THE HISTORY OF Passive Obedience Since the REFORMATION.  
AMSTERDAM: Printed for Theodore Johnson in the Calver-Straet. 1689.   

THE PREFACE.  
HAving always thought, that the Doctrine of Passive Obedience, or Nonresistance of our lawful Superiors, had been a Doctrine founded in the Holy Scriptures, recommended to the Christian World by the Precepts and Example of our Blessed Saviour, and the Practices of his more immediate Followers; which Copy the Church of England hath exactly transcribed, to whose immortal Glory it must be said, that She alone (in contra-distinction both to Papists and Dissenters) hath asserted the Principles of Obedience to Princes, as the best Ages of Christianity owned, and practised it; and having lived so long to see that Doctrine ridiculed, and called the Doctrine of the Bowstring, and the Assertors and Practisers of it exploded, as Old Lacrymists, and the matter of fact, as to the first Ages of the Reformation, denied; while some affirm, that the Tenet was no older than Archbishop Laud, and was introduced by a few Court Bishops, 
Bishop Saunderson's Preface to Archbishop Usher, of The Power of the Prince, and Obedience of the Subject. The Apostle saith, put them in mind to be subject to Principalities and Powers. Tit. 3.1. Tho' S. Paul was certainly no Man-pleaser, far from seeking himself, or from making merchandise of the Word of God, or handling it deceitfully for filthy Lucre sake, nor were there hopes of Preferment, when the Church had no settled Revenue, nor was there any Christian Prince in the Universal World; but he draws his Arguments from the Ordinance of God, the discharge of Duty, and a good Conscience, the advancement of the Gospel, and the honour of the Christian Religion. See more in that admirable Preface.  the better to make way for the attainment, and establishing of their own Grandeur; by reason of which, the Enemies of our Communion (both Romanists, and others) have confidently averred, that our Obedience to our Sovereigns is nothing but our Interest, and that we have vindicated the Rights of Kings, because they have vindicated the Rights of our Church, and have prosecuted all that disliked our Constitutions: I could no longer forbear writing in the behalf of that truth which is eternal and unalterable (as are all the Doctrines of Christianity, though we must acknowledge to our shame, that they are more illustrious in our Books, than in our Lives) and showing, that from the infancy of the happy Reformation, the Church of England hath always believed and avowed, That it is the duty of every Christian, in things lawful, actively to obey his Superior; in things unlawful, to suffer rather than obey, and in any case, or upon any pretence whatsoever not to resist, because, whoever does so, shall receive to themselves Damnation.  
Nor can the Doctrine be unseasonable, since no Government can be safe without it, men's Passions naturally inclining them to think well of themselves, and to make Complaints of hard Usage, even then when they are most gently treated; what Instances have we in the Writings of the last Ages? When Parsons. in the name of his Party, resolving to expose the admirable Reign of Q. Elizabeth, renders her worse than the worst of Tyrants, and asks, Where are the nero's and Dioclesian's, where are the Genserics and Hunnerics; As if neither Pagan nor Arian Persecutors were as cruel as she? And when another Classis of Men blackened one of the best of Men, and the best of Princes, the Martyr CHARLES I. as the great Enemy of his Country, the Invader of the Religion and Liberties of his Subjects; and have not former Ages laboured under the same Discontents? When the disaffected Jews could say, We have no portion in David, nor any inheritance in the Son of Jesse, every man to his tents, O Israel: And yet that Prince was of Gods own immediate designation, and a Man after Gods own heart. Now if upon such Pretensions Subjects may right themselves by resisting their lawful Superiors, how soon will a fruitful Land be turned into a barren Wilderness, and Paradise itself become a Field of Blood? And I have with some regret and confusion reflected heretofore, that in the Romish Communion, Preston, Widdrington, and Barns in England; Walsh and Charon in Ireland; and in Scotland Barclay (to omit other Countries) all professed Papists (and all but Barclay Priests, and consequently more obliged to uphold the Grandeur of the Pontifical Chair) should honestly and stoutly appear to the Vindication of this Truth, which we seem either weary or ashamed of. I never wondered to see the Enemies of our Church make a Fastingday of our Blessed Saviour's Nativity (as if they were sorry that he came into the World, and perhaps with reason, because their Actions were so contrary both to his Precepts and Example) but I stand amazed to see her Sons disown her Doctrine and Constitutions.  
Did we seriously study the Laws of Providence, and consider the indispensible Obligations laid on us of taking up the Cross; did we remember, that Affliction is the Church's Portion, and that not the least Evil may be done to procure the greatest Good; this 
a Aug. de haeres. & Epiph.  Doctrine would be more easily believed and more readily embraced. They were the Gnostics of the Primitive Church, who taught Men to swear and forswear, and to sly from Persecution, when it was the Lot of Religion. And for these among other Reasons, I conjecture, does 
b Stillingfleet's Ser. Jan. 30. 168 ●/9. p. 3. 4.  a learned Man of our Church, call Simon Magus (the Institutor of that vile Sect) The Leviathan of the Primitive Church, who destroyed all the differences of good and evil: And that probably, because, as the Leviathan makes himself sport in the waters, so the Gnostics played with Oaths, and all Laws divine and human, 
c Id. p. 4.  setting a mighty Value upon themselves, and having mean and contemptible Thoughts of the Authority which God had established in the World; and it may be, because he was the Hobbs of that Age, who gave being to Opinions contradictory to the whole Tenor of the Gospel: For the Gnostics thought, 
d Id. p. 5.  all the Governments of the World to be nothing else but the contrivance of some evil Spirits, to abridge Men of their Liberty, which God and Nature had given them: and that this is the speaking evil of Dignities, which they are charged with by S. Judas.  
And the same great Man says 
e Sermon Novem. 5. 1673. pag. 2, 3. , that it was one of Machiavelli 's Quarrels against Christianity, that by its Precepts of Meekness and Patience, it rendered Men unfit for such great Undertake, as could not be accomplished without something of Cruelty and Inhumanity; whereas the old Religions by the multitude of Sacrifices, did inure Men to Blood and Destruction, and so made them fit for any Enterprise. And Machiavelli was certainly in the right, if Religion were intended only to make Men Butchers, or to instruct them in the use of Swords and Gunpowder; nay, the Religion of Mahomet is in this respect to be very much preferred before the Christian, etc.  
And having mentioned Hobbs, how am I ashamed to find, that his Authority and the Reasons which he derived from Milton, and both from Doleman, i. e. Parsons the Jesuit, are of a sudden so generally received, as if the Doctrine were Apostolical, and aught to be preached in all the World, That Power is originally in the Body of the People, that the Foundation of all Government is laid in compact, and that the breach of Conditions by one Party dispenses with the Duty of the other, though confirmed by Sacraments, Oaths, 
B. Saunderson's Case of a rash Vow. §. 9 The several Duties, that by God's Ordinance are to be performed by Persons that stand in mutual relation either to other are not pactional or conditional, as are the Leagues and Agreements made between Princes; but are absolute and independent, wherein each Person is to look to himself, and to the performance of the Duty that lies upon him, though the other Party should fail in the performance of his. Cons. Praelect. 5. de Juram.  and reiterated Promises; that a Prince may be opposed in his Politic, though not in his personal Capacity, that when Religion is a part of our Property it may be defended, and that the Determinations of Providence are to be followed, or that the Prosperity of a Cause is a Mark of its goodness. And what encouragement hath the owning and complying with such Principles given to many weak and ignorant Persons (who cannot distinguish between the steady Doctrines of a Church, and the Opinions and Practices of some of her Members) to embrace the Roman Faith and Communion, I need not declare, the Matter of Fact is visible; while we are accused, that all our former Declarations have been only pretence and juggle, and that we have been Loyal no longer than we could get by it. I speak this, God knows, not to upbraid, but to deplore, and if I could, to confute the Calumny, and with the deepest sense of the Interests of a poor despised Church, which is still, and will be the best, the most Orthodox, and most Primitive of all Christendom.  
Nor is this Account strange and new (any otherwise than as it concerns the Church of England as distinct from other Protestants) since 
a Exomologes. cap. 12. I confess, I wondered, that they could hope to make any Christians believe, that their Reformation came from the Spirit of Christ, when instead of those spiritual Arms of Charity, Humility, Patience, and most indispensible Obedience, even to Nero himself, by which Christ enabled his Apostles to conquer the World to the belief of the Gospel, Calvin and Luther put into the hands of their Sectaries Malice, Pride, Hatred to suffer for Conscience sake, active Resistance against all Authority; in a word, the very same Weapons which the Devil suggested to Mahomet. After the best enquiry I could make, I could not find or hear of (during our bloody Civil War) so much as one single Person of the Presbyterian Calvinist Party, but did actively oppose his King, nor one single Minister of that Party, but was a Trumpet to incite to war. Cons. Loc.  Cressy makes it one of the most cogent Reasons, why he (when he vainly thought the Church of England quite destroyed, so as never to be restored) could not communicate with other Protestant Churches, because they, (though in that Accusation he falsifies and calumniates, as I shall make it appear in the following Discourse) taught men, That it was lawful to take Arms in defence of Religion, and that when Princes persecuted the Truth, their Subjects were no longer bound to obey them. Nor is Cressy the only Person of the Popish Communion who hath laid this Imputation at the door of the Protestants, though without Reason or Justice, while the Romish Church in one of her General Councils determins the Deposition of Princes, who are not in all things obedient to her Injunctions. And I hope no man can imagine that I intent to promote any disturbance by this Writing: 1. Because I only do the office of an Historian (not wilfully misquoting any Passage, nor citing it contrary to the Author's intention and meaning, as far as I understand it; and this also must excuse me from being obliged to make good every Argument from Authority or Reason, which my Author's use; for that Province those of my Authors which are alive, are obliged to manage, or to acknowledge their Mistakes) I intending only to show the concurrent Testimony of our greatest Men in this momentous Point. 2. Because I am told, 
a Dr. Burnet's Royal Martyr, page 6.  that the Incendiary and Incendiarism were among the much abused words of the late times, yet those were the great Incendiaries who kindled God's wrath; and that it is from such that we may justly fear the like, or rather severer Judgements, if our Sins be greater than they were then. i e. When under the specious Pretexts of Liberty and Religion they first opposed, and then murdered the Lord's Anointed. 3. Because he who preaches up the Necessity of Suffering, and the Unlawfulness of Resisting Superiors, and who avers, that the Gospel teaches the followers of our Blessed Saviour to die, but not to fight for Religion, is little likely to be a Disturber of Government, whose Original he acknowledges to be only from Heaven, and accountable only to that Tribunal.  
For at last it will be found true, that no Government can be safe, while those who live under it, do not own this Principle, That it is not lawful upon any Pretence whatsoever, to take Arms against our Lawful Sovereign; since he, who is Obedient and Loyal only because his Compliance advances his Designs (either of Profit, Pleasure, Honour, Revenge, or any other Lust) as soon as his Point is gained, his Duty ceases; but he who is obedient to his Sovereign, 
Dr. Tennison, Hobbs' Creed. p. 159. Except a Man obey for Conscience sake, all the Cords of outward Pacts and Covenants will not hold him, when he dreams that the Philistines are upon him, and that he can deliver himself by force from the power of his Enemies, in which number the Prince himself is reckoned by ambitious Subjects out of favour.— Mr. Pelling's Sermon, Jan. 30. 1683. p. 43. Some are for the King, as long as he is rich, powerful, able to maintain their Interest; this is the Loyalty of the Leviathan, etc.  because he is God's Vicegerent, and because God hath obliged him to be subject, not only for wrath, but for conscience sake, can never be shaken from his good resolutions, and will be unalterably true to his Oaths and his Duty.  
And when so many Men eminent for their Piety, Learning and Station have unanimously agreed in delivering their Sentiments in this Point, to say, that whatever they said or did, was to gratify or advance their ambitious or covetous Appetites (as if their Honesty, like Quicksilver in a Weatherglass, risen higher or sunk lower, as the day proved clear or cloudy) is to bring an unjust Scandal on the Church and her most illustrious Champions, Men of great Probity and Wisdom, as the greatest Hypocrites and Time-servers in the World, who sacrificed their Consciences to their Desires of growing rich and powerful, while had the Times been contrary to them, they would have owned other Principles: This Imputation I shall wipe off, and show, that even in the worst of times, in the Marian Persecution, this Doctrine was publicly owned and asserted, when contrary to the Laws of Nature and Humanity, and the Rules of Christian Equity, the Protestants were most cruelly harras'd: 'Tis true, the Devil said to God of Job, Turn thy hand against him, and he will curse thee to thy face; but it was the Devil that said it, and he was a Liar from the beginning, and so it proved in the Case of Job; for when God altered his Methods, and treated the good Man, as if he had been his Enemy, Job was always the same, perfect, and upright, one that feared God, and eschewed evil.  
In this Catalogue I purposely omit Bishop Manwaring and Sibthorp in the Reign of CHARLES I. and Bish. Parker, Cartwright, etc. in the Reign of JAMES II. because their Authorities were in their own times excepted against, as of Men that did not write soberly on the Subject, resolving for the most part, to appeal to the Writings of such Men, who have been, and are esteemed the unquestionable true and orthodox Defenders of the Protestant Religion against her Romish Adversaries; and if such Authorities will not incline, and the Reasons of such eminent Authors persuade the Reader to be of my Opinion, I shall only say, I am sorry that I have lost my labour.   

THE AUTHORS.  

THE Articles Page 3  
Injunctions and Canons Page 4  
The Homilies Page 7  
The Liturgy Page 10  
The Orders of Bishop's Page 12  
University Censures Page 13  
The Institution of a Christian Man Page 19  
Bishops, Tonstal, Stokesly, and Bonner Page 20  
Tyndal the Martyr ibid.  
Bishop Latimer Page 21  
Archbishop Cranmer ibid.  
Sir John Cheek Page 22  
Martyrs and Confessors in Queen mary Reign Page 23  
Archbishop Sandys Page 26  
Bishop Jewel ibid.  
Bishop Bison Page 27  
Mr. Perkins Page 29  
Mr. Hooker ibid.  
Archbishop Bancroft Page 30  
Adrian Saravia ibid.  
King James I. Page 32  
Bishop Buckeridge Page 33  
Mr. Tho. Cartwright ibid.  
Archbishop Whitgift Page 34  
Dr. Fulke ibid.  
Bishop Carlton Page 34  
Bishop Andrews Page 35  
Bishop King ibid.  
Dr. Jackson Page 36  
Dr. Hakewil Page 37  
Dr. Bois Page 38  
Dr. Donne Page 40  
Archbishop of Spalata Page 41  
Archbishop Montagu Page 42  
Bishop Lake ibid.  
Mr. Dod Page 43  
Bishop Hall ibid.  
Bishop Davenant Page 47  
Archbishop Usher Page 48  
Archbishop Bramhal Page 50  
Bishop Brownrig Page 52  
King Charles I. Page 53  
Dr. Hammond ibid.  
Bishop Ferne Page 54  
Mr. Chillingworth Page 55  
Dudley Diggs ibid.  
Sir Edw. Coke Page 58  
Dr. Gerhard Longbaine ibid.  
Ric. Overton Page 59  
Bishop Saunderson Page 60  
Dr. Bernard Page 63  
Mr. Symmons Page 64  
Bishop Tailor Page 65  
Bishop Kenn Page 66  
Dr. Seth Ward, B. of Sarum ib.  
Dr. Lamplu, Bishop of Exon Page 70  
Bishop Hacket Page 71  
Dr. Sharp Page 72  
Bishop of Lincoln ibid.  
Dr. Burnet Page 73  
Bishop of S. Asaph Page 78  
Dr. Sprat, B. of Rochester ib.  
Mr. Thorndyke Page 79  
Dr. Spencer, Dean of Ely ib.  
Dr. Tillotson Page 80  
Dr. Stillingfleet Page 81  
Dr. Patrick Page 84  
Dr. Towerson Page 86  
Mr. Scrivener Page 88  
Mr. Glanvil Page 91  
Dr. Horneck Page 93  
Dr. Tennison ib.  
Dr. Hooper Page 94  
Dr. Hascard Page 95  
Dr. Falkner ib.  
Dr. Hicks Page 97  
Dr. South ib.  
Dr. John Moor Page 98  
Jeremiah in Baca; or a Fast-days Work, etc. Page 99  
Mr. Wake Page 100  
Dr. Beveridge Page 102  
Dr. Ironside ib.  
Dr. Isaac Barrow Page 103  
Dr. Cave ib.  
Dr. Dove Page 104  
D. Puller ib.  
Dr. Scott Page 105  
University Address presented by Dr. Gower Page 108  
Dr. Grove Page 109  
Mr. Hesketh Page 110  
Dr. Freeman Page 111  
Dr. Littleton Page 112  
Dr. Morris ib.  
Dr. Lake ib.  
Mr. Lynford Page 113  
Mr. Long Page 115  
Dr. Fowler Page 116  
The Faith and Practice of a Church of England Man Page 117  
Mr. pain Page 118  
J. Kettlewell Page 119  
Mr. beling Page 121  
Dr. Calamy Page 122  
The whole Duty of Man Page 125  
Erasmus ib.  
Grotius Page 126  
Beza ib.  
Luther ib.  
Calvin ib.  
Camero Page 127  
Is. Casaubon ib.  
Peter du Moulin Page 128  
Mons. Bochart Page 129  
David Blondel ib.  
Sam. Petit Page 130  
Mons Allix ib.  
Dr. Bourdieu ib.  
Le droit Souverain, etc. ib.    

THE HISTORY OF Passive Obedience Since the REFORMATION.  

INTRODUCTION.  
WHen Judicious Men undertake to determine what are the Doctrines of any Church, they do not guide themselves by the Practices, nor the Writings of some of her Members, but by the Positions which she hath publicly owned and asserted, and the Practices that are consonant thereunto; this being agreeable to the Counsel of our holy Saviour, who when he bids us 
* Mat. 7.15, 16.  To beware of false Prophets, who came in Sheep's Clothing, but inwardly are ravening Wolves, cautions us, that we shall know them by their fruits, i.e. Not by the Fruits of their Lives, but of their Doctrines. So does 
† Serm.  Bishop Sanderson interpret the Words, and so also does the Dean 
‖ Serm. on Nou. 5.1673. p. 28, 29.  of S. Paul 's: We think it most convenient to follow our Saviour's Rules to judge of men's Pretences, how great, and haughty soever, by the Fruits they produce, which Rule is not to be understood concerning the particular Actions of Men, which have no respect to their Doctrines; for as S. Chrysostom observes, many Heretics have been Men of excellent Lives,' and so on the contrary— but we are to understand it of those Fruits which their Doctrines have a direct influence upon; and therefore the Rule hath a particular respect to two things, by which we are to examine the fairest Pretences: 1. The Design they end to. 2. The Means made use of for the accomplishing this Design. If therefore the Design be quite of another Nature from that of the Gospel, if the means be such as are directly contrary to it, we may from thence justly infer, that how plausible soever the pretences are, how fine and soft soever the Sheep's clothing be, that inwardly they are ravening wolves. Thus that great Man determines it against the Jesuits in the very case of resisting, excommunicating, deposing and murdering Princes; and so do we all judge concerning the Church of Rome, many of her Members are doubtless loyal and peaceable, but their Church teaches them otherwise in the famous Lateran Council; 
* M. Payn's Sermon, Sept. 9.1683. pag. 20. Treason in Papists is like original sin to mankind, they all have it in their Natures, though many may deny it, or not know it.— But in Protestants it is like the Italian Distemper, it was first brought from another Country, and is no way natural to our own, though the Infection hath been taken by too many, who had an ill Temper prepared for it. Cons. Dr. Jackson's Works, Tom. 3. l. 12. ch. 8. p. 978.  their Loyalty and Peaceableness may be the Fruits of their Education, or their good temper, but not of their Faith, or as Dr. Sherlock says, they may be loyal, as Englishmen, but they cannot be so, as Papists.  
Would we therefore judge of the Doctrine of our Church, we must consult her Articles, Canons, public Homilies, public Offices of Devotion, General Orders of her Bishops, Censures of her Universities, and Writings of her greatest Men, who have vindicated her Doctrine, and explained her Belief; and this Method I shall use to discover what hath been owned by the Church of England, as to the Doctrine of Nonresistance, or Passive Obedience.   

CHAP. I. The Doctrine of the Thirty nine Articles.  
THE Articles of our Church have been always looked upon as the stated Doctrine of our whole Church, to which all her Priests are obliged to make their Subscriptions, they are allowed a place in the Body of the Confessions of the Protestant Churches, and are highly commended by Foreigners, as well as by our own Writers; for 
* Bishop Ridley's Farewell Letter apud Fox, tom. 3. p. 506.  this Church hath in matters of Controversy Articles so penned and framed after the Holy Scriptures, and grounded upon the true understanding of God's Word, that in short time, if they had been universally received, says Bishop Ridley the Martyr, they should have been able to have set in Christ's Church much concord and unity in Christ's true Religion, and to have expelled many false Errors and Heresies, wherewith this Church, alas! was almost overgone. Nor is this that excellent Prelate's peculiar Opinion, but of the whole Church, which ordains, 
† Can. 3. an. 1604.  That whosoever shall affirm, that the Church of England by Law established under the King's Majesty is not a true and Apostolical Church, teaching and maintaining the Doctrine of the Apostles, let him be excommunicated ipso facto. And Can. 5. Whosoever shall affirm, that any of the thirty nine Articles agreed in the Synod, 1562— be in any part superstitious, or erroneous, let him be excommunicate ipso facto.  
Anno 1552. In the Convocation held at London, Articles of Religion were agreed upon, of which the Thirty sixth runs thus,  
The Civil Magistrate is ordained, and allowed of God— and therefore is to be obeyed not only for wrath, but also for Conscience sake— And expressly asserts, That the Bishop of Rome hath no Jurisdiction in this Realm of England.  
In the Articles of our Church under Queen Elisabeth, anno. 1562. it runs thus, and so continues to this day.  
The Queen's Majesty hath the chief Power in this Realm of England, and other her Dominions, unto whom the chief Government of all Estates of this Realm, whether they be Ecclesiastical, or Civil, in all Cases doth appertain, and is not, nor aught to be subject to any Foreign Jurisdiction.  
And it is remarkable, 
‖ Rogers' Praef. to the 39th. Artic.  that these Articles of 1562. were published in the same year, in which the Massacre at Vassey in France was committed by the Duke of Guise, and when all the Protestants in the Country were sentenced to Death by the Parliament of Paris.  
It is true, this Doctrine is not limited to the particular Case of Subjects taking up Arms, but it seems to me by two necessary Consequences to be deduced from it. 1. Because if the Pope, who pretended by a Divine Right, had no power over Kings, much less have the People any power, who pretend to an inferior Right, that of Compact. 2. Because the Article makes no distinction, but excludes all other Power, as well as that of the Pope. And in truth, the Plea is the same on either side; the Pope says, as long as the Prince governs according to the Laws of God, and the Church (of which he is the Interpreter) so long the Censures of the Church do not reach him; and say the People, as long as the Prince governs according to the Laws of the Land (and of the meaning of those Laws themselves are the Interpreters) so long are they bound to be obedient; but as soon as the King doth any thing that may contradict the Pope, than he is (deservedly, say the Romanists) excommunicate, deposed and murdered; and when he usurps upon the People's Liberties, than he ought to be deposed by the People's; the Arguments on either side are the same, and for the most part the Authorities; for (as 
* Moderate. of the Church of England, ann. 17. §. 19 p. 481.  Dr. Puller well observes) both Papists and Dissenters deny the Supremacy of the King, one attributes it to the Pope originally; the other to the People: and the same Arguments that the Pope useth for his Supremacy over Kings, the Disciplinarians use for establishing their Sovereignty.   

