The Vnrighteous iudge, or an answer to a printed paper, pretending a letter to Mr Io. Goodvvin, by Sir Francis Nethersole knight. Wherein the rough things of the said pretended letter, are made smooth, and the crooked things straight: and the predominant designe of it fully evinced to be, either an unscholarlike oscitancie and mistake, or else somewhat much worse. / By the said Jo. Goodwin.

The Vnrighteous iudge, or an answer to a printed paper, pretending a letter to Mr Io. Goodvvin, by Sir Francis Nethersole knight. Wherein the rough things of the said pretended letter, are made smooth, and the crooked things straight: and the predominant designe of it fully evinced to be, either an unscholarlike oscitancie and mistake, or else somewhat much worse. / By the said Jo. Goodwin.

Table of contents

Title page

AN Answer to a printed Paper, pretending a Letter to Mr. Io. GOODVVIN, by Sir Francis Nethersole Knight.

Errata

[Page]

[Page]

AN Answer to a printed Paper, pretending a Letter to Mr. Io. GOODVVIN, by Sir Francis Nethersole Knight.

Sect. 1 SIR, on the 11. of this instant, I received together with a Letter in writing, a packet of Papers and Books from you; for which I then apprehended my self bound to return you thanks, and it was really in my heart so to doe. But two or three daies after comming casually to the sight of a Printed paper of yours, which you call, A Letter to Mr. Jo. Goodwin, &c. I clearly found your Present to be [...], a giftlesse Gift, by discovering your heart to be far from [...]. me. Sir, though all undue comportment with the greatnesse of this World, be the first born of abhominations to my soul, which as well my reason, as long experience, have taught mee to be a temper very creative of enemies, and oppositions in the highest, from the world; yet, God assisting me, the method of my warfare against my enemies, as it hath been, so shall it still bee, that of Heaven, which encountreth evill with good, and attempteth the reconcilement of enemies, by the pardoning of their sins. So that though your Pen be very provoking, and the attempt of it (at least in appearance) to cast me out of the patient and peaceable possession of my Soule; yet you shall not need fear any reciprocation of incivilities from mine, nor that I will offer with your fire. Onely I must desire you to beare that Christian freedome at my hand, which commandeth me to shew men their errours in their true shapes, without the least palliation or partiality when I am called to it.

[Page] Your addresse in the first word [...] of the Letter you sent me, is this: Sir, I send you here with a printed letter, with the books therein mentioned, whereof I have no doubt, but you will finde your selfe obliged to take notice in print. I candidly presume that it was onely some oversight in you, that (with the Scribes and Pharisees) you said and did not, and doe not look upon it as any breathing of that spirit in you, which wrought in them. But assuredly I received no printed Letter from you, whereof I find my self any waies obliged to take notice in print. And for that printed letter, subscribed with your name, which I understood you had published many daies before I came to a sight of it; and of which I might very possibly never have so much as heard, (many papers of that qualitie, rising and falling in the world, without my cognizance of either) upon my first perusall of the contents of it, conceiving it to be purum putum, quanta quanta est, convi [...]ium, I was in suspence, whether I should return any other answer unto it, then that of Hezekiahs servants unto Rabshakeh, which was by silence; or at most, then that of Michael to his Antagonist. [...], The Lord rebuke thee. But upon further thoughts, considering how apt men of weak understandings, and strong affections unto evill, are, to blesse themselves with a thing of nought in order to their encouragement in their evill wayes: I rather inclined to draw up somewhat a more particular answer unto it; chiefly to wipe off the undue aspertion of that iniquitie (falsly so called) variablenesse of judgement, and withall to correct the malignitie of some other ingredients therein.

Sect. 3 But Sir, I beseech you first an ingenious and Christian account, how you can call that, A letter to Mr Jo. Goodwin, which you never sent to him, nor took any probable course that he should ever come to the sight of it. If you had considered the nature of the writing, and upon what terms you published it, might you not rather have stiled it, A defamation of Mr. Jo Goodwin? I confesse I finde a few lines in it, of some affinitie with part of a letter, which about ten or eleven daies since was brought to me by an unknown Messenger, from a (then) unknown Authour, and who at that time [Page] judged it a point of wisdom to veile his name (though presently after it seems he condemned himself of iniquitie, and variablenesse in judgement, by proclaiming his name upon the house top) but such a Synecdoche as this unlesse Charitie in her more then humane exaltation be the interpreter, will not save the credit of such a title from the disparagement of an untruth. Concerning this Letter, you tell me (pag. 5. of your printed paper) that God did not give me the grace to entertain the friendly purpose of him that sent it, (therein expressed) with sutable friendlinesse, but suffered me to reject it with this slighting, if not scornfull answer, that I would make no answer to the letter of an unknown Person. But Sir, upon this accompt I must crave leave to tell you (I know not how you and your messenger will agree in dividing the shame between you) that I rejected not any friendly purpose of yours, nor any other mans, with any slighting, or scornfull return. My answer to your Messenger was to this effect, that if the Gentleman, who sent the letter, would please at any time to repaire unto me, I was ready to give him the best satisfaction I could▪ but that it was contrary both to my minde and practice, to return answers in writing to the letters of unknown persons, refusing to trust me with their names. I know no delinquency in this answer against any principle of civility (much lesse of Religion) if you shall please to shew me any, you shall finde me very pliable to the impression.

