〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, OR, The Loyal Subjects Indignation, FOR HIS Royal Sovereign's DECOLLATION;  
Expressed in an Unparallelled PARALLEL Between the Professed murderer of K. SAUL, and the Horrid actual Murderers of KING CHARLES I.  
The Substance whereof was delivered In a SERMON Preached at All hallows Church in NORTHAMPTON, On (the Day appointed for an ANNIVERSARY HUMILIATION in reference to that execrable Fact) Jan. 30. 1660.  
By SIMON FORD B. D. Minister there, and Chaplain to his MAJESTY.  
London, Printed by J. H. for Samuel Gellibrand at the Golden Ball in St. Paul's Churchyard. 1661.   

To the RIGHT HONOURABLE JOHN Earl of LAUDERDAIL, Viscount Metallan, Lord Thirleston and Bolton, One of the Gentlemen of his Majesty's Bedchamber, Principal Secretary of State in the Kingdom of Scotland, and One of His Majesty's most Honourable Privy Council in both Kingdoms  
Right Honourable,  
WHen I had the Happiness to be first known to your Lordship, during your Late Tyrannical and tedious Imprisonment at Windsor Castle (for which I still acknowledge myself obliged to your own Condescension, inviting me thereunto) I remember your Lordship was pleased to acquaint me, that some Books of mine formerly published, had been part of the entertainment of your private hours, during the vacancy which that barbarous Persecution gave you from Public Business. And the remembrance hereof emboldeneth me to presume, that your Lordship's Library will afford this Little Piece also a place among its Fellows: Nor am I altogether out of hope, that it may have the like favour of approbation at your Lordship's hands, from the experience then given me of the value which your Lordship then assured me you put upon them: Especially, when I consider, that the subject matter of it is Loyalty; for which your Lordship then suffered so deeply under the heavy hands of the Late bloody Tyrant and Usurper: and for which I have been for several years persecuted by the Murderers of our Late Sovereign of Glorious Memory, for endeavouring to obstruct them in the quiet possession of his vacant Seat, by both refusing to subscribe, and also bearing public Testimony from the Pulpit against the Subscription of that accursed Engagement, imposed by them in order to a post-justification of that horrid Fact, the Extirpation of the Royal Posterity, and the Settlement of themselves in their Rights, by colour of a public and National Consent.  
And I assure you (my Lord) that the Conscience hereof (together with that little Contribution which (in my low capacity) I have (through God's Goodness) lived to give towards the Restauration and Settlement of his present Majesty, my most Gracious Sovereign, and Royal Master, (whom the Divine Protection long preserve) is not the least of my Comforts, nor (I hope) shall be to my dying Day. Upon the comfortable experience whereof (as also upon the conviction of those Doctrines, which in this, and my former Parallel, I have published to the world) I am resolved as long as I live (through God's Grace) to seek the Peace and Welfare, and Support (to my capacity) the Crown and Dignity of my most rightful Sovereign, and bid a perfect defiance to all Persons and Principles whatsoever, that are given to change.  
Now the Lord grant that the guilt of the Late Horrid Murder upon the Lords Anointed, may be so wiped off from the Score of these Nations, that we be never visited with those very evils, or worse, (for a just punishment thereof) to prevent which, the Contrivers and Executors of it, took so irregular and unlawful a course. I mean, that the violent revengefulness of some Spirits among us, may not re-produce such woeful Tragedies, as God hath mercifully delivered us from once and again, within a few years last passed, and perpetually honour his just and rightful Successor, our present Sovereign, with the most Noble and Glorious Title, of the Allayer of our mutual heats and animosities, the Moderator of all our Differences, and the Reconciler of us each to other (even whether we will or no) by the Interposition of his Royal Authority. Let 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be his perpetual Motto, and the inviolable Observation of all his Acts of Pardon and Oblivion, be his Memorial and Honourable Remembrance to all Generations; and may your Lordship's Counsels be perpetually assistant to Him (as I doubt not but they will) in all things of that Tendency; which will not only preserve your Name in that Repute which you have hitherto maintained amongst all pious and sober persons, but render you a Councillor in whom there will be safety to the Person and Throne of his Sacred Majesty, and make good the Character, which amongst other your Honourers, have been given of your Lordship's Wisdom and Temper, by  
Right Honourable, Your Lordship's most Humble and Affectionate Servant, SIMON FORD.   

〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 OR, The Loyal Subjects Indignation, FOR HIS Royal Sovereign's Decollation, etc.  2 SAM. 1. 14. And David said unto him, How wast thou not afraid to stretch forth thine hand to destroy the Lords Anointed? 
THis Chapter contains in it a relation of certain passages 
The Introduction to the Text. An Amalckites Narrative of the death of Saul.  concerning the death of King Saul, (which whether true or false (seeing we must take them upon the credit of a fugitive soldier) can hardly be put out of question; though we, (as probably David, to whom it was made, did) will at present suppose them true:) and the carriage of David thereupon. The whole story whereof seems to be recorded of purpose for the vindication of the holy man, from the unjust imputation of designing and conspiring to take away his Sovereign's life, by the defensive Arms which he had formerly born against him. And three particulars are therein mentioned, as evidences of his innocence.  
1. His unfeigned grief for that lamentable death which (by the relators story) he understood had befallen him, v. 11, 12.  
2. His indignation against, and justice upon the person who professed he was the instrument to hasten it, v. 13, to 17.  
3. His pious endeavour to perpetuate the memory of his deceased Sovereign in a mournful Ditty composed by himself, and appointed in succeeding Ages to be sung in a solemn manner by the children of Judah. To which purpose, he caused it to be recorded in a book kept (as it seems by Josh. 10. 13.) of purpose, to preserve the memorial of eminent men, called the book of Jasher, or the Upright; and gave it (in remembrance of the weapons of war which (it appears by 1 Sam. 31. 3.) were most fatal in that battle wherein Saul received his foil, and first wound) the title of Kesheth, or the Bow, of which you have the particular account from v. 17. to the end.  
My Text comes under the second of these mentioned particulars, and is the verse wherein David expresseth his deep resentment of the related fact, with a just horror and indignation: David said to him, How wast thou not afraid to stretch forth thy hand to destroy the Lords anointed?  
Which words, because they relate to a preceding Narrative, made by an Amalekite (a mercenary of saul's, as is likely, escaped out of that battle before mentioned) concerning the manner of the King's death: We will take a little time before we come to a particular view of them, to examine the considerable passages in it, and circumstances relating to it.  
And it is observable that the villain expresseth in 〈◊〉 carriage and relation, a strange mixture of  

1. Confidence. 
Managed with a strange   
2. Caution.   
First, Confidence, in that he took the boldness to be the Relator 
1. Confidence.  of such a story concerning himself, and that in the face of Authority, which an ordinary person would have trembled to have been charged withal by another. And that which most sets off his confidence, is, that the person before whom he confesseth himself guilty of promoting saul's death, was his immediate Successoun▪ David, who by his death became actually King. Had he been never so slightly read in politics, he might have learned, that succeeding Kings, (however, they may look on the news of their Predecessors death as acceptable tidings, yet) seldom look favourably upon those who have been Instruments in making the royal Seat void for them; as considering that the same persons who have been so kind to them, upon like inducements, may be easily tempted to do the like courtesy for others, as occasion serves.  
But (it seems) the Wretch built his confidence upon three probable 
Upon mistaken grounds.  conjectures, in all of which (nevertheless) he was sorely mistaken.  
1. That David, being by God's appointment and samuel's unction, the next in succession to Saul, might by his greediness to grasp the Sceptre, be tempted to make another judgement of the fact, than otherwise he would; and account his service meritorious, who had helped him to it sooner than in the course of nature it would have fallen. He made an ill conjecture (it appears) at the temper of David's spirit, which was not so sharpset upon the dish of Royalty (however tempting in itself, and to vulgar appetites) but that he could stay till God's providence in a regular way carved it to him. How much mind soever he had to the golden apple, which sets all the world at odds, Dominion, yet had he no mind to have the Tret on which it grew, battered, to make it fall before the time.  
2. That however David might be too mortified to by't at the bait of Ambition, yet secret revenge might tickle him into a good humour, when he understood in what manner divine vengeance had overtaken his deadly enemy, and implacable persecutor. But David had learned, that a gracious soul is frequently the more endangered by being secure from dangers. That, a state of persecution well husbanded, is the most feracious soil for grace to thrive in. That, be the benefit accrueing by the fall of one's enemy never so great, yet to rejoice at the destruction of him that hateth us when evil hath found him, is not only a vicious disposition in morality, but a sin of no ordinary size in Divinity, Job 35. 15. and especially, when the person so suffering is the Lords anointed; and so, the private advantage accrueing thereby to any person, is too inconsiderable a compensation to be laid in balance against a public loss. And upon this account his politics failed the Relator in his second presumption.  
3. That David had been in Arms against Saul for divers years, and was at this time in a posture of defence against him in a frontier Town of an enemy's Country. These considerations gave very great suspicion that he designed the death of Saul himself, and so was (at least intentionally) a partner in guilt with him who effected it. But the Miscreant either knew not, or was willing not to know that David's Arms were merely defensive, not offensive; that, as his warrant for wearing them was extraordinary, and much different from other subjects in like cases, so his temper in the use of them was extraordinary also: and lastly, that he had more than once given evidence of no less, when both opportunity, and tentation from his most intimate friends, had put it to the utmost trial, 1 Sam. 24. & 26. And thus was he mistaken in his third conjecture, which bottomed his Confidence. And possibly, he himself might have some twinges and wrenches of suspicion that he might be so; and that, in the midst of his boldness, makes him to manage his relation (in the second place) with much  
Secondly, Caution: Which appears in several particulars observable 
2. Caution in his Artifices & Pleas for justification or extenuation of the Fact. 1. He relates only the death of Saul, David's enemy. v. 5.  in his carriage and narrative, whereby he seems of purpose to design the extenuation of this fact which he assumed the boldness thus to relate. As  
1. That though he brought the tidings of both saul's and Jonathans' death, yet he pretends not to have any such particular knowledge of Jonathans' death, as he had of saul's, though David asked him concerning them both; lest David should by the circumstances of his own relation, have suspected him guilty of Jonathans' death also, as he confessed himself of saul's. He knew that friendship which was between David and Jonathan, would have endangered him to a more severe scrutiny, than he hoped he should undergo for saul's. At least, he was not so ready to insist on that part of the story, which he knew was the most unwelcome, and therefore chose to insist only on that which he hoped would be better entertained. He had indeed slain David's enemy, and so could give the most perfect relation of his death: but could say little but from the voice of the people, concerning the death of his friend.  
2. That though he confesseth he had an hand in the death of 
2. He justifieth his Fact. 1. By saul's request.  Saul, yet he was requested by himself to do it. He said unto him, stand upon me, I pray thee, and slay me, ver. 9 Now, volenti non fit injuria; and how much less, roganti? No man is injured, but against his will; and therefore, it cannot (in any reason) come under the notion of Injury, to satisfy another's Request, which hath in it a superlative degree of Voluntariness. Besides, he was his Sovereign, and so his Requests adopted the Authority of Commands. And if his Sovereign's Command might warrant him to take away the life of another, why might it not justify him rather in the case of his own? seeing what is a man's own, is more properly and directly in his power to dispose of, than what is another's. Add to this; that it was the last Office of Love and Service that he was capable of performing towards him; and that so great, that as he had cause to believe, that Saul himself thanked him for it in his dying thoughts, so his very Ghost, if it were present, could not but attest, that no man ever merited more highly from Saul, than he had done.  
3. That there was Reason enough why Saul should account no 
By his dangerous condition.  less of this Service, for no man in his condition, but would have courted death, more amorously than ever he did the dearest Object of his Affections: Wounded he was by his own hand, and as one that 
Job 3. 21.  longed for death, he had digged for it into his own Breast, as for hid Treasure: But the Channel he had made for Life to run out at, was too narrow to give it a speedy Vent, which he so earnestly desired. And how could his eyes endure to see his Beloved Sovereign lie in that misery, wherein Life was his greatest Burden, and not ease him of it? Besides, Had there been any grounds to hope, he might recover of the wound he had given himself, no Subject he had, should have been more ready to have bound it up, and attempted the Cure, than himself. But sure he was, that long he could not live, V 10. And to have protracted his Life, when there was only so much remaining in him, as served to augment the anguish of his death, had been the greatest Cruelty. So that, his condition considered, he could not but highly merit, by dispatching him quickly. Or if his Charity to him in that case might in any construction be interpreted criminal, yet the guilt could not be such, as to render him the thousandth part of a Murderer, seeing he could be no further chargeable with it, than that pitiful fragment of life amounted unto which he took away. 
By the Philislims' pursuit of him.   
4. That had he not done him the kindness of releasing his weary soul, he had undoubtedly fallen into the hands of the uncircumcised Philistines, which he professed to be his great fear, 1 Sam. 31. 4. And so had doubly died by the Wounds and Sarcasmes of his Heathen Enemies. For, the Chariots and Horsemen followed hard after him, V 6.  
5. That he brought no design with him to the place, where he 
By his unpremeditated and providential coming to the place where he lay.  did that Unhappy Act. For he was by mere Providence, while he fled for his own life, cast upon that lamentable Object: He happened by chance upon Mount Gilboa, V 6. and there he found Saul leaning upon his Spear: And this consideration will clear him from all prepensed malice, which is essentially requisite to constitute a Murderer: So that in this case killing was no Murder, Besides, such was his haste, that he was in, to escape with his own life, that he had not the least time to deliberate upon any such course as might have saved saul's, or to debate with himself concerning the Lawfulness or Unlawfulness of the Fact, being hardly himself, through his own fear, and the suddenness of the surprise by so unexpected a Providence.  
6. That whereas it might possibly be supposed, that some covetous 
By his preserving and restoring the Royal spoils.  desire of enriching himself with the Royal Spoils, tempted him to the Fact; to clear himself from any such suspicion, he had brought with him, and now tendered to his Lawful Successor, the Crown that was upon his head, and the Bracelet that was upon his Arm, V 10. Which he took off after he was dead, to preserve them from worse hands.  
7. And lastly, That it had been, and still was his unspeakable 
By the mouraing habit which he made the Relation in.  grief, that he was so unhappy, as to be any way drawn in to be instrumental in so sad a Business. That he had already spent more Tears for it, than he drew drops of blood in it; not because he thought himself in the least criminal, but because he had been so unfortunate, as to do that which looked like so great a Crime. This, though it be not recorded as the Language of his Lips, yet so much is recorded, v. 2. concerning the Garb in which he presented himself to David, as may justify a conjecture, that he intended it as no small part of his vindication: He had rend his , to testify the rending of his heart, and covered himself with ashes, to show how willingly he could have laid himself down in the dust for his dear Master, if by dying he could have redeemed his Life. 
His entertainment from David.   
Pleas as plausible, as so heinous a Fact could possibly admit of. After which, we may suppose him pausing a while, and travelling with expectation of some great reward from David, before whom he seemed to himself to have so well acquitted himself, that he doubted not, but his Murder would advance itself to the reputation of Merit. But my Text tells you, how David disappointed his expectations, took down his confidence, and answered all his plead, by setting before him the atrociousness of his Fact, nakedly, and in itself considered in mitigation whereof, no Circumstances ought to be admitted to consideration: For, be all that thou hast said, true, (replies David) yet art thou not in the least excusable. For, How wast thou not afraid (upon whatever Motives, or with whatever intentions) to stretch forth thy hand to destroy the Lords Anointed?  
And thus have I led you through the Context to the Text, by 
Division of the Text.  a Preface somewhat tedious (I confess) but yet very necessary, to the full understanding and profitable improvement of it, as you shall see hereafter. Mean while, may it please you, with me, to observe, in this Reply of david's, these three Parts considerable,  

