, &c. must I needs then take up Armes? no certainly, in such case I must submit to His Authority, in the willing suffering of that punishment he shall inflict, as is afore-said. Or did our Saviour wrong himselfe in submitting unto Pilate? or did those good Christians in the Primitive times wrong themselves, when they glorified God so much in their chearfull sufferings upon this very ground. If you may be Judge they shall all have actions of the case against themselves, and were Martyrs in their owne wrong: indeed I doubt you'le never be guilty of such a sinne. And so I have done with your first Proposition that you pro­pose to the Malignants, as you most malignantly stile them, that are the Kings good Subjects. And now let us see what instru­ction you give us in your second, (Cum bonis avibus) What is it? The great offence of Authority is whatsoever is commit­ted against the State: spoken like a Politician. And what is this to your purpose. The great offence of Authority you say is [Page 33]whatsoever is committed against the security of the State. And I say so too, and inferre upon it, that therefore that designe which you are about, and would justifie, is one of the great of­fences against Authority; for what greater offence against the security of the State, then to incense a people to rebell against their Governour, or to teach them to trample under foot that supreame power of the Magistrate, and those Lawes of the Kingdome, upon which the safety and security of the State is established. Talke what you will of the danger and oppression of a tyranny, you may see if you will in the fruit of this your bloudy designe, that one rebellion and civill warre may bring in more mischiefe against the safety and security of the State, then halfe a dozen Tyrants would likely have done: for shew me any Tyrant that ever reigned in this or any other Kingdome, that by his single oppression brought a Kingdome to the sixth part of that consusion, that this ungodly designe now on foot hath brought our Kingdome unto. Great complaint there was of the tyranny of Ship-money and Loanes, &c. and are they not all reduced? But for my part (I care not who knowes my minde) though I cannot justifie the things, nor those that advised them, yet I conceive it had beene much better for us to have borne Ship-money, Loanes, Monopolies, and many more oppressions, then to have changed those burdens for such a con­fusion as is now brought into the State, which is like without Gods great mercy, to end in the ruine and destruction of the Nation: And therefore you are no good Counsellor for the safety and security of the State, for though that grand principle which is so much abused, be admitted for true, That Salus po­puli suprema lex, yet I can tell you it will make little for your purpose, since it is no way for the safety of the people, (as you see written in bloud before your eyes, upon Edge-hill, and at Braynceford, & many other places) that they should enabled to take up Armes against their Prince, as often as they shall fancy, or be perswaded by any others, that meane to plough with them for a crop to their owne ambition. That the Prince hath broken his covenant with them, or transgressed the limits and bounds of his Government. The peoples safety is never at [Page 34]greater hazzard, then when it is put into their owne hands: shew me a Common-wealth that ever suffered so much in the gripe of a Tyrant as many have done by the feet of a multitude, & otherwise your Observation will be turned against your self. And your owne penne will condemne you for a great offender against the security of the State, when you incense the people to maintaine Sedition: you see the Malignants are but little the wiser for this your second Proposition.

I come to your third. Heathens tell us, that the wise must give as much to the Law as may be, but to the Law-giver as little; for (sayes he) he is a man subject to passions, may be miscarried, &c. Had I a minde to cavill, I could quarrell at your Grammer. But let that passe: Heathens tell us, you say, Well said, it is very well done, Heathens are fit Authors for such an heathenish businesse. But yet you must deale electively amongst them, you may not take them all at adventure, some are too honest to countenance your businesse, and that's not well where Heathens must correct Christians. And truely I doubt you have mistaken your choice here, for what (I pray you) doe these Heathens tell you, That the wise must give as much to the Law as may be, but to the Law-giver as little, be­cause he is a man subject to passions. What doe you meane by the Law, if you meane the authenticall constitutions of the Kingdome, made by the King, with advice of the two Houses of Parliament. The quarrell is then His Majesties and ours, who doe complaine that there is too little given unto the Lawes; That they are vilified and despised, battered downe and demo­lished by I know not what arbitrary and illegall Ordinances: give you and your party the Law its due, and there will be quickly an end of the quarrell; then the King shall have His Rights and praeeminences acknowledged which the Lawes doe give Him, and the Subjects shall have their rights and liberties made good, and their lives secured from plunder and violence, which the Lawes allow them; then those offenders that have violated the Lawes shall be brought to condigne punishment: Then Brownists and Separatists, depravers of the Common-Prayer-Booke, and all rebellious and seditious people, shall [Page 35]have their due portions that the Law gives them; and in that distribution I doubt you would have little cause to rejoyce: Then the Militia of the Kingdome shall be restored into His hands, unto whose trust the Law hath committed it: Then new Lawes shall not be made without the royall assent of His Majestie: Then treason shall be treason againe, and loyalty shall be loyalty againe: Then the good Subjects of His Maje­stie shall not be imprisoned, or spoyled of their goods, or de­prived of their lives, without a due and a legall tryall: Then there shall be no Supersedeas'es sent out to prohibit or interdict a legall proceeding against any routs or riots in Southwarke: Then Habeas Corpus'es shall be granted unto the Subject upon just and legall causes, without any quarrell against the Judges. But alas, that's the cause that we groane, that you give so little to the Law. I would you were so good an Advocate as to per­swade those, whose part you seeme to act, to re-establish the Law in its full and authenticall force; and I thinke the King and his party will aske no more of you. But you deale deceit­fully with the Law, as well as with His Majestie: you talke much of it; you speake it faire, you give it good words, but in the meane time you make too little account of the force of it, it is with your party no better then Sampsons withes or cords, at best you use it but as a leaden Lesbian rule, bending it and bow­ing it to your owne purposes; and things never go right when the structure is made the measure of the rule. But I would faine know what you here meane by the Law-giver, whose portion you would have to be so straitened, as little as may be to be gi­ven unto him. Doe you meane by the Law-giver the King? I thanke you for that then, for sure that is your meaning. But truely in my opinion you deserve to be complained of to the Close Committee, for giving so much as that stile imports unto His Majestie, for if the King be the Law-giver, then the Legis­lative power is not in the Houses, but in the King; for there must be but one Law-giver, unlesse you meane to confound the body of the Common-wealth, (as indeed it seemes you doe) and then what will become of your Ordinances of Parliament? Sure you have much to answer for for this; neither can I see [Page 36]how you will slip the collar, unlesse you should say, that by Law-giver here you understand the Houses of Parliament. And then you runne into another errour, that will deserve the Barre; for sure it will be thought a strange doctrine there, that as little as may be should be given unto the two Houses, that we may give the more unto the Lawes. It will seeme then that you would have them regulated by the Lawes, and not to be left unto such a God-like power of arbitrary rule, as some seeme to affect. Sure this was not well considered, otherwise Master Glyn might have beene sent upon another message unto you, then to give you thankes for your Sermon, even to have requi­red you to make a recantation, and the Order before your Booke should have ended there. That no man should presume to print your Sermon, and then Andrew Crooke might have had the more leisure; but I see wise men may sleepe. Indeed we may see plainly here, how they that shoot upward against God or his Substitute, make a marke of their owne heads: and here you may note too what a scurvy scab this conscience is, that will speake interlocutory truths for us, even a-fore wee are a­ware, even when we are bent to the most contrary falshoods. You might have done well to have lookt a-fore you had leapt into this Dilemma, if you had beene more constant in your er­rours they might perhaps have pass't the better. But this ree­ling shewes you to be drunke, whether with malice or ambiti­on, or popularity, I know not: you cannot walke steedily it seemes, a giddinesse that many of your side are sicke of. Now you are on one side, now on another; so here you have cleare­ly forsaken your rote, and reeled cleane over the gutter to the other side. However you would be understood, you are a very Royalist in this, though indeed you confound your selfe too by contrarieties even in the same period, so that I can scarce tell what to make of you, neither do I beleeve you very well under­stood your selfe. Do you meane the King must have as little as may be given to him? then you acknowledge the King to be the Law-giver, and that the Legislative power is in Him. Or doe you meane the Houses of Parliament by the Law-giver? then by your doctrine the Houses of Parliament must have as [Page 37]little given to them as may be. See how you are caught in your owne spring, see Pro. 18.7.