Sect. 4 But Sir, that (in the passage mentioned) is of the worst resentment, that you take the name of God in vain, in telling me, that God did not give me Grace to intertain, but suffered me to reject such a motion, as you are pleased to call, a friendly purpose: whereas you might much more reasonably, and with lesse sin; have said, that God gave me grace to reject it, and suffered me not to entertain it. All the friendlinesse of purpose that I was able to discerne in that Letter, was to draw from mee my judgement particularly, and that under my hand in writing, touching all the proceedings of the Army, how farre I goe along with them, and where I leave them; an intention or demand, as in it self captious and insnaring, and requiring much more time to answer, then the writing of a few lines of plain English, or then I could through the pressingnesse of much businesse upon me, spare; So proceeding from [Page] an unknown Person, especially from one, who refused to bee known so much as by his Name, much more suspicious, and theatning. Besides, I had so much the more reason to be jealous of this importune and suddain demand of my judgement, in matters of such high import (for the account was demanded by the return of the messenger) because I had distinctly, and in plain English, declared my self, how farre my intent was to justifie the Armie in their late and present proceedings, in my Right and Might, towards the end of the second Section; viz. in all such actions, which were of like tenour and import, with that of their late garbling, or sifting of the Parliament, i. (if English yet more plain can be spoken) in all such actions; the equity or justnesse whereof is not impeachable upon any other terms or ground, then that.

Sect. 5 And truly Sir, though I love not to look over narrowly for mens intentions at their left hands, yet when intimations this way are pregnant, and look me in the face, I dare not say, I see them not. I really wish that you could reconcile those passages in your printed Letter, with such a Friendlinesse of purpose towards me, as you professe, which my understanding, though assisted with much charity, knoweth not how to break, or tune into such an harmony. For I had much rather beleeve, though upon weaker and lesse convincing grounds, the Friendlinesse of any man towards me, then the falsnesse of his heart, upon the clearest demonstrations. But to deale plainly with you, I must borrow the saith of that generation of men, who (as Solomon saith) will beleeve every thing, to beleeve, that so many reproachfull terms as your pen mustreth up against me, as Pope, New Light, selfe-condemned Heretique, and so many groundlesse suggestions, as that Souldiers and Officers of all degrees have been seduced by me, that the Members of the House of Commons now sitting, have been led out of the rode of their loyalty by me, that I greatly appeare in the Face and Body of my late Discourse, intituled, Right and Might, &c. to teach things contrary to what I assert in my Anticavalerisme; and moreover, that so many instigations of persons of severall Interests and capacities, Independents, Souldiers, Parliament men, &c. to fall foule upon me, in case I shall refuse to do that, which is most unreasonable, sencelesse, and impious for me to [Page] doe; I must (I say) borrow the Faith of Fooles, to beleeve that such symptomes as these, are consistent with a sound mind, or Friendly purpose towards me, in him, on whom they are found.

Sect. 6 Whereas you very unworthily insinuate against me, that all Independents in the Army, as wel Souldiers as Officers of all degrees, may reasonably be judged to have been seduced by me, as likewise that the Parliament now sitting, (though you are not wise enough to cal them a Parliament, nor to determine in what capacity they fit) may have bin led out of the rode of their loyalty by the observation of my irregular motion, &c. the God on high, who must shortly judge both you & me, knows, & these worthy persons themselves, both Parliament men & Souldiers know, that I never was the man from whose tongue or pen the least word, or syllable, tending to the forming, fashioning, or directing of any their proceedings, ever came. Onely when I clearly discerned, that through better teachings then mine, they were ingaged in wayes of Conscience and Honour, such as were (through the blessing of God) like to blesse the nation, wherin notwithstanding, in stead of thankes and encouragements deserved, they met with contradictions and hard sayings from many, and were (with their Lord and Master) numbred amongst transgressors, I conceived my selfe obliged in duty, to being forth the righteousnes of their cause into the clearest light I could, and to stop the mouthes of gainsayers with my pen. And therefore whereas you desire, that the Members of the Honourable House of Commons now sitting (though in what capacity you are not wise enough, you say; not willing enough, I feare, to determine) would change their game, and give over hunting of Lions and wild Boares, I mean the grand disturbers and destroyers of the Nation, and pursue after dead Dogs and Fleas, or hunt Partridges on the mountains, harmlesse, weake, and contemptible men, doe you not at once declare your selfe an enemy to the peace and safety of the Kingdome, and to all those that are righteous and innocent in it, and a Friend to Thieves and Murtherers. Whether you do declare your selfe, or no, upon such terms as these, I am not wise enough to determine: but I beseech you doe your selfe judge.