1. Quid, or what he replies; That it was a fearful sin for him to stretch out his hand to destroy the Lords Anointed.  
2. Quis, or the Person that made it; David said.  
3. Quomodo, or the manner of his Reply, which is by way of vehement Interrogation: How wast thou not afriad, etc.   
First, The Quid, or Substance of his Reply, importing the Horridness of the sin of this Amalekite.  
To which there is a twofold Evidence;  
I. The Aggravations of the Crime here condemned, taken from,  

1. The Person that committed, but aught to have avoided it with holy Fear; Thou, under a twofold Capacity: 

1. Thou, a Private man.  
2. Thou, a Subject, by present relation (at least) to Saul, being his Soldier.    
2. The Person on whom it was committed, and who ought to have been otherwise dealt withal, considered in a double Capacity. 

1. Of his Civil Quality; He was Unctus, a Person who had received Regal Unction, and was thereby separated from the Vulgus, or common sort of men, a King solemnly inaugurated, The Anointed.  
2. Of his Sacred Relation, and so he was Messiah Jehovae, the Lords Anointed, God's Deputy and Vicegerent by special Commission.    
3. The Fact itself, which was, 

1. In its Nature, bloody, he destroyed him.  
2. In its Principle, voluntary, he stretched forth his hand to do it, which imports a purpose and resolution of heart to do it.  
3. In its Manner, it was done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, without fear; He was not afraid to do that Act which he should have trembled at.     
II. The Invalidity of all his former Pleas, or whatever might be urged in his defence; gathered from the connexion of the Verse with the preceding Relation; David takes no notice of any of his Pleas at all, which imports thus much [although all this, and much more might be truly said in his defence, yet it was nevertheless horrid to David, nor aught to have been to him.]  
Secondly, Quis, or the Person replying, David said; who comes under a twofold Consideration also.  

I. According to what he truly and indeed was. 

1. As a man; one truly pious, and incomparably tender-conscienced, [David (the Saint) said]  
2. As a King; For saul's death actually possessed him of the Throne, though he were not possessed of the Kingdom: [David (the King) said.]    
II. According to the mistaken Idea or Notion under which the Malefactor represented him to himself in the grounds of his forementioned Confidence; and so he comes under a threefold view: 

1. As a Person mortally persecuted by Saul; who never left hunting him as a partridge upon the Mountains, till he had hunted him into a Foreign Country, where now he was.  
2. As a Person formerly in Arms against him, and yet standing upon his guard, in Ziglag, the place of his present Retreat.  
3. As the Person who had long (by divine Warrant) expected the devolution of saul's Crown upon himself.     
Thirdly, Quomodo, or the manner of his Reply; which imports an unusual heat and eagerness, a strange concitation of passions. For it is by way of vehement Interrogation, aculeated with abundance of quick Tartness.  
It is not barely Assertio docentis, an affirmation of his Duty, for than he needed to have expressed it only thus; [Thou oughtest to have been afraid.]  
Nor barely, Querela dolentis, an expression of his grief for the sad accident: For than he had not needed to have languaged it otherwise than thus; [Alas! What a fearful thing was it for thee thus to stretch forth thy hand, etc.]  
Nor barely, Quaestio discentis, an enquiry concerning the temper (or distemper rather) wherein he did it, which might have been sufficiently expressed thus; [Wast thou not afraid, etc.  
But it is Interrogatio exprobrantis, a smart interrogation, exprobrating to him the audacious impiousness of the Fact. [How wast thou not afraid, etc.] Which expresseth all the rest, and more too. In a word, it speaks three Passions, which David felt upon the sad Relation.  

1. Grief; For so do we find that Passion venting itself by a doleful Interrogation, Lam. 4. 1. & Isa. 1. 21. etc.  
2. Wonder and Astonishment; that a Person so abject and contemptible, should arrive at the confidence to direct a steady blow at the heart of his Sovereign. And such [How's] do we also find in Scripture: See Isa. 14. 12. Prov. 30. 13. etc.  
3. Horror and Abomination of the monstrous impiety, as well as daringness of the Act. And we are not without Examples of the Expression of this passion in a like Form. See Gen. 39 9 Hest. 8. 6. etc.   
And thus, having crumbled my Text to pieces, for the fuller 
And handled.  Explication of it, by the due weighing of every Word contained in it, it will be needful to look them over severally.  
1. As they relate to the Chapter and Narrative contained in it.  
2. As they may be accommodated by way of parallel to the sad occasion of this day's Solemnity.  
And First, As they relate to the Chapter and its Narrative, it 
First view of the Text.  will be useful to consider the three Parts of the Text distinctly, the first, by way of Doctrine, the second and third by way of Inference or Application.  
1. First then, The Quid or Doctrine which is by David in the 
Part 1. Quid. Or the heinousness of this Fact of the Amalekite in kill Saul, and (under that) of King-killing in general. Evidenced;  Text in ended, to be amplified to the utmost, is, the horrid wickedness of this particular Fact of the Amalekites killing of King Saul (in Hypothesi) and thence (in Thesi) or generally, the heinousness of the sin of murdering Kings, under whatever diminutive considerations it may be presented.  
Now this Intention, David in the Text doth amply make good, (as before was intimated.)  
1. By so emphatical a Collection of the Circumstances of the Crime confessed, which the distribution of the Text enumerates.  
2. By the rejecting of all those Pleas (as invalid) which either were expressed, or might be implied, in the particulars of his defence before mentioned.  
I. The aggravating Circumstances of the Fact, in the Text, are, 
First, By the aggravating Circumstances. Taken From the Person committing the Fact.   
1. The Considerations under which the Murderer came, (viz.) of a private person, and one who (of a Foreigner, an Amalekite, whose life Saul had spared, contrary to the express Command of God, 1 S●m. 15.) was admitted into the condition of a Subject and Soldier under him; and (if the conjecture of some, that this Amalekite was Doegs Son, be true) had received a peculiar Obligation from him, in the advancement bestowed upon his Father.  
But (to omit his Obligations, which indeed render the Fact monstrously ingrateful, could they be proved; but being only received from Jewish-Tradition, and not asserted in the Text, I shall make no further use of them) in that he was (confessedly) a private person, and a Subject, it was evidence sufficient of the horridness of the Fact, that he did it. For, for a private man to execute a power of Life and death, was an high presumption, and would amount to no less than Murder, if acted upon the Meanest and most Criminal Person in the world: But when to the Privateness of the Condition, is added Subjection also, this adds a far greater aggravation. Had the Amalekite slain his equal, he had been a Murderer; but the slaying his Superior, to whom he was lawfully subject, rendered him a Parricide. They that justify the power of Subjects over the Lives of their Lawful Superiors, had need find out a Logic, that can verify Contradictions; for such must that Doctrine necessarily maintain, that renders the same Persons ad invicem, towards each other, and at once, Sovereign and Subject; the Subject his own Princes Sovereign, and the Sovereign his own Subjects Vassal. So that the sin of King-killing, acted by the hands of Subjects, upon this bare account, amounts to no less than an Usurpation of a Jurisdiction inconsistent with all Principles or right Reason, and all Laws, both of God and man, and renders the Person that is guilty of it, superlatively criminal, as one who forfeits his Soul to God, and his Life to man, by the guilt of the highest Praemunire that can be incurred. This is the first emphatical aggravation of the Fact, from the Person committing it. Let Saul deserve to die never so justly, yet what Commission had the Amalekite, a private Person, and his Subject, to kill him? And so David tells him: — At tu indignus quid faceres tamen?  
[How wast not [Thou] afraid?]  
II. The Fact is yet rendered more heinous, by the Second Emphatical 
From the Person murdered, who was,  aggravation in the Text, taken from the Person slain, Saul, under a double Consideration:  
He was  