But your good meaning may perhaps save you from the bar, greater faults than these have been look't over, in those in whose affection the Houses have confided. They and we too know your meaning well enough, your meaning is, that the King must have as little as may be given unto him, and perhaps you will leave the honest Philosopher to answer for the terme of the lawgiver: but then you must have something to say for the application. But let's goe. And I pray you tell me then, would you have the King have lesse than he hath? I hope those good men whose advocate you are, by this time have done their en­deavours to have left him a pretty naked Majestie. They have taken a good competent care, that his Highnesse should not surfet, either of revenue, or authority. They have not only beene frugall in their gifts, or indeed in their no gifts: but they have done the best they could to purge him of all superflu­ities. Good faire attempts have beene made by some to have drawne out his very blood. As long as his Majestie hath such carefull Physitians, you need not feare his being Plethoricall. But why doe you spend time and Paper? briefly, sir, you may know this: That his sacred Majestie (whom we believe a­gainst all those slanders, and blasphemies that have beene rai­fed against him) hath professed his intention to governe by the lawes only. And we find not that he desires any other power than such as the law gives him, and his ancestours have quietly enjoyed, and such as may enable him to give life unto the law, if this be so then, for ought I know, the more we give to the King, the more we give to the law: and the more unto the law, the more unto the King: if this be not so, prove the contrary, for they that are wife will not take your jealousies for proofes, yea with his Majesties favour, I durst almost be bold to lay him before you at your mercy thus farr. Take not from the law of the Kingdome, and spare not the King, take as much from him as you can. But then you must leave him as much as the law allows him, and I am confident he will be well content with it. Indeed the Philosopher was wise and honest in [Page 38]his rule, and puts us in minde, that the safety of a State doth much depend upon this, That all cases as neere as may be, that fall under consideration in Government, should have their cleer, full, and positive rules set downe in the received lawes of the common-wealth, wherby they are to be ruled and managed, that as little as possibly may be may be left to arbitrary government. Where the rule of the magistrate is only his owne will and judgement which is subject to be misguided by passions, which the law is not lyable unto. And we finde not but that this is his Majesties earnest desire; Perswade you if you can the houses of Parliament to joyne with him in these designes by leaving of all arbitrary government, by ordinances or otherwise, in opposition to the knowne constitutions of the Kingdome, and then you need goe no further for an umpire. The law will be the dayes man of this great quarrell, and will send every one home in peace with his owne portion. The King, the Parlia­ment, the Subject shall have all their owne. The King shall be the supreme governour: The Parliament the great Coun­cell: The Subjects shall have their lives and liberties secured, excepting only such as have forfeited their titles. And God shall have his service duely and peaceably performed. And then instead of a deformation of the Church, and a destruction of the Common-wealth, we may have a full and happy reformati­on of the one, and a reparation of the other, Quod faxit Deus. And I intreat you in the meane time to remember, that the hou­ses of Parliament are neither Gods, nor Angels, sure some of them are men subject to passions as well as others, otherwise there would never have beene such doing and undoing as there hath beene, no nor halfe that adoe amongst us that there now is. And therefore I pray you intreat them not to challenge ab­solute power to themselves, but that they as well as his Maje­stie may make the lawes their rule too, for there is some doubt made, I can tell you, that some of them are carried, and so may be miscarried, by more passions than their owne, or else aske the Londoners. Give me leave only to mind you of one thing more, and I have done with this proposition, That if there be little to be given to the Law-giver, by that wise rule of the hea­then, [Page 39]surely much lesse is to be given to the Subject, and then your proposition is not much for your turne. Hitherto you see you edifie but little, the malignants may be as malignant as ever for ought you have said yet, for their conversion.

But perhaps there's more weight behind: well, we'll en­deavour to poyze it if there be, let us see then what's your fourth proposition.