Sect. 7 But the high prize, which in your printed Letter you run [Page] so shenuously to obtaine, is to disparage me as a man of a variable and inconsistent judgement, yea to Article against me as a Selfe-condemned Heretique▪ unlesse I shall presently with the turning of an hand, or in the twinkling of an eye, remove mountaines, [...]. (in your Dialect) give you such reasons for the change of my judgement [since the writing of my Anticaval [...] risme] which may satisfie you, that they are of sufficient importance to make such an alteration in me. Good Sir, at this point I must deale plainly with you, and tell you▪ that here you speak so irrationally, that you leave me very little hope of finding much strength of reason in those other writings of yours, the perusall whereof you commend unto me, and so have much obstructed my way to the reading of them. For first, must be needs be an Heretique (much more a selfe-condemned Heretique) who changeth his judgement, without giving an account unto the world of his change? Change of judgement even upon such termes as these, may as well be a reduction unto Orthodoxisme, as a deviation unto Heresie, Secondly, every opinion, whether retained in judgement, or deserted, doth not make an Heretique, whether in the one case, or the other. Thirdly, as to the particular opinion, a recesse from which you presume in me, but prove not at all, and conclude to be Heresie; I desire to learn from you, when, where, or by what Authour it was ever adjudged Heresie, to hold, that whosoever sheddeth man [...] blood, be he never so high, or never so low, his blood lawfully may be shed by man in a judiciary way. Fourthly, It is [...], an importune and very unreasonable demand, that a man should presently, and (as it were) with a wet finger, especially at all times, and under any circumstances whatsoever, give an account of the change of his judgement, though in the greatest and weightiest matters. Fifthly, It is yet much more unreasonable, to stigmatize a man with Heresie, unlesse upon the change of his judgement, he shall account to men of opposite judgement, for his change, in such arguments and grounds, which shall be satisfactory unto them, that such an alteration in him is justifiable. Doe not your self say (in the postscript of your printed letter) that for a man to confesse himself convinced of an errour he hath made publique, especially if his judgment hath not bin swaied by weight of reason,[Page]but overballa [...]ed by private Interest, is one of the hardest points of selfdeniall? So that▪ according to your principles, he is an Heretique, nay a self condemned Heretique, who cannot justifie or maintain those opinions which he holds, by such arguments, which will make men of contrary judgement, deniers of themselves, yea and this in one of the hardest points of self deniall. If this bee your touchstone to try Heretiques, and self condemned Heretiques by; I feare that neither you, nor any of your partie will stand before the touch. But Sixtly (and lastly, for this) that which (in this quarter of your discourse) is at deepest and most desperate defiance with all principles of reason, and common sence it self, is, that you pronounce him a selfe condemned Heretique, who shall not give such an account, as hath been described, and evicted for most unreasonable, unto you, and others, of the alteration, of his judgement. For (I beseech you) is it not possible for a man, to have grounds and reasons satisfactorie to himself, and to his own judgement and conscience, for what he holds, unlesse he publisheth them in print? Or is a man self condemned, who verily, and in the simplicitie of his heart beleeveth, that he hath sufficient ground, for what he holdeth, or professeth, unlesse he maketh publique profession of his grounds also? Were you a self condemned Heretique, untill the other day, when (as you say) you took off your mask, and declared for the King, against both Parliament, and Armie, and their proceedings? For doubtlesse till of late, you gave neither me, nor the world, any reason at all, much lesse any that did satisfie either me, or others (as neither yet have you done) that you were not, I will not say, in an Heresie; but, in an errour, or failer in judgement, whilest you stood by the Cause of Prerogative, and Will, turning your back upon the Cause of Equitie, and of the just interest of the Kingdome; which, being interpreted, is none other, but the cause of God. Were you therefore a man condemned in your self, because you did not justifie your selfe before others? Or if you were a man justified in your self, though condemned by others, whilest you kept your reasons and grounds to your self, of that opinion, for which others condemned you, why may not I be admitted to take part with you in the priviledge, upon the same terms?