1. Unctus.  
2. Unctus Domini.   
I. He was Unctus, (in his Civil Quality) He was a Person 
Anointed.  solemnly separated from other men, an Anointed King. Anointing (or whatever Ceremony of Investiture is, (by the Customs of Particular Nations) equivalent thereunto) puts a Note of highest difference between the Persons dignified therewith, and others. Three high and honourable Functions in the Scripture were conferred by this Ceremony of Anointing, and all of them sensed and privileged from Injuries by virtue of that Holy Oil; the Priestly, Prophetical and Royal Offices. Not to instance in the two former, (upon which (whatever these confused times have suggested to the contrary) it were easy to prove, that God hath written a Nolitetangere, a Privilege from common handling) to be sure the Last, (the Royal) is so highly secured by the holy Scriptures, that they exact from Subjects such a special Awe and Reverence towards Kings, as not only binds the Hand and Tongue, but the very Heart also, to the good behaviour: Whence in the case of this very Saul, when he was once anointed King, the Holy Ghost puts the Brand of Sons of Belial upon all those who despised or spoke contemptuously of him, 1 Sam. 10. 27. And Solomon strictly forbids us to curse, or wish evil to the King, even in our very thoughts, Eccles. 10. 20. So that this Consideration was very effectually conducing to the aggravation of the Amalekites in the Text, and (in him) of every King-killers offence: For the consequence is a minori ad majus, undeniable. If the lesser injury may not be done to Kings, the greater may not. If our Tongues, nay Thoughts are not to injure them, much less our Hands.  
II. To strengthen this consideration further, David calls him 
And the Lords Anointed.  not only Unctum, [Anointed,] but Unctum Domini, [the Lords Anointed] Which Title peculiarly relates him to God as his Vicegerent and Lieutenant, and enhanceth the sin of King-killing to the guilt of High Treason against God himself. That the Title of the Lords Anointed, is attributed to other Kings besides Saul, as to all the Jewish Kings, yea and Heathen Kings also (instance Cyrus, Isa. 45. 1) argues that the same security belongs to all other Kings, as being no less related to God, and commissioned under him: That Supreme Authority resides originally in the Body of the People as the Fountain of all just power, and is delegated to Kings from 
Not the People's.  them, as their servants entrusted by them, and for maladministration accountable to them, is a Doctrine that savours so much of a spirit quite alien from the Scriptures, that I shall almost as soon turn Mahometan, as believe it. Surely in that the Holy Ghost calls them Gods, he cannot be thought to assign them an humane Original, without allowing the Creature a power (which he every 
Ps. 82. 6.  where denies him) of conferring a Divinity upon the work of his hands. Man, whilst he attempts to make a God, doth no other, than the Child, that attempts with a Bundle of Clouts, to make a Babe. They that say to the works of their hands, ye are gods, Hos. 14. 3. are no other, than blasphemous Idolaters; and the gods they make, are Elilim, vain Idols, not Elohim, true Gods, Jer. 16. 20. Psal. 96. 5. Yea, it is a strong Scripture-consequence against the Divinity of such Puppet-gods; [The workman made it, therefore it is not God, Hos. 8. 6.] Of like nature is the Presumption of those men who undertake to make and unmake Kings, at their own pleasure; and that so great, that (in reference to this very claim) the Great Antichrist is justly charged with lifting himself up above all that is called God, 2 Thes. 2. 4. And to set up Kings without God, (Kings of humane Constitution, contrary to God's appointed Order of Succession) when it was acted by the Ten Tribes, in the case of Jeroboam, and the succeeding Kings of Israel, is yoked (as a parallel piece of presumptuous Impiety) in one and the same verse, with making Idols of Silver and Gold, Hos. 8. 4. Indeed a God and a King of man's making, are both alike, Idols both; and they that make them, are like unto them. It is He alone that hath it to give, who confers the least spark of Divinity, Political, as well as Natural: and he that says to a man of his own setting up, Thou art God's Deputy, first, robs the True God of that power, and then bestows it upon a Counterfeit. And although the Constitutions of some Nations, where Popular Election disposeth of the Crown, may seem to invalidate this Doctrine, I must tell you, that (besides that ab initio non fuit ita, the Original of all Governments was from Paternal Jurisdiction, and next that hereditary Succession (both appointed by God) and all Forms varying from those, are too novel to prescribe against an ancienter Constitution) even there where Election (according to Law and Custom) designs the Person, God's Ordination confers the Power, that he is invested withal; for there is no power but from God, Rom. 
Kings (even where elected by the People) are nevertheless,  13. 1. In such Nations, the Kings may be Electi, Plebis, the People's Elect; but when once regularly chosen, they become Uncti Domini, the Lords Anointed. And with this distinction, (though it may possibly be, orthodox enough to interpret St. Peter's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (Pet. 2. 13.) of a person according to the Laws and Customs of a Nation elected, or acknowledged for King, that thereby he becomes (so far) an Ordinance or Creature of man: yet) when this Creature of man is so far made, as man's Votes or Laws or Consents can make him, he receiveth (over and above this) by a Divine Dixi, a word of Authority, to make him the Object of conscientious Obedience, which the same Apostle intimates in the next words, Submit yourselves to every Ordinance of man for the Lords sake, i. e. as considering the relation he hath to God. The Body of Authority is made by Laws and Customs of Nations, but the Soul of it is infused by God. Prometheus may make the Image of a man of Clay, but it is Fire from Heaven that must animate it, or it is but an Image still: So till the Word of God come to men, (as our Saviour phraseth it, John 10. 35.) and say 
God's Anointed.  Ye are Gods, they are but (as Samson bereft of his Locks) like other men: But when once Gods dixi, is passed, then, and then only, this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this Ordinance of man, becomes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Constitution and Ordination of God, Rom. 13. 2.  
It is true indeed, that (for the ascertaining of men's Consciences in the Object of their Civil Worship) Gods dixi, always concurs with the just and lawful Issue of Humane Constitutions and Customs, so that God hath given us this Infallible Note, to discern who is Unctus Domini, his Vicegerent and Deputy, that he comes to govern according to the Laws of the Kingdom. But yet you may not ascribe the Authority he hath, to the Laws which assert his Right, but to God, whose Constitution enables those Laws to determine in so weighty a matter.  
And hence, it will not follow, that the People's consent (which 
And therefore not subject to their Jurisdiction when once admitted.  made those Laws, upon the determination of which the divine Constitution is necessarily attendant) renders the Person invested with Authority according to those Laws, at all, much less altogether, dependant upon the People for that Authority; and that therefore in case of maladministration, he may be unmade by them who made him, more than it will follow, that because (according to the standing Law of Nature) the rational Soul is necessarily annexed to the Substance of the Body, in the instant of Generation; therefore we own our Spirits to our Parents, as well as our Bodies, or that (upon that Supposition) the Natural Parent may dismiss the Soul of his Child from the Body at his pleasure, which he is supposed to have by generation conferred upon it. But rather (as in Nature and Reason the Soul of man, however necessarily tied to the order of Nature in generation, is yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, God's Offspring, Acts 17. Not the Parents, and therefore may not be dislodged our of the Body without a Writ of Revocation, a Redite Filii hominum, from the Father of Spirits, for no man hath 
Psal. 90. 3. Heb. 12. 9  power over the Spirit, but only God that gave it, Eccles. 8. 8. 12. 7. So in the true and genuine reason of State-Government, (which is to be fetched from the Scriptures, not men's Politics) Authority, which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Ordinance of God, (whatever necessary Connexion, by divine appointment, it have to humane Laws and Customs) cannot justly be separated from the Person, whom those Laws and Customs have invested with it, without an Act of divine resumption. He that saith to Princes, Ye are Gods, makes them (in a Political sense) what he says they are, Civil Deities, and such they must continue, till by a like dixi or word of Repeal, he unmake them again. And the resolution which Conscience must expect, to determine herein also, must be fetched from the Laws Umpirage in all Nations.  
Now from this Dixi of God, this Divine Constitution it is, 
But Sacred & secured by Divine Ordination  that the Persons of Kings have in all places and ages been accounted Sacred. This Unction from the Holy One, (give me leave so to call it in allusion to that of St. John, though by him used in another sense, 1 John 2. 20.) secures them from the gripes of rude hands, with a Nolite tangere. For so (though that Text directly relates to God's wonderful preservation of the three Patriarches, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and that under the Notion of God's Prophets, under which Relation God expressly cautions Abimelech, Gen. 20. 7. And that Passage, it is more than probable, the Psalmist had in his eye, when he penned it) the Argument which God useth, Psal. 105. 15. for the Privilege he gave them, that they were Uncti Domini, will necessarily extend the security there claimed for them, to all who are partakers of a like Unction: [Touch not saith he, mine Anointed] by that known Logical Maxim, A quatenus ad de omni valet Argumentum. A consideration, which so far prevailed with Holy David, that his heart smote him, in the Cave, for only cutting off the Skirt of King saul's Garment, as if the savour of the Divine Unction by descending (as it is said of Aaron's, Psal. 133. 2.) to the Skirts of his Garment, had communicared its Tincture so far to the Royal Robe, as to mind him by the Sent it left upon his very fingers ends, that he had made too bold with the Lords Anointed, 1 Sam. 24. 5. And therefore, no wonder, 
And that although abusing their Power against the Laws, and turning Tyrants.  if he charge it so home upon this Amalekite, who had with a murderous touch assaulted that Body that wore it.  
Obj. True, (will the Anti-monarchist say) whilst Princes keep to the Rules by which they are to govern; but if they transgress them, do they not thereby forfeit their Privilege, and become as other men; yea, far worse, by being Tyrants: Is it not lawful to kill a 
which is,  Tyrant, that preys upon the Lives and estates of his Subjects, like a wild Beast let lose, and makes use of God's Authority committed to him, to secure himself in such intolerable Abuses?  
Sol. To which I answer,  
1. Was not this very Saul as properly a Tyrant in this kind, 
Proved by several Arguments.  as any recorded in Scripture or History? Was he impowered by the Law of God (by which he was to govern, Deut. 17. 14, 15. etc. to the end) to persecute an innocent David, as he did? or to attempt the murder of his own Son Jonathan, as he did? 1 Sam. 20. 33. Or, was he impowered to destroy a whole City of Priests, for the supposed offence of one Ahimilech, as he did? 1 Sam. 22. 18. Was he impowered by that Law to do many other irregular Acts, which Samuel reckons up by way of Prophecy concerning him, when he made him King? 1 Sam. 8. 11, 12. And yet was he still Unctus Domini, under the Protection of his Divine Unction, and not to be touched with a violent hand.  
2. There is a twofold Tyrant, Tyrannus Titulo, & Tyrannns exercitio, a Tyrant for want of a just Title to govern, and a Tyrant by unjust Acts in his Government, though his Title to Government be never so just. He that is Tyrannus Titulo, and hath no Title to govern, an Usurper, hath no nolite tangere, no divine Protection from his Unction, no touch not mine Anointed, to secure him.  
And (although it be not (in my judgement) a safe Principle, which permits every private Person to destroy such a Tyrant, (seeing hereby private men are made competent Judges of Sovereign Rights, and the most Lawful Prince cannot be safe, if that be allowed) yet) no question, the Collective Body of a Nation, headed by an Usurper against the general sense of those who have the ordinary power of interpreting and executing Laws, may (upon their call) rise up against, dispossess, and bring him to condign punishment to make way for the Lawful Prince unjustly excluded.  
But where a Prince lawfully entitled to his Government, is yet Tyrannus exercitio, abuseth that Government, to unjust and illegal Barbarities, (though herein he offend as highly against God, as it is not easily imaginable, how any one can more, because he defaceth (the most glorious Image of God) himself; and reflects the partnership of his guilt upon God, whom he represents, as authorising him to such enormities, which the power received from him (only) capacitateth him to act: yet) is he still, because of the Anointing, a privileged person, not to be violated by thy hands, or mine, whatever evils we suffer under him, and what capacity soever we may be in, to revenge them. I will evidence this to you by a familiar Instance: Adulterated Coin, that bears the Prince's Image, without the warrant of his own Mint, to attest it, any man may refuse to receive in payment, and knock to pieces, or nail to a Post, because it is adulterate. But good and lawful Coin stamped by just Authority, how much soever it may be battered or defaced, whilst any Print remains of the Royal Inscription to declare it such, may challenge a free passage, and may not be refused, or wilfully abused. So (whatever becomes of Tyrants by Title, who bear God's superscription only by adulteration, and are mere By-blows of Supremacy) those that are not so, (however Tyrannous actions may blemish and deface them, yet) because they are the Legitimate Issue of a Divine Commission, and so truly Filii Excelsi, the Sons of the most High, having the true stamp of his Image upon them, must be still owned as such, and respected according to their Authority.  
3. But be it supposed, that (notwithstanding all that is said) such a Forfeiture may be made, as the Objectors pretend; I would fain know, who shall be Judge, when, and by what Acts this Forfeit is incurred: Shall the Prince himself? I doubt they will think that unreasonable, because in this case he is a mere Party, and so will undergo the suspicion of Partiality to himself, from a Principle of self-Love.  
Who must then? The Collective body of the Subjects? And do not the Objectors see that the same reason excludes them? Will not the Principle of Self-Love, and Self-revenge be as apt to corrupt them, in taking cognisance of the Injuries they feel? But there is an higher exception against them yet; and that is the offending Israelites Question to Moses, Who made thee a Judge? Exod. 2. 14. By what Law either Divine or humane, (was the Question of our Late martyred Sovereign) can the Subject be impowered to sit in Judgement upon his King? And indeed, as there is no such Law, so is it most unreasonable there should be: For, grant the Subjects such a power, and considering the prevalency of prejudices against Governors, and the frequency of successful attempts of ill-meaning persons, to spread those prejudices, together with the incapacity of the People to know and judge of the true reason of State-Actions, etc.) and tell me, whether it would ever (in likelihood be the felicity of any King (how just soever) without a miracle, to escape being deposed or murdered, at one time or other by his subjects. The Complices and Partners in guilt of every malefactor whom he hath put to death, though never so justly, would before a Popular Judicatory arraign him for Murder; the persons concerned in confiscated Estates, would Indite him for theft and robbery: the Fanatic punished by his Laws, for never so horrid Blasphemies, and pretended conscientious Conspiracies, etc. would prosecute him for a Persecutor: insomuch that the only way for a King to be secure in such a Kingdom, were to let all justice go at six and seven, and then he would be obnoxious to the displeasure of none but (those, who though by this dissolution of Government they would be the deepest Sufferers, yet by their conscientious Principles are remotest from all likelihood of revenging themselves upon their Sovereign) the truly Godly. Nay (I will speak a big word for once) it would be hard for the most righteous Governor of the whole world, to carry himself so inoffensively towards his Subjects, but that the major part of them, were his actions to be scanned by their Judgement, would think it fit to Vote the reins out of his hand for maladministration.  
And if neither Prince nor subjects in general be fit to determine in this Controversy, who shall then? Will they say, the Representatives of the People? If so, in what capacity shall they undertake it? Not of Inferiors surely, or Equals; for par in parem (much less inferior in superiorem) non habet imperium. Of Superiors? From whence shall they derive that power? If from Law, show that Law? If from popular election, than their power can be no other than before was in the body collective by whom they are chosen; so that except the people be superior to their Sovereigns (which hath before been disproved,) they cannot delegate that superiority to others, which they never had themselves.  