The law say you is the common surety betweene the King and the subject. I say so too, and wish its credit had beene so good that its word might have beene taken something better than it hath beene, it might have beene better security both to King and Subject, as some thinke, than the publike faith: I pray you restore it unto its credit if you can, and the King will be no looser by it, no nor the subject neither, But to helpe our dull understandings you tell us what you meane, when you say the law is the common surety, &c. that is to say (say you) it binds me to pay the King tribute. That's strange, why doe you not doe it then, and perswade others thereunto? Sure you nodded here, you had sate up late about the contrivance of these propositions, so zealous were you for the good of the poore foolish malig­nants if they would but be guided. And here your eyes grew heavie, and your pen it may be for want of their guidance, fell a wandring towards the truth, for you seeme here to speak here in the person of a subject. And your sense is equivalent to this, that the law bindes the subject to pay the King tribute, what is it then I beseech you tell me, for though I am a malignant I am willing to learne, what is it I pray you that bindes or allowes the Subject, not only not to pay the King tribute, but to rob him of his revenue, to interrupt his rents, to make seizure of his goods, to ransack & make spoyle of his exchecquer? Do you know what you have said, or whom you here accuse, surely if the law binde the subject to pay the King tribute, there is no law that allowes the subiect to rob him of his rights. Nay, you are not content with that neither, but you say it bindes you to pay the King tribute, &c. What? are you mad now? Take heed of that I beseech you, why, as sure as can be, you are hired by the malignants to plead the Kings cause under pretence of op­posing [Page 40]him. Doe you not yet know what a danger us thing an &c. is? certainly you stole this out of the late Canons. The Law bindes you to pay the King tribute &c. why in this &c. you may binde the subiect to pay obedience too as well as tri­bute, and so bring in the heresie of the Christians amongst us againe, and root out that wholesome doctrine of the Galile­aus, Nay, by this &c. you may take off the edge of all those swords that are lifted up against him, I pray you bethinke your selfe, hath not the Correctour of the Presse abused you? you may doe well to get an order for the turning him out of his place if he hath, for this is directly the language of Ashdod as some thinke: but we take it indeed to be the language of Ca­naan, if it be rightly interpreted, and the very sense of our Sa­viour: sure you forgot what you had lately written out of your heathen: That this law giver must have as little as may be given unto him. But perhaps, you'll make him pay deare enough for it, and that ere you have done, he shall have little reason to brag of your bounty. I confesse I thinke so, Well but how doe you make amends? why you have bonds for the King too. I pray you let them be golden chaines, and then I doubt not but he'll be willing to weare them. The law you say, bindes the King that I shall enjoy my protection, your meaning is that the subject shall enjoy his protection, for I hope you doe not meane to mo­nopolize protection, your sense then is, that the King is bound by the law to protect the subject, take heed then you prove not a rebell, for then I shall tell you, that your proposition will not hold in those termes that you render it. The King is not bound to protect rebels, but the subiect he is, I doubt not but he'll confesse it; yea, I am confident would most willingly yeeld it. But I pray you mistake not: the law bindes the King, so that in dutie he is bound to performe it, and if he doth it not he is an­swerable unto God for it, who will most certainly bring him to an account. But let me tell you withall once more for your instruction, that he is answerable unto God alone, since he who is acknowledged to be supreme Governour, and only supreme Governour in all his dominions, hath none other above him but God alone, nay none in his dominions equall unto him. And [Page 41]sure, they that are below him have no power to judge him, and if not to judge him, neither to correct him, or who I pray you, hath made the subject his ruler? or is a Common-wealth reversed now the onely fashion for a State? what autho­rity hath the inferiour to call the superiour to an account? doth the Steward use to call the Master to a reckoning? or where is the Tribunall, at which the King must be judged? Or in whose name shall the Indictment be made against him, or the Writs goe forth for the execution of judgement? Or what if the King please to grant himselfe a pardon, sure you must ee'ne be content to leave the King unto the judgement of the Lord, yea, and to leave his heart unto his guidance too. The last refuge of the Subject is to make his complaint unto God: And Kings have reason to take good heed how they give occa­sion of such complaints, for they are like to meet with an im­partiall Judge, that regardeth not the person of Princes. But for the Subject to take upon them to force the King their su­preame Governour to his duty, or to take upon them to correct him, is to thrust into Gods office, who is King of Kings, and Lord of Lords, the onely ruler of Princes. See whose property this is, Revel. 1.5. & 17.14. & 19.16. See whose vertue it is that hath that name written upon it King of Kings, and Lord of Lords. And take heed how you goe about to cloath any o­ther in his garment, or to part it amongst any: Or how you in­vest any other with His Authority, for He will not give His glory to another. But alas His Majestie is very hardly dealt with: He is required to protect His people, and yet he is not allowed that Authority, or Power, or Revenue, which is re­quisite thereunto. They doe all they can to disarme Him, and then require Him to defend them. They binde His hands, and when they have done they quarrell with Him, that He doth not use them in his defence, is not this a very Egyptian oppres­sion, to bid him make Brick without straw, or indeed rather it may seeme to be a meere jeere of his Majestie, but they had best take heed how they mock at Gods Substitute. This I hope may serve for your fourth proposition. Your fifth and last is de­finitive. And you give us the character of a good Subject in it: [Page 42] In a word, he is a good subject (say you) that lookes upward, to see what in God, Gods Vicegerent commandeth; and secondly, That lookes downeward, to see whom the obedience thereunto doth ei­ther hurt or hinder. Why, now it seemes you would teach them to looke a squint, for he that lookes upward and downeward at once must needs doe so: but however I observe, that you would have the subject have his eyes about him, that he may looke and see. And so would I: it is my prayer unto God, that he would open the eyes of the subject, of you, and all the rest, that they may see in this designe against his Majestie and them­selves, how they runne headlong upon their owne ruine. And I wish they may see with their owne eyes, and not with the eyes of other men only, to take all things upon trust that shall be imposed upon them magisterially, by those that seeme to deny the use of reason. Secondly, I observe, that you would have them first looke upward, and so would I, and to see what in God the Lords Vice-gerent doth command. And wheresoever any thing is commanded by the Vicegerent contrary unto the Lords command, I advise them take that counsell of the Apo­stles, rather to obey God than men: but yet in such case, I ad­vise you and them according to the example of the Apostles to submit by passive obedience, where they cannot by active per­formance of his commands. Thirdly, I observe that the King according to your confession is Gods Vicegerent, and therefore to despise him is to despise God, and therefore none can devest him but God, whose substitute he is. Fourthly, you would have the Subiect looke downward too, to see whom the obedience to the Superiours command doth either hurt or hinder. I am afraid there hath beene too much looking downeward to worldly ends and purposes, to private aymes and contrivances, which have made us forget our duty to God and his ordinance, and our re­gard to the publique safety. And this is the ground of all our mischiefe, and this looking downeward is no good posture, if we beleeve the Psalmist, Psal. 17.11. But yet I would have them to looke downeward too in a good sense; and first in humility with the Publican, and secondly in Christian charity with the good Samaritane, that with a Christian warinesse they [Page 43]may as much as lies in them frame their obedience to the good of others; but not so as to take upon them the power to mode­rate the commands of their Superiour, as if wheresoever they shall be pleased to fancy an inconvenience, either to the pub­lique or any private concernment, it should be in their power to deny obedience; for that is the Governours charge, to looke hee commands nothing that may disadvantage the Common­wealth, or any part or member thereof: it is not for every pri­vate man, nor indeed for any to be the Judge of that, otherwise there could never want pretences for disobedience. There can hardly be found any such inconvenience that can be answerable to that succession of mischiefe that is like to accrue upon the dissolution of Government; or the exposing the Magistrates command unto the examination of the rude and ignorant mul­titude, so as to enable them to resist where they shall dreame of some hurt or hinderance that may therein accrue unto others, or themselves. We must remember here that the fifth Command­ment is the first of the second table: And that that is indeed the guardian of all the rest, and the Kings Throne stands highest there even at the very foot-stoole of the Throne of God, which is set up as it were in the first Table of the Law. And there­fore so that we doe not any act that lieth contrary unto the rest, wee must be content to suffer and leave consequences to God; however, you cannot bring in active resistance or rebel­lion to the definition of a good Subject. So I have done with your Propositions, and come to your confirmation of this last. You tell us that Papists grant you this, (and your margent points me to Bellarmine) That in the Superiour three things are concurrent. 1. The place, which is from Christ alone. 2. The person, which is from the choosers. 3. The union of these two, which is from Christ, but by the mediation of a hu­mane act; let Protestants then, say you, have their eyes in their fore-head. I could answer you very briefely, by excepting a­gainst the force of your argument, which seemes to runne à majori, as if what Papists say in derogation from Magistrates, must much more be granted by Protestants; or as if they gave more unto obedience then we, which is no such matter; for I [Page 44]would have you know, that maugre all your seditious doctrines, it is yet the glory of the true Protestant Church, which neither you nor Papists shall ever deprive us of, that we according to the judgement and practise of Christ our Master, and the Apo­stles our leaders, and the Primitive Christians, are the best main­tainers of obedience to Kings and Magistrates; and herein we leave behinde us both Papists and Schismaticks, as two kindes of Foxes tayled together with firebrands of Rebellion betwixt them. And therefore you must not thinke to drive us from our station, by telling us, that Papists yeild this or that. We abhorre Popery in this and all other points: Doe not you know that the Throne of the Romane Antichrist must be built up upon the ruine of the civill Authority of Emperours and Princes? take heed you play not his game for him. The truth is, you may be ashamed to lay such a scandall upon the Protestant Church, as to give Papists the precedency in point of Allegeance. I doe here in the name of the whole Protestant Church of England enter my Protestation against your admission, and doe avow it to be clearely against the tenet of the true Protestant Church: That Subjects may upon any pretence take up Armes against their lawfull Prince. If any that have called themselves by the name of Protestants have said or done any thing to the contra­ry, we doe so farre disclaime them. Your miscarriages in this point have brought a scandall and reproach upon the name of Protestants, and have opened the mouthes of Papists against us, as if we were countenancers of Rebellion, and all because we through (I was about to say) too much charity, have tolerated such as you are amongst us. It is you Schismaticks, not we Pro­testants that have given this occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme; it is you that like Simeon and Levi have made us, as much as in you lyeth, even to the stinke amongst the Inhabitants of the world, when even Papists, Turkes, and Heathens are ready it may be feared, to lay your mischievous opinions and ungodly practises upon us, as if Protestants were patrons of Rebellion: which we doe abhorre from the very bottomes of our hearts. Witnesse the cleare Article of our Church of England.

And therefore it matters not to us what Papists say or doe in this point, it hath beene an old quarrell betweene Papists and us, and you may even goe and shake hands with them in this point. And yet I see not what great advantage Bellarmine gives you, in that you here quote out of him, I could direct you to some others of them that speake much more plainly to your purpose; and it seemes you are yet but a novice in the study of Rebellion, that you are furnished with no more pertinent au­thorities, for what I beseech you doth Bellarmine grant you here? truly all is scarce worth thankes for ought I see. 1. The place is from Christ alone, then take heed how you despise the authority of that place or office which is derived from Christ. 2. The person is from the choosers, it may be in some sort true in elective Kingdomes: but I pray you remember that the Crowne of England is successive and hereditary, and therefore none but God is the chooser here, so that the person is from him too. 3. The union of these two is from Christ, but by me­diation of an humane act. What then though it were granted, this would make little for your purpose, for if the union be­tweene the person and the place be from Christ, let what hu­mane act soever intercede, none but he that makes the union may take upon him to make a separation, if that rule of the Apostle be authenticall, Those whom God hath joyned let no man put asunder. Besides, by this act they set him above all their owne power, and doe part with that very power unto him which was before in them, in designing him for their supreame Governour, and you must shew some superiour authority to enable the doing of such an act. And now let Protestants have their eyes in their fore-heads, and see how grossely you para­logise, to deceive both your selfe and others. Did you not finde that the people are mad already, a man might thinke you would scarce venter such stuffe amongst them. But let Papists and Schismaticks hold what they will at their perils, we Pro­testants by Gods grace will live and die in obedience unto God and our Gratious Prince, whom God long preserve, to the peace of this Kingdome.