CHAP. II. The Doctrine of the Injunctions and Canons.  
IN the Infancy of the Reformation under Henry the Eighth, (for there I begin the Restoration of Religion to her Purity in this Kingdom, as Dr. Burnet does.) 
† Burnet hist. Reform. l. 3. p. 226. tom. 1. And Fox. tom. 2. p. 387.  Anno 1536. Injunctions were issued out, the first of which is, That every Man that hath Cure of Souls, shall for the Establishment and Confirmation of the King's Authority and Jurisdiction— sincerely declare, manifest, and open for the space of one quarter of a year next ensuing once every Sunday, and after that at the least wise twice every Quarter in their Sermons and other Collations, that the Bishop of Rome 's usurped Power and Jurisdiction having no Establishment or Ground in the Law of God, was of most just Causes taken away and abolished,— and that the King's Power is in his Dominions the highest Power and Potentate under God, to whom all men within the same Dominions, by God's Commandment, own most Loyalty and Obedience, afore and above all other Potentates in Earth. Now if a King be above all other Powers, than he cannot be accountable to any other Power, and so ought not to be resisted.  
Anno 
* Burnet's Collect. of Records, p. 181.  1538. came out the Lord Cromwel's Injunctions, as they were called, wherein the same Duty is enjoined in the same Words. This also is the first of the Injunctions of Edw. the Sixth 
† Sparr. Collect. p. 1, 2.  An. 1547. (the Preface to which Injunctions acknowledges that part of them were formerly set out by Henry the Eighth, and the rest added by King Edward the Sixth.) This also was the first of the Injunctions of Queen Elizabeth, with a very little variation: and accordingly in the Articles of Enquiry of Archbishop Cranmer in the Diocese of Canterbury, under Edward the Sixth, the first is, Whether all Persons, etc. have preached against the usurped Power of the Bishop of Rome? Secondly, Whether they have preached, and declared at the least four times in the year, That the King's Majesty's Power, Authority, and Pre-eminence within his Realms and Dominions is the highest Power under God? Here the Injunction plainly distinguishes the claim of the Pope from other claims, implying, that our Church always believed that her Prince's Power was derived immediately from God, and that they were superior to all their Subjects, either singly or collectively, and so were not accountable to them, but only to God: and among Bishop Ridley's Articles of Visitation An. 1550. one is, Whether any do preach, or defend, that private persons may make Insurrection, stir Sedition, or compel Men to give them their Goods? Anno 1564. being the seventh Year of Queen Elizabeth, in the 
‖ Sparr. Collect. p. 123.  Articles for Preaching it is enjoined, That the Minister move all People to Obedience, as well in observation of the Orders appointed in the Book of Common Service, as in the Queen's Majesty's Injunctions; as also of all other civil Duties due for Subjects to do: and that all Preachers, Preaching Matters tending to Dissension, etc. shall be complained.  
At last the Injunctions were called Canons, and the first Canon An. 1603. in the first Year of King James, is the same in substance with the Injunction of Henry the Eighth, Edward the Sixth, and Queen Elizabeth; and for this reason, Can. 55. it is ordained, That every Minister should before his Sermon acknowledge the King to be in all Causes, and over all Persons, supreme Head and Governor, in more express terms than were formerly used.  
But particularly I look upon the Canons of the Year 1640. to be a full Explanation of the belief of our Church in this point. Now Can. 1. enjoins all former Laws, Ordinances, and Constitutions formerly made for the acknowledgement and profession of the most lawful and independent Authority of our dread Sovereign Lord the King's most excellent Majesty, to be carefully observed, and then descends to give an Explanation of the Royal Power and Authority; That the most sacred Order of Kings is of divine Right, being the Ordinance of God himself, founded in the prime Laws of Nature, and clearly established by express Texts both of the Old and New Testament: and for any Person or Persons to set up, maintain, or allow, in any their said Realms or Territories respectively, under any pretence whatsoever, any independent coactive Power, either Papal or Popular, (whether directly or indirectly) is to undermine their great Royal Office, and cunningly to overthrow that most Sacred Offfice, which God himself hath established, and so is treasonable against God, as well as against the King. For Subjects to bear Arms against their Kings, 
See the Doctrine of these Canons vindicated in Dr. Puller's Moderate. of the Ch. of Engl. c. 12. §. 6. p. 34.  offensive or defensive, upon any Pretence whatsoever, is at least to resist the Powers which are ordained of God; and though they do not invade, but only resist, St. Paul tells them plainly, They shall receive to themselves Damnation: while in the next Paragraph they show, that this Doctrine does not entitle the King to every Man's Estate.  
But against the Synod, that made these Canons, lies a great Objection (though I should have thought, that the hard Censures of it might have been spared, because no Synod of our Church, and perhaps none of any other Protestant Church hath so expressly condemned Popery, and Socinianism, the great Enemies of true Reformed Christianity, as this Synod hath done 
‖ V Art 3.4.  that it was not a Lawful Synod, because it was continued, and sat after the Parliament was Dissolved, and was by another Parliament Condemned; not to answer, that that very Parliament, that first Condemned this Synod, ruined even the Monarchy itself, nor that the Synods of old Provincial, or General were not dependent on the meeting of the States at the same time. I answer; First, that these Canons were made, and confirmed in full Convocation of both Provinces of Canterbury, and York, and the making of Canons being a work properly Ecclesiastical, these Canons were made by the Representatives of the whole Clergy of this Kingdom. 2. The Canons were confirmed by the King (which was all that was of old required in such Cases) and though the Convocation sat after the Dissolution of the Parliament, yet, 1. This is not without Precedent even in the happy Days of Queen Elizabeth, not to look back into Henry VIII. or the primitive Times. And 2. the Persons, who condemned this Synod are well known to have done it to justify their own Proceed, being resolved to ruin Episcopacy (and with it the Monarchy) and afterward by their own power they called an Assembly of Divines, and What a Confession of Faith, what Discipline, Rites, and Methods did they Establish? a Directory among other things, out of which they left the Lord's Prayer (perhaps because it 'twas a Form) the Apostles Creed (because themselves thought they could make a better) and the Ten Commandments (because the fifth plainly accused them of Rebellion against their Lawful Prince). And it is worth the observing that Sr. Edward Deering Speeches that were spoken with so much Virulence against this Synod (and afterwards Printed) were by the Order of the same House, who first applauded them, decreed to be Burnt by the hand of the Common Hangman. And if it be still objected, that the Canons were Reprobated since the Restitution of Charles II. I say, that I quote them, not as a Law, that obliges the Church, but as the known Sense of the Church of England at that time.   

CHAP. III. The Doctrine of the Homilies.  
THough the name of Homily hath been looked upon, and censured by unthinking People, as ridiculous, yet those admirable Sermons made by our first Reformers, as a body of practical Divinity, and a Confutation of the Errors and Idolatries of the Church of Rome, are, as Bishop Ridley said of the first Tome of them, 
* Apud Fox To. 3. p. 506.  Holy and wholesome Homilies, Recommendations of the principal Virtues, which are commended in Scripture, and against the most pernicious and capital Vices, that so, alas! do reign in this Realm of England. These we subscribe to, as containing wholesome Doctrine; 
† Dr. Stanley's Faith and Pract. c. 7. p. 192.  and every Man hereby sees what Opinions the Clergy are of, for they subscribe and assent to the Book of Articles and Homilies, and to the Book of Common Prayer. Many also have some regard to the Articles of An: 1640. They take the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, and the Test, etc. and Johnson says, That the Book of Homilies is the best Book in the World, next the Bible. And since a 
‖ D. Welw. Letter to M. March, p. 10.  late Author is so bold to say, that Passive Obedience, in the narrow sense we take it in, was not so much as thought on at the time of the publishing the Homilies, I must first ask him, How he came to be so well acquainted with the Thoughts of those venerable Men who wrote the Homilies, at this distance of time? What Communication hath he with the other World? or what peculiar Memoirs, that have scaped all the wise Men of our Church, who have been conversant with her Records, have fallen into his hands? And then I will show, that the Expressions of the Homilies are very full and plain, and exclusive of all Pretences to take up Arms against our lawful Superiors.  
The Homily or Exhortation to Obedience, 
Burnet's Hist. Ref. part 2. l. 1. c. 6.  was made An. 1547. in the Reign of K. Edward the Sixth; in the second part of which Sermon of Obedience we are told, that it is the calling of God's People to be patiented, and on the suffering side, and to render Obedience to Governors, although they be wicked, and wrong doers, and in no case to resist, and stand against them. Subjects are bound to obey them (i. e. Governors) as God's Ministers, although they be evil, not only for fear, but also for conscience sake: and here, good People, let us mark diligently, that it is not lawful for Inferiors and Subjects in any case to resist, and stand against the superior Powers; for St. Paul 's words be plain, That whoso withstandeth shall get to themselves Damnation. Our Saviour Christ and his Apostles received many and divers Injuries of the unfaithful and wicked men in Authority; yet we never read, that they, or any of them, caused any Sedition or Rebellion against Authority: we read oftne, that they patiently suffered all Troubles, Vexations, Slanders, Pangs, Pains, and Death itself obediently, without Tumult or Resistance. Christ taught us plainly, that even the wicked Rulers have their Power and Authority from God; and therefore it is not lawful for their Subjects to withstand them, although they abuse their Power. Let us believe undoubtedly (good Christian People) that we may not obey Kings,— if they command us to do any thing contrary to God's Commandments, in such a case we ought to say with the Apostle, We must rather obey God than Man; but nevertheless, in that case we may not in any wise withstand violently, or rebel against Rulers, or make any Insurrection, Sedition, or Tumults, either by force of Arms, or otherwise, against the Anointed of the Lord, or any of his appointed Officers; but we must in such case patiently suffer all wrongs and injuries, referring the judgement of our Cause only to God: and Part 3. of the same Homily. Ye have heard before of this Sermon of good Order and Obedience, manifestly proved both by Scriptures and Examples, that all Subjects are bound to obey their Magistrates, and for no cause to resist, or withstand, or rebel, or make any Sedition against them, yea, although they be wicked men.  
The second Book of Homilies was compiled in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth; and among them, the Homily against Disobedience and wilful Rebellion, is full to this purpose; 
* Part. 1.  In reading the holy Scriptures we shall find in very many, and almost infinite places, as well of the Old Testament as of the New, that Kings and Princes, as well the evil as the good, do reign by God's Ordinance, and that Subjects are bounden to obey them. The further and further any Earthly Prince doth swerve from the Example of the Heavenly Government, the greater plague he is of God's Wrath and Punishment, by God's Justice unto the Country and People over whom God for their Sins hath placed such a Prince and Governor. What shall Subjects do then? What a perilous thing were it to commit to Subjects the Judgement, which Prince is wise and godly, and his Government good, and which otherwise? as though the Foot must judge of the Head; an Enterprise very heinous, and which must needs breed Rebellion;— and is not Rebellion the greatest of all mischiefs?— A Rebel is worse than the worst Prince, and Rebellion worse than the worst Government of the worst Prince that hitherto hath been.— If we will have an evil Prince, when God shall send such a one, taken away, and a good one in his place, let us take away our Wickedness, which provoketh God to place such a one over us.— Shall the Subjects both by their Wickedness provoke God for their deserved punishment to give them an undiscreet and evil Prince, and also rebel against him, and withal against God, who for the punishment of their Sins did give them such a Prince. And this Doctrine is excellently enforced in the second part of that Homily from the Example of King David in his Carriage towards Saul. And one reason perhaps why these old plain Sermons are by some men despised, and evil spoken of, is, because they so hearty recommend this Doctrine of Nonresistance.   

CHAP. IU. The Doctrine of the Liturgy.  
TO our Homilies I subjoin the Liturgy of our Church, the most excellent body of public Prayers that the World owns. In the Morning and Evening Service for every day, God is said to be the only Ruler of Princes, exclusive of both Pope and People. To the understanding of which Collect, I shall give you the Paraphrase of Dr. Cumber. 
* Compan. to the Temple, part 1. § 23. p. 171. Ed. Fol.  The Church of England is famous above all other Churches for her entire Loyalty to the King; which may be seen not only in the Lives of the true Sons thereof, but in their Prayers, etc. 
† Id. p. 173.  God is the only Judge of the Actions of Princes, since they are his Servants and Substitutes; to their own Master they must stand or fall, and are only accountable to his Tribunal: and therefore we have so much the more need to pray for them to their great Lord, that he would direct them to do well, and guide them who are to rule us, that this their mighty Prince may be in safety and in peace: for if it should be otherwise (which God forbidden) we neither will nor can oppose them, having no other Arms against our Prince but Prayers and Tears. 
‖ Id. p. 174.  If he were a Saul or a Nero, we should sin in ceasing to pray for him. 
‡ Id. p. 176. v. p. 225.  It is natural to the true Sons of the Church of England to love the King.— If a foreign Prince opposes our King, he is a Robber; if 
* P. 177.  he be a Subject who rises against his Sovereign, he hath renounced Christianity with his Allegiance, 
☞  and is to be esteemed a Troubler of our Israel. Therefore whosoever they be that are Enemies to the King, and whatsoever the pretence be, we wish they may never prosper.  
In the Litany we pray God to deliver us from all Sedition, privy Conspiracy, and Rebellion; and Dr. Cumber 
† Part 2. § 2. p. 225.  says, That the Words Rebellion and Schism were put into the Litany since our late unhappy Civil Wars, that have given us reason to pray, From all Sedition, etc.  
In the Greek Liturgies he says it is thus expressed, From Civil Wars, etc. 
☜  but not one Word of this could he ever find in the Roman Missals that have come to his hands; it being the peculiar Glory of the Church of England, that her Prayers and Practices have always been eminently loyal, and Enemies to Treason and Rebellion. And he says farther, 
* Ib. p. 226, 227.  That Rebellion is a sin so contrary to Christianity, that though the Primitive Christians had all the Provocations imaginable, and Force sufficient, they never offered to rebel.— So that they who do rebel have divested themselves of the Christian Principles, and almost of their Humanity too.  
In the Prayer for the Parliament, We may say of our Princes as Pliny said of the good Emperor Trajan, they have freely yielded to rule by those Laws to which nothing but their own goodness could oblige them; and doubtless the People of England ought to take it as an Act of Grace that their Kings have consented to govern them on this manner.  
In the Prayer after the Commandments the King is said to be God's Minister, and we beg God, that all his Subjects duly considering that he hath God's Authority, may faithfully serve, honour, and humbly obey him according to God's blessed Word and Ordinance. And this is admirably commented; 
† Id. part 3. §. 4. p. 20.  We are to consider that Kings bear God's Name, and act by his Power; and such as rebel, do fight against God, oppose his Word, and resist his Ordinance, etc.  
In the occasional Office for Nou. 5. we pray God, That the King may cut off all such workers of Iniquity, as turn Religion into Rebellion, and Faith into Faction. And in the Office for May 29. when we thank God for the Restoration of the Royal Family, we beseech God to accept of our unfeigned Oblation of ourselves, vowing all holy Obedience in Thought, Word, and Work, unto the Divine Majesty, and promising in him, and for him, all dutiful Allegiance to his anointed Servant, and to his Heirs for ever. And it is also observable, the Proclamations relating to those solemn times are appointed to be read, which are as full to this purpose as any thing can be: and by our Canons, when the Minister bids Prayer before his Sermon, to continue the belief of this Truth, he is bound to exhort the People, when they pray, to acknowledge the King to be in all Causes and over all Persons, next and immediately under God supreme, etc.   

CHAP. V The Orders of our Bishops.  
BY the Orders of our Bishops I mean not so much the particular Injunctions, or Inquiries of our Prelates within their own particular Dioceses (though of such instances there is no want, as I have shown Chap. 2. from the Articles of Inquiry of Archbishop Cranmer, and the Articles of Visitation of Bishop Ridley, and could prove from many other such Instances) but the general Orders which have been sent from the Metropolitan to the whole Church; such Injunctions, when obeyed, aught to be looked on as the sense of the whole Church, unless we shall impeach either the Makers, or the Complyers, of dishonest Practices; especially when the Adversaries of the Church have given occasion to such Injunctions: thus when Knight (of whom I shall treat in the next Chapter) was censured at Oxford, the same Year some Cautions concerning Preachers and Preaching, were by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, with the King's Consent, as the Law required, sent to the several Bishops of their Provinces to be put in execution in their several Dioceses. The Directions are dated Aug. 4. 1622. of which the first requires, That no Preacher, etc. shall fall into any set course, or common place, otherwise than by opening the Coherence, and division of his Text, which shall not be comprehended and warranted in essence, substance, effect, or natural inference, within some one of the Articles of Religion set forth Ann. 1562. or in some one of the Homilies set forth by Authority, etc. The fourth is, That no Preacher, of what Title or Denomination soever, shall presume from henceforth in any Auditory within this Kingdom, to declare, limit, or bound out by way of positive Doctrine, in any Lecture or Sermon, the Power, Prerogative, Jurisdiction, Authority, or duty of Sovereign Princes, or therein meddle with Matters of State, and Reference between Princes and People, than as they are instructed in the Homily of Obedience, and in the rest of the Homilies, and Articles of Religion, set forth by Public Authority.  
These Injunctions were again renewed and reinforced in the days of King Charles the Second, and in the next Reign: and in the Articles of the present Archbishop of Canterbury, 
* July 16. 1638. Art 7.  the Clergy are expressly enjoined, That in their Sermons they should four times in the Year, at least, teach the People, That the King's Power being in his Dominions highest under God, all Priests should upon all occasions persuade the People to Loyalty and Obedience to his Majesty in all things lawful, and to patiented Submission in the rest, promoting, as far as in them lies, the public Peace, and Quiet of the World.  
And agreeably to this Doctrine were the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, especially the later, framed, which though particularly made against the Papists, yet as Bishop Sanderson well observes, where the Reason of making and imposing an Oath is particular, 
Praelect. 7. de juram.  but the words of the Oath are general, there the Oath obliges according to the sense of the words in their utmost latitude; as, says he, for Example, in the Oath of Supremacy, to the making of which the Usurpation of the Pope gave occasion; the words being all general, do exclude all Persons from exercising that Supreme Power in this Kingdom. And every Clergyman especially aught to reflect, how often he hath solemnly professed and averred; That it is not lawful upon any pretence whatsoever to take Arms against the King, or any commissioned by him, etc. and to remember, that that Declaration was enjoined in opposition to the Doctrines of the year 1641, the Men of which age asserted, That the Power of Kings, was given them by the People, and might be resumed by the Donors; that the King was  with the States, and that his Politic differed from his personal Capacity. Now the occasion of the making a Law, and the preamble of it are looked on, as the best Interpreters of the words of a Law.   