And now there remains only one shift imaginable for the judging this case: and that is recourse to a Foreign power, which indeed is so fare from amending the matter, that it makes it fare worse. For (besides that Sovereign Princes are equals in Authority, (though not in Dominions it may be) and so the former maxim recurres, Par in parem non habet imperium, and that none is likely (because of the precedent) to be courted to such an Employment, (except the Pope, who challengeth a Supremacy over Princes as Christ's universal Vicar, and whose claims in this kind have been over and over refuted:) how shall a Foreign Prince be enabled to excercise this Jurisdiction, but by the success of a War? And for subjects to call in a Foreign force to arbitrate the differences between them and their Sovereign, what can it amount unto but the highest of traitorous Conspiracies?  
4. (and last) Suppose the case were unquestionable, and the forfeiture made and justly so judged, yet, to whom doth the seizure upon this forfeited Authority belong? Not to man (certainly) for it hath been before proved that all Authority is God's Ordinance, a Flower of his Prerogative, a Jewel of his Crown, and so can fall (upon forfeiture) only into his hands who derived it. So that it will clearly follow, that if God himself (for the chastisement of a sinful people, or for other holy ends of his own) shall think fit, for a while, not to enter upon the forfeiture, it will be high presumption in any men to precipitate the judgement of God, and enter before his time (though in his Name and right) upon his peculiar. Hence the Saints of God in former and latter times, have suffered under the bloodiest Tyrants with admirable patience, as under God's scourges, and referred their cases to him who judgeth uprightly: and even in their complaints to him, have expressed so much Christian temper and moderation, that they have rather prayed for the conversion and pardon of their persecutors, than wished vengeance upon them. And when they have foreseen the vengeance coming, have not desired the woeful day, Jer. 17. 16. but deprecated it rather: However (to be sure) they never put forth their hands to the iniquity of self-reparation, but patiently expected the coming of the Lord, Ja. 5. 6, 7. And upon this ground David checks the forwardness of Abishai, (who offered him the service of smiting Saul dead) Destroy him not, for either the Lord shall smite him (with a disease) or his day (in the course of nature) shall come to die, or he shall descend into the battle and perish: but the Lord forbidden that I should stretch forth my hand against the Lords Anointed, 1 Sam. 26. 8, 9, 10. And yet (which makes this Answer more considerable) the Crown of Saul was not only actually forfeited, but adjudged so by God himself, and the reversion of it bestowed upon David, 1 Sam. 15. 28. Notwithstanding all which, you see, the holy man will not be persuaded to make a forcible entry, but waits till God by his providence devolves that upon him which he had demised by promise.  
Obj. Obj. It will be farther objected, that this privilege belonged indeed deed to Jewish Kings, but it may be doubted, whether the Gospel 
This privilege belongs not to Jewish Kings only, but all other Kings. Sol.  (introducing a state of Liberty, beyond that which the Jews enjoyed,) the same immunity belong to Princes since the coming of Christ?  
Sol. To which I answer again,  
1. That Gospel liberty dissolves not Natural or Civil duties: and those that think it does, make it a cloak of maliciousness, 1 Pet. 2. 13, 16.  
2. That the immunity of Jewish Kings belonged not to them as such, but as Gods Anointed, as deputed Gods under the most high. And the Gospel owns the Supreme power, even in the hands of persecuting Heathens as an Ordinance of God, Rom. 13. 2.  
3. And it is evident that the ancient Christians thought so, who after they had adventured their lives in the field for persecuting Emperors, as Soldiers, laid them down for their Religion, in obedience to their commands (though unjust and barbarous) as Martyrs.  
And thus have I dispatched the second consideration, (that of the person slain) made use of in the Text for the second Aggravation of the sin of King-killing: that Saul slain was not only Unctus, an anointed King, by his civil Quality, but Unctus Domini, one who was God's Vicegerent, by sacred Relation. And (by consequence) am now at liberty to insist a while on the third Aggravation taken from the fact itself, as the Text states it. And that is represented notoriously foul by three things. 
From the Nature of the Fact, as Bloody.   
1. That it was in its nature bloody. He destroyed the Lords anointed. It was not a murder intended only, nor a murder barely attempted without success, but an actual murder. And yet, had he not effected it, the very attempt (considering the quality of the Person) had been so heinous a crime, that the Laws of Nature and Nations would have punished it with death. But here the guilt is infinitely aggravated by the execution of that which had been so highly criminal but to attempt. For a King, (however attempted against) whiles he is but in being, fills the Royal Seat, and Heads the Commonwealth, and animates all Courts of Justice by the Authority of his Name: yea, lays some restraint upon the most lawless and dissolute persons, on the account of a possibility of being called to account for their outrages and enormities. But the actual taking away of a King's life, exposeth the empty Throne to the next potent Usurper, silenceth the Laws, annuleth all deputed Powers, by the expiration of their Commissions, renders every man (in a sort) his own Master, and sets up (for the Time) as many Lords of misrule in a Nation, as there are evil-disposed persons in it. And although these evils are not equally felt in hereditary Kingdoms, as in others, (because in such the King never dies) yet, they are all equally chargeable upon all Regicides; seeing, that they do not all actually ensue, is no thank to them, but to the public constitution rather; and the Fact in its own nature being every where of like pernicious tendency, and such as (even in the best constituted Governments) may give advantage of opportunity to the designs of those who shall desire to improve the alteration of affairs, to the subversion of the Fundamentals of Government, by which succession is secured; as we of these Nations have lately found by too sad experience. In which respect, the fact of this Amalekite was the more heinous, as being an actual destroying of the Lords anointed.  
2. That it was a voluntary or rather wilful Act. For he stretched 
wilful.  forth his hand, and that with a purpose to destroy the King. Had the King accidentally rushed upon his drawn weapon, or had his armed hand, by impression from some external force, been made the instrumental cause of taking away the life of the Lords anointed, or any other like accident had rendered him the destroyer of the King, though besides his intention; it had been an infelicity to have been bewailed all the days of his life: But to reach forth his armed hand to lend him a voluntary wound, with a purpose to take away his life, was a crime, not to be expiated with his life itself. Every sin receives its degrees of sinfulness from the degrees of voluntariness appearing in it. And the more heinous the sin is, the more aggravation doth it admit from the concurrence of the will in any sort, because the greater an evil is in itself, the more perversion of the will (whose only proper object is good) must there needs be, to render it capable of choosing it.  
3. (and last) That it was committed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he was not afraid to do it. A modest, timorous sinner hath so much (at least) of the 
Audacious.  appearance of virtue, as abates something of the odiousness of the sin he commits. But a very strange monster of wickedness must he needs be, who hath arrived at the unhappy pinnacle of sinning dedolently. To baffle shame, and muzzle fear, and stifle conscience in sinning, implies a kind of absolute Sovereignty and Dominion in wickedness, and renders the person so qualified, a kind of omnipotent sinner, and (by consequence) the most remote from all possibility of repentance. And such a Wretch doth David imply that man to be, whom neither Religion towards God, nor reverence to Majesty will restrain from so horrid a crime, as this of destroying the Lords anointed, let whatever can be pleaded on his behalf: Which brings me to the second particular evidence which David gives to the Quid or matter of his Answer, (the first General part of my Text) which hath waited a long while for its dispatch,  
And that is, [the invalidity of all that had been, or might be pleaded 
2 2. The second particular evidence in reference to the matter of David's reply (or the doctrine of the heinousness of King-killing) The invalidity of all Pleas made for it.  on this malefactor's behalf,] implied in the connexion of this sour and severe expression, with the Amalekites garb and Narrative, before improved for his vindication. Notwithstanding all which David pronounceth him guilty of the horrid sin of murdering the Lords anointed, and sentenceth him accordingly. To clear the Justice of which Censure and Sentence, (seeing it will much conduce to the main Hypothesis [the setting forth the horrid wickedness of King-killing] and be of much use to us in our application) we will consider every one of his real or possible Plea's apart, and answer them in their order. His own pleas are seven (before mentioned) to which we will add one made by Interpreters of this Scripture; and that shall be the first.  
First, (though the Amalekite pleads it not, yet) there may be a 
The Amalekites pleas answered Plea 1. answered, (which is the plea of Interpreters for him.)  Question made, Whether the Holy Ghost in the relation of saul's death, 1 Sam. 31. 4, 5. do not acquit him of having any hand in the Fact, though he (in hope of reward) might take it upon himself? For the story tells us, that when Saul had desired his Armour-bearer to do him the kindness to dispatch him, and he had refused, Saul took a sword and fell upon it: and that he died of that wound by his own hand, seems probable by what is immediately subjoined, that saul's Armour-bearer seeing that he was dead, fell likewise upon his own sword and died. From hence (with much likelihood) some Interpreters confidently acquit the Amalekite from the Fact. Nor shall I much contend with them about it, seeing I shall (upon other accounts) clear David's justice upon him anon. Though I might tell them that there is no cogent reason to demonstrate a contradiction between the relation of the History, and the Amalekites Narrative. For what if Saul fell upon his own sword, and the Amalekite says he found him leaning upon his Spear? Both may be true; he might (first) fall on his own Sword, and (that not dispatching him) might scramble up again, and make a Second Attempt with his Spear, but could not make way through his Coat of Mail, as the Margin to v. 9 renders his words to the Amalekite. And what if it be subjoined, after his falling on his Sword, that his Armour-bearer saw that he was dead? Doth it therefore follow, that he died immediately of that Wound? The Armour-bearer might conclude him dead, seeing him so wounded and fallen; when yet he might struggle longer with death, than he imagined, and outlive him that thought him dead, even till the Amalekite came, and finding him in that sad posture, killed him outright.  
But (however) be it that the Amalekite did the Fact indeed, or only boasted (in hope of reward) that he had done it; yet received he no wrong from David.  
1. Voluntary Confession (especially, where no Force is used to extort it, upon public arraignment, in the presence of a Judge) is Conviction sufficient, to justify the condemnation of the person confessing.  
2. Abundance of Circumstances there were to confirm David in the belief of it: As,  
1. That he was an Amalekite, and so one that upon a National quarrel, might be supposed to owe Saul a Mischief, who had put the whole Nation of which he was, excepting only himself, and some few more (it is probable) carried away contrary to Gods Command alive for Slaves, 1 Sam. 15. And it may be (upon this account, in his Examination) David asked him again, whence he was? V 13. (though in his Relation of the Discourse between Saul and himself, he had let fall no less before) that he might judicially confess that Circumstance, so necessary to his Conviction, upon Deliberation.  
2. The Crown and Bracelet, which were known to be saul's, gave evidence, that in all probability, he had the Rifling of dead Saul, and probably, might kill him, that he might plunder him.  
3. That whether he committed the Fact, or no, yet was he guilty of it, in intention (at least) otherwise he would not have made so formal a story to gain from David the reputation of having done it, and related it with a kind of glorying in it, as an act of merit towards David.  
Insomuch, that if he were not really guilty of the Fact, David was upon these evidences, guiltless of his Blood, and as he tells him, V 16. that his Blood lay upon his own head.  
And thus hath the first Plea made by Interpreters on his behalf, no other strength than this, to give farther evidence to the horrid guilt of King-killing, even though it be granted. For if that person justly died for it, who had (as the Plea supposeth) not other guilt of the Royal Blood upon him, than that he esteemed the shedding of it a meritorious Service, and shown his willingness to have done it, by boasting that he had done it: What a dreadful Crime must it be, to be guilty of the Fact indeed? the very Intimation of a good will whereunto, rendered this Amalekite so criminal. 
His own seven Pleas answered.  Et passa est Poenas peccandi sola voluntas?  
Plea Answered. 2 But it may be further said (as was before urged) that Saul was a Tyrant, a Persecutor of David, and his deadly Enemy. And it is hard measure that he should die by David's Command, who had by this very Fact saved David's Life.  
To this, the Answer (from David's Principles) is easy: He was indeed David's Enemy, but he was David's Sovereign, and the Lords Anointed. Besides, Had David been so desirous to be rid of his Enemy in such a way, he needed not to have left that work to be done by an Amalekite, seeing he had refused such a Service, when offered by better Friends. Lastly, If he were David's Enemy, he ought the rather to do him Justice upon his Murderer, that he might declare himself in the execution of Law the more impartial; and learn others, that the private Injuries received from our just and lawful Sovereigns, aught to make no Impressions upon our Allegiance to the Lords Anointed.  
Plea Answered. 3 But Saul himself desired him to put an end to his miserable life, (the Amalekites Second Plea)  
Grant this too. But was he Saul, that is, himself, when he desired it; Fear, and Gild, and Anguish, and Loss of Blood and Spirits, and (it may be, over and above) an evil Spirit from the Lord (with which he was wont to be haunted) may be supposed at this time, to intercept the exercise of his Reason. And is it the part of a Sober man to kill another at his Request, when he is out of his wits, and understands not what he says? Will no Law allow a madman to dispose of his Goods and Lands, and will it warrant him to dispose of his Life? Besides, Who is there that thinks himself obliged to gratify the desires, or obey the Commands of a private Person in distemper, by easing him of his Life, whenever he thinks it a burden? How much less, when the case concerns a public Magistrate, whose Life and Death are of public concernment, and the Lives of whole Nations are bound up in his? So that the best obedience, in such a case as this, had been, by Principles of Religion and Reason to have endeavoured the reducing of his Sovereign to a sober temper, and till that could have been effected, to have taken from him all Instruments of death, bound up his wound, and saved his Life (as far as in him lay) though against his Will.  
Plea Answered. 4 And be it (which is his third Plea) that the case seemed never so desperate; and the wound he had given himself, never so mortal in appearance, yet so long as Life remained, all hopes were not vanished. How many persons have recovered, whom the best Physicians and Chirurgeons have given over for desperate? He should have endeavoured his best, and then if Success had not answered the endeavour, the endeavour (which was his duty) would have cleared his Loyalty, both before God and man. Besides, Nature and Reason incline every man to a desire of enjoying his Friends, as long as possibly he can, though all Prognostics assure him, that enjoyment cannot be long. We do not think a Cordial cast away upon a near Relation, the utmost effect whereof, we are assured, cannot be more, then to respite death for a few minutes. To be sure, all Nations that are never so little reclaimed from Barbarism, would with one mouth condemn him, who when a dear friend lies struggling with the pangs of death itself, should knock him on the head, to put him out of his Pain. And therefore, what in a like case, had been unlawful for the Amalekite to have done to a private Relation, was notoriously criminal towards the Lords Anointed.  