[Page] Sect. 8 And whereas you essay to bruise the heele of my Right and Might well met, that so the credit of it may halt in the apprehension of men, by going about the bush to represent the Author of it, as a man of a desultorie, and variable judgement, and hereby condemning himself of iniquitie; I perceive hereby, that you deale more in colours, then in substances. For whatsoever my judgement was in the point you wot of, whether Negative, or Affirmative; when I wrote my Anti-Cavalerisme, certain I am, and certain also might you have been, if you had looked a little better, before you had leaped, that there is nothing, either in the passage which you transcribe, or in any other part of the discourse, of any import for your turn, I mean, which asserteth, or presenteth it, as a thing unlawfull, to touch the lives of Tyrants, or (in your dialect) of Kings (for day and night, it seems, to you are but ths same) in a due processe or course of Justice. Again, whatsoever my judgment is now about the same question, or point, whether I judge it lawfull, or unlawfull, to smite the lives of Tyrants, or King Tyrants, with the sword of Justice upon sufficient evidence of crimes deserving death: certain I am, that in my late discourse, intituled Right and Might, &c. I affirm nothing positively, on the one hand, or the other. Suppose that in the one discourse some things were expressed not with so much steadinesse or circumspectnesse of terms, (though I am conscious of no such defect here, as I shall account presently) but that a weak understanding might inferre, and possibly think that my judgement stood against the lawfulnesse of all judiciarie proceeding, against Kings, in matters of life and death; and upon a like failing in my other discourse, (though to my best understanding I am as blameles here, as in the other) that I seem to hold a lawfulnesse of such proceedings; Must I upon the account of other mens weaknesse, or incogitancie in reading, be condemned for variablenesse in judgement, or as one, who have condemned my self of iniquity? These (questionlesse) are Prerogative dealings, and have no communion with principles of Equitie, Reason, or Religion.

Sect. 9 But because you seem rather to insult, then say; that the passage by you transcribed from p. 7. of my Anti-Cavalerism, stareth the Composer of my late Pamphet in the face with a wide oden mouth, whereby (if your Rhetorique transcendeth [Page] not my Grammar) you mean, that it manifestly contradictetth what I affirm herein, suffer me in a few words to shew you how vain your rejoycing is in this behalf: For,

First, that I speak nothing in the passage, concerning, much lesse against, any judiciarie triall of, or legall proceedings against Kings, is cleare; first, because in the very first words of the passage, which lead the sense of the whole, I use the expression of offering violence to the Person of a King, or attempting to take a way his Life [viz. by violence] Now the taking away of the life a malefactour, by the hand of Justice, in a due and regular processe of law, was never (I beleeve) by any man, termed the offering of violence to his Person. Secondly, that unlawfulnesse of offering violence to the Person of a King, which I here insinuate, I oppose to the known Doctrine and Practice of the Jesuites. Now the manner and methord of offering violence to the Persons, or of taking away the lives of Kings which the Iesuites both teach and practise, is known to be, not by bringing them to a judiciall tryall, or upon evidence of matter of fact against them, deserving death, but by wayes of assasination, poysoning, and such extrajudiciall and murtherous practises. Thirdly, for the proofe of the unlawnes which I here plead, of taking away the lifes of Kings, I mention Davids conscience smiting him, when he came but so neer the life of a King, as the cutting off the lap of his garment. This also plainly shews, that the unlawfulnes of taking away the lives of Kings, which I here maintain, onely respects the fact as perpetrated, or to be perpetrated, by private men, or out of a course of publique Justice. For David, when his Conscience smote him upon the occasion specified, was a private man. Now for me to argue thus; a private man and without due processe of law, ought to make conscience of taking away the life of a Malefactor, how worthy so ever to die; therefore a Magistrate upon evidence of the fact in a legall way, ought to make conscience of it also, were to beat the aire, or to give water instead of wine. Fourthly, by the tenor of the objection, whereunto the passage under contest is reponed by way of Answer (in part) the relation and proportion between which, is soon seen in the discourse it self (though it would be somewhat long here to argue it) it evidently appears that the said passage looketh [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] not towards any triall of Kings for their lives by lawfull Magistrates, but onely impleads all violence offered, or to be offered, to them, by private men.

Sect. 10 Nor doth the simile in the passage, wherein the [...]ives of Kings are resembled to consecrated Corn, meet to be reaped or gathered by the hand of God himself, necessarily import any such thing as you would worm, and work out of it, as viz. that it should be sinfull, or unlawfull, for any man, or men whatsoever, in what case soever, to take away the lives of Kings. Because, whatsoever is done in a way of justice, and according to the Will, Word, or Commandement of God, is frequently in Scripture, and may in sufficient proprietie of speech, be said to be done by God himself. This rule, though perhaps you cannot finde in the Homilies of the Church of England, yet may you finde it more then once in the writings of Reformed Divines. It is frequent in the Scriptures (saith Mr. Ainsworth) to make one the doer of a thing, which hee commandeth to be done. In Numb. 193. Thus Ioshua saith unto Achan: Insomuch as thou hast troubled us, THE LORD SHALL TROƲBLE thee this day. Immediately it follows: And all Israel threw stones at him, and burned them with fire, &c. Ioh. 7. 25. The Lord himself is said to have troubled Achan, because what Ioshua and the People did to him in this kinde, was according to his will and appointment. Thus God himself said unto Moses, I will smite with the rod that is in mine hand upon the waters Exo. 7. 17.: whereas the sequell plainly sheweth that it was Aaron, and not God himself, otherwise then by his command, that smote therewith upon the water. See also Matth. 19. 6. 2 Cor. 12. 21. upon the former of which places, Zanchie (I well remember) delivereth the same rule, for substance, with that mentioned from M. Ainsworth. So then, God having commanded, that who so sheddeth mans blood, by man shall his blood be shed; Gen. 9. 6. whose blood soever is shed in a regular obedience to this command, may be said to be shed by by God himself.