CHAP. VI The Censures of our Universities.  
NOR are the Censures of our most famous Universities in this case to be neglected, or looked on slightly; it is well known, what a Repute the Judgement of the single College of the Sorbone hath at Paris, and how much the Authority of the Foreign Universities, together with our own, swayed with King Henry the Eighth, and persuaded the Christian World to credit the Justice of his Divorce.  
Now I shall not mention the Censure of the Mille manus Petition, as it was called, in which both the Universities most amicably agreed, resolving only to give an account of the Proceed at Oxford in the Years 1●22, 1647, and 1683; the Decree of 1622, was made the 25th of June in full Convocation on this occasion. 
† Antiqu. Oxon. l. 1. p. 326, 327, etc.  Mr. Knight of Broadgate Hall, (now Pembroke College) preaching at S. Peter's in the East on Palm-Sunday upon 1 Kings 19.9. What dost thou here Elijah? started this Question, Whether it were lawful for Subjects in the defence of themselves, when persecuted for Religion, to take Arms against their Prince? which he held in the Affirmative; for which Doctrine, when he was convened by the Vicechancellor, he pleaded the Authority of Paraeus, in his Commentary on the xiii. to the Romans, and the Example of King James, who assisted the Rochellers against their King; and was for that reason sent to Prison, the Vicechancellor making the Bishop of St. David's (Laud, who in May of the same Year had his Conference with Fisher the Jesuit) acquainted with it, from whom the King was informed; who ordered Knight and his Sermon to be sent up, the Author being committed a Prisoner to the Gatehouse in Westminster, where he lay two Years; and at last, by the intercession of one of his Fellow Prisoners with Bishop Williams, was released; and having asked the King's Pardon, went into Holland, where in a short time he died.  
When Knight was complained of, the King sent to the Vicechancellor, to enjoin the Students of Divinity to lay the Foundation of their Studies (next to the holy Scriptures) in the Fathers and Councils, and to abstain from the Writings of either Jesuits or Puritans: and accordingly, the Heads of Colleges, the Professors, etc. met in Convocation (the Bishops, that were then about the Court, having condemned the Doctrine (and the Books that contained it) as seditious, and contrary to the holy Scriptures, the Decrees of Councils, and Dictates of the Fathers, and to the Doctrine and Constitutions of the Church of England) and censured among others this Proposition, 
* Proposit. 2. v. Antiqu. Oxon. p. 327.  That Subjects, not private Persons, but inferior Magistrates, may take Arms to defend themselves, the Commonwealth, the Church, and true Religion, against their Sovereign, or the superior Magistrate, upon these Conditions; If 1. The Prince turn Tyrant. 2. If he compel his Subjects to commit Idolatry, or to blaspheme. 3. When any great injury is done. 4. If they cannot otherwise be safe in their Fortunes, their Lives, and Consciences: upon condition also, 5. That under the pretext of Religion, or Justice, they do not seek their own advantage; and 6. That their Arms be managed with much moderation, Moderamine inculpatae tutelae. These are the Terms of the Proposition; and the Censure of the University runs thus, This Proposition is false and seditious, and so craftily restrained under such Conditions annexed, as every seditious Person may make use of to vindicate himself. And the third Proposition, which is of the same kind, is alike condemned: so that it is no wonder that Gillespy, in the Preface to his Sermon, calls this Doctrine the new Oxford Divinity; and I wish no worse had been ever broached or owned there.  
Nor did the University rest here, but withal decreed and declared, That according to the Canon of the holy Scriptures, Subjects ought by no means forcibly to resist their Prince; and that it is not lawful to take Arms either offensive or defensive against the King upon the account of Religion, or any other Pretence; requiring all the Members of the Convocation to subscribe the Censures, and enjoining all that should be admitted to any Degrees, to take an Oath to consent to the determinations of that Convocation; while the Commentary of Paraeus was burned in the Churchyard of St. Mary's at Oxford, at Paul's Cross in London; as it was likewise burned at Cambridge; that University joining with her Sister of Oxford in the Condemnation of those seditious Doctrines.  
For as a 
* Doublet. Ep. ad Gerh. Voss.  learned Foreigner, who at that time was upon the spot, informs, that Knight citing for his Opinion the Authority not only of Paraeus, but also of Bucanus and Junius Brutus, affirming further, that it was the Opinion of all the Reformed Divines, and illustrating it by this instance, that If the King of France should (while his Army laid Siege to any Town of the Protestants his Subjects) happen to fall by the hand of any of the besieged, he was justly slain, nor was he that killed him guilty of any crime; both the Universities condemned the Doctrine: and though at Oxford only Paraeus' Book was burned, yet at Cambridge they also burned Bucanus' Common places, and Junius Brutus (or Hubert Languet's) Vindiciae, and damned the Authors to perpetual Infamy; my Author adding, that the Cambridge Doctors were the more fierce of the two, whether because they hated the Puritans, or were the Majority of them at least, Remonstrants; the Censure of that University Doublet saw, when he was at the Commencement, it being put into his Hands by him who drew it up, upon his promise not to transcribe it. What hindered its publication, I know not, while the same year Dr. David Owen published his Antiparaeus seu Determinat. de Jure Regio adv. David. Paraeum at Cambridge, anno sc. 1622. Octavo, in which the Doctrine of Resistance is throughly confuted. This Censure, and the Execution done upon his Book much troubled the old Paraeus. And his Son 
* Append. in Comment. ad Rom 13.5 vit. Paraei.  says, that his Father meant, what he wrote, not of Kings endowed with an absolute power, but of such as were admitted to their Crowns upon condition; while the illustrious Hugo Grotius thought so well of it, that he hath inserted it at large in his Works 
† Vot. pro pace ad Art 16. p. 661.  with a high commendation, affirming, That the Reverend Memory of King James the first, the wisest King of Great Britain, and the honour which he owed to the University of Oxford, which at that time foresaw the Calamities which England afterward suffered, and a just fear lest the pernicious Doctrine might do more mischief, engaged him to reprint the Censure. To which Determination Dr. Prideaux, Dr. Abbot, and the other eminent Men of that time gave their suffrage.  
Anno 1647, June 1. The same famous Academy met in Convocation, and declared their Judgement concerning the Solemn League and Covenant, and a few of their Reasons, why they could not take that Covenant I shall transcribe, 
* Ad calc. vit. Sanderson. p. 174.  as they were drawn up by Bishop Sanderson.  
1. We cannot take the Oath without acknowledging in the Imposers a greater power, than for aught appeareth to us, hath been in former times challenged— 
† P. 181.  3. We cannot take the Oath without manifest danger of Perjury, 
‖ P. 182.  the Oath being contrary to the Oath of Supremacy by us taken. 
‡ P. 201, 202.  We are not satified in being obliged to preserve the King's person, and Authority in the preservation and defence of the true Religion, and the Liberties of the Kingdom, forasmuch as 1. No such limitation of our Duty in that behalf is to be found either in the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance (which no Papist would refuse to take with such a Limitation) nor in the Protestation, nor in the Word of God. 3. Such a Limitation leaves the Duty of the Subject at so much looseness, and the safety of the King at so great uncertainty, 
☞  that whensoever the People shall have a mind to withdraw their Obedience, they cannot want a pretence from the same for so doing. 4. Hereby we make ourselves guilty of an actual and real diminution of his Majesty's Power and Greatness, which in the same Breath we call the World to witness with our Consciences, that we had no thought to diminish, etc. 
P. 210, 211.  The Tyranny and Yoke of Antichrist, if laid upon the Necks of Subjects by their lawful Sovereigns, 
☜  is to be thrown off by Christian Boldness in confessing the truth, and patiented suffering for it, not by taking up Arms, or violent resisting the higher Powers. 
Pag. 217 — Because some have inferred from the very Order, that the Defence of the King's Person, and Authority ought to be with subordination to the preservation of the Rights, and Privileges of Parliaments, and the Liberties of the Kingdom, therefore we cannot take this Oath.— Especially being told in a late Pamphlet, 
P. 219.  that the King, not having preserved the Liberties of the Kingdom, etc. as of duty he ought, is thereby become a Tyrant, and so ceaseth to be a King, and consequently that his Subjects cease to be Subjects, and owe him no longer Subjection; which Assertion since we hearty detest as false and scandalous in the Supposition, and in the Inference seditious and devilish, we dare not by subscribing this Article give the least countenance thereto.— And that we may take the Covenant in our own sense is contrary to the nature and end of an Oath, which must be full of simplicity, 
P. 223.  contrary to the end of Speech, etc. and will bring a scandal upon our Religion, that we practise that ourselves that we condemn in the Paqists, viz. Swearing with Jesuitical Equivocations, and mental Reservations, that we play fast and lose with God, in as much as what we swear to day in one sense, we may swear the direct contrary to morrow in another. 
P. 225. — And if this would satisfy the Conscience, we might with a good Conscience not only take the Covenant, but even subscribe to the Council of Trent also, yea, and to the Turkish Alcoran: 
P. 229.  if the King should not protect us, but neglect his part too, having power and ability to perform it, his voluntary neglect ought not to free us from the faithful performance of what is to be done on our part.  
Ann. 1683. July. 21. in a full Convocation many opinions were condemned that had been published in divers Books, and writings in English, and also in the Latin tongue, 
P. 2.  repugnant to the holy Scriptures, decrees of Councils, writings of the Fathers, the Faith, and profession of the Primitive Church: and also destructive of the Kingly Government, the safety of his Majesty's Person, the public Peace, the Laws of Nature, and Bonds of Humane Society, as  
Proposition 1. All civil Authority is derived originally from the People.  
Proposition 2. There is a mutual compact tacit, or express, between a Prince, and his Subjects: and if he perform not his Duty, they are discharged from theirs.  
Proposition 3. 
P. 3.  that if Lawful Governors become Tyrants, or Govern otherwise, than by the Laws of God and Man they ought to do, they forfeit the Right they had unto their Government.  
Prop. 7. Self-preservation is the Fundamental Law of Nature, and supersedes the Obligation of all others, when they stand in competition with it.  
Prop. 8. The Doctrine of the Gospel concerning patiented suffering of Injuries, is not inconsistent with violent resisting of the higher Powers in case of Persecution for Religion.  
Pr. 9 
P. 4.  There lies no obligation upon Christians to Passive Obedience, when the Prince commands any thing against the Laws of our Country: and the Primitive Christians chose rather to die than to resist, because Christianity was not yet settled by the Laws of the Empire. And besides the Condemnation of the Doctrines, the Books of Milton, 
P. 7.  Baxter, Goodwin, Owen, Johnson, etc. were ordered to be publicly burnt by the Hand of the Marshal in the Court of the Schools, as Books that were fitted to deprave men's Manners, stir up Seditions and Tumults, overthrow States and Kingdoms, and lead to Rebellion, Murder of Princes, and Atheism itself: And a Prohibition issued, forbidding the Reading any of the said Books under great Penalties.  
This Decree was drawn up by Dr. Jane, Dean of Gloucester, and the King's Professor of Divinity at Oxon, and subscribed by the Vicechancellor, other Professors, and the whole Convocation. And pursuant to this Decree Parkinson, a Fellow of Lincoln-College, for maintaining, that the Right and Foundation of all Power was in the People, that Kings are accountable for their Maleadministration, etc. And particularly, that King Charles the First was justly put to death, for making War upon his Subjects, was an. 1684. expelled the University.  
And it is observable, that our excellent Homilies, that so expressly require Obedience to Princes, and condemn Rebellion and Resistance upon any pretence whatsoever, were Printed at the Theatre the same year that the abovementioned Decree was made.   

CHAP. VII. The Opinions of Learned Men.  
WHen Men would know what are the Sentiments of any Church in her Articles or Sanctions, the most rational Course is to make inquiry among those who were concerned in making them, or those who may be presumed best to understand them, by reason of their nearness to the time, their acquaintance with the Compilers, or their extraordinary Sagacity and Honesty; and of suchpeople in the Church of England must we make Inquiry concerning the Doctrine of Obedience and Nonresistance. In 
* Burn. hist. Ref. part. 1. l. 3. p. 245.  the Days of Henry the Eighth, when the Reformation began to dawn, an. 1537. a Convocation was held, upon the Conclusion of which there was Printed an Explanation of the chief Points of Religion, signed by nineteen Bishops, eight Arch-Deacons, and seventeen Doctors of Divinity and Law, in which there was an Exposition of the Creed, the Ten Commandments, &c: But this was but a rude Draught, the beauteous Strokes were given it 
† Id. p. 286.  anno 1540 when a select number of Bishops sat by Virtue of a Commission from the King confirmed in Parliament (among which were Cranmer, Ridley, Redman, and other extraordinary men) their first work was to draw up a Declaration of the Christian Doctrine for the necessary Erudition of a Christian Man, in which the Commentary on the fifth Commandment thus instructs us: Subjects be bound not to withdraw their Fealty, Truth, Love and Obedience towards their Prince for any Cause whatsoever it be, nor for any cause they may conspire against his person, nor do any thing towards the hindrance or hurt thereof, or of his Estate. And this they prove out of Rom. 13. Whosoever resists the power, resists the ordinance of God; and they that resist the ordinance of God, shall get to themselves damnation. And ●n the sixth Commandment, No Subjects may draw their Swords against their Prince for any Cause whatsoever it be. So that hereby we see, that the Declaration made in the Reign of Charles the Second, (That it is not lawful upon any pretence whatsoever, etc. (is not Novel Doctrine, but the old Doctrine of the Church of England even in the infancy of its Reformation.— And again, Although Princes, which be the Supreme Heads of their Realm, do otherwise than they ought to do, yet God hath assigned no Judges over them in this World, but will have the Judgement of them reserved to himself, and will punish them when he sees his time. And Ann. 1542. 
‖ Id. Coll. of Record. n. 26. p. 252. V Fox to. 2 p. 346, 347.  it is expressly enjoined by the Bishop of London to his Clergy, Item, That every of you do procure and provide of your own a Book called The Institution of a Christian Man, otherwise called the Bishop's Book, and that you and every of you do exercise yourselves in the same according to such Precepts as hath been given heretofore, or hereafter to be given. So that I suppose the Book to have been the whole duty of Man of those days.  

SECT. I.  
The Popish Bishops, Tonstal and Stokesly, in their Letter to Cardinal Pool, 
* Apud Fox to. 2. p. 351, 352.  prove out of St. Austin, St. Chrysostom, and other Fathers, That a King is accountable to God only for his Faults; that he hath no Peer upon Earth, being greater than all Men, and inferior but to God alone, etc. and from hence they show, That the Pope's Power (and by parity of Argument the Power of the People) to depose Kings is a Doctrine that will be to his own Damnation, if he repent not; whereas he ought to obey his Prince according to the Doctrine of St. Peter and St. Paul: nay Bonner himself, 
Ap. eund. p. 673.  as he wrote the Preface to the Book of true Obedience, so in his Sermon at Paul's Cross, Ann. 1549. in the beginning of the Reign of Edward the Sixth, declares, That all such as rebel against their Prince, get to themselves Damnation; and those that resist the higher Power, resist the Ordinance of God; and he that dieth in Rebellion is utterly damned, and so loseth both Body and Soul,— what pretences soever they have; as Corah, Dathan, and Abiram, for Rebellion against Moses, were swallowed down alive into Hell, although they pretended to sacrifice to God. So much of the Doctrine of the Reformation did even Bonner himself at that time own▪ and this also was the Opinion of the Protestants of that Age; for 
† Ap. eund. to. 2. p. 592  among the Heresies and Errors collected by the Popish Bishops out of the Martyr Tyndal's Book, called the Obedience of a Christian Man, this is the fourth, he faith, fol. 113. that a Christian Man may not resist a Prince being an Infidel, and an Ethnic, and that this takes away free will; or as it is in the 
‖ Inter addend.  Latin, Non licere Christiano resistere Principi Infideli, & Ethnico. Tollit libertatem arbitrii. Where observe, that the Papists looked upon it as if Tindal had said, that it was impossible to do so; whereas he only means, that a Christian ought not to resist, etc. for the Words are thus explained; 
‡ Ibid.  St. Peter willeth us to be subject to our Princes, 1 Pet. two. St. Paul also doth the like, Rom. xiii. who was also himself subject to the Power of Nero: and although every Commandment of Nero against God he did not follow, yet he never made resistance against the Authority and State of Nero, as the Pope useth to do against the State not only of Infidels but also of Christian Princes.   

SECT. II.  
In the Reign of Edward the Sixth the true Religion began to flourish, and at that time old Father Latimer was famous for a plain and honest Preacher; 
* Fol. 56.  he in his fourth Sermon before the King telling the Audience what Conference he had with my Lord Darsey in the Tower, subjoins, that when that Lord pleaded that he had been always faithful, and had he seen the King in the Field he would have yielded his Sword to him on his Knees, he replied, Marry, but in the mean season you played not the part of a faithful Subject in holding with the People in a Commotion and Disturbance: it hath been the cast of all Traitors to pretend nothing against the King's Person; they never pretend the matter to the King, but to others; Subjects may not resist any Magistrates, nor aught to do any thing contrary to the King's Laws. And to put the matter out of all doubt, in his Afternoon 
† Matth. xxii. 21.  Sermon at Stamford he says, If the King should require of thee an unjust Request, yet art thou bound to pay it, and not to resist, nor rebel against the King. The King indeed is in peril of his Soul for ask an unjust Request, and God will in his due time reckon with him for it; but thou must obey the King, and not take upon thee to judge him, for God is the King's Judge, etc. and know this, that whensoever there is an unjust Exaction laid upon thee, it is a plague and punishment for thy Sin. We marvel that we are plagued as we be, and I think verily, this unjust and unfaithful dealing with our Princes is one great cause of our plague: look therefore every Man upon his Conscience; ye shall not be judged by worldly Policy at the latter day.  
Archbishop Cranmer, in his Letter to Queen Mary (whatever his fear might otherwise betray him to do) confesses, 
Ap. Fox, to. 3. p. 672.  That the Imperial Crown, and Jurisdiction of this Realm, is taken immediately from God to be used under him only, and is subject unto none but God alone; 
‖ p. 674.  and afterward averrs, That as the Pope taketh upon him to give the Temporal Sword to Kings and Princes, so doth he likewise take upon him to depose them from their imperial States, if they be disobedient to him; and commandeth the Subjects to disobey their Princes, assoiling the Subjects as well of their Obedience as of their lawful Oaths made unto their true Kings and Princes contrary to God's Commandment, who commandeth all Subjects to obey their Kings, or their Rulers over them. It is not to be denied that this great Man was for the Lady Jane; but besides his Temper, I have this to say for him, that the several and contrary Acts of Parliament, limiting and changing the Succession according to the King's Pleasure in the latter end of Henry the Eighth's Reign, might very well in such a juncture of Affairs as happened on the Death of Edward the Sixth, stagger a wise Man, and incline him to believe, that the Son had the same Right that his Father had (as unquestionably he had, if it were a Right of the Crown) especially while that Right was recognised and confirmed in Parliament.  
To this excellent Prince was Sir John Cheek a Tutor, as he also was the Restorer of the Greek Tongue in England: he in his Advice of the True Subject to the Rebel, 
Ed. Oxon. 1641. p. 2, 3, 4.  or the hurt of Sedition, thus bespeaks the Rebels of that Age; For ourselves, we have great cause to thank God, by whose Religion, and holy Word daily taught us, we learn not only to fear him truly, but also to obey our King faithfully, and to serve in our own Vocation like Subjects honestly— ye, which be bound by God's Word not to obey for fear, like Men-pleasers, but for conscience sake, like Christians, have contrary to God's holy will, whose Offence is everlasting Death, and contrary to the godly Order of Quietness set out by the King's Majesty's Laws, the breach whereof is not unknown to you, taken in hand, uncalled of God, unsent by Men, unfit by reason, to cast away your bounden Duties of Obedience, etc.— yet ye pretend, that partly for God's sake, partly for the Commonwealth's sake, ye do rise.— How do you take in hand to reform? Be you Kings, by what Authority, or by what Succession? Be you the King's Officers, by what Commission? Be you called by God, by what Tokens declare you that?— Ye rise for Religion, what Religion taught you that? If you were offered Persecution for Religion, you ought to fly, so Christ teacheth you; and yet you intent to fight: if you would stand in the truth, you ought to suffer like Martyrs, and you slay like Tyrants, thus for Religion you keep no Religion, and neither will follow the Counsel of Christ, nor the constancy of Martyrs: whatever the Causes be, that have moved your wicked Affections herein, 
Pag. 11.  (as they be unjust Causes, and increase your Faults much) the thing itself, the Rising, I mean, must needs be wicked and horrible before God; and the usurping of Authority, and taking in hand rule, which is the sitting in God's Seat of Justice, a proud climbing up into God's high Throne, must needs be not only cursed newly by him, but also hath been often punished afore of him, and that which is done to God's Officers, 
Pag. 12.  God accounteth it done to him.— Ye be bound in God's Word to obey your King, and is it no Breach of Duty to withstand your King? See also Bishop Hooper's Comment on the Fifth Commandment.   

SECT. III.  
But the outward Felicity of the Church, as it was very great under Edward the Sixth, so it was short-lived; a black Storm gathering under Queen Mary, and at last falling severely upon her Protestant Subjects, who dealt with her as they were in duty bound; they assisted her cheerfully till she got her Crown, and when contrary to her Duty, and her Promises she persecuted them, some of them resolutely suffered Martyrdom, others, as our Saviour advises, fled into Foreign Countries for Protection, the great Men of that Party solemnly disowning the Principle of taking up Arms against their Sovereign, even when she had falsified her promises to them. And this is attested by more than a few of the greatest Men of that Reign, 
‖ Burn. Hist. Res. part. l. 2. p. 285.  the Bishops of Exeter, S. david's, and Gloucester, Taylor, Philpot, Bradford, Crome, Sanders, Rogers, Laurence and others, who having given an account of their Principles conclude thus, as the Historian says, These things they declared, that they were ready to defend, as they often had before offered, and concluded, charging all People to enter into no Rebellion against the Queen, but to obey her in all points, except where her Commands were contrary to the Law of God. But their own words will most properly give us their meaning, as 
* Tom. 3. p. 100, etc.  Fox records. Because we hear, that it is determined to send us speedily out of the Prisons of the King's Bench, etc. (where at present we are, and of a long time some of us have been, not as Rebels, Traitors, seditious persons, Thiefs, or Transgressor's of any Laws of this Realm, Inhibitions, Proclamations, or Commandments of the Queen's Highness, or of any of the Councils, God's Name be praised therefore, but only for the Conscience we have to God, and to his most holy Word and Truth) to one of the Universities there to dispute— We writ and send abroad this our Faith— humbly requiring, and in the Bowels of our Saviour Christ, beseeching all that fear God to behave themselves as obedient Subjects to the Queen's Highness, and the superior Powers which are ordained of God under her; rather after our Example to give their Heads to the Block, than in any point to rebel, or once to mutter against the Lord's anointed, we mean our Sovereign Lady Queen Mary, into whose Heart we beseech the Lord of Mercy plentifully to pour the Wisdom, and Grace of his Holy Spirit now, and for ever. Amen. First, we confess, and believe all the Canonical Books of the Old Testament, etc. And having reckoned up what Doctrines they owned, and what they condemned, they go on thus— And we doubt not, but we shall be able to prove all our Confessions here to be most true, by the Verity of God's Word, and Consent of the Catholic Church— In the mean season, as obedient Subjects, we shall behave ourselves towards all that be in Authority, and not cease to pray to God for them, that he would govern them all generally, and particularly with the Spirit of Wisdom and Grace; and so we hearty desire, and humbly pray all Men to do, 
☞  in no point consenting to any kind of Rebellion or Sedition against our Sovereign Lady the Queen's Highness; but where they cannot obey, but they must disobey God, then to submit themselves with all patience and humility to suffer, as the will and pleasure of the highest powers shall adjudge, as we are ready through the goodness of the Lord to suffer whatsoever they shall adjudge us unto, rather than we will consent to any Doctrine contrary to this, which we here confess, unless we shall be convinced thereof either by Writing, or by Word, etc. and the Lord of Mercy endue us all with the Spirit of his Truth, and Grace of Perseverance, therein unto the end. Amen. May 8, Anno Dom. 1554.  
This Letter was subscribed by Bishop Ferrar, Bishop Hooper, and Bishop Coverdale, and by nine others, who were the Flower of Confessors at that time. And if it be objected, that Wyat's Rebellion happened the same year, and that he took Arms upon the Account of Religion, I answer, 1. Were it so, this was the fault of but a few discontented Protestants, not the fault of their Religion and Principles, but of their Passions. 2. Nor did those Discontents take Arms for Religion, as the Historian says expressly: 
* Burn. ubi supra. p. 269.  For when Wyatt made his Proclamation at Maidstone, he professed, that he intended nothing but to preserve the Liberty of the Nation, and keep it from coming under the Yoke of Strangers, which he said all the Council except one or two were against, and assured the People, that all the Nobility and chief Men of England would concur with him. (Now the Generality of the Nation was then Papist, the Nobility and Gentry especially, and so could not be presumed to take Arms for the Protestant Religion.) He said nothing of Religion, but in private assured those that were for the Reformation, that he would declare for them.— And his Demands 
† P. 270.  have no relation to Religion, but to the Command of the Tower, and that the Queen should be under his Guard, etc. The same 
‖ Ibid.  Historian affirming, that the Rebellion was not at all raised upon the pretence of Religion, which according to the Printed Account set out by the Queen's Order was not so much as once named, and that Poynet Bishop of Winchester was not in it, 
P. 171.  etc. and that Christopherson's Book on this Subject was but a Flourish of his Wit, and no decisive proof. And I cannot learn but that Wyatt as well as Dudley died a Papist. 'Tis true, some of his Adherents pretended Religion (as there are, and will be wicked Men of all Persuasions) but they did but pretend Religion as Mr. Bradford (one of the Writers of the aforementioned Letter) said of them in his Exhortation to the Professors of the Gospel in England: but, 
☜  as he adds, they were Hypocrites, and under the Cloak of the Gospel would have debarred the Queen's Highness of her Right, but God would not so cloak them.  
This therefore was the Sentiment of our Confessors at home, during the Reign of Queen Mary, and I doubt not, but it was the Sense of their Brethren the Confessors abroad (as I shall make it appear from the Writings of the Bishop's Jewel and Sandys) whatever the Author of the History of the Troubles at Francfort says to the contrary, who was well known to be a party, and for that reason not fit to give such evidence 
* P. 195.  as he does, that the greatest Traitors and Rebels King Edward had in the West Parts were Priests, and such as had subscribed to the Book, or whatsoever by Law was then in force— But in all the Stirs which have happened either since the Queen's Majesty came to the Crown, or before, I have not heard of so much as one (Minister, or other) that hath lifted up his hand against her Majesty, or State, whom it pleaseth the malicious Man to term Precisian and Puritan, Traitor and Rebel. While this Author hath forgot what before he recorded, 
* Pag. 44, 45.  That Knox their Patriarch was banished from Francfort for High Treason against the Emperor of Germany. And not long after the History was written, Hacket and his Companions would have convinced him, that the Men of his Party can be Rebels.   