Plea Answered. 5 If it were (as he farther alleged) really true, that the Philistines were in never so hot a Pursuit of the flying King, yet had this Amalekite no warrant to kill him for prevention: For, might not Providence have led them another way, and suffered none of them to light upon that place where he lay? The Divine Protections of Sovereign Princes are many times of kin to Miracle. Great deliverances giveth he to his Kings, and sheweth mercy to his Anointed, Psal. 18. 50. Again, admit, he were never so much in danger of falling into the hands of his pursuing enemies, yet who knows, but he might have lighted into the hand of some Noble Personage, that (in honour) would have spared the Royal Blood, and thought it more generous, to take a King Captive, then (in cold Blood) to have murdered him, when he was not capable of resistance? Or if it had been the Lot of a Mercenary Soldier to have lighted upon him, might he not have endeavoured the Preservation of such a Noble Prisoner in hope of a Ransom? Nay, had this Amalekite been sure, that all the Philistines were so barbarous, that never an one of them, would have saved the King's Life, out of hatred to his Religion, as well as Person; yet (had he consulted either the honour of his Sovereign dying, or the safety of his Soul after death) it had been far better for him to have left him to their Swords, t●en to perform his Request with his own. For had an Uncircumcised Philistine for his Religion's sake, slain him, his death had been his Infelicity, but not his guilt: Nay, those hands that slew him upon that account, had advanced him to the honour of Martyrdom; whereas, to die precariously, by the hands of a Subject, whom his own pusillanimous entreaty had prevailed with, to take away his life, rendered him a cowardly self-murderer (by Proxy) and lost him not his Life only, but his Honour, and ('tis to be feared) his Soul together. Besides, If this Principle be but admitted, [That it is not criminal to take away a King's Life, provided it be done to prevent the kill of him by other hands,] How can any Prince's life be secure? For may not any one of many Conspirators, justify himself, (by this excuse) for killing the King, that he did it, to prevent his Fellows? And would it not be the greatest and subtlest piece of ambition that could be, in such a case, to be the first of a traitorous Crew, that should strike the mortal Blow, seeing he of all the Company, would be secured of Indemnity, upon this Principle, who could obtain the precedency in the horrid Fact? Nay, how easy would it be, for any person, (especially, if his own Suspicions may be admitted for evidence) to conceit a Plot against the King's Life to be contrived by others, and then account himself at liberty to kill him for prevention? However, Suppose there could be a case in which so dangerous a Principle might be admitted, yet (surely) it must be the last Refuge, when a sufficient Trial hath been made of all Means to prevent that danger, which threatens a Prince's Life, and all prove ineffectual. Had this Amalekite done his best to have saved him from the Philistines; had he put his shoulder under his fallen Sovereign, to lift him out of the common Road, into some by-place, had he taken some course to disguise him, that the Pursuers, had they lighted on him, might not have known him to be the King; or any other way tried his utmost to secure him, he might with more appearance of Innocence, have done him this kindness at the very last, to have slain him himself. Was Mount Gilboa, or the Coast near it, so barren of Bushes, or Pits, or Thickets, or Hollow Trees, or Cottages, that might have given a distressed King shelter, till the Pursuit was over; that no shift could be made, to show a Subjects Loyalty, whatever the Success had been? Well far the hearts of such Subjects, who in like exigences, would have tried 1000 homely Artifices, to have secured their Liege Sovereign, rather than have taken this course of preventing the cruelty of pursuing Enemies, by murdering him more charitably with their own Hands: And if none of them should have proved successful, would have stood by him, to the utmost of extremities, and then have opposed their own Breasts against the drawn Swords of bloody Pursuers, though they had been sure to die with him; as considering, that the Life of the Lords Anointed, was worth 10000 of theirs, and that (next him that dies for Gods-sake, there is none who comes so near the honour of Martyrdom, as he that dies for God's Vice-gerents sake, his Lawful Sovereign.  
Lastly, Had the Philistines killed him, they were in a double capacity more excusable than this Amalekite: For they were Conquerors in a Battle newly gained, and in the heat of pursuit; (and in National Wars, the Conquered forfeits his life to the Conqueror's mercy) Nay, they were Subjects of another Country, and so Saul was to them but an Ordinary Person: But this Murderer was not only of the same conquered party with Saul, and so had no claim to a power of his life by the Success of the Day, but one of his own Subjects and Soldiers, raised for the defence of his Person, and so was obliged by all means (even with the loss of his own) to preserve (not take away,) the Life of his Sovereign and General, and the Lords Anointed.  
Plea answered. 6 It is probable enough (his Fifth Plea) that he came by the mere conduct of Providence, to the place of this sad Tragedy, and in his own Flight stumbled upon Saul unawares, and that the hast he was in to save his own Life, somewhat disordered his Reason, that he had not a like freedom of deliberating what was best to be do●e, as at other times. But yet he was an Amalekite, and there might be something of Enmity against Saul,— Altâ ment repostum, upon the account of a National Feud, and in such a disposition (as malice useth to be quickly up and ready, when Providence offers an opportunity of retaliation) this time (how little soever it was) might be long enough to excite a desire of Revenge, together with a Plot to make it seem innocent, by pleading the suddenness of the Accident in its excuse. Besides, it may seem (by his own relation) that he was not in so much hurry of thoughts by the suddenness of the Providence, but that he had Reason enough left, to give a direct Answer to Saul's Question, V 7, 8. and to argue himself into the Commission of that bloody Fact from the Considerations which he pleads, as moving him unto it; and that he was not in so much haste, but that he had time enough (by his own confession) to hold a formal Discourse with Saul, (too long (one would think) for a dying and a flying Person to dialogue together) and surely, he needed not much longer time, than he confessed he had, (especially, seeing he had leisure enough to inform himself, that the Person he discoursed with, was his Sovereign) to reflect upon his own heart this Question, [What warrant have I to destroy the Lords Anointed?] So that whatever his haste was to save his own life, he made more haste than good speed to take away saul's.  
Plea Answered. 7 And though he would seem free from any covetous design, tempting him to such a Fact, that he might enrich himself with the Royal spoils; yet, who knows, but th●t was first in his Intention, and the ground of his Action, though upon second thoughts, (consideringhow difficult it would be for him, a private Soldier, to make money of things so commonly known, without being questioned, where he had them? and that to bring them to the next Successor, might yield him more profit, than he could have sold them for) he afterwards thought it fit to present them to David? However, (be it that he had no intention to dispose of them any other way, when he committed the Fact yet) was he not hereby much furthered in his excuse. For could he think, that an Intention honestly to dispose of the Royal Ornaments, would make a compensation for the murder of him that wore them? Surely, if so, he was much out, in bringing them to David, who had now reason to value a King's Life higher than so, by the price he could not but set on his own. Nay more, he could not indeed have given more loud evidence against himself, than by bringing of those Regalia, he had done. For hereby he had cut himself off from a capacity of pleading ignorance of the Person whom he slew; which (if any) would have most steaded him; for he could not but know, that the Crown he brought, was a Badge of Sovereignty, and therefore in killing him, on whose Head he confessed it was, he confessed that he knowingly killed the Lords Anointed.  
Plea Answered. 8 Lastly, All the Expressions of sorrow for the Fact, with which he ushered in his Relation, might be but feigned and formal: Or if not so, yet what proportion was there between a base Varlets Tears, and Royal Blood? It was well that he mourned for the Infelicity of his Fact; but it would have been better, if he had repent of the wickedness of it. And if (seeing how it was like to go with him) he might plead that also; he must know, that repentance, though it may avail a murderer towards the obtaining of his pardon from God, yet it is not a Plea sufficient to indemnify in a Court of humane Justice. Murderers, especially, such Atrocious Murderers, justly die, by God's Law and man's, though truly penitent. The Tears of Repentance may do much towards the reparation of a man's own Innocence, but can do nothing towards a reparation for another's Life.  
In a word, if indeed he repent of the fact, he could not but be willing to prevent (as far as in him lay) the spreading of the leaven of his example to infect others with a like guilt: and the effectuallest course to prevent such crimes for the future, is the exemplary punishment of those who have taught the world to commit them.  
And thus have we dispatched the first part of the Text (with its reference to the hypothesis of the Chapter, and the Doctrine couched in it, The heinousness of the sin of murdering Kings.) Come we now to the two remaining, which (in the person expressing his sense of it, and the manner how he expresseth it) contain the substance of those practical Inferences which it affords for Application. And we will begin with the second part.  
Secondly, Quis, or [the person expressing his deep sense of this 
Part 2. Quis, or the Person thus replying, David.  horrid Fact,] David, who may herein be exemplary to after-Ages, in the twofold Consideration, wherein the distribution of my Text represented him.  
I. Consider him according to what he was, in a twofold Capacity. 
Considered, according to what he was. In his personal Capacity,   
1. As a man, (in his personal capacity) and so I told you before he was a truly pious person, an eminent Saint, and for nothing more eminent, then for tenderness of Conscience.  
That he was a person truly pious and eminent for Saintship, is demonstratively 
An eminent Saint,  evident in the high characters the Holy Ghost every where bestows upon him. God's servant David, is a Title wherein (by the mutual, and that frequent interchanging of it in Scripture) both God and he seem to delight. And such a servant God thought him, that he seems to boast of his findings, when he had met with him, as if the like were not to be found again, [I have found David my servant, Psal. 89. 20.] So good a servant he was, that (as another high expression carries it) God himself could hardly wish or desire a better, (allowing the imperfections incident to humane frailty) for he was [a man after his own heart, and one that would stick at none of his Commands, but do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all his wills.] A man so good, that God takes measure of the goodness or badness of all his Successors, by the proportion or disproportion they bore to him: as being so far accounted good, as they walked in the way and steps of their Father David; and so far bad, as they departed from them; of which frequent Instances might be given, would time permit. Yea, so good, that the best of men that ever was (the Lord Jesus Christ) is by the Holy Ghost, called by the Name of David as his most suitable Type, Jer. 30. 9 Hosea 3. 5. Nor do the Characters given him in that kind, speak more than his own practice justified. Every morning, his waking thoughts conversed with God, Psal. 139. 8. Yea, he was one, who (over and above the seventh day reserved by God for his public service, which he as constantly attended, as the doorkeepers of God's house themselves, Psal. 84. 10.) consecrated seven petty Sabbaths a day to devotion, Psal. 119. 164. and broke his sleep at midnight to spend time in religious duties, Psal. 119. 62. and one of so raised a spirit in his pious meditations and devotions, that his remains have been ever since made use of, as Forms of public Devotion in the Church, in which Notion he is called the sweet Psalmist of Israel, 2 Sam. 23. 1.  
And for the tenderness of his conscience, there needs no other 
and notably tender-Conscienced.  evidence, than (that one instance already touched at) the disturbance he felt in himself for cutting off but one thread of saul's garment, though done for a testimony of his own innocency, 1 Sam. 24. 5.  
This is the person, whom the relation of this Amalekite, concerning his murdering of Saul, doth so transport into an holy passion, that he cries out, How wast thou not afraid to stretch forth thy hand to destroy the Lords Anointed?  
And herein he sets a fair copy for all persons who pretend to Saintship, and plead Tenderness of Conscience, to write after: and gives us of this Age a liberal occasion to wonder at that new-fashioned, or rather new-fangled garb of Sanctity, which some have assumed to cloak the actual guilt of fare more horrid Villainies, than this (the very relation whereof so startled David) in my Text; and at that paradoxical notion of tenderness of conscience, which admits Murders and Treasons of the most horrid aggravation imaginable, into the reputation of most heroical virtues, and elevated acts of Religion. For surely, if David were such an eminent Saint, these persons who so directly walk Antipodes to his principles and practice, can pass with all sober Christians for no other than incarnate devils: and if David's Conscience were so truly and remarkably tender, the Consciences of these men must needs be harder than Adamants, and seared into an incurable dedolency, whose principles and tempers carry so irreconcilable a contradiction to his, and that in a matter of so high a concernment as blood, and that not of ordinary persons, but of the Lords Anointed.  
2. Consider him as a King (in his politic and public capacity,) 
In his politic Capacity (by the death of Saul) King.  which by saul's death he was now vested withal. The Intelligence which this Miscreant brought him (it is probable) gave him the first glimpse, the first intimation of the actual devolution of the Crown upon him: and now, as a public Magistrate, he gives the Relator himself the first handsel of his new Royalty, a severe increpation in the Text, and a deserved execution in those that follow. And a like piece of Justice doth he (a while afterwards) execute upon the murderers of Ishbosheth the son of Saul, who had for two years been set up by a Faction, as Competitor with him in the Kingdom, chap. 4. Examples, followed by Amaziah King of Judah, upon the murderers of his father Joash, 2 King. 14. 5. and very ordinarily to be paralleled in all Histories, wherein there is no piece of Justice more commonly taken notice of, than the severe inquisition and recompense made by succeeding Princes, for the blood of their Predecessors. And indeed, both the Law of God (which admits 
(Upon occasion whereof,  no compensation for humane blood, but the blood of him that sheds it, and that upon good reason too, because in the murder of man the Image of God is defaced, Gen. 9 6.) allows and requires this severity, in such cases: and the Law of man conformably allots an exemplary addition of penal circumstances, to that severity in the case of King-killing, upon weighty reason, seeing in that prodigious crime there is a defacing of a double Image of God, both Natural and Political. So that if it were possible to inflict a double death upon such malefactors, their double, yea, manifold guilt (for he that murders a Supreme Magistrate, virtually and in effect, murders a Community) would abundantly justify the rigour of such an execution. 
Juven. Sat. 8.  
Horum supplicio non debuit una parari  
Simia, non serpens unus, non culeus unus.   
One death (indeed) is too little for such Parricides, as kill the Father of an whole Kingdom. Severity in such a case, is such a piece of righteousness, as establisheth the Throne (Prov. 16. 12.) by scaring those of succeeding Ages from doing so presumptuously.  
Upon consideration whereof, as those Princes are abundantly 
The severe circumstances of the execution of Traitors, justified.)  justified, who in this piece of justice follow David's example; so are those persons as much to be blamed, whose either good nature, and softness of disposition, or evil Principles, and partnership of guilt, prejudiceth them against the severe executions of Regicides, which humane Laws every where appoint, and humane Authority (in terrorem) for others terror, sometimes practiseth. For it is but meet, that exemplary severity should teach men the difference between the value to be put upon the persons of Princes, and Subjects: Otherwise Assasinations would be as frequently acted upon Sovereigns, as Murders upon Private men; yea, hardly would any King that hath an enemy daring enough to adventure a bare life, be translated into Heaven siccâ morte, with an unbloudy death. Whereas (on the other side) experience tells us, that those who can contemn a single death, yet dread it clothed with such Circumstances, as carry a Brand of eternal ignominy with them, by a Blot upon the Memory, and a Tincture upon the Blood to all posterity.  
II. Consider David according to the Presumptions on which the 
And as he was mistaken by the confident Presumptions of the Murderer.  Murderer grounded his Confidence, and we shall find an ample Ground, for the farther improvement of his Example herein. For, if a David persecuted by a Tyrannous King, and that without any colour of Justice, for so many years, be thus affected with the Murder of his Implacable Persecutor, if a David, who had fled to Arms for shelter, against his Sovereign's unjust violence, neither dared himself to use those Arms to the prejudice of his Person, when he had him within his power, nor would dismiss his actual Murderer without exemplary vengeance; and lastly, if the undoubted right of Succession in his Throne, and the long expected news of an avoidance thereof, could not soften the radicated Principles of Loyalty in David, so far, as to induce him to admit of a secret titillation of complacency in that Fact, when done to his hand, which made his way plain to the possession of a just Royalty, or sweeten him one jot towards the Person who had been the Instrument of making room for him: doth it not demonstratively follow, that all other Persons, (especially such as are not under the like probable Effects of Tentation in this kind) should be as sowrly irreconcilable to the Agents and Principles, which are in the same condemnation, for prodigious impiety and flagitiousness? Especially, when it shall be considered, how emphatically, how pathetically David expresseth his sense of this horrid action, which I shall lay before your consideration in the handing of the Third and Last Part of my Text.  
Thirdly, The Quomodo, or manner of David's Expression of the 
Part 3. Quomodo. Or the Manner how David answers.  violence of those Passions, which he inwardly felt upon occasion of this Relation; which (as I told you before) is by way of sharp and cutting Interrogation.  
Importing,  