The fourth Consideration you say is criticall. I leave you [Page 46]to make good the sense of this title, which for my part I am not so good a critick to understand very well. But to the mat­ter. And herein you seeme to lay downe one exception of the people against the employment of their estates in this pre­sent bloudy businesse that you plead for, and thereto you re­turne your answers, My money shall not helpe to kill men; that you set downe as the voyce of the squint-eyed multitude as you call them. And now let us see your answer; and indeed here you are liberall, that you may teach them to be so: you give them two answers for failing, and it was but need of your bounty, for both will scarce make up halfe a good one; one six pence would have beene better then two such slips, but what you want in weight it seemes you would make up in number. And first you tell them, Their money is none of theirs; if the Lord, the Law, the Liberty, the Cause, or the Defender thereof stand in need thereof, no more then the Asse in the Gospel, or the bread and beefe of Nabal. Theirs in the like case.

Secondly, you tell them, that If they hinder the killing or quel­ling of those who would both kill and quell you, yours, your Reli­gion, Kingdome, they become friends of Gods enemies and yours: and resolve to make peace with them, with whom God is resolved to have warre.

In your first answer your Thesis is true. But it will trouble you to make good your Hypothesis; neither are your proofes so cleare and pertinent. I shall endeavour to display your ar­gument thus.

1. You lay downe this for a ground, That where the Lord, or the Law, or the Liberty, or the Cause, or the Defenders there­of have need of our estates, private mens purses are none of their owne: That's the meaning of your Thesis.

Your Hypothesis you tearme to be understood, and if you speake any thing to the purpose, it is this.

But in the present designe against His Majestie, the Lord, the Law, the Liberty, the Cause, and the Defenders thereof have need of the peoples money; and therefore as the case now stands, Their money is not theirs, their property ceaseth, they have no power to deny.

Your Thesis you make good by two examples or presidents of holy Scripture, The first, out of Matthew 21.3. where we find the Asse delivered up for the supply of our Saviours necessity, to furnish him for his journey to Hierusalem. The second out of the 1 of Samuel the 25. and the 11. where we find David in his necessity desiring supply of Nabal, and being denyed by that unthankfull churle, going about to revenge himselfe upon him by a resolved plunder, and destruction of Nabal and his family.

1. Give me leave to say something unto your Thesis, and to examine your proofes, and then I shall shew the vanity and fals-hood of your hypothesis.

And first I grant you this with all my heart, that every one is bound to part with his private estate where the Lord cals for it, or hath need of it, either for the procurement of his glory, or for the supply of the necessity of the Church, or his poore members, or where the exigency of the publique requires it, for the maintainance of the law, the liberty, or the publique good: for the defence of a good cause, and the assertours of it, and whosoever doth not part with their estates in a due pro­portion being legally required, preferring the publique good before their private commodity, sinnes: for the Word of God teacheth us, that the Lord is the chiefe proprietary of the whole world, and that of him we hold all that we have, and are but Stewards of it to his use, and for his glory. And nature it selfe teacheth us, that the good of the parts must yeeld unto the necessitie of the whole body: and we find the parts of the universe, though senselesse and irrationall, putting this rule in practise: as they are swayed in their motions by the invisible hand of divine providence in the government of the world, since even the senselesse creatures and elements of the world, are content to forget their owne private good, and to forsake their proper motions, to procure and maintaine the integrity of the universe, so for the prevention of a vacuum or emptinesse, wherein the integrity of the universe is concerned: we finde that water will forget it selfe and its owne proper motion, and ascend upward, and aire will become retrograde, and descend downeward; and I could wish we that are rationall creatures [Page 48]had learnt this a little better than we have, publike matters would not then have beene carried with the private spirits of ambition and revenge, as it may be feared, they have beene too much in our dayes, which hath too great a share, it is thought, in our present distempers: publike aymes procure unity. But dissentions are usually the broode of private resolutions. But yet give me leave to put in a little caution, lest there should be some misunderstanding of the matter, and to desire it may be received sano sensu, & cum grano salis, for though all that bee most true, yet give me leave to put you in minde, that the ne­cessity of others or of the publike, doth not destroy the pro­prietie of the subject, for we must distinguish here betweene the power that a man hath over his estate, and the duty that lies upon him in the mannaging thereof. A man doth not al­wayes loose the power of a proprietary over his estate, where his duty engageth him to part with it. I am bound in duty to relieve every poore man that I find to stand in need of my help, and to part with my estate unto him according to my ability, and his necessity, but yet I have still a property in my goods, which I ought so to impart, untill I have alienated them by gift. Otherwise you will authorize every one upon pretence of ne­cessity, to become carvers unto themselves of other mens e­states, which would be a fine colour to make violence and plunder become authenticall, and to take away the thankes of charity and almes, contrary to the Apostles Doctrine, Phile­mon the 14. who though he had need of Onesimus to minister unto him in his bonds, yet he would not doe it without the consent of his Master, that the benefit of Philemon therein un­to him, might not be as it were of necessity, but willingly. And in the 9. of the second to the Corinthians, at the 7. verse, speak­ing of the ministring to the necessity of the Saints, hee doth not take vpon him to ravish a supply from them, but leaves it to every man to doe it, according as he purposeth in his heart. So let him give, saith he, not grudgingly or of necessity, for God loveth a cheerefull giver. Yea and Saint Peter in the 5. of the Acts, notwithstanding the necessity of the Church, at that time, yet he allowes Ananias and Saphira to have had a [Page 49]power and propriety in their lands, untill they had sold them, and professed the alienation of the whole price thereof unto the Church, Acts 5. verse 4. whiles it remained, saith Saint Peter to Ananias) was it not thine owne, and after it was sold, was it not in thine owne power? A pregnant place, not only for the purpose we now speake of, but also for the quashing of that pernicious doctrine that is thought to be too busie in the world, as though none but they whom some men please to stile the children of God, had any right or propriety in their estates, but that they may rob them at their pleasure as Egyptians, or defraud and cosen them how they list in their dealings, so that they deal uprightly with the brethren. A fine trick of the Divel, to teach men to cosen and cheat in sinceritie: whereas we finde here, the Apostle S. Peter allowes Ananias and Sapphira, though wicked and ungodly people, and none of the true professours of the Gospell, yet I say, he allowed them a propriety in their land before it was sold, and in the price of it after it was sold, and such an one, that the necessity of the Church could not make void: had they not declared their consent to an alienati­on, than indeed the keeping back of any part was both Sacri­ledge and dissimulation with the Holy Ghost: Sinnes that I would wish you and your party to take heed of. And if the ne­cessitie of the Church doth not destroy proprietie, so neither doth the necessity of the Common-wealth, but where consent of the owners, either expresse or implied doth some way goe along with it. And yet in both these and other such like cases, all men in duty are bound to part with their estates: neither doth either of the presidents you bring out of Scripture, inferre any thing more than I here set downe. Though indeed if they had any thing more in them: we know there was that extra­ordinarie in them, that might very well exempt them from be­ing presidents for us to follow: in the former, we finde the mediate Authoritie of our Saviour who is Lord paramount of the whole world, and the chiefe and absolute proprietarie, if I may so speak, of all mens possessions: who are but tenants at will under him. And therefore that divine power in him that gave away by expresse donation the goods of the Egyptians [Page 50]unto the Israelites, might well challenge what he pleased unto himselfe, notwithstanding all private right that any other had in it subordinate unto his. And for David we know it is possible there might be some sinne in his attempt, designed upon Nabals goods, as it is cleere enough, there was in his resolution for his destruction, as you may well ghesse by that thanksgiving that he returnes unto God, for sending Abigail to stay him from his purpose. 1 Sam. 25.32, 33. or if not so; we know David was a Prophet subject to extraordinary motions of the free spirit. And you must take heed how you make all such examples your presidents, lest with Sampson you pull downe the house upon your heads, to be avenged of your enemies, Opera liberi spiri­tûs non sunt trahenda in exempla communit vitae. But we finde in both these examples still a propriety acknowledged in the ow­ners. And therefore wee reade in Saint Lukes relation of the same passage with that of Matth. 21.3. That the owners thereof said unto them, what doe you loosing the Colt? nei­ther doe we finde that our Saviour gave the Disciples com­mission to take the Asse or the Colt by force, but he tels them, that upon their declaration of his necessity they would send them. And he by his divine power as you may see, plainly there inclined them to consent thereunto, and you know, volenti non fit injuria. There was no destruction of propriety for ought I finde, but a voluntary consent of the owners to supply the necessity of our Saviour. And for that passage about Nabal, 1 Sam, 25.11. we doe not finde but that David in his message doth leave Nabal a propriety in his goods, notwithstanding all the necessity that he was in, or what else you can observe; though perhaps in his passion upon Nabals refusall to relieve him, he might set upon a designe destructive thereunto. But passionate undertakings are no good rules. And therefore it is more safe for us, to gather instruction from David in his coole blood, before he was put into a heat by Nabals churlishnesse. And then we shall finde clearely, that he acknowledgeth Nabal to have a right in his goods. And he desires a supply of courtesie and bounty, doth not challenge it as of right and debt: and therefore he intreateth, not demandeth, I pray thee: and what [Page 51]doth he intreat? not a payment, but a gift. Give I pray thee. And what? not what David pleaseth, but what Nabal shall thinke fit. You may know him to be a beggar in that he is no chooser: Da quaeso quod obvenerit manui tuae servis tuis, Give I pray thee whatsoever commeth to thine hand, unto thy ser­vants, and to thy sonne David. Neither did Nabals denyall alter the property, as now some may seeme to intimate by their practise. They will allow man a property to give unto them, but not to deny them, nor keepe to themselves; if they once deny, they forfeit their property. And surely they allow us but a poore interest in our estates, that yeild us no more power but onely to give them away at their pleasure, to whom they shall thinke fit. Our Saviour allowes a greater privi­ledge to a propriety, and to understand something else by it. when he askes that question in the Gospel, May I not doe what I will with mine owne. Where he sets forth the power that a propriety gives a man over his owne estate, which is, that hee may doe what hee will with it, so as to exclude force to awe or compell him to the contrary. Though I say in duty it is otherwise, for so men may not doe what they will with their owne, for they are engaged in duty to part with it, to the necessities of the Lord in his poore Members in his Mi­nistry, in his Service, in his House, in his Church, of the Law, of the Liberty, or the publique cause, and the defenders there­of: So that if they deny supply unto these, they sinne, and are answerable to God for it. But this doth not expose them to a deprivation by violence or plunder, by force or compulsion, otherwise your argument might serve as well for the re-calling of Ship-money. But now it seemes the case is altered, any thing is of force when it serves your turnes; but take heed, you doe not know what may be built hereafter upon these founda­tions that you lay. Wee must distinguish betweene the power of Kings over their Subjects, and their duty; and we must di­stinguish too between the power of Subjects over their estates, and their duty, if we meane to judge aright of either, or to be­have our selves aright toward either, or that they shall behave themselves as they ought to doe; for we must know and they [Page 52]must know, that power is larger then duty in both, and duty must set limits unto their power, but those limits must be set by God and themselves, not by others without them. The power of Kings must engage us to subjection, either active or passive, though they use it unjustly. The duty of Kings must teach them subjection to that power of God which is above them, that they may not use their power unjustly.