SECT. iv  
Under Queen Elisabeth the Truth broke from behind the Cloud, and shone triumphantly; and as Truth is always the same, so it appeared in this particular Doctrine: Archbishop Sandys was one of the Confessors of that Age, and from him we learn, 
† Serm. 3. p. 51.  That if we despise Government, and speak evil of them that be in Authority, if we mutter and murmur against the Principality of Moses and Aaron, if we loathe the present State, and seek after Alterations, then shall the Blessings of God turn into Curse. 
‖ Id. Ser. 4. p. 67.  As we should pray for all Men, so chief for Kings (and undoubtedly it is unlawful to rebel against those whom we are bound to pray for.) In Paul 's time the Kings and Rulers of the People were Ethnics, Tyrants, Enemies to Christ, and cruel Persecutors of the Gospel, whereupon some thought it not convenient for the Church to pray for them, who sought to destroy it, S. Paul abateth this Opinion, teaching them, that they should chief pray for such, as for Men in greatest danger, and most needing the help of their Prayers, pray for him that prayeth not for himself,— We must pray for ill Princes, because the King's Heart is in God's Hand, that he may turn their minds, and stay their Persecutions, etc. to pour out Supplications, 
Pag. 68  that God would grant them a long life, a safe Government, a sure dwelling, 
Tertull.  valiant Soldiers, faithful Counsellors, a good People, and a quiet world, and whatsoever the Hearts of Men or Kings do desire, (and I am sure such a Prayer is not reconcileable with resistance) and let all such as will not say Amen to this Prayer, assure themselves, that they are neither dutiful Christians, nor faithful Subjects.  
Thus also speaks Bishop Jewel, 
* Def. of the Apol p. 15.  We teach the People as S. Paul doth, to be subject to the highest Powers, not only for fear, but also for conscience; we teach them, that whosoever striketh with the Sword by private Authority, shall perish with the Sword; if the Prince happen to be wicked, or cruel, or burdensome, we teach them to say with S. Ambrose, Tears and Prayers be our Weapons. 
☜   
Anno 1586. Bishop Bilson Printed his Book of the true difference between Christian Subjection, and unchristian Rebellion. And therein says, 
* P. 260.  Deliverance if you would have, obtain it by prayer, and expect it in peace, 
P. 262.  these be Weapons for Christians— the Subject hath no refuge against his Sovereign, but only to God by prayer and patience.— Christ foreteaching his Disciples, 
P. 256.  that they should be brought before Kings and Rulers, and put to death, and hated of all Men for his Names sake, addeth not, as you would have it, he that first rebels, but he that endureth to the end shall be saved. 
P. 278. — Your Spanish Inquisitions and French Massacres are able to set grave and good Men at their wit's end, and to make them justly doubt, since you refuse the course of all divine and human Laws, with them, whether by the Law of Nature they may not defend themselves from such barbarous Bloodsuckers— if the Laws of the Land where they do converse, do permit them, etc.  
This last Quotation I have transcribed, that I might answer the Authority, which some Men use to prove, that it is lawful in some Cases for Subjects to resist. For were this true: yet 1. This is but one Doctor's Opinion, contrary to the Doctrine of the Church (and that with a limitation which concerns not us) nor do we pretend, that any Man is infallible. 2. Bishop Bilson had been in other things very much deceived, though a wise Man, and a good Scholar, for even upon such Men their Passions do many times impose; witness the Nullity. 3. For this very Opinion Bishop Bilson is censured by the 
† Third Paper to Henderson, p. 85. op. 2d. Edit. ann. 1687.  Martyr Charles; For Bilson, I remember well what Opinion the King my Father had of him for these Opinions, and how he shown him some favour in hope of his Recantation (as his good nature made him do many things of that kind) but whether he did or not, I cannot say. 4. At the time when Bilson's Book was written, the Queen was assisting the Dutch against their, and her common Enemy, the Crown of Spain: now if in the Low-Countries the Government was founded in Compact, as many Learned Men say, and that all their Privileges, Sacred and Civil, contrary to that Agreement, were invaded, and the Inquisition introduced, all their Petitions slighted, and some hundred thousands barbarously murdered, this altars the Case, while it can no way hold good in Governments, where there is no such Compact. 5. 
‖ Ductor. dubitant. l. 3 ch. 3. rule 3. n. 19  Bishop Taylor quotes Bilson, with Barclay and others, as an Assertor of the Doctrine of Nonresistance, and Loyalty. If the Opinion of Bishop Bilson (were he never so venerable for his Learning and other Accomplishments) be contrary to that of our Blessed Saviour, and his holy Apostles, we ought to renounce them; and I have with a mixture of sorrow and shame reflected upon Cressy's Censure of that Book, 
* Exomolog. c. 12.  Queen Elisabeth conceived it convenient for her worldly Designs to take on her the Protection of the Low-Countries against the King of Spain, she employed Dr. Bilson, Bishop of Winchester, to write his Book of Christian Subjection, in which, to justify the Revolt of Holland, he gave strange Liberty in many Cases, especially concerning Religion, for Subjects to cast off their Obedience; but that Book which served Queen Elisabeth's worldly Designs, by the just Judgement of God hath contributed much to the Ruin of her Successor King Charles; for there is not any Book, that the Presbyterians have made more dangerous use of against their present Prince, than that which his Predecessor commanded to be written to justify her against the King of Spain. 
† Howel's Life of Lewis 13.  And it was a smart Observation of Lewis the Thirteenth of France, when that good King Charles was involved in a Civil War, that perhaps God punished him for assisting the French Protestants at Rochel, when in Arms against their Sovereign.  
But after all, let's hear this Reverend Prelate, where he determines, rather than disputes upon this Case, and none shall need to speak for him.  
The Jesuit after long arguing with him about the Magistrate's being accountable for his Faults to the People, 
The true Difference between Christian Subject. etc. part 3. p. 97, 98. Ed. Lond. 1586. Id. p. 252, 253.  as well as the People to him, comes at last to this Issue: Then Princes, (says he) have impunity to do what they list without fear of Laws. To which he replies; Princes appoint penalties for others, not for themselves; they bear the Sword over others, not others over them: Subjects must be punished by them, and they by none, but by God, whose place they supply. And in another place, We deny, that Princes have any superior and ordinary Judge to hear and determine the Right of their Crowns: We deny that God hath Licenced any Man to depose them, and pronounce them no Princes— Princes have far greater honour and power over Subjects, than any Man can have over Sons and Servants; they have power over Goods, Lands, Bodies and Lives, which no private Man may challenge. They be Fathers of our Country, to the which we be nearerbound, by the very Confession of Ethnics, than to the Fathers of our Flesh: how then by God's Law should Subjects depose their Princes, to whom, in most evident words, they must be subject for conscience sake, though they be Tyrants and Infidels. 
Pag. 277.  And lastly, in Answer to the Jesuits Objection of the Germane Princes resisting the Emperor, which was the Hinge on which all the difference in their Arguments did hang. They were Magistrates, (says he) and bore the Sword in their own Dominions; you are private Men, and want lawful Authority to use the Sword: their States be free, and may resist any wrong by the Law of the Empire. You be Subjects, and simply bound by the Laws of the Country to obey the Prince, or abide the pain which the public State of this Realm hath prefixed— The Queen of England inheriteth, and hath one and the same right over all her Subjects, be they Nobles or others.  
So Mr. Perkins on the Fifth Commandment: The Duties to Superiors in Authority are, 1. Obedience to their Commandments, Rom. 13.1.— because every higher power is the Ordinance of God, and the Obedience which we perform to him, God accepteth it, as though it were done to himself, Rom. 13.2.— Qu. What if our Superiors be cruel and wicked? Answ. Yet we must yield Obedience to them, but not in wickedness, 1 Pet. 2.18. Act. 4.19.— 2. Subjection in suffering the Punishments inflicted by our Superiors. Qu. What if the punishment should be unjust? Answ. Yet must we suffer it, till we can get some lawful Remedy for the same, 1 Pet. 2.19, 20.— And among the Sins against this Commandment he reckons the sixth to resist the lawful Authority of Superiors: and the seventh to obey them in things unlawful.  
In this Reign Mr. Hooker published his judicious Books of Ecclesiastical Polity, from the first of which it must be confessed, it is observed, that he lays the Foundation of Government in Agreement, 
Spalatens. de Rep. Eccl. lib. 6. c. 2. n. 19 p. 526. Opinionem verò jam factam communem nostrorum Scholasticorum, etc. That the common Opinion of the Schoolmen, and most other Divines, which place the power of Government in the Body of the People, as if it were given to them by God, and the People might dispose of it to whom they pleased, is false, and altogether to be rejected.  he herein following the Schoolmen too strictly, who had brought in the Terms and Notions of the Aristotelean Philosophy into the Christian Church, while Aristotle is known to be a great Lover of a Democracy: but whatever he laid down in Thesi, I am sure he hated the Deductions, that some Men make from him, that because Government arose out of Compact, therefore the People may call their Princes to an account; for in those Fragments of his Eighth Book of Ecclesiastical Polity, which were happily preserved by Archbishop Usher, and published by Dr. Bernard in his Clavi Trabales, (who professes, 
* Pag. 49, 50.  that by what art, and upon what design, so much was expunged, he knows not) he fully declares his mind. 
† Pag. 93, 94.  In the mighty upon earth (which are not always so virtuous and holy, that their own good minds will bridle them) what may we look for, considering the Frailty of Man's Nature, if the World do once hold it for a Maxim, that Kings ought to live in no Subjection, that how grievous disorder soever they fall into, none may have coercive power over them. Yet so it is, that this we must necessarily admit, as a number of right well learned Men are persuaded, etc. Inducements leading Men to think, the highest Magistrate should not be judged of any saving God alone, are especially these: 1. As in natural Bodies there could be no motion, unless there were something that moves all things, and itself continueth , so there must be a supreme Head of Justice, whereunto all are subject, but itself in subjection to none, which kind of pre-eminence, if some aught to have in a Kingdom, 
☞  who but the King shall have it? King's therefore no Man can have lawful power and authority to judge; if private Men offend, there is the Magistrate over them, which judgeth; if Magistrates, they have their Prince; if Princes, there is Heaven, a Tribunal before which they shall appear, on earth they are not accountable to any. And here this admirable Discourse breaks off abruptly, which is a great pity.  
There is no need to give Archbishop Bancroft a place in this Catalogue, the naming of his Books of dangerous Positions &c, and the Survey of the pretended holy Discipline are a sufficient Proof of his Sentiments; and by his Directions (if I mistake not) was the account of Hacket, Coppinger, and Arthington drawn up, called, Conspiracy for Pretended Reformation; the Design of which Books is expressly against the Doctrine of taking up Arms against the Lords Anointed, especially on the account of Religion.  
Near Mr. Hooker therefore I shall place his dear Friend Adrian Saravia (as the Ancients frequently quote St Basil, and St Gregory of Nazianzen together) who though a Foreigner, better understood both the Civil, and Ecclesiastical Polity of these Kingdoms, than some Natives. And he thus pronounces in the behalf of truth. 
‖ Epist. ante libr. de Imperandi autorit. & Christianâ obedient. . At this time the Authority of Kings is called in Question, and many men Dispute, that the Authority of the People, or of the Senate (the States) is above the King, and that from Reasons of Humane, not of Christian, and Divine Philosophy; and what is much to be lamented not without great Scandal of the Church of Christ, they having got by reading the Roman, and Greek Historians, Philosophers, and Orators an Admiration, and liking of their Manners, and Laws, so as to think, that all other Governments ought to be Modelled like them— Many Books are written by our own, Men, and by the Papists on this Subject, which incite the Nobility and Commons to take Arms, whensoever Kings turn Tyrants; which Doctrine, since it is contrary to the Principles of Christianity, which our Saviour and his Apostles delivered to the Church, and brings ruin, and desolation to Kingdoms, and Commonwealths, I have thought myself bound to confute— And see the Madness of these People, who writ on this Subject; the Papists oblige all Subjects to take Arms against an Heretical Prince i. e. one whom they call so; and others they oblige Subjects to take Arms against a Prince, that is a Papist, and therefore refuses to Establish or Defend the Pretestant Religion; so that of whatsoever persuasion a Prince be, by some part of his Subjects he must be accounted a Tyrant, while a true Christian is a Good Subject, let his Prince be of what Religion he pleases.— It is Intolerable Impiety to abuse the Testimony of Holy Scripture to the Confirmation of so Pestilent an error, while no Pagan Laws, no institutes of the Philosophers can enjoin Subjects a more perfect and strict Obedience, than the Doctrine of the Gospel, &c, after this in the Book, he shows, that the Original of Government is from God, and not from the People; that the People, when they have chosen a King, have no Authority over him afterwards; that a King is as much a King before his Coronation Oath, as after it, and many other such things: he concludes his fourth Book. 
‖ p. 314. Ed. 1610.  (and it is great pity, the other three Books are lost) with this excellent passage. Since God is the preserver of Mankind, he cannot suffer a Tyrant longer to Reign, than it is necessary for the punishment of the Sins of Men, wherefore the best remedy against a Tyrant is the amendment of our Lives, and constant Prayers to God.— A serious Meditation upon the precepts of our Lord and Master Jesus Christ will easily teach us, what is the Duty of Good Men toward evil Kings, and Princes; he, who shall revolve with himself the precepts of loving Enemies, can be no Man's Enemy, much less his Kings; he who is prepared to Bless them, that Curse him, and is resolved not to return railing for railing, nor to pursue revenge of injuries, will never speak irreverently, nor Curse Crowned Heads, nor lie in wait for their Life; he, who hath learned, that we must not resist evil, but overcome evil with Good, with Forbearance, and Patience, can never be a Rebel, never be a Traitor. These things the Apostles taught us, these things the Fathers have delivered down to us, and being bred up under these institutions they patiently suffered the most cruel Torments, and by suffering overcame; and to us their Posterity they have left this Example, in whose steps it is much safer for us to tread, than to give credit to the Authors of the new Doctrine, that is contrary to it.   

SECT. V  
King James, when he came to the Crown, brought learning enough with him to Vindicate his own Right, and the Rights of other Princes, and without vanity it may be Affirmed, that he hath managed that subject to Admiration in his Writings; the greatest part of which were opposed to the Doctrines of the Romanists, though his Basilicon Doron smartly chastises the Disciplinarains. This King in the Hampton-Court 
* p. 47, 48.  Conference severely Condemned some of the notes of the Geneva Bible, as partial, untrue, seditious, and savouring too much of dangerous, and Traitorous Conceits; as for Example, the Marginal Note on 1. Exod. 19 alloweth disobedience to Kings,— on 2. Chron. 15.16. the Note taxeth Asa for deposing his Mother only, and not killing her; And to show the agreement between Papists 
† P. 49 50. , and some others in these Doctrines, whereas Dr. Reynolds complained of a seditious Book written by one Ficlerus a Papist in behalf of the Pope against Queen Elizabeth called De jure Magistratûs in subditos, the Bishop of London said, that the Author of that Book was a great Disciplinarian, whereby it did appear, what advantage that sort of People gave unto the Papists, who mutatis mutandis could apply their own arguments against Princes of the Religion 
‖ p. 7●. . In that Book it is asserted, that if Kings observe not those compacts, to which they were Sworn, Subordinate Magistrates have powet to oppose them,— and to punish them, till all things be restored to their former State, that what Power a General Council hath to Depose a Pope for Heresy, the same the People over Kings, that are turned Tyrants.  
And it is worth the notice, that King James, when the Prince Palatine his son in law had axcepted of the Crown of Bohemia, did not only dissuade him from 
* Rushus. Collect. p. 12.  it (it being an usurpation upon the Rights of the Emperor) but disavowed the Act, and would never style him himself by that Title, nor suffer his Chaplains so to do. And the defeat of that unhappy Prince near Prague is very remarkable, it happening on Sunday Novemb. 8. Anno 1620. when part of the Gospel for the Day was, Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's.   

SECT. VI  
Under a learned King the Arts flourish, and therefore many eminent Authorities appear in this Reign to the vindication of the truth. Dr. Buckeridge Bishop of Rochester in his Sermon on Rom. 13.5. before the King Sept. 23.1606. says 
‖ p. 16. , there is no resistance, either thou must obey good Princes willingly, or endure evil Tyrants patiently 
† p. 3. . If they command any thing against God, their Authority comes too short; in such cases it is better to obey God, than Men; and yet in these things, though we may not obey, yet we may not resist, but suffer.— 
* p. 13.  Subjection to higher Powers is necessary in Christians Necessitate praecepti, & Finis, by the necessity of the end, Peace, and Tranquillity, and Religion in this Life, and Life Everlasting after Death. And by necessity of the Precept, Honour thy Father, and Mother; in which number all Kings, and Fathers of Countries, and Princes must have the Honour of Reverence to their Persons, of obedience to their Laws, of patience to their Punishments, of maintenance to their Estates, and of fidelity to their Crowns; thus saith Archbishop Laud's Tutor, for so was Bishop Buckeridge.  
Tho. Cartwright also, notwithstanding his other heterodox Opinions, and Practcies, seems in this to be Orthodox; 
* Confut. of the Rhem. Test. in Rom. 13.4. p. 968. V p. 58. V Archbishop Bramhal.  We praise God, that our sworn Enemies are constrained to give us the testimony of sound Doctrine in all duties toward Princes, both good, and bad, Fathers, and Tyrants; for our practice accordingly we are content to rest in equal and indifferent judgement, this one thing we may boldly say, that we seek not to betray our native Princes, nor to lie in wait for their Lives, as the Jesuits most wickedly, and unnaturally do. These were Mr. Cartwright's cool thoughts in his old age, whatever his former Sentiments might have been.  
Archbishop Whitgift also herein agrees with T. C. for when he says, 
* Def. of the Admonit. p. 4. Ibid.  Indeed the Doctrine of the Gospel,' which is the Doctrine of Salvation, hath been, is, and will be a friend to Princes and Magistrates, yea though they persecute the same. T.C. re-joins: If it be asked of the Obedience due unto the Prince, and unto the Magistrate; it answereth, that all obedience in the Lord is to be rendered: and if it come to pass, that any other be asked, it so refuseth, that it disobeyeth not, in preferring obedience to the great God before that which is to be given to mortal man. It so resisteth, that it submitteth the body, and goods of those that profess it, to abide that, which God will have them suffer in that case. And to this the Archbishop subjoins, All this is truly spoken of the Doctrine of the Gospel.  
Dr. Fulke, 
* In 1 Pet. 2.18.  on the Rhemish Testament. It is a lewd Slander against Wicklif, (that Magistrates lost their Authority, if once they were in deadly sin)— he obeyed, and taught obedience to the Kings Edw. III. and Rich. II. in whose time he lived, which two Princes all men know to have committed deadly sin, yea some heinous and notorious sins. So it is a detestable slander against us, whom you call followers of Wicklif; for none of us ever held, or taught any such Seditious, or traitorous Opinions: but your Heresy cometh nearest to this Opinion, which holdeth, that the Pope hath Authority to depose lawful Kings from their Thrones at his pleasure, etc.  
Anno 1610. Bishop Carlton printed his Book of the Jurisdiction of Princes, wherein he affirms, 
* Ch. 1. p. 4.  That in external, coactive jurisdiction the King hath Supreme Authority in all Causes, and over all Persons, Ecclesiastical as well as Civil, and that this is that, that hath been published by divers Writings and Ordinances— 
* P. 12. Ch. 2.  Some of the Pope's Flatterers of late, as also others, to open a wide gap to Rebellion, have written, That the power of Government by the Law of Nature is in the multitude— but the first Government was in a Family, it is absurd to think, and impossible to prove, that the power of Government was in the Multitude.— and what is a King by nature, but a Father of a great Family?   

SECT. VII.  
I am now entered into a vast Ocean, where Writers are every where to be found, and I resolve to examine them as they occur, without adjusting with a too curious niceness the exact Chronology 
* Ser. 1. on Gowrey's Conspir. p. 781. ; And I begin with Bishop Andrews, the smartest Adversary that ever the great Card. Bellarmine met with, A King is All Rum, no rising against him, or, if any man rise, they had better sit still— for Kings begin from God, we cannot set ourselves against them (saith Gamaliel) but we must be found to fight against God; being ordained of God (saith S. Paul, Gamaliel's Scholar) to resist them is to resist the Ordinance of God; none might better say it than he, it was told him from Heaven, when he was about such another business, persecuting Christ in his Church, 
* Ser. 2. p. 791.  and having quoted the example of David toward Saul, he adds, I verily think, God in this first Example of his first King over his own people hath purposely suffered them all (i.e. all the faults of Governors) to fall out, and to be found in him, even all that should fall out in any King after him. 1. His Government was tyrannical. 2. He usurped a Power in things spiritual, taking upon him to sacrifice in person. 3. He dipped his hands in the blood of God's Priests. 4. Was possessed by God with an evil spirit, a case beyond all other cases, and yet destroy him not Abishai. 
* Ser. 3. on the 5. August. p. 800.  King's are God's Anointed to the superseding of two Claims, meos, saith the Pope— another Claim hath of late begun to be buzzed as if they were Christi populi (the anointed of the People) and held of them; but this Claim also falleth to the ground by the Text— God help if the people fall to make Gods— to say that Princes may be lawfully slain— is to make men believe, 
P. 801. P. 808.  that they go to Heaven for breaking God's Commandments. 
* Ser. 3. on Gunpowder Treas. p. 938, 939. V Appen. p. 91.  What if Kings take too much upon them (Corah's exception) than it is, dedi vobis Regem in irâ, saith God by the Prophet, Angry was I, when I gave him, but I gave him tho.— but this onus Principis, how may webe rid of it? Is there any other per me to go to? to deprive, or depose them sure, where the worst is reckoned that can be of them, clamabunt ad Dominum, is all I find: in nature, every thing is dissolved by the same means it came together; in the Law, institution and destitution belong both to one, etc.  

* Sermon on the Queen's day at the end of his Lectures on Jonah. p. 695.  Bishop King. It is the greatest dishonour to Religion to put down Princes, a thing which neither Moses in the Old, nor Christ in the New Testament, etc. ever hath taught, counselled, and much less practised, I say not against lawful Magistrates, but not against heathenish infidel Idolaters, tyrannous Rulers, though by the manifest and express sentence of God reprobated, and cast off. 
P. 696. V p. 697.  I never could suspect, that in the Commission of Christ given to his Disciples there is one word of encouragement to these lawless attempts, unless to go into the World be to go, and overturn the World, to shake the Pillars, and foundations thereof with Mutinies, and Seditions, and unless preaching may be interpreted proclaiming of War, and Hostility— unless to baptise be to wash the people of the World in their own blood, unless binding and losing be meant of Fetters and Shackles, retaining and remitting of Prisons, and Wards, and receiving the Holy Ghost be receiving the fiery and turbulent Spirit, which our Saviour liked not. 
* Id. Lect. 35. in John. p. 472, 473, etc. Cons. Loc.  If such were the King, as Darius was, and such his Rulers and Officers, as would make a Decree to defraud God of his Worship (as Dan. 6.) be thou also as Daniel was, enter into thy House, and open thy Windows toward Jerusalem, and pray, etc. stay not till the King, or his Council release thee thereto, and if every hair of thy head were a life, redeem thy duty to God 〈◊〉 adventure, and loss thereof rather than neglect it, and if ●●ou happen to be alone in that action, yet forego it not— I like not in any case that the least advantage, and slip in the Earth be given to the People against his lawful, and Christian Governor, it is as fire to Flax, an easy, a welcome persuasion to busy, and catching natures, the least exception once taken against their want of Religion, Piety, Justice, or the like is so far followed, that not only the Prince in the end, but the whole People ruth it.  
Doctor Jackson 
* To. 3. Treat. of Christian obed. p. 903.  yield but once, That dominion over the Creature is founded in Grace, and then tempt the precious Saints to muster Decem legiones, and if God suffer them to prosper, they will be the godly party, whether men will, or no. 
† P. 933, 934.  Let every Soul be subject, is not the same as let every Soul be obedient to the higher Powers, no, no, albeit there can be no obedience without subjection, yet may there be subjection without obedience; and oftentimes when obedience to humane Powers is dangerous, subjection is due, and cannot be denied without the just censure of disobedience, Act. 4.18, 19 the Apostles were commanded not to speak in the name of Christ, so far were they from doing what was commanded, that they refuse to hearken to such a proposal, yet were they still subject to their Power, whom they refused to obey, for they suffer themselves to be imprisoned by them without resistance, and yet withal they obey the Angel of the Lord, which opened the Prison doors, Acts 5.18. but being the second time convened, without violence offered they subject themselves to their Power, and do not appeal to the Angel, which had delivered them out of Prison, or implore his aid to resist their Power— with this flat denial of obedience to their injunctions they do not deny, or question subjection to their coercive Power, nor do they repine at the exercise of it, or rail upon the actors; and the true reason of the subjection of their bodies without subjection of their Consciences was that Commandment of our Saviour, Luke 12.4, etc. fear not them that can kill the body, etc. 
* Id. p. 941.  the Rule is General, that unto the penalty, or sanction of every humane Law, or Ordinance passive obedience, 
☜  or subjection of the outward man is due, whether the Law be just, or unjust 
* P. 963. — and this Rule holds as punctually of the Magistrate, as of the Magistracy: 
† P. 965.  he, that is a King, or supreme Magistrate by just, and lawful Title, may not be resisted, albeit he exercise his Power tyrannically. 
† P. 967.  The power which the Highpriest exercised in apprehending our Saviour was unjust, and satanical, was it therefore lawful for Christ's Disciples to resist it; to oppose violence to it was unlawful, and if Peter had continued to do, as he began, he had fallen under the Sanction of this Law, They that resist, shall receive damnation.   