1. Grief.  
2. Wonder. With  
3. Horror.   
1. Grief. Which, how great it was in David's Breast upon Grief. this occasion, divers Particulars in the Text and Context express.  
And those may be reduced to these two Heads; (Evidenced in,  

1. Sudden Transports.  
2. Deliberate and Solemn Acts.   
1. For Evidence of his sudden Transports, let us but view the 
His Sudden Transports. &  11th. and 12th. verses; where we are told, that he rend his , and put all his Court into a like Posture of Mourning. He mourns, and weeps, and fasts all that day until Even.  
2. For evide●ce of his Deliberate and Solemn Acts, to testify 
His Deliberate and Solemn Acts.)  his hearty sorrow for this doleful accident, we find him, v. 17, 18. (as I told you in the Preface) penning an Epicedium or Funeral-Song, for the constant use both of himself, and the People of Judah, and commanding it to be set to a Musical Tune, and taught them; that this Lamentation might be perpetuated to all posterity. Nor was David's example in this kind altogether barren, for we find it afterwards followed by the godly Jews, upon occasion of the untimely death of good Josiah; they mourned so truly and hearty for him, that the greatness of their sorrow in after-ages grew into a Proverb, [as the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the Valley of Megiddon, Zech. 12. 11.] And among their Solemn Lamentations, had one kept on record to Posterity, penned by an holy Prophet, Lam. 4. 20. and perpetuated the solemn remembrance of that heavy stroke by public Command: For so 2 Chron. 35. 24, 25. expresseth it at large: All Judah and Jerusalem mourned for Josiah; and Jeremiah lamented for Josiah, and all the singing men and singing women spoke of Josiah in their Lamentations to this day, and made them an Ordiance in Israel, and behold, they are written in the Lamentations.  
And afterwards, when Gedaliah the good Governor left by Nebuzaradan, was treacherously slain by Ishmael, Jer. 41. 1, 2. We find there was an Annual Fast appointed, and observed till after the return from Captivity, upon the Month wherein he was slain, as the most judicious Interpreters expound the Fast of the 7th. Month, Zech. 7. 5. Which Examples loudly call for like deep and solemn Impressions and Expressions of heartiest sorrow from all Loyal Subjects upon like Accidents, and abundantly justify the Annual Solemnisation of this Day; (especially if we consider, how great a Loss these Kingdoms suffered, and how great a Gild they contracted by the Lamentable Providence that occasioned it: Of which, more plentifully anon. Indeed the Tears of Subjects are the best Spices to embalm a Sovereign's Memory withal; nor can there be a louder attestation to the Deserts of a Prince, than that his Loss is bewailed as a Common Calamity. Upon which account it is, that God promiseth it as a signal Mercy to the hopeful Son of wicked Jeroboam, that all Israel should mourn for him, 1 Kings 14. 13. and threatens it as a heavy judgement on Jehoiakim, the wicked Son of good Josiah, that he should be buried with the Burial of an Ass, thrown in a ditch, without any one to mourn or lament for him, neither Brother, nor Sister, nor Subject, Jer. 22. 18, 19  
2. Wonder and Astonishment, at the strangeness of the accident, 
Wonder,  and boldness of the Villain, in first daring to act, and then, not blushing to relate that fearful wickedness. And fit it is that such Monsters wherever they are found, should still set the whole world at gaze in a pious Amazement. Which Affection, however in itself it be not so directly moral, as some others are, yet it conduceth very much to the exciting of that which is so, to wit, an holy shyness and aversation of mind towards those Tentations, which we are before prepossessed against with a potent prejudice, as so many monstrous and portentous Births of hellish wickedness: Which apprehensions whosoever hath, concerning the detestable sin of King-killing, will quickly improve it unto,  
3. Abomination and Abhorrency: the third Passion, wherein David expresseth his sense of this horrid Fact. For we may very 
and Horror or Abomination  well suppose that his tender and delicate Conscience presently took an Alarm from the Amalekites brazenfaced Relation, and rallied all the Spirits in his Body, to the Fortroyal of his Heart, to fortify it against the pestilential breath of such a proditious Monster; and thence it shot forth the Darts of fiery indignation in the Frowns of his Royal Countenance, and sharpened every hair of his head into a Porcupines Quill, which extreme horror erected (as it were of purpose) to fly in the Face of the detestable Object. All this, and more, presents itself to our apprehension, in the Form of this stinging Interrogation, wherein, Quot Verba, Tota Tonitrua; every word is a Clap of Thunder, How wast thou not afraid to stretch forth thy hand to destroy the Lords Anointed?  
And indeed, nothing less than such an Hyperbold of abomination will serve to express, as it ought, the just sense which those who will imitate David in either of his forementioned Capacities, (whether of good men or good Magistrates) ought to have of that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that monstrous steam of Hell, and stench of the bottomless Pit, which breathes out of the mouths of those unclean Beasts, and Lying Prophets, (whose Throats are worse than an open Sepulchre) by whom the sin of King-killing (which David and every good man so startles at) is not only proclaimed Lawful, but extolled as meritorious; and much more, of that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Abomination of Desolation, (the practice of that monstrous Principle) when (especially) it shall be set up in the holy place, and worshipped in the thoughts of deluded Creatures, as a distinguishing Character of eminent holiness.  
And thus (at last, have I done with the Text, as it relates to 
2 II. Seco●d View of the Text. As accomodable to the Occasion.  the Chapter and Narrative contained in it, together with the Doctrine and Inferences (in general) comprehended therein. It only remains, that I review them in this place, as they may be accommodated by way of Parallel to the sad occasion of this day's Solemnity.  
And truly, when I thought of finding out a parallel Text of 
The Parallel relating to the Parts of the Text.  Scripture to the Text of Providence, which this sad day calls to our Remembrance, I must confess, I found myself are an unusual loss. Many Kings deaths are recorded in Sacred Writ, and divers of them violent and bloody; and divers of them brought about by the hands of Rebellious and Traitorous Subjects. But to match all the Circumstances of the most execrable Murder of our Late Gracious Sovereign, I know none that can tolerably pretend unto it.  
That which my Text attempts towards it, lies rather in the parallel 
In the First, (expressing the Horridness of the Sin.)  which should be between David's Spirit and ours, upon so sad an occasion (for which end mainly I made choice of it) then that which may be supposed between saul's Person and Death and his Majesties, which are (almost altogether) unparallelable. And therefore in those short Touches of Collation, which I shall bestow upon them, I must of necessity compare them, and what befell them, in their discrepancies; as that Painter, who to set off the vast bigness of an Elephant, draws a Mouse by his side.  
It is true indeed, that in some of the aggravations of the horrid 
How far it holds: & Where it halts, viz.  murder committed upon them both, the Parallel holds. That both were Kings, Anointed, and the Lords Anointed, and both murdered by Subjects; but the differences are far more in the rest of the Circumstances, and those so vast, that the power of Invention c●n hardly bring them nearer to one another, than the two Poles.  
1. Consider we the Person Murdered (our Late Gracious, and 
In the difference between the Persons murdered; King Saul & King Charles. (Occasioning a short Character of our late Sovereign.)  now Glorious Sovereign. A person (take him either as Man, or King) of a Temper so far different from saul's, that as the one seemed to be composed of Cruelty, so the other seemed to have nothing in his Constitution but Clemency. A person (in both capacities, both of Man and King) so free, not only from the guilt, but even from the suspicion of any enormous Crime, that the malice of his Accusers themselves, could find nothing to stuff out that Black Charge which they laid against him, but the unhappy Contests between Himself and his Subjects (the sad Issues of mutual Jealousies, blown up into an open War by a Divine Blast upon all those Counsels, which might have prevented it, and a just immission of an evil Spirit of Perversities to mingle with them, and render them ineffectual, for the just punishment of our sins) which indeed were his Infelicity, but their guilt, who first made the Breach, and afterwards (as much as in them lay) hindered the making it up, because their own Conscience of having unpardonably offended him, told them, they could expect no Security, but in his Ruin. A Person and King, of so elevated a size, both for Intellectual and Moral Endowments, that the stature of his inward man, as much overtopped the most accomplished of his Subjects, as saul's outward man did overlook the rest of the Israelites, 1 Sam. 10. 23.  
For his Intellectuals: He was endowed with such an height of Fancy, as would have won him the Laurel in a Commonwealth of Poets. He was Master of so sublime a Grandeur of Language, and stately Majesticalness, joined with an amiable fluency of Style, as might have challenged a Dictatorship among the best of Orators; of which his Royal Remains are an indisputable evidence. And for Soundness of Judgement, both in Points of Controversy, and Cases of Conscience, he might have challenged the Theological Chair, upon the account of mere worth, and have sat not only Regius Professor, but Rex Professorum, in both Universities.  
For his Morals: He was Just, Valiant, Temperate, , Merciful (and what not?) to such a proportion, as he might have set the best of his Subjects a Copy of virtue in his own example.  
Indeed he was a Prince who might have passed clear with the universal reputation of the best of English Kings, had he not fallen into the worst of Times, wherein the English Manners were so debauched with the blandishments of a long continued tranquillity and plenty; and their judgements so intoxicated with prejudice, and censoriousness, that too too many neither loved the practice of virtue themselves, nor would willingly allow the reputation of it to others.  
A King, whom if we had not by our sins rendered ourselves unworthy to enjoy longer, we had been (it may be to this day) in danger of nothing more than being surfeited with our own felicity. And that we enjoyed him not, all the world must bear him witness, it was not his fault, seeing in that last and fatal Treaty (as Providence made it) at Newport, he shown so great a desire in his Gracious Condescensions to make his people happy, that he even forgot he had any share of his own to challenge among them; having indeed given them all, but (what he could not part with) that Sovereign goodness of disposition, which was the only thing (almost) that he had left, besides the redintigrated affections of his people, (divers of whom began then to know him better, and therefore valued him the more, out of conviction that they had ignorantly persecuted him) to support his Throne withal. So that, I must needs say it was the fatal infatuation, and infelicity of these Nations, that they knew not in the day of their visitation the things that belonged to their peace: and therefore were they (by the righteous judgement of God) for a full decade of years and more, justly hid from their eyes. O fortunatos nimium bona si sua nôssent Anglicolas!—  
And for his Religion, This I think may safely be said without exception from any, but such as all Religions may blush to own, that if the employment of his serener hours were of a piece with the entertainment of his Solitudes and Sufferings; that man is not enough Christian himself, who can admit a dispute in his own bosom, whether he ought not to be ranked among the chiefest of Christians: or, if (as some suppose) his Afflictions were the School wherein he received the first elements of practical Piety, this (in deed and truth) is so far from being a disparagement to him, that it renders him so much more the subject of all good men's admiration and astonishment, for making so wonderful a proficiency in so short a time, as the digesting into practice the whole Doctrine and Example of his Master Christ, and especially so much as related to the last passages of his life, proclaims to all the world.  
And if in some modes and other circumstantials of his Profession, he pleased not all men, yea possibly might distaste some good men; yet (even in these) his conscientious constancy (and no other principle could prevail with him, when all his earthly enjoyments were apparently adventured to a desperate irrecoverableness by his adhering to them) ought not to be displeasing to any. Especially when we consider, how many principles and practices of far greater incompatibility with true piety, must be allowed, to make the Religion of some persons currant, who most disparage His.  