Sect. 11 Nor will those words in the passage, wherewith you make your capitall flourish, IN VVHAT CASE SOEVER, any whit more countenance your forged cavillation, if you mind the words immediatly following. The intire clause is this: Wee conceive it to be the just Prerogative of Kings, in what [Page]case so [...], to bee secure from the violence of men. You by making majorites of those words, IN VVHAT CASE SOEVER, and minorites, of those which follow, would (as it should seeme) faine imply, that those words, which you make great, comprehend more, and extend farther, then their fellowes following them, which you make little as viz. not onely to secure Kings from the violence of men (whereunto they are expresly limitted) but from the justice of God also administred by men. Take heed what y [...] doe (sayth the good King Jehosaphat to the Judges which he appointed in the land) for ye execute not the judgements of men, but of the Lord, and he will be with you in the cause and judgement, Take heed and doe it: for there is no iniq [...]itie with the Lord our God, neither respect of persons. 2 Chro. 19. 6, 7. Besides, if I should have intended to say, without all limitation and exception whatsoever, that it were the priviledge of Kings, not to have their lives taken from them by men, without sin, in what case soever, I must have supposed, that the Philistines sinned in flaying Saul in battle; that Eliud sinned in killing Eglon, Joshua in putting so many Kings to the sword, as hee did, Samuell in having Agag to pieces &c. which certainly never came within the verge of my thoughts nor (I think) of any other man, who knew his righthand from his left in matters of Religion.

Sect. 12 Nor is it of any value for the crediting of your deduction from the passage in hand, to pretend and say, that if I intended no other security therein unto Kings, then onely from the violence of men in an extrajudiciall way, I made them herein but equall unto private and ordinariemen; it being the privilege, of the meanest of men, that their lives cannot be taken from them without sin, otherwise then by the sword of the Magistrate, and that in a due processe of law For to this the answer is easy; that there is no inconvenience or absurdity in it at all, to assert that in an emphaticall and peculiar way unto Kings, which in a generall consideration belongs unto other men also. The Scripture it selfe doth this frequently. The Apostle Peter, chargeth Christians to honour the King: and yet in the same verse, and in the same terme, hee commandeth them also to Honour all men. [...]. 1 Pet. 2. 17. In like manner, it is written [Page] (saith the Apostle Paul) thou shalt not speake evill of the Ruler of thy people: Act. 23. 5. and yet the same Apostle asserts the same priviledge (I meane, of not having evill spoken of them) unto all men; charging Christians (and in them, all others) to speake evill of no man. Yet againe, he exhorts that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made * Tit. 3. 2. for all men; and immediatly adds, For Kings, &c. So that it * Tim. 2. 12. is no soloecisme at all in reason, or discourse, either to say, or imply that common privileges, having an accent put upon them, are presents for Kings. More might be added upon this account: but I desire not to be tedious unto you▪

Sect. 13 Thus then you see Sir, or cannot lightly but see, how strangely you were mistaken in construing that passage of mine, which you cite in your printed letter. [...]: your treasure, prove but coales. I beseech you take the advantage of the present occasion, and consider with your self so much the more narrowly, whether in many other cases, as well as this, the shaddowes of the mountaines doe not seeme men unto you. And yet I confesse that C. B. hath justified P. D. in his un-cleark-like and frothy mistake. For he being a D. D. standing in Christs stead, and speaking in Christs Name, unto men, abused at once his great Lord and Master, his Auditorie, his calling, his brother, and himself in a most desperate and shameful manner teaching for Doctrine the empty traditions of your pen, and making part of his Audience glad, and part sad, with that Lie, which the sight of your paper (it seemes) had put into his unhallowed mouth.

Before I leave the businesse in hand, because I would secure you against all mistakes, (if it be possible) I beseech you once againe that you will please tounderstand, that in all that I have said to vindicate the innocencie of my mis-understood passage, from the offence, which either you take at it, or would fasten upon it, I have said nothing, either by way of affirmation, or negation concerning the state of my judgement, about the question of the lawfulnesse, and unlawfulnesse, of judiciall procedings against Kings, at the time when I composed my Anti-Cavalerisme. All that I have said or done, upon this account, amounts to no more, then onely to a cleere probation, that there is nothing at all in the passage [Page] so oft mentioned, that can reasonably, or with any tolerable construction of the words, be drawne to a comportance with their judgement, who judge it absolutely unlawfull to subject Kings to that righteous Law of God, which saith, that Who so sheddeth mans blood, by man shall his bolod be shed.