And the power of both Kings and Subjects over their Estates and Revenues, must keepe us from offering any force or vio­lence to deprive them of their properties, though there be good cause they should impart them as above-said, without ex­presse or implyed consent. And the duty of Kings and Sub­jects must teach them so to moderate their power of property, as to impart themselves freely and proportionably to God, his Church, and to the Common-wealth, and to what other exi­gencies, are just and charitable, whensoever the Lord calls them thereunto by giving them occasions and opportunities of performance; otherwise there would scarce be roome left for the free practice of vertue, either in Prince or people in the dis­position of their estates and powers, if all were to be compel­led. But God hath so disposed of things in his wisedome, which for my part I cannot but admire, though I am not able to expresse it as I would in this particular. That he hath left men some freedome for the practise of vertue: So he hath gi­ven Kings power to be Tyrants, (I meane so farre as that they they are not to be resisted by their Subjects) that they may have roome to shew their vertue in performing the duties of good Princes. And he hath given Subjects a power to restraine their liberality, their charity, &c. to abuse their estates (I meane so farre as that others without consent either expresse or implyed, where there is a true and free property, cannot com­pell them to the contrary) that they may shew their free ver­tue in performing their duties, both in the due imployment, and imparting of their estates, that it may be as the Apostle speak­eth, a matter of bounty, not of covetousnesse or necessity; and also in the due and temperate use and husbanding of them, o­therwise we might turne all vertue into necessity. And indeed [Page 53]hereby God hath provided for peace, order, and tranquillity in the world, which you and others attempt, even to banish out of the world; whilest either through ignorance you discerne not (which in charity I will hope of you) till you make mee know the contrary: or through malice you goe about to re­move these land-markes, which God hath set betweene King and people, betweene one Subject and another; for otherwise if Subjects might take upon them to compell Kings to limit their power to what they shall conceive to be duty, this must needs in all probability open a doore to perpetuall confusion and rebellion, and the case must be the same betweene the Sub­jects and Parliaments, as betweene Subjects and Kings, Et jam vestra res agitur, for you can shew no reason to the contrary, I am confident. And on the other side, if others might take upon them to be moderators of my estate, and to compell me to impart at their pleasure, where they shall conceive their exi­gency requireth, we should hardly ever be free (it may be fea­red) from such pretences, of necessity, &c. to countenance continuall intrusions and violent surprisalls of one anothers goods, by this rule every poore man that can plead necessity may come and take your purse for ought I know, and you and hee both had best take heed of that; remember here that of Salomon, Prov. 6.30. Men doe not despise a thiefe if hee steale to satisfie his soule when he is hungry, but if he be found he shall restore seven-fold; he shall give all the substance of his house. You may see there though he deserveth favour, yet his necessity doth not exempt him from being a thiefe, not from the crime, no nor yet from the punishment, (and God doth not use to prescribe penalties where there's no offence) he shall be fined in a seven fold restitution. And therefore though men be truly engaged in duty to supply such exigencies you before speake of, yet this doth not destroy their property, as if that ceased, as you imply, whensoever such occasion or necessity is present, but obligeth their duty: And therefore in those ca­ses where you have not or cannot gaine their consent, you must leave them to performe their owne duties, or else you will transgresse yours, whether you be King or Parliament, or a [Page 54]single Subject. But perhaps you will say, that the Parliament hath in them a devolution of all the Subjects propriety, so as to dispose of their estates to publique purposes: if you meane by the Parliament the King and the Houses, I grant so that they doe it by Act of Parliament. And you must take in the body of the Convocation (if the Clergy be Subjects, or have any li­berty or property) for the disposing of the estates of the Clergy.

But if you meane by the Parliament the two Houses with­out the King, I deny that they have the consent of the Subjects for the disposing of their estates, since they were chosen by the Subjects not to manage the publique affaires of themselves, but in a Parliamentary manner, order, and motion, to joyne with His Majestie, and to doe things by His consent by Act of Par­liament; and therefore since they have not His consent for the disposing of the estates of the Subjects, as they now doe: Nor doe it by Act of Parliament, which cannot be without the King. They can plead no consent of the Subject, who gave them their power onely in that sense, and to that purpose as afore-said: If you are rationall you understand this, if impartiall & honest you will acknowledge it, & give over abusing the people with your Observations. And here the people may see who meane best unto their properties and liberties, since you put us to plead for them, whilest you oppose them for the advantage of your par­ty. And yet will they never open their eyes? but still runne on madding upon their owne ruine. I pray you speake to them to have a little more wit and honesty: let them have your example, it may be it may worke much with them. But what if I should grant you your Theses in your owne sense?

Yet it will trouble you exceedingly to prove your Hypothe­sis: you are so farre from doing it, that for ought appeares you were ashamed to mention it. You leave us to collect it, but prove it, I pray you, for your credit is not so great that we are bound to take your bare word, though you gave it us never so plainly. Prove it then, that the money and goods that is for­ced by your party from the poore Subjects, is for the supply of any of those necessities you speake of.