And indeed, whatever we thought of him living (as to his Religion,) the consequences of his death too sadly evidenced, how much the Protestant Cause was concerned in his preservation: and especially, the sad face of this Orphan-Church of ours, which from that time forwards, became the lamentablest scene of Anarchy and Confusion, that ever was seen in the Christian world, not excepting Munster itself, that saw but the prologue to our Tragedy. For who knows not, that whatever Persons or Parties stepped up into ●●●s vacant Seat, made it the Masterpiece of their policy (like self-seeking Surgeons) to keep our wounds open, that they might keep themselves in practice: and to maintain opposite Factions to peck at one another, that whiles the people were busied in private contests, they might be the less sensible of their public oppressions. Insomuch, that the sad revival of old Heresies and Schisms (every one of which carried a Legion of new ones in its belly) together with the apparent dangers of extirpation to the true Protestant Religion, and all its Professors, for many years together since our sins removed Him from us, have convinced not a few, that he was not so much to blame, as was too commonly thought, for not giving His consent to those violent and sudden changes which their misguided zeal (among many others alike misled,) in those times too importunately called for. And no doubt, if he had lived to have perfected his own designed Model for the Church's settlement, most of those dissensions that have been of late (and yet are) too flagrant among us, had long before they arrived at this maturity, been buried in the grave of oblivion, not so much by suppressing, as by reconciling the Dissenters. But, as David when he had collected materials for the building of the Temple, was fain to leave▪ them with his Advice and Benediction to his Son Solomon to make use of: So our Gracious Sovereign, being not permitted by Providence to live to see the Rearing of that Structure, which he intended, hath left such Materials behind him, together with his Fatherly Charge and Blessing, for this happy work, to his Genuine Son and Lawful Successor, our present Gracious King (whom God long preserve) that we no ways doubt, but (as they are wonderful suitable to the Moderation of his Majesty's temper, so) they will in due time be successfully made use of by him to the Happy Settlement of these Churches with the infinite Contentment of all those that love the Peace of Jerusalem.  
In the mean while, if by what I have said concerning the Person, whose Funeral Anniversary, this Day is appointed to solemnize (and I am afraid I have rather injured his Memory, by saying too little, than the Truth, by saying too much of him) you be in any measure sensible of the Loss you suffered by his violent removal, I hope you are the better prepared to entertain the next Consideration, wherein this accursed Parricide exceeded that of Saul in my Text; and that is,  
2. The View of the Persons who committed this horrid Act: And 
As also in the difference between the Murderers of both.  here our Parallel halts again. Had they been Native Foreigners, as the Amalekite in my Text was, and as he was (in probability) educated in a Heathen Religion, and soured with the Leaven of National Enmity, heightened with the provocation of an universal Massacre, acted by the person they so barbarously murdered, upon all their dearest Relations, the Crime had been more pardonable; but these Parricides were his Majesty's Native Subjects, that had drawn their first Breath in his Hereditary Dominions, & to this Natural Bond of Allegiance, had voluntarily added diverse stronger Ties of religious Oaths, Protestations and Covenants; yea, some of those that lifted up not their Heels only, but their Hands against him, were such as did eat of his Bread, his own sworn Servants, none of them disobliged by any such Provocations of cruel Usages, so that it is hard to imagine, how it might be possible to load a Malefactor with more personal aggravating Considerations, to render him monstrously criminal, than these were notoriously guilty of; except only, that one (which like a vast Mountain, overtops all the rest) that they were Persons of the Professed True Religion, and in that Profession, coveted to engross the Reputation of the most eminently strict and Conscientious. And indeed, this is an aggravation, which ought beyond all others, to whet the indignation of every Conscientious Christian to a keenness beyond all moderation, as that which is most highly injurious to the whole Reformed Cause throughout all the world. O tell it not in Gath, nor publish it in the streets of Askalon, lest the Daughters of the Philistines rejoice! Alas! What sport hath this 
V 20.  sad scandal already made, and how much more may it yet make, to the Romish Emissaries, whose Religion hath been wont to raise Rebellions, and to canonize for Saints, the most prodigious Traitors; and hath alone born the odium of monopolising the 
(Occasioning a Vindication of the Protestant Religion from Romish Calumnies.)  guilt of murdering Princes, for many ages; that they have now too colourable a pretence to discharge a part of that guilt upon those of the Protestant Communion, as being hereby become Fratres in malo, Brethren in this horrid wickedness with themselves! An Occasion which we confess we have cause to bewail, because they make such use of it: But we must withal tell them, that we think our Profession no way touched in its reputation thereby, in the judgement of any whom inveterate Malice doth not prejudicated against us. For besides, that the Persons engaged in this horrid Act, were (most of them) departed from the Protestant Faith or Communion, or both, before they engaged in this horrid Villainy, (and so can no more justly reflect the guilt thereof upon the Church they once belonged to, than a Renegado's miscarriages can concern the Troop which he hath forsaken) Let the Romanist know, that no such Fruit ever grew upon the root of Protestant Doctrines, which abhor and detest all such Principles, and execrate all such Offenders; and (by consequence) if any persons who professed themselves Protestants, were guilty of this Barbarous Fact, Protestancy itself is no more concerned in it, than any State is in the Crimes of other Malefactors, who suffer daily by the Sword of Justice, for Robberies, Murders, and Burglaries, without any imputation upon the Community to which they belong; which sufficiently vindicates itself, by the Laws provided against such Crimes, and the Severity executed upon those who commit them, from any partnership in them.  
In a word, when the Romanist can show us any such Tenets as these, publicly avowed by general consent of Protestants, [That Christ hath left a power to any Person or Persons in his Church to dispose of all Crowns and Sceptres, and hath subordinated the Temporal to the spiritual Sword: And that Sovereign Princes being once blasted by the Thunderbolts of that Church, may be lawfully deposed and murdered by their Subjects; and that Subjects (in such a case) are absolved from all Oaths of Fealty and Allegiance to them, etc.] let them impute the guilt of this horrid Crime to us, and spare not: but so long as we, and they notoriously know, whose Doctrines these are, it is no hard matter to guests, what Heifer those Seditious Seminaries ploughed with, and at whose Forge they sharpened their Goads, and Ploughshares, who sowed the Tares, of such Traitorous Principles, in the field of our English Church and Commonwealth.  
However (for our fuller vindication in this Particular) let every true Protestant for ever abominate the Memory of those Monsters, and detest their Principles, who have thus opened the mouths of our Adversaries against our Religion, and laid such a stumbling-block of prejudice in the way of those poor seduced creatures among us, who are thereby hardened in the distance they keep from us and our Communion.  
3. A Third Consideration to amplify the horrid murder of our 
And the vast disproportion between the Facts themselves.  Late Sovereign, beyond that of Saul, may be taken from the Fact itself: Which although (in the case of Saul) it hath already been charged with,  
1. Bloodiness. 2. Wilfulness. And 3. Audacionsness enough: Yet in all these, our part of the Parallel weighs much heavier than that. The Amalekites Fact was a Sneaking Business, acted in a Corner, so that it had not been known, but by his own Relation. But this was a Public Tragedy, in all the Acts of it, wherein the Conspirators, made all the world Spectators of their audacious Effrontery. Here was a Pageantry of Public Justice, an High Court solemnly convened, a Bench, and a Bar, a Precedent, and a Prisoner, an Indictment, and a Prosecution, and a Sentence, and all these, in the most public place of Judicature in the three Nations. And after this, a Bloody Execution, not in a Corner, but in the open Street, in the Face of the Sun, as if they meant (with a kind of def●nce to God himself) to call him in, as a public Spectator, to behold how insolently they trampled upon his Authority, in his undoubted Vicegerent. A Tragedy, which in all the Acts and Scenes of it, I am confident all the Histories in the world cannot match. Many Kings have died by the Sword, by the Dagger and the Pistol; many by poisonous Drugs, and other such Instruments of private and clandestine ambition, or revenge: But never any till this black day, by the Executioners Axe, upon a public Scaffold, in the Front of His own Royal Palace, etc. Nay more, if a Survey were made of all the Utopian Inventions of Poetical Fancy, no Stage ever had a Tragedy like this acted upon it. No Fabulous or feigned History ever adventured a Relation like it to the eyes of the world: And indeed sober Readers would have disgusted them, if they had, upon the very account of the monstrousness of it, and taxed the Author with an unpardonable Error, for transgressing 
Ficta voluptatis causae sint proxima veris. Nec quodcunque volet, poscat sibi fabula credi. Hor. Art. Poet.  the ordinary Rule of Fiction, the subject matter whereof, must be such as seems to carry an appearance of Truth, and though it be not verum, yet it is verisimile. So that here was a confluence of all that wilful projected Cruelty and Insolence could contribute to the aggravation of a Villainy.  
4. To show the Parallel yet more unparallel, in the case of our late Sovereign, his Murderers had none of all those Pleas to excuse their wickedness, which before have been urged on the behalf of the Amalekite. For,  
1. They made it too public to render it any way disputable, 
None of the Amalekites Pleas, pleadable for this.  whether they were the Persons who did the Fact or no. And after they had done it, they gloried in it as an act of Transcendent Justice, and took pride to be pointed at for it.  
2. So far was our murdered Sovereign from being (as Saul was) a Tyrant and a Murderer; that none ever lost Life or Limb by his Authority, but in a course of Justice, or by the chance of war. And if he were an Enemy to any true Davids (which some object to him as a Crime) it was his Infelicity not to understand them to be such, which occasioned it; and I am confident, if any such there be, who had cause to complain of hard usage from him, they are so far David's still, that they will give the Murderers as little thanks for rescuing them from their Sufferings, in such a way, as he did this Amalekite.  
3. So far was he from being weary of his Life, and desiring the courtesy of a dispatch out of it, that he strongly and unanswerably asserted to the faces of his Murderers his Right both to his Life and Crown.  
4. So far was he from an inevitable necessity of dying at that time, either by natural Infirmity, or accidental stroke of Providence, that he was in the very Prime of his Age, Health and Strength.  
5. So far was he from being pursued by any Enemies but themselves, that he had but newly concluded a reconciling Treaty with those who had fought against him, whose Arms and Hearts were with a wonderful alacrity open to receive him, and expiate all former unkindnesses with all possible Demonstrations of Affectionate Loyalty.  
6. So far were his Murderers from lighting occasionally upon a tentation to this Fact, and being surprised by the unexpectedness thereof, that it was the issue of a Conspiracy of divers years before.  
7. So far were they from being clear of the design of enriching themselves with the Royal Spoils, that (like Ahab) they had no sooner killed, but they presently fell to taking possession of all the Royal Lands and Revenues, and distributed them amongst themselves: And whereas this Amalekite, after he had done the Fact, he took the Crown and Bracelet of Saul, & returned them to his Lawful Successor; these barbarous Murderers to make good their unjust possession) exclude his undoubted Heir and Successor, for many years, from his unquestionable Rights, and put God himself to the expense of a Miracle at last to restore him.  
8. And Lastly, So far were they from bewailing the Fact, when they had done it, that (as I before told you) they triumphed in it, as the most Righteous, Heroic and Meritorious Act, that ever was done by men. And someof them expressed an ambition to perpetuate the memory of their Names by no other Epitaph; yea, when God's Justice and man's overtook them, and brought them to deserved Execution, took the Confidence to challenge a Crown of 
The Conclusion in a serious application of the other two parts of the Text, expressing a defi●e that in these the Parallel may hold between David and us: Or rather that we may excced him (as there is great cause)  Martyrdom in the Kingdom of Glory, and prefer the Cause wherein they suffered, before those of the chiefest of Martyrs; and abused themselves with a Rodomantick persuasion, that it were a piece of ambition, becoming the most eminont of that noble Society, to desire an Exchange of condition with them. The saddest Instances of the efficacy of delusion that ever the world saw from its first Creation to that very day.  
And thus have I done with my Parallel so far as it concerns the Circumstances of the two Facts, the one of the Text, and the other of the Time; wherein there is little to be seen, but Concordia disoors, an agreement in nothing but this, that there is scarce any Circumstance wherein they agree. I have only this to add, that I hope to find a better Harmony in the other Part of it, which comes now to hand; [the Parallel of David's carriage upon the one, and the Temper of all Religious Hearts among us, and the Generations that are to come, in reference to the other] containing the due sense which as he had, so we ought to have, of so detestable and piacular a Fact, and dismal a Providence: Which sense (according to the forementioned distribution) ought to express itself in three things.  
1. Grief; of which David had far less cause than we, upon a 
In our Grief, For the Loss received.  fourfold account.  
1. Of the Loss received: Which (in David's case) was inconsiderable, if compared with ours, He indeed lost a Sovereign, valiant enough to fight the Lords Battles, and one, who by his conduct, had divers times saved Israel; but one who was now in his Wane and Declination; so that (whatsoever David in modesty thought of him) the Loss of Saul was Israel's gain, by making room for a better Successor, himself.  