SECT. VIII.  
Doctor Hakewil was thought fit by King James to be entrusted with the instruction of his eldest Son Prince Henry, the delight of the English Nation, and to vindicate the just rights of Princes he set forth Ann. 1613. his Scutum regium, in which Chap. 1. Lib. 1, he shows, What a horrid sin Murder is, especially (Ch. 2.) of Princes, who are God's immediate Vicegerents, and sit in the place of God, and are accountable only to him— against whom to make insurrections is with the Giants to make War against God— and Ch. 6. discoursing of that Text, 1 Sam. 8. that their King should seize their Vineyards, etc. he subjoins, not that this was lawful for their King to do (for the King's duty is otherwise described Deut. 17.) but that if he did so, they ought not to resist him, and therefore the Prophet subjoins, ver. 18. not that they were to shake off his Yoke, or to disturb his Reign, or to murder his Person, but to call upon God for redress— and Ch. 7. the Prophet David shall rise in judgement against those that do otherwise, and shall condemn them, who had this excellent Lesson not only in his mouth, but in his heart, and I could wish engraven on all men's tongues, and hearts, and hands in great Letters, Nolite tangere Christos meos. In the subsequent Chapters he considers the other Examples of Rebellion, and resistance in the old Testament, and Ch. 14. the Example of our Saviour, who patiently submitted to all injustice, though he could have called for more than twelve Legions of Angels. And when Pilate was a most profligate Man, and no one could be worse than the Pharisees, and High-Priests, and Tiberius the Emperor was infamous for his perjuries, his lusts, and murders, yet even then so did our Saviour demean himself (and every action of his is our instruction) towards the Magistrates of his time, who were Infidels, Barbarians and Tyrants. And in the second Book he considers the obedience of the ancient Christians to Nero and other Persecutors, under Julian, and the Arian Emperors, when they were punished contrary to Law, deriving the History down to the times of Pope Gregory the Great, and the Emperor Focas, from whence we date the Papal Tyranny. 
On Epist. for the fourth Sunday after Epiph.   
Dr. Bois the Dean of Canterbury, says the same on those Words, Let every Soul be subject, etc. The Proposition is peremptory, delivered not narratively, what others hold meet, but positively, importing what God would have done, not advised only by Paul, but devised also by Christ as a Command in imperative terms expressly, Let every Soul be subject— Every Soul is every Man, and this universal Note confutes as well the seditious Papist as the tumultuous Anabaptist.— To be subject is to suffer the Prince's Will to be done, aut à nobis, aut de nobis, either of us, or on us; of us, when he commands for Truth, on us, when he commands against the Truth: either we must be Patients or Agents; Agents, when he is good and godly, Patients, when he is tyrannous and wicked: we must not use a Sword, but a Buckler, against a bad Prince. St. Paul doth not here say, Let every soul be subject to Virtuous and Christian Governors, 
☞  but indefinitely to Potentates.— I have read and heard, that the Jesuits are desirous to purge St. Paul's Epistles, especially this to the Romans, as being herein more Lutheran than Catholic. This Text of all other (Let every Soul be subject, etc.) is much against their humour and honour.  
The exempting Clergymen from the Obedience to secular Powers, 
Ep. Rom. 13.1.  is a Doctrine not heard in the Church a thousand years after Christ, p. 159. [Bishop Bilson against the Jesuits, p. 128.]  
Whosoever therefore resisteth.] If there be no power but of God, and nothing done by God but in order, he that resisteth Authority, resisteth God's Ordinance: so the Lord himself said to Samuel: 
1 Sam. 8.7.  They have not cast thee away, but they have cast me away, that I should not reign over them.— As God is a great King, so a King is as it were a little God: he therefore that resisteth the Prince, resisteth him that sent him; Almighty God is King of kings, and Lord of lords: 1 Tim. 6.15. (pag. 161.)  
He is the Minister of God for thy wealth.] 
* D. Buckeridg. Sermon upon the fifth Verse of this Chap.  If he be a good Prince, causa est, he is the Cause of thy Good, temporal and eternal; if an evil Prince, he is an occasion of thy eternal Good, by thy temporal evil. 
† August. Serm. 6. de verbis Dom. secundum Matt.  Si bonus, nutritor est tuus; si malus, tentator tuus est: If a good King, he is thy Nurse; receive thy nourishment with obedience: if evil, he is thy tempter; receive thy trial with patience. So there is no resistance; either thou must obey good Governors willingly, or endure bad Tyrants patiently. (pag. 162.)  
As all power is from God, so for God: and therefore when the Prince commands against truth, it is our Duty to be patiented, and not agent. (Ib. 162.)  
23 d. Sunday after Trin. Mat. 25.15.  

‖ Zepper. Aretius. Aquin. 22. quaest. 10.4. Art 6.  This Scripture showeth evidently, that the Kingdom of Christ abrogateth not the Kingdom of Caesar, but that the Gospel is a good Friend unto commonweals, in teaching Princes how to govern, and the People how to be subject unto the higher Powers. It is not Christ and his Word, but Antichrist and the Pope, who deny to Caesar the things which are Caesar 's, absolving the Subject from his Allegiance to his Sovereign— This Intrusion upon the things of Caesar is thought unjust and uncouth even by the Sorbon and Parliament of Paris in France, by the Commonwealth of Venice, by the Seminary Priests in England; in a word, distasted of all Popelings in the world, except the Serpentine Brood hatched of the Spanish Egg Ignatius Loyola. Read the Books of Watson, especially Quodlibet 8. Art 7, 8. Barclai, of the Authority of the Pope; Roger. Widdrington Apolog. pro Jure Principum: Sheldon's general Reasons proving the Lawfulness of the Oath of Allegiance. The ready Pens of our accurately learned Caesar and his judicious Divines have foiled in this Argument the Pope's Bullbeggar Cardinal Bellarmine. (p. 550.)  
As for the Tributes of Caesar, if they be just and reasonable, we must pay them as his Wages; if unjust and unreasonable, we must bear them as rur punishment. We may rofel his Arguments in Parliament, and repel his Oppression according to courses of Law, but we may not in any case rebel with the Sword. (Ib.)  
On S. Peter's Day: Act. 12.1. (p. 725.)  
Prayer was made without ceasing of the Congregation.] Prayers and Tears are the Church's Armour, and therefore when Peter was imprisoned by cruel Herod, the Congregation cometh unto prayer, and not unto powder for his deliverance: they did not assault the Prison, nor kill the Soldiers, 
● Salmeron tract. 35. in Act.  nor break the Chains; only prayer and patience were their Weapons: Arma Christianorum in adversis alia esse non debent quam patientia & precatio.  
Dr. Donne, the Dean of S. Paul's: 
* Pseudomart. ch. 6. § 10. p. 172.  Thomas some ancient Greek States, which are called Regna Laconica, because they were shortened, and limited to certain Laws, and some States in our time seem to have conditional and provisional Princes, between whom and Subjects there are mutual and reciprocal Obligations, which if one side break, they fall on the other, yet that Sovereignty, which is a power to do all things available to the main ends, resides somewhere, which, if it be in the Hands of one Man, erects and perfects that Pambasilia, of which we speak.— 
* Id. § 11.  God inanimates every State with one power, as every Man with one Soul, when therefore People concur in the desire of such a King, they cannot contract, nor limit his power, no more than Parents can condition with God, 
☞  or preclude, or withdraw any Faculty from that Soul, with God hath infused into the Body, which they prepared and presented to him, etc.— And upon this Principle of the Sovereignty, and unaccountableness of Kings, he shows, that those who suffer for asserting any other power over Kings, are not Martyrs, but Traitors.  

† Id. Serm. 39 p. 391, 392.  We sin against the Father, the Root of Power, in conceiving amiss of the Power of the Civil Magistrate,— when God saith, By me King's reign, there the Per is not a Permission, but a Commission; it is not that they reign by my Sufferance, but they reign by my Ordinance; a King is not a King, because he is a good King, nor leaves being a King, as soon as he leaves being good; all is well summed up by the Apostle, Rom. 13.5. Ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.— The Law of the Prince is rooted in the power of God, 
‖ Ser. 69. p. 698.  the Root of all is Order, and the Orderer of all is the King.   

SECT. IX.  
The Archbishop of Spalleto came a Stranger into this Kingdom, but in a little time became well acquainted with the Estate of our Church, and spoke her Sense in his Books, which were well received both here and abroad; nor does his Apostasy afterward concern the Merit of the Cause; for if we may believe a 
‖ Bishop Cousins of Transub.  Reverend Prelate of our Communion, the Archbishop of Spalleto did make good what he promised here, when he came to Rome, that he would own and defend the English Church to be a true Church of Christ. And that among other her Doctrines he very well understood this of Nonresistance, (or rather he understood it to be a Doctrine of the true Catholic Church; for his Books were written, though not completed, before he left Italy) will easily appear, when it is remembered, that 
* Lib. de Rep. Eccles. cap. 1.  he shows to the confutation of all that can be said to the contrary, That our blessed Saviour, while he lived on earth, had no temporal Kingdom: 
‡ Cap. 2.  That the Power of Princes is immediately from God, proving it from Rom. 13.1. That thus God ordained the Affairs of the old World, that God himself was the King of Israel, till the Days of Saul, that he transferred his power, not to the people, but to Saul,— that this Opinion, that Kings were of God's Institution, and not the peoples, was the Belief of the ancient Christians, which he proves from the Writings of Irenaeus, Tertull. Chryst. Optat. Didymus, Hosius, Ambrose, Austin, etc. And from the Assertions of the elder Popes and Councils, that the common opinion of the Schoolmen, and other Divines, that Government is in the Body of the People is false; that there is no Revelation hath confirmed this Assertion, that all, that the Light of Nature says, is, that Men must be governed, and that if the Government were originally in the Hands of the People, all Governments ought to have been Democratical, which, says he, is the worst, and most imperfect Form of Government; he proving also, that if the People do elect, they cannot call the Prince, whom they elect, to account; after which 
† Cap. 10. n. 82.  he proposes an Objection; If Princes be so unaccountable, then there is no Remedy against evil Princes, no not though they are Enemies to the true Faith, and are guilty of Maleadministration of the Government, and vex their Subjects both in their Civil and Sacred Properties; for while Deposition is the only Remedy, if they cannot be deposed, there is no Remedy. To which he answers: 1. That we are to inquire after such a State, not what is free from all Inconveniences, but what is subject to the least, and the least dangerous; but much more pernicious and destructive of human Society are those Confusions, which are wont to arise from the Rebellions of Subjects, and from Civil Wars, than those which happen from the Cruelty of an ungovernable King exercised upon his Subjects. 2. That this is proper and peculiar to a supreme temporal Prince, that he cannot lawfully be deposed, for such Kings are only inferior to God, and are his immediate Vicegerents, etc. And in his Confutation of the Errors of Suarez, 
‖ C. 3. n. 6.  he shows the mistakes of that Jesuit, that there is no Revelation that God hath given Princes such a power, proving from S. Paul, that there is no power, but what is of God.— And 
† N. 16.  if a Crown happen to fall to an Infidel, his Subjects are bound to obey him, in which case, says he, we ought to acknowledge, and reverence the Equity of the English, 
☞  who when they had freed themselves from the Papal Yoke, and embraced the Reformed Religion under Edward the Sixth, did notwithstanding after his Death set the Crown on the Head of his Sister Mary, whom they knew to be a Papist, and zealously affected towards the Pope, which Succession the Peers did not only allow of, but the Prelates also, who expected nothing from her, but Executions and Martyrdoms; for they knew, that Religion ought not to hinder the Admission of the lawful Heir to his Right.— 
‖ N. 17.  For the Power of a King is given him by divine positive Law, and therefore there is no other but God, who can take his power from him.  
To this Archbishop I will join his bitter Adversary, Bishop Montagu, 
* Not. in Invect. 2. Naz. in Jul.  because herein they were both agreed; When the Christians in Julian 's time betook themselves only to their Prayers, and not to Force, it was not because they could not, but because they would not; for they had sufficient force to subdue the Tyrant, as both Greg. Naz. and S. Austin aver; but they had learned patience in the School of their Master Christ, who had recommended it to them, both by his Words, and by his Example, not to confound Heaven and Earth, etc.  
Bishop Lake 's Sermon Preached in Trinity-Church in Winchester at An Assizes. 1610.  
A false Religion doth not hinder him from being a lawful Sovereign. To resolve the Conscience of such as doubt, Whether a different Religion doth evacuate the Power of a lawful Sovereign. It doth not, (says he) though it be a false Religion.   

SECT X.  
Old Mr. Deed hath been censured, as a Puritan, but I am sure, neither he, nor his Copartner Clever were so in this point; for in their 
* The 5th. Commandment, p. 216, 217.  Comment on the Commandments, they thus declare themselves. The first Duty of the Subject is Submission both inward and outward; in heart to reverence, and outwardly to obey the Magistrate, and this is commanded, Rom. 13. Let every soul be subject, etc. He commands not only a bodily Subjection, which may be in many rebellious persons, that resist Authority, and lie open to the Curse of God for this sin, but an inward submission of the Soul, as unto a spark of God's Authority, 
☜  and an appointment of his. For if this inward be not first, this outward will fail upon every occasion; there must be also an outward subjection in obeying their Commands, as far as they command lawful things; but if it so fall out, that the Prince, or any in Authority under him command things unlawful against the Commandment of God, than it is better to obey God than Man, yet so, that we be content to bear any punishment that shall be laid upon us, even to death itself, as Daniel, when the King made a wicked Edict, would not yield unto it, but yet was content to yield unto the punishment with patience, and never went about to gather a Power against the King in his own Defence, etc. so that if the Magistrates Command be lawful, the Subject must obey; if he require an unlawful Obedience, he must not rebel, but suffer the punishment without grudging, 
☜  even in heart, Eccl. 10.20. If the King be unjust and wicked, we must pray God to convert him, that as our Sins have brought an ill Governor over us, so our Prayers may either remove, or better him.  

Bishop Hall's Contemplations.  

The Inauguration of Saul. 1 Vol. fol. p. 1029.  
Earthly Monarches must walk by a Rule, which if they transgress, they shall be accountable to him, that is higher than the highest, who hath deputed them: Not out of care of Civility, so much as Conscience, must every Samuel labour to keep even terms betwixt Kings and Subjects, prescribing just moderation to the one, to the other Obedience and Loyalty; which whoever endeavours to trouble, is none of the Friends of God, or his Church.   

The Death of Saul. Lib. 14. p. 1084.  
Saul was none of the best Kings, yet so impatient are his Subjects of the Indignity offered to his dead Corpse, that they will rather leave their own bones amongst the Philistines, than the Carcase of Saul. Such a close Relation there is betwixt a Prince and Subject, that the dishonour of either is inseparable from both.— but how unnatural is the Villainy of those Miscreants that can be content to be Actors in the Capital Wrong offered to Sovereign Authority?   

Page 1085.  
Every drop of Royal Blood is Sacred; for a Man to say that he hath shed it, is mortal.   

The Death of Absalon. Lib. 16. 1128.  
Stranger's shall relieve him, whom his own Son persecutes.—   

Page 1129.  
O holy David, what means this ill-placed love, this unjust mercy, deal gently with a Traitor? but of all Trayors with a Son?  
Who can want courage to fight for a righteous Sovereign, and Father, against the Conspiracy of a wicked Son? The God of Hosts with whom it is all one to save with many or with few, takes part with Justice, and lets Israel feel what it is to bear Arms for a traitorous Usurper.  
Let no Man look to prosper by Rebellion; the very thickets and stakes and pits, and wild Beasts of the Wood shall conspire to the punishment of Traitors.   

Page 1131.  
— Even at this day very Pagans and Pilgrims that pass that way, cast each man a stone into that heap, and are wont to say in a solemn Execution, Cursed be the Parricide Absalon, and cursed be all unjust persecutors of their Parents, for ever:  
Fasten your Eyes upon this woeful Spectacle, O all ye rebellious and ungracious Children, which rise up against the loins and thighs from which you fell, and know that it is the least part of your punishment, that your Carcases rot on the Earth, and your Name in Ignominy: these do but shadow out those Eternal sufferings of your Souls, for your full and unnatural disobedience.   

Sheba's Rebellion. Page 1132.  
That a lewd Conspirator should breathe Treason is no wonder, but is it not wonder and shame, that upon every mutinous blast, Israel should turn Traitor to God's anointed?   

Contemplations. Lib. 18. p. 1171.  
In the Case of Succession into Kingdoms we may not look into the Qualities of the Person, but into the Right.  
— No Bond can be surer than the natural Allegiance of Subjects: I do not find that the following Kings stood upon the Confirmation of the People; but as those that knew the way to their Throne, ascended their steps without aid.   

Page 1174.  
How durst these seditious Mouths mention David in defiance? One would have thought that very Name had been bale to have tempered their fury, and to have contained them within the limits off Obedience:—  
Blessed be God for lawful Government: Even a mutinous Body cannot want a Head: If the Rebellious Israelites have cast of their true Sovereign, they must choose a false.   

Jeroboam. Page 1175.  
The Civil defection was soon followed by the Spiritual. As there are near respects betwixt God and his Anointed, so there is great Affinity betwixt Treason and Idolatry.—  
They cannot return to God and hold off from their lawful Sovereign; They cannot return to Jerusalem and keep off from God, from their Loyalty. How can they be mine— whiles— the Priests and Levites shall preach to them the necessity of their due obedience, and the abomination of their Sacrifices in their wilful disobedience.   

Bishop Hall's second Vol. Christ and Caesar. p. 416.  
It is Religion that teacheth us that God hath ordained Kingly Sovereignty, Rom. 13.1. ordained it immediately; That Position was worthy of a Red-hat, Potestas Principis dimanavit à Populo, Pontificis à Deo. (Bellar. Recog.) What need I persuade Christian Kings and Princes, that they hold their Crowns and Sceptres as in fee from the God of Heaven? Cyrus himself had so much Divinity, Ezra 1.2. It is Religion that teaches us that the same Power which ordained Caesar enjoins all faithful subjection to Caesar; Not for fear, but for Conscience.   

Bishop Hall's third Vol. Pag. 118.  
3. A promissory Oath, which is to the certain prejudice of another Man's Right cannot be attended with Justice.  
4. No prejudice of another Man's right can be so dangerous and sinful as that prejudice which is done to the right of public and Sovereign Authority.  
5. The right of Sovereign Authority is highly prejudiced, when private Subjects encroach upon it; and shall upon suspicion of the diavowed intentions, or actions of their Princes, combine and bind themselves to enact, establish, or alter any matters concerning Religion without (and therefore much more if against) the Authority of their Lawful Sovereign.  
6. A Man is bound in Conscience to reverse and disclaim that which he was induced unlawfully to engage himself by Oath to perform.  
7. No Oath is or can be of force that is made against a lawful Oath formerly taken; so that he that hath sworn Allegiance to his Sovereign, and thereby bound himself to maintain the Right, Power, and Authority of his said Sovereign, cannot by any second Oath be tied to do aught that may tend to the infringement thereof; and if he have so tied himself, the Obligation is ipso facto void and frustrate.  
And according to this Doctrine was Mr. Dod's practice; 
* Sir H. Yelverton's Pref. to Bishop Moreton of Episc.  for a little before Naseby fight King Charles of blessed memory sent the Earl of Lindsey to Mr. Dod to know his opinion of the War; his Lordship found him ill, nevertheless he sat up, and dictated his sense of it; but the Earl was on a sudden by reason of the fight hurried away, and whether the King had the Paper or no, I cannot learn; but the original (or a Copy of it) was by some zealous Man suppressed; no doubt, because it condemned taking up Arms on the specious pretences of Religion, and Liberty. And according to his Sentiments was his usage, he being plundered by the Parliament Army, as well as the other (so called) Malignants.     

SECT. XI.  
There was no little Clash between Archbishop Laud, and Bishop Davenant about other points, but in this they agreed 
* Davenant deter. qu. 4. p. 22.  He that taketh the sword, shall perish by the sword, i. e. He that usurps the Sword, he that uses it without permission from the King, who by God's Ordinance bears the Sword; now who can believe, that a Prince will give leave to draw his own Sword against himself— all others ought to abstain from laying hands on him, whose punishment God hath by a certain special privilege reserved to himself.— the ancient Christians, being harassed with most grievous persecutions, never fled to these indirect means, 
Pag. 23.  but defended the Church by those means, which God hath appointed, viz. by the tears of her Christians, the preach of her Priests, and the sufferings of her Martyrs; and what Suarez say, 
* V p. 24.  That there is no need of a Superior Power to keep the Pope in order, because Christ will in an especial manner in this case provide for his Church, may be with much greater reason said of Kings— Christ himself will in a more Eminent manner defend his Church, not only against the cruelty of persecutors, but also against the gates of Hell.— Resistance is unlawful, and contrary to God's Ordinance; for St. Paul says it is a sin, and worthy of eternal damnation to resist the Powers ordained of God. Put the case, that Princes will not only not purge the Church of Heresies, and false worship, but what is worse, 
* Id. qu. 12. p. 58.  will defend those corruptions by their Authority, yet in this case the people ought not to reform; 1. Because God requires from Subjects— to suffer whatsoever the Magistrate can inflict rather than desert the true Religion; but not to compel the Magistrate— for Religion is to be defended not by killing others, but by dying for it ourselves, not by cruelty, but by patience, not by wickedness, but by fidelity, says Lactantius. 2. When the people undertake such an action without the Prince's consent, it is Rebellion; now evil is not to be done, that good may come thereof— let such Men take to themselves whatever Names they please, they are Traitors, not Christians; L. there will be great danger in so doing— for should they get the Power, they cannot make Laws— 
* Qu. 17.  What shall be able to keep a Man within the duty of a good Subject, who will not be bound by Oaths.— 
† Qu. 30.  Criminals of the Superior Order (i.e. Kings, etc.) God hath reserved to his own Court, and Judgement.   