Is it for the supply of the necessity of the Lord, to main­taine a Warre against his Substitute, (acknowledged so by the Scots in their late Petition to His Majestie) and directly contra­ry to Gods command? Rom. 13.

Is it for the supply of the necessity of the Lord, to main­taine practises of Sacriledge, demolishing of Churches, viola­ting of Sepulchres; to set forward a disturbance of Gods Ser­vice in his house, to abandon the daily use of publike Prayers where they have beene used, and whereby God hath received so much glory, and the people so much comfort, and to bring in prophanenesse, or at the best to undertake a reformation by a way God allowes not, when it hath beene offered in a peace­able and fit manner? or where doe you finde that the sword is to be moderator, or that reformation in Religion is to be founded in bloud?

Or is it for the supply of the necessity of the Law to nou­rish a Warre clearely against Law, both in it selfe, and in the purpose and drift of it? in it selfe, as being without and against the Kings command, and against His Person and Authority, who is declared by Law the supreame Governour, and so the supreame Moderator of the Sword in the drift or purpose, which we understand not at all, if it be not to abridge the King of that preeminence and authority which His Ancestours have, and He ought to enjoy by the Law of the Kingdome: As the power of the Militia, of consenting or with-holding His as­sent to the allowance or dis-allowance of Acts of Parliament; of choosing Privie Counsellors, &c.

Some say necessity hath no Law, but I am sure the Law hath no necessity of the plunder of mens estates to any such pur­pose.

Is it for the supply of the necessity of liberty of the Subject, that their liberty should be taken away to cure men of their diseases by killing them, or to cast them into the Sea for feare they should suffer ship-wracke?

Is it for the necessity of the cause, or the defenders? what cause is it I beseech you that doth necessitate any such thing? is it Religion? have wee not beene Protestants all this while? [Page 56]why doe you not confute the Articles of the Church of Eng­land? it may be indeed your new Synod will doe it for you. Hath not the truth flourished amongst us all this while till of late? you your selfe seeme to confesse it, if there be any sense in your words in your next Paragraph as wee shall see anon. Who is it than that goes about an alteration? might you not have thanks if you would let it flourish still as heretofore it hath done, or if any thing be to be mended, hath it not been offe­red? what's that cause then, the necessity whereof doth lay such fanges upon the Estates of the Subjects? or who are those defenders you speake of. I am sure I know who is the Defen­der of the Faith under God; and then remember who it is that you oppose: surely you had need explaine your selfe, for for ought we can yet learn by you, the Subjects have good right to keepe their goods unto themselves, for any necessity that you can plead; it doth neither alter their Property, nor engage them in duty to impart for the maintainance of this dismall Warre against His Majesty. They are much more engaged to impart them to Him, that stands for the defence of the true Protestant Religion, together with the Law and Liberty of the Subjects. This is the cause, and this is the defender, that may much better plead necessity of supply.

But you have two strings to your bow, and so you had need, for you see one of them will not hold. And what's your second? let us see what that will doe. Your money shall not helpe to kill. That's the resolution of the squint-eyed multitude: well say you when you meane ill; but what's your answer? why you tell them, that if they hinder the killing, quelling, of those who would both kill and quell you, yours, your Religion, Kingdome. They become friends of Gods enemies and ours, and resolve to make peace with them with whom God hath resolved to have warre. How doe you prove that? why Exod. 17. ult. what saith that place? why, these are the words which you leave us to finde out there, for he sayd, because the Lord hath sworne to have warre with Amalek from generation to generation. Go to now, where does your great strength lie? or how may a man doe to bind this Sampson of yours? This invincible perswasive [Page 57]or reply, or what you will call it, wherewith you doe so un­mercifully seize upon the judgments of the poore blear-eyed people.