Sect. 14 But good Sir, suppose it should be granted you, that in the passage you transcribe, Icleerly shew my self to have been of your judgment, touching the unlawfulnes of all judiciarie proceedings against the lives of Kings, what earnings can you make of it? or upon what ground of reason, or with what face of ingenuity, can you upon such a supposition, prejudge me a Selfcondemned Heretique, unles I shal either strengthen your hand by a publique avouchment of my standing in the same judgement still, or weaken it, by giving such an account of the alteration of my judgement, which may satisfie you? If you shall pretend, that the reason why you would tie mee to this sowre apple-tree, is, because I speake doubtfully upon the point in my Right and Might, my cleere answer is, that in this discourse I interpose nothing at all concerning it, unless (haply) it be, by holding forth and asserting such grounds, in order to the cleering of another Question, wherein (possibly) you, and others of your judgement may conceive, that the negative of what (according to the supposition mentioned) I formerly held touching the universall exemption of Kings from triall, is concluded also. But Sir, give me leave to say, that if those grounds and principles of Reason and Religion, which I assertin my discourse, and upon which the whole fabrique of it is built, be first in themselves solid and cleere: and secondly doe with alike soliditie and cleereness, contradict and overthrow that judgement of yours, which you suppose to have been sometimes mine with you; then I have already performed that hard taske, which upon your supposall of the alteration of my judgemennt, you impose upon me; and have given you and others, such reasons, which may, and ought to satisfie all reasonable men touching such an alteration of judgement in me.

If the said grounds, be not solid and cleare in your apprehension, and withall seem to you to oppose that judgement of yours, which (as you will needs suppose) was sometimes [Page] mine, the confutation of them lieth upon you, not upon me, who judge them inconfutable. And howsoever it is a thing ridiculously [...]reasonable, for a man, when his judgement is opposed in a discourse, to impose upon the Author a confucation of his own discourse. Or if this be the task you would enjoyn me, to declare whether these principles and grounds. I assert, doe contradict and overthrow that judgement of yours (supposedly mine quondam) this is (in a manner) as unreasonable, as the former. For it is a labour of much difficulty, and requiring long study, and in some cases not far from an impossibitie, for a man to beat out all the particular consectaries, consequences, and conclusions, which are virtually contained in all such principles, which he hath occasion to deliver and assert. If you shall yet pretend and say, that what you desire of me to vindicate my selfe, is obvious, and easie to be done, being no more but this, that I would declare, whether I conceive, or apprehend, that supposed former judgement of mine concerning the untouchablenesse of the lives of Kings, to bee consistent with those grounds and principles, which I build upon in my late discourse: I must again answer, that such a thing as this is indeed easie to be done, but no ways honourable or comely, for me in this, nor for any man else to doe in the like case. Hee that shall (especially in publique) deliver his judgement, in matters of great weight, presently, yea without a proportionable retirement of himself for the exact Ad poenitentiam properat, qui citò judicat. casting up of all particular accounts relating to such an undertaking, apparently runs a double hazard; the one, of misleading others; the other, of dishonour to himself.

Sect. 15 And thus Sir you see, how every waies unreasonable, uncivil, and importune that imposition is, which you lay upon me; I must be, by your award, a self condemned Heretique, unlesse to gratifie your prerogative humour, I shall acquit my selfe from that, which is no crime, by an act of self condemnation.