SECT. XII.  
I will not quote Archbishop Laud, because the Adversaries to this Doctrine aver, that it was of his inventing; but instead of him I will call for an unquestionable witness Archbishop Usher, who expressly ordered, 
* Clavi Trabales. p. 52.  That Loyalty should according to the Canon be four times every year preached to the people, while his actions were a plain Comment upon his Opinions. I need not mention the regard the foreign Protestant Divines had to him (and the Romanists too, especially Cardinal Richelieu) as well as those of our own Country; 
* Apud eund. & Sanders pref. to the Bishop's Book.  While I inform the Reader, that in the beginning of our most unhappy Commotions the Lord Deputy of Ireland Strafford desired the Primate Usher to declare his judgement publicly concerning those Tumults, which he did in two Sermons at Christ-Church in Dublin on Eccles. 7.2. Whereupon the Deputy signified, it would be acceptable to the King to print the Sermons, or to write a Treatise on the Subject; the latter the Archbishop made choice of, and sent it into England with an intent to have it printed; as the Martyr Charles designed, that his Subjects might receive the satisfaction from the same, as himself had done. In the time of the Usurper Cromwell it was not thought fit to be printed, lest it might have been perverted to the support of his Power. For by this time the flatterers of that great Tyrant had learned by a new device upon the bare account of Providence without respect to the justice of the Title (the only right, and proper foundation) to interpret, and apply to his advantage whatsoever they found either in the Scriptures, or in other Writings concerning the Power of Princes, or the duty of Subjects, profanely, and sacrilegiously taking the Name of that holy Providence of God in vain, and using it only as a stalking Horse to serve the lusts and interests of ambitious Men.  
In the first part of that learned Treatise the Bishop proves, that the Power of the Prince is from God, and that 
* Part. 1. §. vi. p. vi.  Our Government is a free Monarchy, because the Authority resteth solely in the person of the King, whereupon it is declared, that the King is the only Supreme Governor of these Realms in all Causes whatsoever; which could not stand, if either the Court (of Parliament) itself, or any other power upon Earth might in any cause overrule him; I say any Power, whither foreign, or domestic, and then 
* §. 28.  He discourses at large as of the original of Regal power from Heaven, so of the Law of the King proceeding in the second part to treat of the Obedience of the Subject 
* V p. 109. 111, 134, etc.  In which he plainly shows, that whither the Power be good, or bad, whosoever does resist it (by withdrawing his service from it, or denying Tribute, or not giving that honour to it, which he ought to give) resisteth the Ordinance, and disposition of God, by whose appointment they bear Rule. 
* P. 145. 146.  Quest. But how are Subjects to carry themselves, when such things are enjoined, as cannot, or ought not to be done; R. surely not to accuse the Commander, but humbly to avoid the command— and when nothing else will serve the turn, as in things that may be done, we are to express our subjection by active; so in things, that cannot be done, we are to declare the same by passive obedience without resistance, and repugnancy; such a kind of suffering being as sure a sign of subjection as any thing else whatsoever.— He, 
P. 147, etc.  that consults with flesh and blood, will hardly be induced to admit this Doctrine of passive Obedience, and therefore, if he will learn this Lesson, he must make choice of better Masters, and listen in the first place to Solomon, Prov. 3.5. Trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and lean not to thine own understanding. And to that Oracle of the Son of God himself, Matth. 16.24. If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, etc. then must he raise up his thoughts to the height of that beatitude, which our Saviour's own mouth hath given assurance of to all such, as will be ruled by him herein. Matth. 5.10, 11, 12. Blessed are they that are persecuted for righteousness sake, etc. and to look on the recompense of Reward— and to encourage himself with the precedent of the Apostles and Prophets, the innumerable company of Martyrs, and Confessors:— and above all to look unto Christ himself. Obj. 
P. 150,  But suppose the King should command us to worship the Devil, would you not give us leave to stand upon our Guard,— and if not, what will become of God's Church, and his Religion? R. As if this had been a new Case never heard of before; when the Devil-Worship, i. e. that of Idols, (called Devils, 1 Cor. x. 20.) was so vehemently urged by the cruel Edicts of the persecuting Emperors, did the Christians ever take Arms against them for the matter, or betake themselves to any other Refuge, but fervent Prayers unto Almighty God, and patiented suffering of what disgrace or punishment soever should be put upon them, 
Pag. 152.  etc.— But if men's Hands be tied, no Man's Estate will be secure, etc. I answer, God's Word is clear, Whosoever resisteth, resisteth the Ordinance of God, and thereby a necessity is imposed upon us of being subject, not only for wrath, but for conscience sake, which may not be avoided by the pretext of any ensuing mischiefs whatsoever— it becomes us in obedience to perform our part, and leave the ordering of Events to God, 
Pag. 177.  whose part that is.— And so much both of active Obedience, which in all things that may be done, we are bound to perform unto our Sovereigns, and of the passive, which in other Cases with all Christian Fortitude we are tied to undergo, 
☞  without the least carnal thought either of resisting their Authority, or conspiring against their Persons, State and Dignity. And then he closes his Discourse with an account of the Obligation of Oaths, etc. and the methods of the ancient Church, when persecuted, viz.' Patiented Sufferings, and Prayers to God.  
Nor need I mention Dr. Heylin, whose Opinions are well known, and are remarkably to be seen in his Stumbling-Block of Disobedience discovered, censured, and removed, etc. Of which the Arguments are cogent, and the Authorities good, though I do not like the sharpness of his Language, nor the severity of his Reflections.   

SECT. XIII.  
Archbishop 
* Oper. to: 1. disc. 2. The Serpentine-Salve, p. 525, 526.  Bramhal who succeeded Usher both in his See, and his Loyalty, says there were Nonconformists in the Days of Queen Elisabeth, and King James, who severely protested in Print, That no Christians gave more to the Royal Supremacy, than they, without limitation or qualification— that for the King not to assume such a power, or for the People to deny it, is a damnable sin, nay, although the States of the Kingdom should deny it him; and if the King command any thing contrary to the Word of God, yet we ought not to resist, but peaceably to forbear Obedience, and sue for Grace, and when that cannot be obtained, meekly to submit ourselves to punishment— abjuring all Doctrines repugnant to this as Anabaptistical, and Antichristian, they condemn all Practices contrary to this as seditious and sinful. And then proceeds to give his own Opinion: That Dominion is not from the Grant or Consent of the People, but from God. 
Pag. 527, 528. — That absolute Power may be limited by Statutes, etc. without communicating Sovereign Power to subordinate or inferior Subjects, or subjecting Majesty to Censure, which Limitations do not proceed from mutual Pactions, but from Acts of Grace and Bounty. 
Pag. 531. — If the People be greater than the King, it is no more a Monarchy, but a Democracy. Our Oath binds us to acknowledge the King to be supreme in all Causes, and over all persons; to defend him against all Conspiracies, and if to defend him, much more not to offend him.— That Oath which binds us to defend him against all Attempts whatsoever, presupposeth, that no Attempt against him can be justified by Law— against such evident Light of Truth to ground a contrary Assertion derogatory to his Majesty, 
Pag. 532.  upon the private Authority of Bracton and Fleta (no authentic Authors) were a strange degree of weakness or wilfulness— that Subjects who have not the Power of the Sword committed to them— may use force to recover their former liberty, or raise Arms to change the Laws established, 
Pag. 537.  is without all contradiction both false and rebellious.— Surely, 
Pag. 538.  if any Liberty might warrant such force, it is the Liberty of Religion, but Christ never planted his Religion in Blood, he cooled his Disciples Heat with a sharp Redargution, Ye know not what spirit ye are of. It is better to die innocent, than to live nocent, as the Thebean Legion, all Christians of approved Valour, answered the Emperor Maximian. 
Pag. 542. — If a Sovereign shall persecute his Subjects for not doing his unjust Commands, yet it is not lawful to resist by raising Arms against him, they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. But they ask, Is there no Limits? I answer, where the Law doth not distinguish, neither ought we to distinguish; how shall we limit what God hath not limited? Obj. But is there no Remedy for a Christian in this Case. Yes, three Remedies. 1. To cease from sin, remove our sin, and God will take away his Rod. 
☜  2. Prayers and Tears. S. Naz. lived under five Persecutions, and never knew other Remedy. The third Remedy is flight; this is the uttermost which our Master hath allowed; nor is this way so hard for Subjects: this way hath ever proved successful to the Christian Religion.   

SECT. XIV.  
With Archbishop Usher I will also join Bishop Brownrig, a Man much of his primitive temper, and approved Moderation (even by the Enemies of our Church, notwithstanding his Episcopal Character:) 
* Serm. to. 1. Serm. 2. p. 26, 28.  The Writ, by which Princes are made, issues from Heaven, King's reign by God's Election, not by his Permission only, that is too weak and sandy a Foundation, permission falls short of approbation, etc. 
† Serm. 3. p. 33.  Darius was an Enemy to the Church, one that kept the Church of God in Bondage and Captivity, used them not as Subjects, but as Slaves, enthralled them to his Tyranny; yet still acknowledged and honoured by the Prophet as their rightful Sovereign,— the primitive Saints submitted to Julian, that hateful Apostate; S. Peter requires Subjection not only to the good and gentle, but to the froward Governors.— Darius made a wicked Law, forbidding Religion, and enforcing to Idolatry, assumed all Religious Worship to himself, yet the Prophet acknowledges and honours him, as his King and Sovereign: observe, Religion requires Subjection to those Kings that deface the Worship of God, and would compel to Idolatry. Now if it be said, that Idolatry was the Worship enjoined by the Laws of the Land: We answer, that Idolatry is against the Law of God, and so the Jews were under a superior Obligation; and I think, if Men may take Arms, when any thing is done to them contrary to human Laws, there seems to be more reason, that they should do so, when any thing is done contrary to the Laws of the great King of Heaven and Earth; but the latter is by our Adversaries disallowed, therefore with much more reason the former. But it is time to return to Bishop Brownrig, who avers, That active and actual Obedience to ungodly Laws we may not, we must not yield, and perform; thus to submit to Men were to rebel against God; but yet protestation of Subjection must continue, though our particular active Obedience be denied, or restrained— though we dare not perform our active Obedience in doing what they command, 
Pag. 34.  yet we must perform our passive Obedience in submitting to their punishments— Papists teach, that Heretical Kings forfeit their Crowns and Lives, if they command against God. No, we must here with Daniel honour their Persons and Calling, when Conscience forbids us to fulfil their Commandments.— Darius also was now the Author of Daniel's destruction, his Law ensnared him, his Power condemned him, his Seal shut him up in the Den of Lions, yet for all this the holy Prophet honours him as his King. Observe, No worng or injury can exempt or discharge our persons from our Lawful Sovereign. 
☜ — He upbraids not the King with Tyranny and Impiety, charges him not with the cruelty of his usage, threatens him not with Vengeance and Judgements from God, much less, as a Prophet, doth he denounce sentence of deprivation against him; but fergetting his wrongs, forgiving his Injuries, sends up a devout Prayer for his life and welfare, etc.   

SECT. XV.  
In Justice I ought to have given King Charles the First the Preference to some of the forecited Authors; but I have reserved him to lead the Van of the remaining Writers, who were particularly engaged in the Service of that Truth, for which that great Prince became a Martyr; and when I have mentioned this, I have said enough to those who consider what he suffered by the Men who were Enemies to the Doctrine of Nonresistance, and what he unanswerably wrote in Defence of that Doctrine, being resolved at present to quote no more of him, than that one Sentence in his Second Paper to Henderson, that to reform (as Grosthead said) in o'er gladii cruentandi, is a wicked and ungodly saying.  
This Prince shall be attended (as he ought) by his Chaplains, and Dr. Hammond comes first, of whom it were enough to say, that he was a Member of the Convocation, anno 1640, for that discovers his Sentiments, since he gave his consent to those Canons. But he hath more particularly declared his Opinion, especially in his 
* L. 2. § 5. p. 53.  Practical Catechism: Some Wars are unjust, as that of Subjects seditiously raised against the Supreme Power in a State. 
† Sect. 9 p. 69, 70.  But what may we fight for, if we may not fight for Religion? Resp. It is the most precious thing indeed, and that to be preserved by all lawful, proper, proportionable means; but then War, or unlawful resistance being of all things most improper to defend, or secure, or plant this, and it being acknowledged unlawful for Peter to use the Sword for the Defence of Christ himself, to do it merely for Religion must needs be very unlawful; Religion hath still been spread, and propagated by suffering, and not by resisting; and indeed it being not in the power of Force to constrain my Soul, or change my Religion, or keep me from the Profession of it, Arms, or Resistance must needs be very improper for that purpose. And the same Author in his Section of Meekness, says, if they be our lawful Magistrates, than our Meekness consists in Obedience, active or passive, acting all their legal Commands, and submitting so far at least, as not to make violent resistance to the punishment, which they shall inflict upon us. I shall put you in mind of this great Truth, that Christ and his Disciples were, 
Id. sect. 11. p. 79, 80.  of all the Doctors that ever were in the World, the most careful to preserve the Doctrine, and Practice of Allegiance, even when the Emperors were the greatest Opposers of the Christian Religion; and if ever you mean to be accounted a Follower of them, you must go, and do likewise.  
S. But was not Tiberius an Usurper, and yet Christ saith, Render to Cesar the things that are Caesar's? C. Julius Cesar wrested the Power out of the Hand of the Senate, but before the time of Tiberius the Business was accorded between the Senate and the Emperors, that the Emperor now reigned unquestioned without any competition from the Senate.— Which Case, how distant it is from other forcible Usurpations (where the Legal Sovereign doth still claim his Right to his Kingdoms, and to the Allegiance of his Subjects, no way acquitting them from their Oaths, or laying down his Pretensions, though for the present he be overpowered) is easily discernible to any who hath the Courage and Fidelity to consider it, and is not by his own Interests bribed, or frighted from the performance of his Christian duty. And this Doctrine he ex professo maintains against S. Marshal, Godwin, and others, in his Treatise of resisting the lawful Magistrate under the colour of Religion, etc. in which he condemns Subjects taking Arms against their Prince 
* p. 54. etc.  by Arguments taken, 1. From the nature of Religion. 2. From the Examples of Christ and Christians. 3. From the making of Christianity, and particularly of the Protestant Doctrine. 4. From the Constitution of the Kingdom; affirming, that in the New Testament there is no one Christian Virtue or Article of Faith more clearly delivered, more effectually enforced upon our Understandings and Affections, than that of Obedience to Kings.  
Bishop Ferne hath written purposely on this Subject, his Resolution of Conscience, whether upon supposition, the King will not discharge his Trust, but is bend or seduced to subvert Religion, Laws and Liberties, Subjects may take Arms and resist.— Resolved, That no Conscience upon such a Supposition or Case can find a clear ground for such Resistance.— whence it follows, that the Resistance made against the higher Powers is unwarrantable, and according to the Apostle, damnable, Rom. xiii. You are told, says Dr. Ferne, the Gospel, and your Liberties, 
Epist.  and all you have are in most eminent danger, and without taking Arms for the defence irrecoverably lost, and that it is lawful by the fundamental Laws of this Kingdom. You must take all this upon trust without any express and particular warrant to rule, and secure your Conscience against the express Words of the Apostle forbidding Resistance, Rom. xiii. 
* §. 3. & 4.  and then disproves that Tenet, That Power is originally in and from the People, and that if a Prince discharge not his Trust, the Power devolves again upon the People, 
† §. 5.  showing, that most of their Weapons for Resistance were sharpened at the Philistines Forge, their Arguments being borrowed from the Roman Schools; and 
‖ § 6.  doth Religion stand in need of a Defence which itself condemns, and which would be a perpetual Scandal to it? But should I transcribe all that is to the purpose, I should offer to the Reader the whole Book, to which I must refer, as I also refer him to the excellent Treatise of the Archbishop of Tuam (Maxwell) called Sacrosancta Regum Majestas, written upon this very Subject.  
Chillingworth. Religion of Protestants a safe way, etc. p. 360.  
If I follow the Scripture, I may, nay I must obey my Sovereign in lawful things, though an Heretic, though a Tyrant; and though, I do not say the Pope, but the Apostles themselves, nay an Angel from Heaven, should teach any thing against the Gospel of Christ, I may, nay I must denounce Anathema to him.   

SECT. XVI.  
I might also only name Dudley Diggs' Book of the Unlawfulness of Subjects taking up Arms against their Sovereign in what case soever, but then I should do wrong to my Subject and the Truth. 
* Pag. 2.  In the Service of which the Author shows, That that one main Principle by which the seduced Multitude hath been tempted to catch at empty Happiness, and thereby have pulled upon themselves Misery and Destruction, That every Man being born free, the Law of Nature doth justify any Attempts to shake off those Bonds imposed upon him by Superiors, if inconvenient and destructive of native Freedom, is false, since every Man is not born free, all being by Nature subject to paternal Power, and consequently to the Supreme Magistrate, to whom divine Law confers the several Powers, which Fathers resigned up; and 
† p. 7.  that those that will allow any Power to Subjects against their Ruler, do thereby dissolve the Sinews of Government, by which they were compacted into one, and which made a Multitude a People; for there cannot be two Powers, and yet the Kingdom remain one: Afterward he proves 
‖ p. 13.  by what Arts and Persuasives People are moved to Rebellion, particularly 
‡ p. 30, 31.  by being brought to believe, That we are a mixed State, and that our Kings are accountable, etc. and then 
* p. 34, 41, 42. etc.  proceeds to prove the Doctrine of Nonresistance from Scripture, proving, that the same Obedience which God required from the Jews under the Law to be shown to their Judges and Kings, is now required, and that Christ enjoins his Followers under the Gospel as high a degree of Patience towards the higher Powers, and that there is great reason that we should perform this duty more cheerfully, because our Saviour hath commended Persecution to all those that will live godly, and that both by Precept and Example— Rebellion in Christians being most prodigious— The Jews wanted not some Colours of Reason to rebel; their Blessings were temporal, but a Christian cannot have any shadow of Scruple. St. Peter failing in this Duty by resisting the Magistrate in defence of his innocent Master, hath taken special care not to be imitated, and therefore informs us largely with the full extent of Christian Patience. Then 
‖ p. 45. etc.  he makes an excellent Comment on St. Paul's Words, Let every Soul be subject, etc. Here is a fair warning, take heed what you do, you have a terrible Enemy to encounter with, it is a Fight against God; you cannot flatter yourselves with a prosperous issue, for those that resist, shall receive to themselves Damnation.— You have God's Word for it, you are damned if you resist.  
This same Year came out a Pamphlet called, The late Covenant asserted, printed on the day of Trouble, Rebuke, and Blasphemies, for Thomas Underhil, Ann. 1643. undertaking to prove, That there is a sweet Agreement between the Protestation and Covenant, and Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy; that the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy did bind to the taking of the Covenant— to take up Arms against their Sovereign, etc. and out of it I shall give an Instance how conscientious those Republican Reformers were, and how obliged by Oaths. 
‡ p. 5. etc.  We have, says he, sworn, that the King ruling by Law is the Supreme Power, and so we have sworn Obedience to him; we abjure any foreign Power; we have sworn that neither Pope, nor Cardinal, nor the most Catholic King, nor the most Christian, shall overrule our King and Kingdom, if we can help it: we have sworn, and we do not repent; 
☜  for in pursuance of this Oath to repel foreign Power we are in Arms at this day. To whom have we sworn Allegiance but to God, and the King in reference to him?— We have sworn, and will not repent to obey the King, 
☜  while he obeys God, ruling his People by his Law and Book. We have not sworn ourselves Servants to Men, their private Wills, their Lusts, etc. and we will maintain the King the higher Power with our Lives and Fortunes. We will obey all his lawful, not personal Commands.— Look into these Oaths, 
☜  and you shall not there find a Word soberly understood contradicting the Covenant: God forbidden that we should vow ourselves Servants to Men, and Rebels to God.— The Queen and the King are notoriously faulty touching both these Oaths, the one doing her utmost to bring in and establish a foreign Power, the other denying Allegiance to the most supreme. Qu. But where have you any warrant to take up Arms against the King? Answ. We will never allow those Words, against the King; they are taken up for the King, and for the defence of all that should be dearest to him; but let it go, against the King, we have warrant for it, when he bends all his force, all his might, sets open the Gates of Hell against the Parliament, against Religion, against our Laws, etc. we vow and covenant to take Arms against King, Queen, both, setting themselves against God, and the power of Godliness, and we have as good Warrant as can be desired for so doing.— 
‖ p. 19  Obj. But I cannot think it a lawful Vow, for we vow to fight against our lawful Prince. Answ. It is not against him, but for him, to deliver his sacred Person out of the hands of Murderers, our Land from out of the hand of Spoilers, and the Laws of God and Men from Sons of Belial, who would make all void, null, and of none effect. Obj. But we have taken the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy already. Answ. You have vowed Allegiance to the King to obey him ruling by Law, according to the Law of Heaven; you have not vowed to obey his private Will, for that is to obey the Lusts of Men, breaking and making void the Laws of God, the Rights and Privileges of a free People. Obj. But the King hath promised to maintain the true Religion. Answ. 
p. 20.  So did the Lady Mary to the Men of Suffolk, etc. To all which venomous Doctrine I will apply this Antidote: Sir Edw. Coke in Calvin's Case says, This damnable Opinion, That Allegiance was due to the King upon the account of his politic Capacity, more than his natural Person, was invented by the two Spencers to cover their Treason; and from thence they deduced these execrable Consequents; 1. That if the King did not demean himself by reason in the Right of his Crown, his Liege's were bound to remove him. 2. That when the King could not be reform by Suit of Law, it ought to be done by the Sword. 3. That his Liege's be bound to govern in aid of him, and in defect of him.— All which Positions were condemned in two succeeding Parliaments.   

SECT. XVII.  
The Year after this the learned Dr. Gerhard Longbaine set out his Review of the Covenant, 
Chap. 9 p. 56.  and therein tells us, That to labour the Advancement of Religion by way of force, contrary to established Laws, and the Prince's Will, hath no warrant by way of Command, or Approbation from God's Word, must be taken for granted, till those who are otherwise minded can show the contrary, and will be needless to persuade, if we show in the second place, that it is against the express Testimony of Scripture. Our Saviour professeth, My Kingdom is not of this World, and adds, for than would my Servants fight: which words, as they evince that it is lawful for Subjects to fight at the Command of their temporal King for the maintenance of his worldly Estate; so they do insinuate, that Christ's Kingdom, being spiritual, must not be advanced by temporal Arms. We have always deprecated the Aspersion which our Adversaries would cast upon us, 
P. 60.  professing, we do not punish any Heretics with Death, but Seminaries for Sedition and Rebellion. Here I must observe, that the Lords and Commons in Parliament, 1 Eliz. confess, they had no means to free the Kingdom from the usurped Power and Authority of the Pope, but with the assent of the Queen's Majesty; so far were they from thinking it lawful to raise Arms for the Extirpation of Popery, when it was established by the Law of the Land. And lest this distinction might seem to invalidate his Objection, he adds, It is utterly destructive to all civil Government; 
P. 61.  for if any be allowed to take up Arms for Propagation or defence of their true Religion, against the civil Laws and Will of their Prince, whosoever hath a mind to rebel, may do it upon the same pretence, and ought not to be questioned by any humane Authority: for though they do but pretend Religion, yet it is impossible for any Judge to convince them of such Pretences; nor can any thing be urged in defence of the true Religion, which may not be made use of by a false.   