Wee'le examine it a little, Your drift is or should be to shew, that the resolution of the people is not good, that their money shall not help to kill in your designe, for that must be your mea­ning? now how do you drive them from this resolution? why thus, you shew them very learnedly that their money must help to kill, &c. how prove you that? why, because they may not hinder the killing, quelling of them, &c. well, it seemes then you are all for killing and quelling, wee might have hoped of more favour, you might have given the people leave to have thought you more mercifull; but is this good Logique? they may not hinder, therefore their money must help; is there no meane betweene helping and hindering? consider it well and you'l finde there is, but that's your weaknesse, or perhaps your hast; wee'l pardon it and allow it that force it wants: But how doe you prove they may not hinder the killing, quelling of the Kings Party, for that's your meaning without all questi­on? why, because they are those that would both kill and quell you, yours, your Religion, your Kingdome: wee need your help a little here, wee understand you in part, your (Us) there stands for your Party I conceive, and your (Ours) for your Wives, Children, Friends, Family, and the like: but we can­not tell yet what you meane by (our Religion) nor very well what you meane by (our Kingdome,) your Commentary here a little I beseech you; doe you meane by Your Religion the Brownists, or the Anabaptists, or the Familists, or the Sepera­tists, or the Libertines, or the Papists; for it is thought you have of all these sorts in your Party, so that your party is very party-coloured; or doe you meane that which wee doubt you have too little to doe with, the true knowne Protestant Reli­gion, or what do you meane by Your Kingdome? is this King­dome any more yours then His Majesties or ours? or what King­dome is it that you meane? I presume you will say, that by (Your Religion) you meane the true Protestant Religion, and by (Your Kingdome) this Kingdome of England, that is so [Page 58]denominated a Kingdome from that good King that God hath set over it: and if so, then give me leave to aske you first, how it appeares to you that the Kings party would kill you or yours, or that they would quell you? doe you but quell your rebellious spirits, and I dare warrant you for either killing or quelling by His Majesty or His Party, if He can help it, any fur­ther then the Law armes Him against you; nay, you may assure your selves His Majesty hath that grace and clemency in Him that will moderate the severity of the Law too, and it is not best for you to deny Him that power; you have had good ex­perience of His Majesties mercy if you would thinke on't: some have thought He hath beene cruell to Himselfe in being mercifull to you; I but I hope all His mercy will returne at length into His owne bosome; you had best take heed you slight it not too much, lest if it be kept too long before you make use of it, that good and pleasant Wine turne Vin­egre. You may doe well to remember that mercy loves not to stand too long at the doore, clemency is not easily wearied, but if it once grow throughly angry, it may prove the greatest fury. If you will needs put His Majesty to His choice, which of the two He will have spilt, He knowes there is difference of price and value betweene rebellious and loyall bloud. And if there be no help for't, but that you will worke your ruine, (the price of the safety and preservation of His faithfull people) you may thanke your selves for setting up such a Market, I know not how to helpe you, but in truth I shall be sorry for you. But you may prevent it if you will, it is but returning to your obedience and loyalty, and I doubt not but shall find His Majesties sword that is now most unwillingly drawn against you for your corre­ction, ready most cheerfully to exercise it selfe in your prote­ction: and so you and yours may be safe if you please, and the Subjects may keepe their money for better purposes then to imploy it to set forward the killing of men; it was sure or­dained for a meanes of preservation, not for the instruments of ruine and destruction. But your Religion your Religion. That will be kill'd and quell'd; if this cry were not in your mouthes I could scarce thinke you to be Rebels; for, is not this the u­suall [Page 59]accoutrement of rebellion to march under the colours of Religion? at least in pale, or in quarter with some others; as liberty perhaps, or some such like, because Religion will not of it selfe take with all palats; but I pray you doe not beleeve that this vizour will alwayes be undiscovered: this velvet maske hath beene so much used, that the nap is all worne of almost, and the bare face may be seene through it. This pre­tence of Religion is growne so stale, and hath beene so often made the lure of sedition, that the very boyes can almost spy out the imposture; and therefore your wiser way will be to get some new fashion for your strumpet, unlesse you meane to have them throw stones and rotten apples at her; alas, this is an old trick to begin mischiefe in the name of God: In no­mine Domini incipit omne malum, is too old and too true a say­ing; but let them take heed that set it forward in such a stile: for this is something worse then to take Gods name in vaine, and then they are not like to be held guiltlesse. And amongst others you had best be wary, for whilst you make God and Religion the stile of this horrid businesse, your whole pro­gresse is a kind of a running blasphemy; nay, perhaps I could easily show you that in many of you is a running perjury in those that have taken the Oaths of Alleageance and Suprema­cy; further answer I cannot give you so fully, as perhaps I might if I did but know what stamp you are of, onely this let me tell you, first for the Protestant Religion, as it hath been for these many yeares in this Kingdome, under the successive and sucesfull raignes of three gracious Monarchs without inter­ruption untill now: so (if you hinder not) His sacred Majesty hath given us good assurance, and wee have good witnesse of it, even God himselfe, besides many thousands upon earth, that it shall not be killed nor quelled, but maintained, and if ever any thing fall out otherwise, I am perswaded wee shall have to thanke such as you for it, which God forbid. And for those other things that walke under the name of Religious, I hope His Majesty will by Gods assistance take some good course for quelling of them, as well Popery as Brownisme, and the rest of that rabble, that wee can scarce tell what to call: Both God [Page 60]and his good people doe expect from His Majesty, that He will be vigilant for the extirpation of these by all due and lawfull meanes, and that He will not admit of the least shew of a tole­ration of them; but yet wee doe beleeve His Majesty will finde out more proper wayes than the sword for the rooting out of those errors from amongst us; and if they can be but quiet, and keepe themselves from sedition and corruption of o­thers: it's like His Majesty will shed no mans bloud meerely for His opinion, but will rather take care for the application of the due meanes for their conversion, and so leave them to the mercy of the Lord; for wee beleeve His Majesty hath o­ther principles, and those farre more gracious and god-like, than those that you seeme to walke by. Though he be never so zealous for Gods house, yet wee conceive He doth not think that He should have any thanke from God if He should build up Sion with bloud. His Majesty we hope will rather remem­ber that David was not suffered to build the Lord a Temple, because his hands had been imbrued in bloud, that the Temple was to be built by a Solomon, a King of Peace, and in a raigne of Peace, and in a peaceable manner without all noyse and tu­mult not so much as the noyse of an axe or an hammer to be heard in that holy businesse, much lesse of a Sword or Speare, or of those thunder-emulating instruments which have beene the brood of cruelty of these last times of the world: wee be­leeve His Majesty will not willingly make use of any such in­struments as these in that worke, unlesse the malice of the ad­versaries compell Him to it. Indeed it may fall out, that San­ballat and Tobiah, with their complices of Arabians, Ammo­nites and Ashdodites may put Nehemiah's work-men to their weapons as well as their tooles, in the building of the Walls of Jerusalem, and to set them upon the businesse with a Trow­ell in one hand and a Sword in the other, that the builders should have their weapons girded by their sides and so build, and that Nehemiah may be enforced to set a Trumpeter by him; but this was onely for the defence of the worke, not to offer any violence to any, but to repell it, in case it were offe­red by any unto them; neither doe wee know of any violence [Page 61]intended of that sort you seeme to suspect, either against you or your religion as you call it, be it what it will, if you will be but quiet, and not rayse tumults in Church or Common-wealth, nor quarrell with other men, because forsooth they will not put out their eyes that they may be as blind as you; if you can [...] alone and be quiet, you may if you will needs be let alone and be quiet in your folly, for any matter of bloud or the like. And yet wee beleeve His Majesty will not let England become an Amsterdam, Truth shall have more en­couragement then Errour: it is fit that those dotards that will persist should be made sensible, it is mercy not to let them pe­rish upon too easie termes: this is not to cut them off from the clemency of God, but to hasten them unto it, and this may be done without killing I hope; and therefore wee beleeve you fright the people in vaine, and make bugbeares of your owne fancies, when you seeme to perswade them they shall find a bloudy persecution for religion, but I hope they will be wiser then to thinke it is any good warrant for them to be rebellious; because you are pleased to be fearefull and suspicious. It is no wisedome for them to cast their goods out of their vessells, be­cause you are pleased to dreame of a storme; they might likely provide much more for their safety by casting out such a rebel­lious Prophet as you are, that have out-run the errand the Lord sent you on, & are become a fugitive from his work; like Jonas, who when the Lord sent him to Niniveh runnes to Joppa, and from thence is bound for Tarshish. It were happy for you if some storme or other might but send you into your right course againe. But I would faine have done with you, you cannot make it appeare that the King or His Party hath any mind to kill you or yours, nor to quell the true Protestant Religion, no nor yet to divorce you from any of your phantasies by the sword, admit any of His Army would, yet I am confident you may looke for more mercy from His Majesty, and if you hin­der not He may have power answerable to His goodnesse; but your Kingdome is in danger, they would quell the Kingdome, who are those I beseech you? if you will not tell me, I can tell you who they are, even they that go about to demolish or [Page 62]diminish the majesty and authority of the kingly Throne; for so much as they take from the power and eminency of the King, so much they quell and destroy the Kingdome; for it is the King and the regall power that gives it the name of a King­dome: they than that goe about to turne the King into an empty stile, or a meere shadow of regaity, and to change the regall Government into a popular State, or Aristocraticall, those are they that go about indeed to destroy the very essence of a Kingdome: looke than who they are that are against the King and against Monarchy, those are they that go about to quell the Kingdome; but perhaps you meane not by the Kingdome this or that forme of Government, but the people and inhabitants; and in this sense, who are they that would quell the Kingdome, but even they that have beene the Authors of this most bloudy and unnaturall Warre against His Majesty, that have divided the Kingdome against it selfe; that have most mercilessely sa­crificed the lives of the poore seduced people of the Land, to their passionate and ambitious or malicious designes; they that have abused both Parliament and people, by endeavouring to make them flaves to their humorous resolutions against their duty both to King and people; they that have stricken at the very foundation of the State and Government, and brought the Common-wealth into a meere Chaos and a confusion; these, these are they that would quell the Kingdome, and therefore if you will needs have the people buy bloud, you must send them to market there; there they may perhaps find some with­in their purchase, but royall and loyall bloud is of too great a rate I can tell you, for all the money they have to pay a suffici­ent value for the least drop of it.

But yet I am not come to the maine force of your argument. They must give their money to help to kill those that would kill and quell you, &c. why? otherwise they become friends of Gods enemies and yours, and resolve to make peace with them with whom God is resolved to have warre; and you prove it, because Moses tells us, that the Lord hath sworne to have warre with Amalek from generation to generation.

Well, than it seemes wee must needs admit, that all that are [Page 63]your enemies eo nomine, are Gods enemies: now that wee are no way convinced of, because wee doe finde your cause to be Gods, or that you have any commission from him, but rather you have many prohibitions from God, if you would take his word in the holy Scripture, unlesse you meane with the Liber­tines to take the warrant of a private spirit. And then second­ly, you seeme to hold, that wee must all assist you with force and violence for the destruction of your enemies and Gods; how than shall the rule of our Saviour be made good, that will have you forgive your enemies, and I say unto you resist not e­vill, which must bind all private men from revenge; but you'l say the Members of the Parliament are all Magistrates, I grant it in subordination to His Majesty; but wheresoever they are found in direct opposition to Him, they become so farre pri­vate in their motions; like the Moone in the Dragons tayle, in direct opposition to the Sunne shee looseth her light.

But God you say, is resolved to have warre with them that have warre with you, and therefore the people must. Prove that. Why? The Lord is resolved to have warre with Ama­leck from generation to generation; therefore with the King and his partie: for it seemes, we must necessarily believe that you are Israelites, and they are Amalekites: but that the peo­ple are not satisfied of, they must therefore looke for better evi­dence from you to convince them: in the meane time, let me desire you to take heed how you misinterpret the Lords oathes, lest you should seeme to taxe God of perjury, as well as some bodie hath done the King. And ther's an end of your criticall Observations.