Sect. 16 Whereas you say, that for ought you know, I am the first, and onely Minister of any Reformed Church, that ever was of this, by my self stiled Iesuiticall, opinion; but are not able to bring the least proof that I am of any such opinion, which I so stile, I should sin against the law of Charitie, which forbids [Page] me to suffer sin to rest upon my Brother, if I should not reprove you for it, as a saying of as much unworthinesse, as could lightly fall from the pen of a sober man. For, I beseech you, where are your evidences, where are your proofes, nay where are your presumptions, where are your shaddows of conjecture, that I am of any such opinion, which is by my self stiled, Iesuiticall? For ought I know, you are the first and the onely man professing Christianitie, who ever aspersed mee with the blot, or blood rather, of such an opinion. But if a Declaration of my self▪ against this Opinion▪ will satisfie you, I here professe, with an heart enlarged, and mouth wide opened, in the presence of Heaven and Earth, of God, Angels, and Men, that I seriously detest and abhorre that Opinion, which is by me stiled, Iosuiticall. But if you suppose that Opinion, to be by me stiled Iesuiticall, which maintaineth a lawfulnes of judiciarie proceedings, as well against Kings as other men; supposing withall that I am of this opinion (though I am as yet sensible of no obligation upon me to tell you whether I be of this opinion, or no) yet I must inform you of this, that in case I be of the opinion, I neither am the first, nor the onely Minister (by many) of the reformed Church, who so judge: yea, and were not my inclination strong, to hope the best, untill I know the worst, I could hardly allow you the sanctuary of those words, for ought I know, as clean, for your refuge. It is very hard to beleeve, but that you know that many Ministers of the Reformed Church have been of that opinion before, and besides me, if I should be of it. Or if you do not (indeed) yet know it, Mr. Prynn's large Tract, intituled the Soveraign Power of Parliaments, and Kingdomes, published in the year 1643. if your please to peruse it, will abundantly satisfie you in this behalf. In the very front and title page of this Book he rejoyceth over it, as being such a piece, wherein the superioritie of our own, and most other forraign Parliaments, States, Kingdomes, Magistrates, collectively considered, over and above their lawfull Emperours, Kings, and Princes, is ABOUNDANTLY evinced, confirmed by pregnant reasons, Resolutions, Precedents, Histories, Anthorities of ALL Sorts, &c. Pag. 199. of his Discourse, he cites a large passage from Zuinglus, which begins thus: When Princes shall act [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] perfidiously and besides the rule of Christ, they may, [cu [...] Deo] with Gods leave, or approbation, be deposed, by the consent and suffrage, either of all, or of the better part of the people. Afterwards, in the same passage, the Authour imputes it to the defact of publique Iustice, that the wickednesses of Tyrants escape without punishment, as they doe. And (saith he) there wants not wayes or means, for the taking away of Tyrants, but there is a mant of publique Iustice (with much more of like import.) In the same page there is a passage likewise of Calvin, which makes it dissimulation joyned with nefarious perfidiousnesse, and a fraudulent betraying of the Libertie of the People, in Magistrates, if they connive at Kings outragiously encroaching upon, and insulting over the inferiour common people, and shall not withstand their raging licentiousnesse, &c. But there is a book intituled, Lex, Rex, Printed here at London, anno 1644. Composed (as is said, and as the stile, and worth of it importeth, though the stile of it, I confesse, is the least part of its worth) by a Minister, a man of the greatest eminencie for parts of learning and judgement in the whole Kingdome of Scotland, and (if fame bee not a flatteresse) inferiour to none in pietie; this book I would gladly recommend to your serious perusall, if you have not already met with it. To relate what this Author sayes of his own, and citeth of other mens, in full comport with the opinion now enquired after, would farre exceed the bounds of my intended answer. Take a first fruits of the harvest. If a King (saith this Authour, pag. 234.) turn a Parricide, a Lyon, a waster, and a destroyer of the People, as a man he is subject to the coactive power of the Laws of the land. If any law should hinder that a tyrant should not be punished by law, it must be, because he hath not a superiour, but God: for Roiallists build all upon this? But this ground is false: for the Estates of the Kingdom, who gave him the Crown, are above him, and they may take away, what they gave him, as the law of Nature and God saith. The substance of this passage he proveth by severall substantiall arguments following. Pag. 404. he saith thus: Wee hold that the Law saith with us, That VASSALS LOSE THEIR FARME, IF THEY PAY NOT WHAT IS DƲE. Now what are Kings,[Page]b [...] Vas [...]als to the State, who, if they turn Tyrants, fall from their right? again p. 1. 3. If then any cast off the nature of a King, and become habitually a Tyrant, in so far he is not from God, nor any ordinance which God doth own. A while after, thus; There is a Court of necessitie, no losse then a Court of Justice▪ and the fundamentall laws must then speake; and it is with the Peopl [...] in this extremitie, as if they had no Ruler. Many other passages there are in this piece relating to the cause in hand, which I respit to your perusall of it.

Sect. 17 To draw to a con [...]lusion; you tell me towards the close of your Paper, that by a perusall of the Books and Papers which you sent unto me, I may peradventure finde more cause to retract the main scope of my whole Anti-Cavalerisme, then the above mentioned passage thereof. Truly Sir, if upon the peruseall which you recommend unto me, I shall finde no more cause to retract the main scope of my discourse, then I have yet found to reverse the passage you speak of, I shall finde none at all. Howsoever, if you have acquited your self in these writings, like a work man that need not to be ashamed, you could not have recommended their perusall to a man more proselyteable, then I. Ballance my reasons and grounds, and I shall demurre; over poise them, and I am yours. One of my chiefe Imployments is, quotidiè de erroribus meis demere: and I shall be really and heartily thankfull unto you, or any man, that will help me in my work. I have not the least expectance that any errour should ever blesse me▪ least of all those, which I have published to the danger of others. Make me to see in the one, what I apprehend in the other, and my Anti-Cavalerisme shall be no more to me, then your [...]. The grounds I build upon in the discourse, as I remember are but few, the number of them, but five: Their names those, First, That Kings have no power, but what is given unto them, either by God, or men. Secondly, That God gives power or Authoritie unto no man to doe unrighteously. Thirdly, That if men give any such power, it is a meere nullitie. Fourthly, That to resist any power, which God hath not given, is not to resist any ordinance of God, nor sinfull. Fifthly, That self defence incase of lawlesse opposition, or assault, is a cleare dictate of the law of nature. Whether there he any [Page] more of this kinde, or no, in that discourse, I doe not at present perfectly remember. Doe but either shake these foundations, or discover to me, that I have built besides them, you and I shall agree in two words about the retractation of the main scope of my Anti-Cavalerisme. I thought to have drawn forth after the same manner, the principles upon which my Right and Might, stands: but these being many more in number, I shall not tempt your patience with the muster of them. Onely I freely make the same offer concernning these, which I did about the other; either present mee with such other principles and grounds, which will serve these, as Aarons rod did the rod of the Inchanters, devoure them; or shew me, where my building stands awry, or off from my foundations; and the same hand which built it, shall soone pull it down.