SECT. XVIII.  
Anno 1646. Richard Overton (the famous Leveller) decked with many fantastic Titles, printed a Pamphlet, entitled, An Arrow against all Tyrants and Tyranny; wherein the Original, Rise, Extent, and End of Magisterial Power, the Natural and National Rights, Freedoms, and Properties of Mankind, are discovered, and undeniably maintained, and the late Encroachments of the Lords over the Commons legally condemned. Out of which, that the Principles of such Men may be made known, I shall transcribe a few passages. To every individual in Nature is given an individual Property by Nature, not to be invaded or usurped by any; for every one as he is himself, so he hath a self-propriety, else he could not be himself.— No Man hath Power over my Rights, and Liberties, and I over no Man's.— If I presume any farther, I am an Encroacher, and an Invader upon another Man's Right, to which I have no Right; for by natural Birth all Men are equal and alike, born to like Property, Liberty, and Freedom.— No Man naturally would be fooled of his Liberty by his Neighbor's Craft, or enslaved by his Neighbor's Might; for it is Nature's Instinct to preserve itself from all things hurtful and obnoxious.— And from this fountain or root all just humane Powers take their Original, not immediately from God (as Kings usually plead their Prerogative) but mediately by the hand of Nature, as from the Represented to the Representers— no more may be communicated than is conducive to a better Being, more Safety and Freedom: he that gives more sins against his own Flesh; and he that takes more is a Thief, and a Robber to his kind, every Man being by nature a King, Priest, and Prophet in his own natural Circuit and Compass, whereof no second may partake but by Deputation, Commission, and free Consent from him whose natural Right and freedom it is.— As by Nature no Man can abuse, beat, torment or afflict himself; so by Nature no Man can give that Power to another.— So that such so deputed are to the general no otherwise than as a Schoolman to a particular, his Mastership is by deputation; and that ad beneplacitum, and may be removed at the Parent's pleasure upon neglect or abuse thereof, and it may be conferred on another. And speaking to the Parliament, he continues: If you think you have power over us to save, or destroy us at your pleasure— the edge of your own Arguments against the King in this kind may be turned upon yourselves; for if for the safety of the people he might in equity be opposed by you in his Tyrannies, Oppressions and Cruelties; even so may you by the same rule of right Reason be opposed by the people in general in the like cases of destruction and ruin by you upon them; for the safety of the people is the Sovereign Law, to which all must be subject, and for which all powers humane are ordained by them. And at last applies all to the pulling down of the House of Lords, as Usurpers. The Pamphlet is said to be printed at the backside of the Cyclopian Mountains by Martin Claw-clergy Printer to the Reverend Assembly of Divines, and are to be sold at the sign of the Subject's Liberty right opposite to persecuting Court.   

SECT. XIX.  
As a Preservative against the infection of such dangerous Principles Bishop Sanderson gives us his Advice. 
* Pref. to Archbi. usher's Book of the Power of Kings, etc.  Some say, it is not for Divines to meddle in these matters, nor do they come within the compass of their Sphere, that they ought to be left to the cognizance and determination of Statesmen, and Lawyers, who are to be presumed most able to judge; the one (by the constitution) in whom the Sovereignty resides; the other (by the Laws) how that Sovereignty is bounded, and limited in the exercise of it— while another sort of Men say, that the original of Government is from the people, that the Power which Kings and Princes have is derived unto them from the people by way of pact, or Contract— that this Power the people may enlarge, or restrain at their pleasure— while the known Laws of the Land have declared the Sovereignty so fully and particularly, and the Oath of Supremacy hath expressed it so clearly, that any Man of an ordinary capacity may understand it as well as the deepest Statesman in the World. That which some talk of a mixed Monarchy (which by the by is an arrant Bull, a contradiction in adjecto, and destroys itself) and others dream of a co-ordination in the Government, as was hatched amidst the heat of our late troubles, but never before heard of in our Land, 
☜  are in truth no better than senseless, and ridiculous fancies— which must fall down before the Oath 
* Vid. Usher of the Power of the Prince. Sect. 6. pag. 6.  (that the King's Highness is the only Supreme Governor, etc.) as Dagon before the Ark; which Oath is sworn according to the plain, and common sense and understanding of the words.— After this he disproves the Position: That the original of Government is from Compact— for the Power of the sword is by the Ordinance of God given to Kings; and for the Contract itself it would trouble the ablest of them that hold the Opinion; to give a direct satisfactory answer to these following Interrogatories: 1. Of the Persons contracting; Were all without difference of Age, Sex, Condition or other respect promiscuously admitted to drive the bargain or not, etc. if any excluded; who excluded them, and by whose Order, and by what Authority was it done, and who gave them that Authority?— Shall the Majority of Votes conclude all Dissenters, & c? God gave Adam the Government of all the inferior World, and the properties of Cain and Abel were held of him; so that it is undoubtedly true, that Government was before Property— and after the Flood the like Government was in Noah, etc. 
* Id. de juram. praelect. 4.  An Oath imposed by one that hath not a just Authority, is to be declined as much as we can; if it be forcibly imposed, it is to be taken with reluctancy, upon this Condition, that the words imply nothing unlawful, or prejudicial to the rights of a third Person; for, if so, we must refuse the Oath at the peril of our lives. 
* Id. praelect. 6.  But what shall we do when the Oath is ambiguous, and we are left to take it in our own sense? R. In this Case we are to suspect a Cheat; and therefore a wise and good Man will reject such an Oath, for which Assertion he there gives his Reasons.— These Lectures of this great Casuist were put into English by the Order, and corrected with the hand of the Martyr Charles. But I must leave the Martyr to return to the Bishop, who in his Lectures of Conscience preaches the same Doctrine. 
* Praelect. 2. Sect. 7. de Conscient.  We must do nothing that is evil for the promoting of the glory of God, and he instances in the zeal of the Jews: the fury of the Germane Anabaptists and our English Rebellion; he further saith 
† Sect. 19  That it is the plea of all seditious persons to pretend the glory of God, the reformation of Religion, etc. while he that proposeth the glory of God for his end, aught to take the word of God as the rule of his Actions. 
* Sect. 21.  Nor do those err less, perhaps more grievously, who drive out one evil by another, as Tyranny by Sedition, Superstition by Sacrilege, etc. 
* Sect. 22.  Object. But rather than destroy the Commonwealth, may we not violate Laws, & c? Resp. I remember, that Christ was thought fit by Caiaphas to be crucified, though innocent, because it was expedient, etc. but this is to make the Scriptures a nose of Wax; but away with such Divinity from our Schools, from our Pulpits, from our minds; the Apostles of our holy Saviour have taught us otherwise; nay the honest Heathens had better thoughts, we must not do evil, that good may come thereof. 
* Sect. 23.  He also avers, that he heard it once said, that those words of the Apostle were meant only of private persons; but that it was lawful, notwithstanding this Command, for the great Council of a Nation to do evil, if the public necessity required it.— 
* Praelect. 6. Sect. 3.  All Laws made by a lawful Power do oblige to subjection, so that it is not lawful for a Subject to resist the Supreme Authority, let it require things just or unjust. 
☞  This was the perpetual Sentiment and practice of the primitive Christians, who lived under the severest tyranny; in Rom. 13. the Apostle presses the necessity of subjection with many arguments, but gives no Man liberty to resist in any case, or upon any pretence whatsoever. It's always necessary to submit, though not always necessary (actively) to obey. After which he proceeds 
* Praelect. 7.  to prove, that Power is from God; and that the people have no right to resume it, etc. and that that Maxim, 
* Praelect. 10.  That the safety of the people is the supreme Law, must include the King in it, and that especially; and that it supposes, there must be an unaccountable Authority in the Prince above all positive humane Law, to whom it belongs to foresee, and Order, that the Commonwealth receive no damage, either through defect of a Law, or through the too superstitious observation of it.  


Sanderson's Twelfth Sermon, ad Aulam.  
No Conjuncture of Circumstances whatsoever can make that expedient to be done at any time that is of itself and in the kind unlawful; for a Man to take up Arms (offensive or defensive) against a lawful Sovereign, may not be done by any Man at any time, in any case, upon any colour or pretention whatsoever; Not for the maintenance of the Lives or Liberties either of ourselves or others, nor for the defence of Religion, nor the preservation of a Church or State; no nor yet if that could be imagined possible for the salvation of a Soul, no not for the redemption of the whole World. p. 166.   

Ad Magistratum.  
Both Wrath and Conscience bind us to our duties, so that if we withdraw our subjection, we both wound our own Consciences and incur your just Wrath, but only Conscience bindeth you to yours, and not Wrath; so that if ye withdraw your help we may not use Wrath, but must suffer it with Patience, and permit all to the judgement of your own Consciences and God the Judge of all men's Consciences. p. 86.   

Ad Aulam.  
As for our Accsuers (Papists I mean, and Disciplinarians) If there were no more to be instanced in but that one cursed Position alone, wherein (notwithstanding their disagreements otherwise) they both consent; That lawful Sovereigns may be by their Subjects resisted, and Arms taken up against them for the Cause of Religion, it were enough to make good the Charge against them both, which is such a notorious piece of ungodliness as no Man that either feareth God or the King as he ought to do, can speak of, or think of without detestation. pag. 134.   

Ad Aulam.  
It were good if we did remember that they are to give up that account to God only, and not to us. pag. 177.     

SECT. XX.  
Doctor Bernard 
* Ser. on Rom. 13.2. in the Clavi Trabalea. p. 21.  affirms, that some Expositors conceived one cause of the Apostle's Exhortation to be the Rumour then falsely raised upon them, as if they had been seditious, etc. And that the Kingdom of Christ tended to the absolving of Subjects from their obedience to any other— And then shows, 
† p. 28, 29.  That it is a Popish Assertion, that a people can never so far transfer their right over to a King, but they retain the habit of it still within themselves— averring 
* p. 30.  That whoever have, or shall resist, do tread under their feet the holy Scriptures— 
† p. 35.  That as Kings receive their Power from God, so are we to leave them only to God, if they shall abuse it; not but that they may, and aught to be prudently and humbly reminded of their duties; but yet without lifting up our Hands against them in the least resistance of them— God wanteth not means whereby he can, when he pleases, remove or amend them. 
‖ Pag. 40.  The Arms of the Primitive Christians were nothing but Prayers to God, Petitions to the Emperor, or Flight, when persecuted, etc.  
To this purpose does Mr. Symmons in his Vindication of King Charles aver, That 
* Sect. 8. p. 84.  Rebels as for God, they believe him as little as they do the King; for they dare not trust him for protection, they have more confidence in the Militia a great deal, and stand more upon it; beside if they did believe God, they would also fear him (Faith and Fear go together) they would regard his Word more, and not be so opposite in all their ways, or endeavour to make it of none effect by their sinful Ordinances and Traditions; besides Faith in God discovers itself by their doing the Works of God; and they are not Hatred, Strife, Sedition, Rebellion, Murder, Lying, Slandering and speaking evil of Dignities, 
Sect. 14. p. 146.  etc. Tell us, (O ye pretenders to Piety) where is that Subjection to the King for conscience sake, which S. Paul calls for, and that Obedience for the Lords sake, which S. Peter requires, 
Pag. 257.  etc.— Consider, and call to mind, whether those Teachers, 
☞  who have been most active, and busy in drawing you into this way, have not hereby contradicted their own former Doctrines? As it was said of Stephen Gardiner, that no Man in the Days of Henry the Eighth had spoken better for the King's Authority, than he had done in his Book De verâ obedientid, and yet no Man more violent in Queen Mary's Time, in persecuting those that held fast to the same Truth and Doctrine; may not the like be affirmed of many of your Preachers, that no Men taught the Duty of Obedience better, or inveighed more against Rebellion, 
Pag. 258, 259.  and sheedin of Blood, than they heretofore have done, but now none more violent.— Observe that Note out of Mr. Fox, how Henry the Fourth that deposed Richard the Second, was the first of all English Kings that began the burning of God's Saints for their standing against the Papists. 
Pag. 260, 261, 262.  As the Doctrine of Infallibility is the Root of all Error among the Papists, so it is now among them that are the Worshippers of a Parliament; for when it was believed, that the Pope could not err, than he might oppose Princes, excommunicate Kings, absolve Subjects from their Obedience, etc. so now, this being swallowed, that the Parliament cannot err, they may raise Rebellion too, absolve People from their Loyalty, persecute the King, etc.— Consider, whether in any thing these Men have performed what at first they promised, whether Religion be better settled, the Church better reform, and united, or the Commonwealth more flourishing, etc.   

SECT. XXI.  
Thus that good Man asserted the Rights of Princes, and the Duty of Subjects in those evil Days, 
* Bishop of Lond. 2d. Letter ab. the neglect of the Lord's Supper.  when under an usurped Power Sin was the Law, and Transgression the Commandment. When three once happy Nations wore the heavy Yoke of Slavery, and Men felt to their cost what the power of the People could do, till God of his infinite Mercy restored our Judges as at the first, and our Counsellors as at the beginning, under whom Truth appeared in its true Colours, and the Mask of Hypocrisy would no longer hid the Deformities of the Traitor; and here I will not mention the Acts of Parliament made just after the Restoration, that condemn the Power of the People, that assert their Authority, Superiority and Unaccountableness of Princes, and the Unlawfulness of taking Arms against them upon any pretence whatsoever; and confine myself to the Writings of the eminent Divines of the Age; and I will begin with the Bishop of Down and Conner, Dr. Taylor, 
† Ductor dubitant. B. 3. c. 3. Rule 1.  who proves, That the supreme Power in every Republic is universal, absolute, and unlimited.— 
‖ Rule 3. n. 1.  That it is not lawful for Subjects to rebel, or take up Arms against the Supreme Power of the Nation upon any pretext whatsoever.— He that lifts up his Hand against the Supreme Power or Authority that God hath appointed over him, is impious against God, and fights against him, Rom. 13. The Apostle doth not say, he that doth not obey is disobedient to God; for that is not true: in some Cases it is lawful not to obey, but in all Cases it is necessary not to resist. 
* Id. n. 2.  I do not know any Proposition in the World clearer, 
☞  and more certain in Christianity than this Rule. And in the fifteenth Number he answers at large that wild Question, as he calls it, If a King went about to destroy his People, is resistance then lawful? And concludes all, 
† N. 15, 17.  We have nothing dearer to us than our Lives and our Religion, but in both these Cases we find whole Armies of Christians dying quietly, and suffering Persecution without murmur— if the Prince doth not do his Duty, that is no Warrant for me not to do mine.  
To this pious Prelate, now in Heaven, I will join a pious Brother of his as yet on Earth 
† Bishop Kenn's Expos. Ch. Cat. V Comman.  Who thus addresses to God in the behalf of his Sovereign: Thou, O Lord, hast set our most Gracious King over us, as our Political Parent, as the Supreme Minister, to govern and protect us, and to be a terror to them that do evil.— O my God, give Grace to me, and to all my Fellow Subjects, next to thine own infinite self, to love and honour, to fear and obey our Sovereign Lord the King thy own Vicegerent for Conscience sake, and for thy own sake, who hast placed him over us; O may we ever faithfully render him his due Tribute; O may we ever pray for his Prosperity, sacrifice our Fortunes, and our Lives in his defence, and be always ready rather to suffer than to resist. So also say the Bishops of Sarum and Exon.  

Seth, Lord Bishop of Sarum 's Sermon Preached before the King at White-Hall, November 5. 1661.  

Rom. 13.2. And they that resist, shall receive to themselves damnation.  
If within the Compass of those Foundations which I have mentioned, 
Pag. 9  be found any colour or shadow of Licence for any person whatsoever, upon any pretence whatsoever, to entrench upon the power of lawful Magistracy, if any warrant at all for open Rebellion, or privy Conspiracies, for murdering or deposing of Princes, or absolving Subjects from their Allegiance; then let Kings cease to be our Nursing Fathers, and Queens to be our Nursing Mothers.  
The Act of Resistance is set down— absolutely without any restraint, 
Pag. 19  in respect of any Pretences, or Causes whatsoever. So that the sense of the words resolved by the Scriptures, is this; every Soul which upon any pretence whatsoever, in any manner whatsoever, shall resist the lawful Authority that is over him, shall receive to himself damnation, that is, he puts himself thereby into a state of damnation.  
If Erroneous, 
Pag. 25.  heretical, or Idolatrous Magistrates may be resisted, (because they are so, or because they join oppression of godly Men unto their Error in Religion) how can any Kingdom stand?  
Supposing this Tenet to be true, it is indeed evident, 
Pag. 26.  no Government can be. But now what colour can there be to charge this Tenet upon Christianity? Doth the Old or New Testament give any occasion to this Doctrine? Is it countenanced, 1. By Moses? Or 2. By the Prophets? Or 3. By our Saviour? Or 4. By the Apostles? 5. That Cloud of Witnesses, (the Noble Army of Martyrs) did they give testimony to this Assertion, or to the contrary?  
1. Moses was so far from the Doctrine of Resistance, 
Pag. 27.  that notwithstanding the Hardness of Pharaoh's Heart, the Cruelty of the Bondage, the Weakness of the Egyptians by Plagues, the Number of Israel six hundred thousand, and three thousand five hundred and fifty fight Men above twenty years old, besides the Tribe of Levi; yet he would not lead them unto the promised Land, without Pharaoh's positive and express consent to their Departure.  
2. As for the Prophets; in the third Chapter of Daniel we find three of God's Children put to the Trial (the fiery Trial) of this Doctrine, by Nabuchadnezzar, an Idolater, and a Tyrant, acting highly under both those Capacities together. They were cast into the fiery Furnace, because they would not worship the Golden Image which he had set up. And in the sixth we find Daniel thrown into the Lion's Den, only for praying to the God of Israel. Let us consider their Behaviour, did they resist or mutiny, or labour to alienate or discontent, or (by denouncing Threats and Terrors) to discourage Subjects from Obedience? How had they been instructed by their Prophets? Jeremy (2 Chron. 36.13.) had taught them that Zedekiah had turned from the Lord God of Israel, in rebelling against Nabuchadnezzar, who had made him swear by God; and that they ought to seek the peace of the city whither they were carried captives, and to pray unto the Lord for it— Jer. 29.7. And therefore the three Children in the Third of Daniel only refer themselves to God for Deliverance; and Daniel in the midst of the Lion's Den prays hearty for Darius: O king live for ever: Dan. 6.21.  
3. In the next place let us consider the Case of Christ and his Apostles, and see whether any such Tenet may be collected from their Doctrine or Practice, their Speeches, or their Actions. As for what concerns our Lord Christ, I have had the Honour formerly in this place more at large to vindicate him from such Aspersions. He paid Tribute at the expense of a Miracle, Matth. 17.27. He submitted himself to all the Powers that were over him; to the Sanhedrim and their Delegates, to Herod, and to Pontius Pilate: he submitted himself to death by an unjust Sentence, even to the bitter and accursed Death upon the Cross, Phil. 2.8. This was his Practice. As for his Doctrine, he taught Men to render to Cesar the things that were Caesar's, Matt. 22.21. He acknowledged Pilate 's Power to be from above, John 19.11. He rebuked Peter for smiting with the Sword; and told him, that those that take the sword shall perish by the sword, Matth. 26.52. He taught his Disciples to pray for them which should persecute them, Matth. 5.44. And the utmost permission which he gave them, was, when they were persecuted in one city to flee unto another, Matth. 10.23.  
4. As for the Apostles, they taught Men to obey them that have the rule over them, Heb. 13.17. To submit themselves to every Ordinance of Man, 1 Pet. 2.13. To do all things without murmuring or disputing, Phil. 2.14. To pray for Kings, and all that are in authority, 1 Tim. 2.2. Saint Peter hath told us, that such as despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities are (in an especial manner) reserved to Judgement, 1 Pet. 2.9, 10. And Saint Paul, in my Text, that they shall receive damnation.  
This Doctrine they sealed with their Blood. Saint Peter (according to Ecclesiastical Tradition) was crucified, and S. Paul beheaded, James, the Son of Zebedeus, slain with the Sword, etc.  
Now, as for the Powers, to which all these Instructions and Behaviours did refer, they were for Idolatry and Tyranny and Persecution— Humani generis portenta. If it be objected, that all these submitted because they were not able to resist: the Answer upon Christian Principles might be, That he which restrained the Flames, and stopped the mouths of Lions, could have given his Servants power to resist; that Christ could have prayed his Father who would have given him more than twelve Legions of Angels for his relief; that the Apostles, who wrought mighty Signs and Wonders, could have rescued themselves, had it not rather pleased the great Ordainer of Powers, by their submission to ratify and establish the Doctrine of Obedience.  
5. But the Belief and Practice of the Primitive Christians will satisfy this Objection even to common Sense and Reason.  
The Instances in this kind are infinite, where Christians, abounding in numbers, being in Arms, and abundantly able to make resistance, have chosen, with the expense of their lives, to yield obedience to Idolaters, persecuting them for their Religion. I shall name but two Examples.  
Tertullian tells the Emperor, that his Cities, Islands, Castles, Councils, Armies, Regiments and Companies, the Palace, the Senate, the Courts of Judicature were filled with Christians; and yet they submitted to Persecution.  
And we read, that the Thebean Legion consisted of six thousand, six hundred, sixty and six persons, every Man Christian, when they submitted to the Decimation of Maximinian for Religion.  
MISHPAT HAMELEK, 
Pag. 63.  (the Jus Regium) the Fundamental Law of the Kings of Israel.  
What then is the meaning of Mishpat hamelsk? Surely it imports thus much, that if all this hard usage should come upon them, they might cry unto the Lord (1 Sam. viij. 18.) but that it would not dissolve Jus Regium (the Right of Sovereignty) or enable them to resist their Kings, or rebel against them.  
That— Pretence, 
Pag. 67.  that after a lawful Sovereign is established— the Power still remains in the People (in the diffused Body of them or their Representatives) to alter the Government as they please; it is in respect of Policy and Government, what the Sin of the Holy Ghost is to Religion.  
These were their secret Griefs; 
Pag. 69.  for a Redress whereof they make a party in the Parliament, they gain to them two hundred and fifty Men, famous in the Parliament, Men of Renown; and in order to their ambitious Designs, they remonstrate against Moses, Numb. xuj. 13. and their Declaration was this Pretence which we are upon; that all the Congregation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were holy, and that Moses and Aaron had lifted up themselves above them, that is, that their power was a contrivance of themselves, not an Ordinance of God; that notwithstanding what God had done to settle the Civil and Ecclesiastical Power, it remained still in the People, or their Representatives assembled together. Now the Scripture tells us, that since the World began God was never more highly provoked, than upon this occasion, Numb. xuj. 32. When he heard this, he was wrath, and greatly abhorred them; he invented a new thing in the World for their sakes; for the Earth opened, and swallowed up Dathan, and covered the congregation of Abiram.  
It tells us, 
Pag. 71.  in effect, that Might is Right; that every thing is just or unjust; good or evil, according to the pleasure of the prevailing Force, whom we are to obey till a stronger than he cometh, or we be able to go through with Resistance.  
That in reference to this Life, 
Pag. 71.  Obedience is a matter of Wit and Prudence; and after Life there remain for us no Concernments.  
How stramineous is this Theory compared with the Christian Theory, which speaks in this wise, Let every Soul be subject to the higher Powers?  
It is but a little while since the Anointed of the Lord, 
Pag. 74.  the holiest, the wisest, the best of Kings, was taken in the Snares of Men pretending to Reformation, and sacrificed to the fury of Men possessed by an evil Spirit from the Lord.  
It is but a very little while since the Lamentation of Jeremy was in the mouth of all the Faithful in the Land, 
Pag. 74.  Lam. two. 9 Our Kings and our Princes were amongst the Gentiles.  
It may be all these things have been done, 
Pag. 75.  that the Say of our Saviour might be fulfilled, Matth. 18.7. ibid. 6. It cannot be but that Offences will come, but woe be to them by whom they come; it were better that a Mill stone, etc.  
It may be God suffered the late Rebellion to prevail, 
Pag. 76.  that he might not leave himself without witness, but show forth his Wonders in our days, in the miraculous Restitution of our gracious Sovereign and the Church.  
Surely these things were suffered, 
Pag. 77.  that the Faith, and Patience and Loyalty of the Church of England might be made bright and glorious by the Flames of Persecution; and that in the day when God shall have given our most gracious Sovereign the hearts or necks of all his Enemies, it may not repent him of the kindness he hath shown to Religion and Government, in lifting out of the Dust the despised Head of that only Church (for aught I know) which makes Obedience, without base Restrictions and Limitations, an Article of its Religion.  
Bish. of Exeter's Serm. before the House of Lords, Nou. 5. 1678.  
Certainly their Authority who lived in the Primitive Light (and who bear witness to their own disadvantage, teaching Submission to Magigrates, though absolute Tyrants, and who never took up any Arms against them, but Prayers and Tears) ought to beget in us a conformity to those innocent times, when Christianity gained as much by Patience as 'tis now like to lose by Rebellion.  
The Emperors for the first three hundred years after Christ, for the generality were very bad, but especially to the Christians they were bloody and cruel; and yet we never read of any Insurrection of the Christians against them, though they were in a condition to do it. The Thebean Legion were all Christians; when the Emperor commanded the whole Army to offer Sacrifice to false Gods, they removed their Quarters, that they might, if possible, avoid the occasion of displeasing the Emperor. He summons them a second time to perform that Worship; they return an humble denial. The Emperor not content with that Answer, puts them to a Decimation; to which they submit with much cheerfulness, and die praying for their Persecutors.  
Not to trouble you with many Witnesses of this Truth, take one for all. Tertullian, who wrote his Apologetic as the sense of the whole Church, he makes there a bold Challenge, and desires them to produce, if they can, any one Example of any Christian taking part with Rebels, such as Cassius Niger and others were: No, he tells them the Christians were better instructed than to hold Resistance lawful: Nos judicium Dei suspicimus, etc. We with patience submit, and kiss the Rod that scourgeth us. Though they have no just cause to torment us, yet there is too much cause why we should suffer. We must acknowledge our Sins against God, and he may punish us in what way he thinks fit; however, resist we must not.  
And again, in his thirty seventh Paragraph of that Apologetic, he tells the Emperor, That his Cities, Istands, Castles, Councils, Armies, his Palace and Courts of Judicature, were filled with Christians; Sic non deesset nobis vis Copiarum: If we had a mind, we could not want force to resist; but we dare not save our Bodies to the eternal loss and perdition of our Souls. We wish to the Emperor a long Life, an happy Reign, a valiant Army, a faithful Council, a sober People and a quiet World. Such as these were their Wishes towards their Emperors, though Heathens and Persecutors.  
Thus you see the Minds of Christ, his Apostles, and the Primitive Christians in that great Point of Obedience to Magistrates. Therefore they who raise Tumults, abett Rebellions, set on foot Plots and Conspiracies, teach Doctrines to murder Princes, are not of the Gospel-Spirit.   