And now in the fifth place, you come like an operatour to cure the people of their melancholy: you draw them forth in their sullen fits, as you conceive, venting their sad and discon­tented thoughts, in those sorrowfull notes you are pleased to set downe. That trading is dead: There money goes: Never so many payments. I cannot blame them, I confesse, to think they pay something too deare for their ruine: but what's the salve you give them for their sore? why, surely they are like to find but little comfort from you. First, you tell such a man, that he [Page 64] is not worth the answering. And I tell you, that he that gives such an answer, is scarce worthy to receive a replie unto it. And therefore let that goe. But yet upon second thoughts you are a little more pitifull. And in some doubt of his capacitie you send him to learne of Job, That we must receive good at the hand of God, as well as evill. True, there is very good reason for it, that they should be patient in misery, and thankfull in pro­sperity, unto God. But yet under favour, this doth not infer that men are bound to contribute to their owne miseries, or be any way accessary to draw them upon themselves, no nor yet to returne any thankes unto those that are the instruments of their calamity: we must submit to Gods justice even in the op­pression of men, and yet that doth no way justifie their oppres­sion, nor hinder us from the use of any lawfull meanes to deli­ver ourselves from them and those pressures they would lay up­on us: it no way ties us to give our selves up into their hands, or to consent to our owne ruine.

Thirdly, you tell them, that the Gospell hath beene a beace­able plentifull Gospell, and then they loved it, ran after it. But now it is otherwise they are otherwise affected, and you commend unto them that of our Saviour, Ioh. 6.26. you follow me for the loaves.

And hath the Gospell beene so peaceable and plentifull a Go­spell, when was that, I beseech you? under what Kings raign? or, how comes it to passe that it is not so still? Surely, if that Gospell could have contented you and others, that have beene so amourous of changes; that which was amongst us in the time of Queene Elizabeth, King Iames, or in any part of the raigne of our Gracious King, I am well assured you might have had it, in as peaceable and plentifull a condition as ever, if men had not beene weary of Gods blessings. His Majestie hath made you very faire offers, if they might have been embraced, but it seems you are growne weary of that Manna, and your wanton palates are fallen a lusting after some new diet. And because other men will not be perswaded to part with all they have to serve your humours: you seeme to challenge them of temporizing, and that they measure out their zeale by their worldly advan­tage. [Page 65]This is indeed a hainous crime I confesse, like the rich man in the Gospell, to goe away sorrowfull from Christ, be­cause he requires him to part with his estate, or with the Gada­rens to drive him out of their coasts, upon the apprehension of the losse of a few swine. They that will part with our Saviour or his Gospell upon such termes as these, are very worthie of their owne choice even to loose that Jewell that they hold at so low a rate. But that this is the case of every one that refuseth to undoe his wife and children, to supply you with his estate, to buie fuell for that fire which is now raging in the bowels of the Church and Common-wealth: or, that it is to be disaf­fected to the Gospell of Christ, not to promote a warre against the substitute of Christ, is a paradoxe that I can never admit into my beliefe, nor doe I thinke the speech of our Saviour in the 6. of John 26. is any thing at all to your purpose. And there­fore you are no good Quack salver for melancholy. The people may even die of their purse-dumps, for any remedie you here afford them.

But it may be you are better at the cure of their follie. That's the sixth and last consideration, which you say is a meere foolish one, if it may be so termed: or rather (for fooles also will be talk­ing) a meere prating, a meere nothing, and non-sensicall thoughts about the present things in the Kingdom. within the verge of this you shall include (you say) the indiscreet running before authority, in things where the command and countermand are not alike, and this (you say) you shall desire to be proposed in these two Propo­sitions.

First, manners to stay the States leasure: but,

Secondly, Is it any offence to doe their worke for them? And you conclude with much gravitie thus; Good meaning may be grounded on errours: But the bad must be shadowed with colours: and so you commend unto your Countrey men, whose salvation you say, if you know your owne heart you earnestly desire, your notes and your selfe with an apologie; first, for your selfe, that you have spoken unto Christians like a Christian. Secondly, for your notes, whereof you say, that none can be so ignorant, as they are plaine to a mind desirous to learne, and for the percase you [Page 66]say it is such as you can speake, and you desire to be thankfull it is no worse, considering your deserts. And lastly you say, there is not all that might be said, but what you could say, which if it may serve the Church, the publike, the Lord Jesus, and your Rea­der, you say you have your end, desiring his prayers for your selfe, under the stile of the poorest of All the servants of Jesus Christ, W. Bridges.

Give me leave to run over this you have here said. And first, for that which concernes your Answer to the peoples mistakes in this last which you call a meere foolish consideration, a meere prating, a meere nothing and nonsensicall thought, about the pre­sent things of the Kingdome: What this foolish prating non­sense of things is, I can scarce discover, that you are so angrie at, and therefore I could wish you had bin more cleer and lesse passionate in your accusation: only something you tell us first, of an indiscreet running before authoritie in things wherein the command and countermand are not alike. Truly I can scarce tell how to make sense of what you say, for what things are those wherein the command and countermand can be alike? or what doe you intend by this designation? but yet I can find out something here to thanke you for, that you would not have the people indiscreetly to run before authority; if they had taken this counsell, or had it given them in convenient time, I con­ceive things had never beene so bad as they are, for what were those Tumults that have had so great a share in the bringing of things to this sad condition they are now in, but an indiscreet running before authority? and therefore thus farre we joyne, and I wish your counsell may be well imbraced. For farther explication you offer your mind in these two propositions.

First, Manners to stay the States leisure, This is some thing short of a proposition; but if I mistake not, your meaning is, that you would have the people have so much manners to stay the leisure of the State, and not to take upon them to doe things of themselves to the disturbance of the worke. I heartily consent unto you, in this likewise. Onely I desire that His Majesty may be understood as a man of authority, and a principall part of the State, and than take heed you condemne not your selfe, and [Page 67]cast a blemish upon the whole carriage of your designe.

Your second proposition as you call it, seemes to be a reply to an expostulation of the people, whom you seeme to bring in justifying their rashnesse, with this question, whether it be any offence for them to doe the worke of the State for them? (this if I understand you is your meaning.) And to this you returne your answer thus, you tell them that good meaning may be groun­ded on errours, but the bad must be shadowed with colours. And truly I see nothing much amisse in this, but your mis-applica­tion; for herein methinks you set before us the very complexi­on of that unhappy businesse you would seeme to plead for, at the best you can make of it; if there be any thing good in it, it hath onely this, not for the justification of the businesse, but it may be for the excuse or extenuation of the fault of some that have beene seduced and engaged therein; that it is a matter of errour in them, not of any evill or malicious intention; but this excuse I doubt me will not serve you all there are some amongst you too knowing to plead such ignorance. And where errour is wanting, they have nothing to hide their bad meaning with­all, but the shaddow of some specious colours, which are at once both a cloud to hide them, and to blind others withall. If wee could but prevaile so farre as to separate errours from the good meaning of some, or remove the false colours from the bad meaning of others, things would than appeare againe in their owne shapes, and disobedience and bloud-shed would be no longer pursued with rejection of obedience and peace; and so there would ensue a perfect accommodation. For that which followes, I have but little to say, onely I commend unto my Countrey-men too these Notes of mine to be considered with yours, and I am sure I earnestly desire their salvation, I will not yeild to you a little in that; and being glad that you ac­knowledge us Christians yet, and that indeed was spoken like a Christian, if all the rest of your Preface had savoured as much of a Christian as this, I should never have spent time upon this worke; for the Apologie you make for your notes, how plaine they are, or what the phrase of them is, I leave them to judge that shall read them. I am sure for the substance of them [Page 68]it is so bad as you apply it, that it doth bespeak you of none of the best deserts; and whether this be all you could, or that o­thers might have said to your purpose, I list not much to exa­mine, I know it is much more than you should, or than any o­ther ought to have spoken. And you have much fayled of your end, if you thought by this to serve either the Church, the Publike, the Lord Jesus, or your Reader, and therefore you have my prayers, that the Lord would give either more know­ledge or more sincerity; if this latter be your want, let me give you my advise in the words of your quotation in the margin out of Saint Augustine, (a little altered) Qui non valuit non poenitenda dixisse, poeniteat quae cognovit non dicenda fecisse. And so I have done with your Preface. I see no great matter in your Sermon, that doth deserve an Answer, and I have other businesse to doe.