But our loss was like the dropping of a skilful Pilot overboard, when the Ship under his conduct, was in the very Mouth of the haven, and big with expectation of landing its precious Merchandise, but (by that sad accident) cast into the hands of raw, and rash and mutinous Seamen; whose indiscretions and animosities have cast us back again into a tempestuous Sea, where we have for many years been tossed up and down, with unspeakable hazard, till at last God by a Miraculous Providence, brought to our help, a Phoenix raised out of his Ashes, the true Heir, both of his Kingdoms and Virtues, who hath once more brought us within sight of Land, and we hope will (if our sins obstruct not his endeavours) set us safe on shore. To prevent which mischief, we ought to grieve (as we have cause) more than David.  
2. Upon account of those sins (in general) which provoked 
and our sins (in general) provoking God to inflict it. (Whereof some are expressed; (the people's.)  God to take him from us. David known, that God had cast off formerly, and now out off Saul for his own sins, not his. But we have cause enough to charge this loss upon our own provoking sins, which (at that time, and since) have been too notoriously apparent to God and the world: Such as, Contempt of God's Word and Sacraments, Reproaching and persecuting his Faithful Messengers, Wanton affecting of new Notions and Inventions, and contemning old Truths, and the primitive simplicity of the Gospel, Uncharitable schisms and separations in the Church, and ambitious self-seeking, and (in order thereunto, fomenting Factions in the State, Sacrilegious robbing of God, and barbarous spoiling and destroying one another with a rage reaching up to Heaven, Notorious Debauchery and Profaneness in all sorts and degrees of men, which spared neither Gods Name, nor his Sabbaths, nor his Creatures, nor the Profession of Religion in the life and power of it, toleration of Popery, and other dangerous Errors and Heresies, and (to make our Ephah of sins yet fuller) a spirit of Rebellion spread over the whole Nation, against just and lawful Authority; and many more might be added to this Black Roll, but that I hasten to an end.  
And was it not time (think you) for God to be avenged of such a Nation as this was? and I would to God (I could with a clear Conscience) stop at was: But I fear, it may, with too much evidence of Truth be added, and yet is. And who could tax that Justice, which by his Providence suffered us to cut through that Bank with our own hands, which (under himself) kept out that Deluge of Miseries, which our sins deserved, and fell down that Royal Tree, in the Branches whereof our several Nests were built. And oh! Let us fear, lest by the continued guilt of the same sins, we procure a Decree of the Watchers, to cut down those Royal shoots, that have grown up in his stead (and he hath begun with them already, to our sad loss) and not leave so much as a stump in the earth, out of which a Rod may grow, to make a Sceptre of.  
But (possibly) here I may be interrupted with a Question: whether 
The Thronts waved,  all the Fault which provoked God to inflict such a severe stroke, were in the People, and the Throne altogether guiltless.  
To which I answer, That I doubt not but personal sins, and acts of misgovernment towards the people under their charge, are incident to Kings as well as to persons of a lower degree. And I dare not persuade myself or others, that our late Sovereign was so much Saint, as to be altogether free; nay he was so much Saint, as (more than once) to confess miscarriages in his Government. 
and why.)  But I must tell the enquirers withal, that I do not believe him one half so criminal, as popular prejudice, blown up by the breath of factious spirits endeavoured to make him. And for what was really amiss in him, I have this to plead, That Kings are persons under such Tentations, as Vulgar capacities do not understand: that because of their eminency and public influence, the Tempter thrusts sorer at them then ordinary, that they may fall; that God 
Psal. 118. 13.  doth sometimes lead them into Tentation, because his wrath is kindled against their people; that (in Scripture) those who have the 
〈…〉 4. 1.  commendation of God's Spirit for the best of Kings, (David and Solomon) have yet more and fouler spots upon their Names, than K. Charles; and that were the busy enquirers into, and censurers of King's faults a while in their places, I fear they would commit more and greater. Let the Questionist if he can, answer me this Question, Si fueris●tu Leo, qualis eris?  
In a word, Were I sufficiently instructed in the Cabinet affairs of our late Sovereign, and had I a revelation withal afforded me, to discover the secret springs of those Counsels upon which he acted, and his own mind in acting; and were I enabled thereby to conclude him really guilty of whatever, and more, than what malice and prejudice have ever charged him withal, I should think myself obliged to do (what is the duty of every good man) that right to his memory, as to bury his errors and miscarriages in his grave, and proclaim his virtues as Royal examples to all Posterity. The Lord discover to his Sacred Majesty, who now fills his Seat, (to whom this enquiry is more proper then to us) both these and those, that he may render his virtues immortal by imitation, and wash off the guilt of his failings, (if any such adhere to the Throne) by deprecating the imputation of them, and avoiding the incursion of the like. And let us help him herein in our prayers, and encourage him by our loyal affections and obedience; and amend our own lives the rather, upon the account of the Love we bear to his prosperity; to whom our sins (whatever they are) are Traitors, though our selves be never so loyal and affectionate subjects. 
And for any sort of partnership in this particular horrid fact,   
3. Let us grieve (and herein I am sure David had not so much cause by saul's own frequent confession) for that special guilt which the Nation in general, and particular persons in great multitudes every where have contracted, by any way furthering antecedently, or abetting consequentially, so horrid and execrable a murder.  
Let no Person or Party think to shift off this duty, as that which only concerns such and such, who had the unhappiness to appear 
(which few are clear of.)  in a contrary engagement to him in the field, (divers of whom, as hath appeared by many real evidences, have vindicated their integrity (with David) in this particular, notwithstanding the foul reflections of some irreconcilable Zealots, (whose heat no Acts of Imdemp●ity or Oblivion can slake) I say, let no man shift off this guilt upon others, because he was engaged in a Party or Interest less obnoxious to such an imputation: For, by that time we all have seriously examined ourselves upon these weighty Interrogatories, Whether we have not (antecedently to this sad accident) had an hand in the heightening animosities, and fomenting the differences, whether Religious or Civil, and sowing prejudices and jealousies, which gave occasion to the public contests? Nay, whether we did what we might, and to the utmost of our power, to keep them from arriving at such an height? And whether (during the civil broils) we (setting aside the consideration of the Quarrel, which (I hope) we shall all strive to remember no more) have not been guilty of such unjust oppressions, and exactions, and violences, as exasperated opposite parties into an irreconcileablenesse? Nay further, whether we interposed (at the time wherein that bloody Tragedy was acting) in all such ways as were within the compass of our capacity to hinder it? Some did indeed, but how few to the body of the Nation? Nay rather, whether we did not, by Petition, or other encouragement, promote it? Or if not, yet, whether we mourned for it, and deprecated the guilt of it? Whether we declared (after the sad blow given) our just abomination and detestation of the fact in our several places and capacities? Some indeed did (and let it be remembered to their everlasting honour that they did so,) but how many were there (who should have been more bold in such a cause) in whose mouths there were no reproofs? And lastly, Whether (ex post facto) we have not justified the fact, by flattering Addresses to the pretended Authority, of those who usurped the Royal Power successively? Whether we have not laid our hands unjustly upon any of the Royal Revenues? Whether we have not contributed Money or Arms towards the opposition of his present Majesty's restitution? And (in a word) Whether we swallowed not the execrable Engagement against Kingship itself, which very few (except only some nice Consciences here and there, who valued their Allegiance at an higher rate) refused to subscribe? I say, by that time every ones Conscience hath seriously answered these Interrogatories, and many such more as may be made, it will be well if Centesimus quisque one of an hundred can before God and his own serious Conscience, say, I am altogether innocent of this blood. O, that our Repentance might be as general as our Gild; and that we might not by casting it in each others Faces, think to clear our selves from that which must be discharged and blotted out only upon our particular and personal repentance.  
4. And Lastly, Let us (as common Christianity blinds us) grieve 
And (lastly) for those who are hardened in the guilt of this sin.  for those who will not be persuaded to grieve for themselves, but are so obdurate in the error of their seduced Consciences, that they secretly applaud themselves, and canonize others for Saints of an eminent Rank, upon the bare account of their influence upon, and engagement in this abominable Act. Alas I Poor seduced Creatures! Can you imagine that God will own it as a piece of merit in you or any other, that you affront, and contemn, and injure (with the utmost indignity) his own deputed Authority? Would any of you, si parvis componere magna liceret, account yourselves obliged by him who with the utmost strength he can make, attempts the molestation or dispossession of a Tenant that holds in your right? Did you ever read in any Scriptural or Church-Records, that any Person was ever accounted a Martyr, that suffered for conspiring, and much less, for murdering his Lawful Sovereign; excepting only the Black Calendar of the Apostate Church of Rome? And shall those who bid the greatest defiance to Popery in their Profession, forsake all the Churches of Christ in all Ages of the world, to adhere to them, in a matter of such concernment, and justify Beckets and Garnets', and other such Traytor-Saints, by vindicating them, in comparison to whom, they were Saints indeed? O, let us pray for the Conviction of these deluded Souls, and if our Prayers prevail not, let us weep for them in secret, though they laugh never so much at our tenderness towards them, as a foolish pity; and profanely bless themselves from our Charity, which their erroneous Consciences judge mistaken.  
2. Wonder and Astonishment, at ●he monstrous Confidence which 
and in our wonder at the; amazing confidence of the: late executed Traitors.  animated those Wretches who presumed to sit in Judgement, and pass Sentence of Condemnation upon their Lawful Sovereign, and (after 12 years' time vouchsafed them by God to repent in, before his Vengeance found them out) would fain persuade God by their Prayers, and the World by their Speeches, that they died with Consciences so innocent, in this matter, as to need no repentance. I profess solemnly, I was never more surprised with admiration, at any thing in my life, than I was upon the accidental view of that dangerous insinuating piece (the poison whereof (I fear) hath infected hundreds of ignorant and wellmeaning people) The Relation of the last Passages of the late detestable Traitors; and that, to see how Omnipotent a Deceiver (if I may so speak) that Spirit of Error and Delusion is, that can so artificially extract Heaven out of Hell, and not only Charm Conscience (even upon the very Brink of Eternity) into a sleep, but impose upon it with such a Cheat as to absolve and justify in so high a manner those Offenders, and so many of them (except we will suppose a Confederacy in such an uniform resolution, of purpose designed for the animating the relics of a broken Party, which I can hardly be so uncharitable as to believe) whom both the Law of God, and the Dictates of Nature in the Principles of all Nations under Heaven condemn. For my part, I dare not judge their eternal estate: But this I must say (for the prevention of any evil Influence from their examples) that I would not for 10000 worlds run their hazard, for all their Confidences and Comforts. And if I had an Infallible Revelation, to tell me they were gone to Heaven, I should think myself bound, to keep it in my own Bosom, lest the publishing of it should occasion the leading Millions to Hell; and pray God, to lead me to Heaven in a more ordinary and unsuspected Road, and keep me from being carried up to a Pinnacle of spiritual Pride upon the Devil's shoulders in the shape of an Angel of Light.  
3. Abomination of those principles which tend to the like Practices. Of all 
and abomination of the Principles that lead to such horrid Crimes. Particularly the F●f●h Monarchis●s.  which (and these late years have been as fruitful in Doctrines of this tendency, as Aff●ica is of Monsters) there are none more desperate, than those of the Expectants of a Fifth Monarchy to be begun in the personal appearance of Christ upon earth to crush all Earthly Powers, and reign visibly with his Saints a thousand years before the general Resurrection, which fancy with abundance more strange conceits of like nature, some confident new Doctors among them, pretend to gather from the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse so evidently, that they have often presumed to set and fix the time of his appearance. What a spirit these Principles can conjure up, there needs no further evidence than the desperate attempt made so lately, by an inconsiderable number of the men of that persuasion; whiles they are seduced to believe, that to make way for this Kingdom of Christ, the horridest murders are meritorius, and the justest executions for those murders, Martyrdom. But alas! poor men, would Christ come to set up a Temporal Kingdom, he hath ways enough of his own to effect it: So that 
Non tali Auxilio, nec Defensoribus istis,  
Christus eget.—   
Christ hath no more need of their Arms to further it, than we have of their Principles, from both which, Good Lord deliver us. AMEN.  
FINIS.