Not to be further troublesome unto you at present, if you please to strike talies, and take satisfaction for my boldnesse from the consideration of your own, I shall take it as a pledge of Christian ingenuitie from your hand. Howsoever, you may aslure your upon sufficient ground, that, any thing in these papers notwithstanding, I am, Sir

Your very loving friend, JOHN GOODVVIN.

Colemanstreet Jan. 18. 1648.

Postscript.

I acknowledge that since the printing of the former part of this Answer, I received a printed copie of that Letter from you, which towards the beginning hereof I deny to have received.

§

§

[Page]

[Page]

[...].

Luke 18.

THE Vnrighteous Iudge, OR An Answer to a Printed Paper, pretending a Letter to Mr Io. GOODVVIN, by Sir FRANCIS NETHERSOLE Knight. Wherein the rough things of the said pretended Letter, are made smooth, and the crooked things straight: and the predominant designe of it fully evinced to be, either an unscholarlike oscitancie and mistake, or else somewhat much worse. By the said JO. GOODWIN.

False witnesses did rise up: they laid to my charge things that I know not.

Psal. 35. 11.

Quidam Christianae ac fraternae charitatis obliti, in tantum existimationem nostram quoquo modo student laedere, ut suam se evertere nocendi cupiditate non videant.

Aug. ad. Artic. sibi falsò imposuos.

LONDON, Printed by G. Dawson for Henry Cripps, and are to sold in Popes-head Allie. 1649.

Errata

Page 1. line 10. for [...], reade [...]. p. 6 l. 1. for shenuously reade strenuously. p. 7. l. 2 [...]. for ground, r. ground [...] ▪ p. 8. l. 15. for the, r. the. p. 9. l. [...]5. for methord, r. method. p. 11. l. 8. for limitted, r. limited. p. 13. l. 5. for bolod, r. blood. l. 27. after, in r. this.

Information about this book

Title statement

The Vnrighteous iudge, or an answer to a printed paper, pretending a letter to Mr Io. Goodvvin, by Sir Francis Nethersole knight. Wherein the rough things of the said pretended letter, are made smooth, and the crooked things straight: and the predominant designe of it fully evinced to be, either an unscholarlike oscitancie and mistake, or else somewhat much worse. / By the said Jo. Goodwin.

Goodwin, John, 1594?-1665.

Edition statement

1649

Publication

Publisher

Text Creation Partnership,

Place of publication

Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) :

Date

2008-09 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1).

ID [DLPS]

A85402

ID [STC]

Wing G1179

ID [STC]

Thomason E540_1

ID [STC]

ESTC R205729

ID [EEBO-CITATION]

99865023

ID [PROQUEST]

99865023

ID [VID]

117256

Availability

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

Series

Early English books online.

Notes

(EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A85402)

Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 117256)

Images scanned from microfilm: (Thomason Tracts ; 84:E540[1])

Source

— The Vnrighteous iudge, or an answer to a printed paper, pretending a letter to Mr Io. Goodvvin, by Sir Francis Nethersole knight. Wherein the rough things of the said pretended letter, are made smooth, and the crooked things straight: and the predominant designe of it fully evinced to be, either an unscholarlike oscitancie and mistake, or else somewhat much worse. / By the said Jo. Goodwin., Goodwin, John, 1594?-1665..

Extent

[2], 18 p.

Printed by G. Dawson for Henry Cripps, and are to sold [sic] in Popes-head Allie,. London :: 1649.. (A reply to: Nethersole, Francis. The self-condemned. Or, a letter to Mr Jo: Goodwin.) (Annotation on Thomason copy: "Jan. 25 1648".) (Reproduction of the original in the British Library.)

Creation

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

Editorial practices

EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.

EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).

The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.

Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.

Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.

Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.

The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.

Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).

Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.