Bishop Hacket's Sermons: on Psal. xli. 9 on the Gowry's Conspiracy, p. 740. 741.  
Surely above all Men, if the Clergy be not careful to set forth the honour of this day with great Honour and Solemnity, it is their Ignorance or their Negligence.— Had these furious Swordmen that laid their Weapons to his Throat, found an austere Master, nay a Tyrant, they must have born with it, and not touch the Man that bears the Character of the Lord's Anointed.   

Dr. Sharp before the House of Commons, Apr. 11. 1679. p. 35.  
O may God so inspire you, That by your means the Person of his sacred Majesty, and the Rights of his Crown, may be secured against all wicked Attempts. And p. 39 Let us hate all Tricks, and Devices, and Equivocations, both in our Words and in Carriage. Let us be constantly and inflexibly loyal to our Prince, and let no consideration in the World make us violate our Allegiance to him. And in his Sermon preached before the Lord Mayor, 1680. speaking of the upright Man, He is one— studiously endeavouring to preserve his Allegiance to his Prince. Pag. 19 He is a Man— that honours the King, that is observant of the Laws, that is true to the Government, and meddles not with them that are given to change. In his Sermon preached at the Yorkshire Feast Feb. 17. 16 79/ 80. p. 17. We may do a great deal of good by our good Examples of Loyalty.     

SECT. XXII.  
And to evince, that this hath been the unquestioned Doctrine of all the Members of this Church, I shall subjoin many other Testimonies. 
* Bish. of Lincoln Principl. and Posit. p. 7.  That England is a Monarchy, the Crown Imperial, and our Kings supreme Governors, and sole supreme Governors of this Realm, and all other their Dominions, will (I believe, I am sure it should) be granted, seeing our Authentic Laws and Statutes do so expressly, and so often say it. In our Oath of Supremacy we swear, That the King is the only supreme Governor; supreme, so none (not the Pope) above him; and only supreme, so none coordinate, or equal to him; so that by our known Laws our King is solo Deo minor, invested with such a Supremacy, as excludes both Pope and People (and all the World, God Almighty only excepted by whom Kings do reign) from having any Power, Jurisdiction, or Authority over him.— This Book hath its Imprimatur, not from any mean hand, but from my Lord Bishop of London himself, which is to me a plain implication, that his Lordship did then own the Doctrine; and so we have another Testimony to the Truth.  

† Burnet's Vind. etc. printed at Glascow, p. 7. etc.  The Vindication of the Authority, etc. of the Church, is full to this purpose. Obj. May not Subjects, when oppressed in their established Religion, defend themselves, and resist the Magistrate? doth not the Law of Nature direct Men to defend themselves when unjustly assaulted? Answ. We must distinguish between the Laws of Nature, and the Rights and Permissions of Nature; now self-defence cannot be a Law of Nature, 
☜  for than it could never be dispensed with without a Sin; nay were a man never so criminal, he ought not to suffer himself to be killed, neither should any Malefactor submit to the sentence of the Judge, but stand to his defence by all the force he could raise; and it will not serve turn to say, for the good of Society he ought to submit, for no Man must violate the Laws of Nature, were it on never so good a design.— Christ's dying for us shows that self-defence can be no Law of Nature, otherwise Christ, who fulfilled all Righteousness, had contradicted the Laws of Nature.— 
‖ Pag. 10.  He than proceeds to demonstrate, that Magistrates derive not their Power from the Surrender of the People— for none can surrender what they have not. 
☜  Take then a multitude of People not yet associated, none of them hath power of his own Life, neither hath he power of his Neighbor's, since no Man out of Society may kill another, be his Crime never so great, much less be his own Murderer.— A multitude of People not yet associated are but so many individual Persons, therefore the Power of the Sword is not from the People, nor is any of their Delegation, but is from God.— 
* Pag. 35.  Consider, that Christ was to fulfil all Righteousness; if then the Laws of Nature exact our Defence in case of unjust Persecution for Religion, 
☜  he was bound to that Law as well as we, for he came not to destroy, but to fulfil the Law, both by his Example and Precepts: if then you charge the Doctrine of Absolute Submission as brutish or stupid (or as contrary to the Law of Nature) see you do not run into Blasphemy by charging that Holy One foolishly; for whatever he knew of the secret Will of God, he was to follow his revealed Will in his Actions.— 
† Pag. 39  If fight at that time (when Saint Peter drew his Sword) for preserving Christ from the Jews, were contrary to the Nature of his Kingdom, so, the Rule of the Gospel binding all the succeeding Ages of the Church no less than those to whom it was first delivered, what was then contrary to the nature of Christ's Kingdom, will be so still.— 
* P. 42.  I shall add one thing, which all Casuists hold a safe Rule in matters that are doubtful; viz. That we ought to follow that side of the doubt that is freest from hazard; 
☞  here then damnation is at least the seeming hazard of resistance, therefore except upon as clear evidence you prove the danger of absolute submission to be of the same nature that it may balance the other, then absolute submission, as being the securest is to be followed. 
* P. 41. — Obj. But he is the Minister of God to thee for good, and if they swerve from this, they forsake the end for which they were raised up, and so fall from the Power and right to our Obedience. Answ. It is true, the Sovereign is a Minister of God for good, so that he corrupts his power grossly, when he pursues not that design; but in that he is only accountable to God, whose Minister he is, etc.— The same Author continued steadfast to this Doctrine, when he left Scotland, and came into England; 
* Ser. on Jan. 30. 1674/5 5. p. 7. 9  David, when Saul was most unjustly hunting his life, would not stretch forth his hand against him, seeing he was the anointed of the Lord— from Almighty God the King had his Power, and to him he knew he was to give an account of his Administration.— Affirming, that the Enemies of that Royal Martyr, 
P. 38.  by Oaths and Counter-Oaths which they often took, had their Consciences so seared as to be past feeling— till they threw off all sense of God and Religion, and set up professedly for Atheism; 
* Id. Ser. on Rom. 13.5.— p. 5, 6. etc.  The real causes of Commotions are seldom the same with those that are pretended for training in, and engaging a multitude; they are truly an ungrounded, and aspiring Ambition, the heat and fury of men's passions, etc.— But 
* P. 19 20, etc.  Natural and revealed Religion do offer us these reasons for obliging us to subjection to the higher Powers; 1. We are taught that those Powers are of God, nay that they are Gods; a strain of speech, that if divine Authority did not warrant it, would pass for impudent, and blasphemous flattery— Deputed Powers are only accountable to those from whom they derive their Authority— and L. 
P. 25.  the Example and practice of our Great Master— My kingdom is not of this World; this doth so expressly discharge all bustling and fight on the pretence of Religion, 
☞  that we must either set up for another Gospel, or utterly reject what is so formally condemned by the Author of this we profess to believe.— Never cause of Religion was of so great concern as the preserving the Head and Author of it. 
P. 27. — If we examine the nature and design of that holy Religion our Saviour delivered, we shall find nothing more diametrically opposite to all its Rules than the distempered fury of these misguided Zealots.— Otherwise doth St. Paul teach the Romans, though then groaning under the severest rigours of bondage and tyranny; and St. Peter doth at full length once and again call on all Christians to prepare for sufferings, and to bear them patiently. 
☜ — And though the bondage of the Slaves was heavy, and highly contrary to all the freedoms of the humane nature; yet he exhorts them to bear the severities even of their froward and unjust Masters. 
P. 29. — With this Argument, that Christ suffered for them, leaving them an Example; from these unerring practices and principles, must all true Christians take the measures of their actions and the rules of their Life; and indeed the first converts to Christianity embraced the Cross, and bore it not only with patience, but with joy. Neither the cruelty of their unrelenting persecutors, nor the continued tract of their miseries which did not end but with their days, prevailed on them, either to renounce the faith, or do that which is next degree to it, throw off the Cross, and betake themselves to seditious practices for their preservation. 
☜ — In twenty years' persecution the Martyrs of one Province (Egypt) were reckoned to be betwixt eight or nine hundred thousand, 
P. 31.32,  and yet no tumults were raised against all this tyranny and injustice; and though after that the Emperors turned Christian, and established the Faith by Law; yet neither did the subtle attempts of Julian the Apostate, nor the open persecutions of some Arian Emperors, who did with great violence persecute the Orthodox, occasion any seditious Combinations against Authority.— And though Religion suffered great decays in the succession of many Ages, yet for the first ten Centuries no Father, 
☜  or Doctor of the Church, or any Assembly of Churchmen did ever teach, maintain or justify any Religion, or seditious Doctrines or practices. It is true, about the end of the Eleventh Century this pestiferous Doctrine took its rise and was first broached, and vented by Pope Gregory VII. Hildebrand. 
P. 36. — The same equality of Justice and freedom that obliged me to lay open this, ties me to tax also those who pretend a great hate against Rome, and value themselves on the abhorring all the Doctrines and practices of that Church, and yet have carried along with them one of their most pestiferous Opinions; pretending Reformation when they would bring all under confusion, and vouching the Cause and Word of God, when they were disturbing that Authority he had set up, and opposing those impowered by him; and the more Piety and devotion such daring pretenders put on, it still brings the greater stain and imputation on Religion, as if it gave a patrociny to those practices it so plainly condemns.— But blessed be God, our Church hates and condemns this Doctrine from what hand soever it comes, 
☞  and hath established the Rights and Authority of Princes on sure and unalterable foundations; enjoining an entire Obedience to all the lawful Commands of Authority, and an absolute submission to that supreme Power God hath put in our Sovereign's hands; this Doctrine we justly glory in; and if any that had their Baptism and Education in our Church, have turned Renegadoes from this, they proved no less Enemies to the Church herself, than to the Civil Authority, so that their Apostasy leaves no blame on our Church.  
The same learned Man 
* P. 446.  in a marginal Note on Bishop Bedel's Letter to Wadsworth (when the Bishop was representing the common Principles of those Papists and Protestants, who asserted a right of taking up Arms against their Sovereign, whenever their Lives, Properties or Religion were invaded) saith, This passage above is to be considered as a Relation, not as the Author's Opinion; but yet for fear of taking it by the wrong handle, the Reader is desired to take notice, that a Subject's resisting his Prince in any cause whatsoever is unlawful and impious. Which passage I have lately seen in some Copies of the same Edition (for I never heard but of one) thus altered: This passage above is to be considered as a Relation, not as the Author's Opinion, lest it should misled the Reader into a dangerous mistake. And when he makes his own Apology 
* Pres. to the Ser. Nou. 5. at the Rolls. 1684.  He professes, I am sure that the last part of the Sermon that presses Loyalty and Obedience, is not at all enlarged beyond what I not only preached in that Sermon, but on many other occasions, in which I appeal to all my Hearers; but I leave the Sermon to speak for itself and me both; and will refer it to every Man's Conscience that reads it to judge, whether or not I can be concluded from it to be a Person disaffected to his Majesty's Government.  

* Id. first Letter to the E. of Middl. collect. of pap. p. 284.  Few have written more, and preached oftener against all sort of treasonable Doctrines and practices, and particularly against the lawfulness of rising in Arms upon the account of Religion— I have preached a whole Sermon in the Hague against all treasonable Doctrines and practices; and in particular against the lawfulness of Subjects rising in Arms against their Sovereign upon the account of Religion.— And I have maintained this, both in public and private; that I could, if I thought t● convenient, give proofs of it, that would make all my Enemies be ashamed of their injustice and malice. 
P. 159. — As oft as I have talked with Sir John Cochran of some things that were complained of in Scotland, I took occasion to repeat my Opinion of the duty of Subjects to submit, 
☜  and bear all the ill administration that might be in the Government, but never to rise in Arms upon that account. 
* Id. third Letter to the E. of Middl. p. 168.  I will do that which I think fit for me to do to day, though I were sure to be assassinated for it to morrow; but to the last moment of my life, I will pay all duty and fidelity to his Majesty. 
* Ans. to the New Test, etc. p. 48, 49.  The Church of England may justly expostulate, when she is treated as seditious after she hath rendered the highest Services to the Civil Authority, that any Church now on Earth hath done; she hath beaten down all the principles of Rebellion with more force and learning, 
☜  than any body of Men hath ever yet done, and hath run the hazards of enraging her Enemies, and losing her Friends even for those, from whom the most learned of her Members knew what they might expect.— We are the only Church in the World, that carries these principles to the highest.— We acknowledge, that some of our Clergy miscarried in it upon King Edward's death, yet at the same time others of our Communion adhered more steadily to their Loyalty in favour of Queen Mary, than she did to the promises that she made to them.— The Laws of Nature are perpetual, 
P. 51.  and can never be cancelled by any special Law; so that if these Gent. own so freely, that this is a Law of Nature (that every individual might fight in his own defence) they had best take care not to provoke Nature too much. 
P. 52. — As we cannot be charged for having preached any seditious Doctrine, so we are not wanting in the preaching of the duties of Loyalty, 
P. 55.  even when we see what they are like to cost us.— Of all the Maxims in the World, there is none hurtful to the Government in our present circumstances, than the saying, That the King's promises and the people's fidelity ought to be reciprocal, and that a failure in the one cuts off the other; for by a very natural consequence the Subject may likewise say, that their Oaths of Allegiance being founded on the assurance of his Majesty's protection, the one binds no longer than the other is observed; and the Inferences that may be drawn from hence, will be very terrible, if the Loyalty of the so much decried Church of England does not put a stop to them.  
But for that we may cite the Testimony of the Right Reverend Bishop of S. Asaph, in his Seasonable Discourse, etc.  
We are Members of a Church, 
Pag. 4.  which above all other Constitutions in the Christian World, enforces the great Duties of Obedience and Submission to the Magistrate, and teaches to be subject not only for Truth, but Conscience sake.  
And among other Motives which he mentions in the behalf of the Established Religion: The fourth (says he) is this, The Safety of the King's Person, and the Prerogative of the Crown, which hath no higher or more necessary Appendent than his Supremacy in his Dominion in all Causes Ecclesiastical and Secular, according to the Powers invested in the Jewish Kings under the Law, 
☞  and exercised by the first Christian Emperor's.  
To whom we may add the Right Reverend Doctor Sprat, in his Sermon before the House of Commons, Jan. 30. 1677/8. by them ordered to be Printed: Where speaking of King Chalres the Martyr— Who (saith he) not only by his Birth had a Successive Right to the Crown, which he could not forfeit; but also by his Personal Vittues, might have deserved another Title to it, if his Crown had been elective, and as his Murderers impudently pretended, at the Disposal of his Subjects, pag. 3. So that he terms him the Vicegerent of God's Power, ibid. & pag. 44.— He pleaded and prayed for his Enemies at the Bar of Heaven, which only was above him. And pag. 47. May all of us be most industriously watchful, that the same Schismatical Designs, and Antimonarchical Principles, which then inspired so many ill Men, misled some good Men, and cost our good King so dear, may not once more revive, and insinuate themselves again under the same or newer and craftier Disguises, and find an opportunity to attempt the like mischiefs.  
And in another Sermon of his at White-Hall, 
Pag. 44, 45.  December 22. 1678.  
Let us withdraw our thoughts, and lift up our minds to the imitation of the most Christian Examples— As of our Saviour himself, so of his Apostles and Disciples, in the first, and therefore the best Ages.— How were they zealous for the Glory of God? Not by violence, or malice, or revenge against any, not eve nagainst their Oppressors; but only by their own Labours, and Prayers, and Patience, and Magnanimity in suffering. How were they zealous in respect to their Temporal Governors? Not to resist for conscience sake, but rather to be subject for that very reason: not by open Rebellion, not by private Machinations, but in blessing, and serving, and submitting to their Emperors, though they were Idolaters; and obeying them in all things except their Idolatry.— Whom to imitate is our Duty.   

SECT XXIII.  
Mr. Thorndyke 
* Apud Falkner's Christian Loyalty, p. 429.  from the Instance of the Maccabees avers, that it was lawful for Subjects to take Arms in Defence of their Religion under the Jewish State (though in that he be mistaken) but expressly condemns taking Arms upon that, or any other pretext under the Christian State.  
Dr. Spencer, 
† Serm. at S. Mary's Cambr. Jun. 28. 1660 p. 4.  (the now Dean of Ely) The Gospel doth very sparingly meddle with State matters, but when it doth, it engageth to Obedience by as obliging Principles as it doth to Religion, even a Principle of Conscience, we must be subject for conscience-sake (not barely for safety's sake) and a principle of highest fear, They that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. A Doctrine taught the World in the Type long before by that Fire and Earthquake which destroyed the Opposers of lawful Authority, Numb. xuj. 33, 34. 
P. 11, 12. — God hath attested unto Sovereignty by suffering none of his Servants in Scripture, few, or none in story to be guilty of wilful opposing lawful Authority,— We find many a wicked Man guilty of this Sin— but as Reverence to other Divine Commands wore off in time [as the power that exalteth itself above all that is called God obtained in the world] so to this among the rest of Obedience, to lawful Authority. 
P. 14. — The Heathens used to reproach the Gospel on this account,— but the Pulpit was never intended to be a Circle, in which to raise up the evil Spirits of Sedition, and State-Commotions; no Religion in the Doctrine of it so greatly secures the Power of Kings, and the Peace of States, 
☜  as the Christian doth; we are bound by the Gospel to be obedient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 1 Pet. two. 18. to the crookedest and frowardest Masters God sets over us. So that Religion can never be pretended against Loyalty; and therefore when I take a sad review of the Evil of our late Disturbances, It ache not so much notice of the Loss of King, Liberty, Property, Parliaments, Blood (though very great) as of impairing so far the Credit of Religion, in the Violences offered to the person of his Sacred Majesty, and that by persons so highly pretending to it; I am sorry, the Papists seem to have now a thirtieth of January, 
Pag. 18.  to return us for a fifth of November.— Christianity disowns all consecrated Daggers, in Heathen Writers indeed nothing of more familiar occurrence, than Panegyrics in commendation of the Assertors of public Liberty by the assassinating of a Tyrant; a thing easily pardonable in them, being able by the dim Light of Nature to discover no more in a King, than a Head of Gold supported by the Clayie Toes of popular Election and Acceptance; but Scripture shows a higher Charter than so, 
Pag. 19  by which Kings hold their Crowns, Prov. 8.15. By me King's reign, etc. the taking Arms to redress some Evils in the Government of a Nation, proves generally, but as the cutting off of the Hand to get rid of a cut Finger. 
Pag. 23. — It is a Truth of everlasting Faithfulness, That can never be brought about (safely) by bad means, which could not be by good.   

SECT. XXIV.  
Dr. Tillotson, Dean of Canterbury, 
* Letter to the Lord Russel, Jun. 20. 1683.  In tender compassion of your Lordship's Case, and from all the good will that one man can bear to another, I do humbly offer to your Lordship's deliberate thoughts these following Considerations concerning the Point of Resistance, if our Religion and Rights should be invaded. 
☞ — 1. That the Christian Religion doth plainly forbid the resistance of Authority. 2. That though our Religion be established by Law (which your Lordship urges as a Difference between our Case, and that of the Primitive Christians) yet in the same Law, which establishes our Religian, 
14 Car. 2. c. 4. 14 Car. 2. c. 3.  it is declared, That it is not lawful upon any pretence whatsoever to take up Arms, etc. Besides that there is a particular Law, declaring the Power of the Militia to be solely in the King; and this ties the Hands of Subjects, though the Law of Nature, and the general Rules of Scripture had left us at liberty, which I believe they do not, because the Government, and Peace of human Society could not well subsist upon these Terms. 3. Your Lordship's Opinion is contrary to the declared Doctrine of all Protestant Churches, 
☜  and though some particular persons have taught otherwise, that have been contradicted herein, and condemned for it by the generality of Protestants. — I beg of your Lordship to consider, how it will agree with an avowed asserting of the Protestant Religion, to go contrary to the general Doctrine of the Protestants: my end in this is to convince your Lordship, that you are in a very dangerous and great Mistake; and being so convinced, that which before was a sin of Ignorance, will appear of a much more heinous nature, as in truth it is, 〈◊〉 calls for a very particular and deep repentance, which if your Lordship exercise by a particular acknowledgement of it to God and Man, you will not only obtain forgiveness of God, but prevent a mighty scandal to the Reformed Religion. I am very loath to give your Lordship and disquiet in the distress you are in— but am much more concerned, that you do leave the world in a delusion, and false peace to the hindrance of your eternal happiness.  
And in his Prayer on the Scaffold with the same Lord he hath this expression— Grant, O Lord, that all we, who survive, by this and other instances of thy Providence may learn our Duty to God, and the King.  
Dr. Stillingfleet, Dean of S. Paul's: 
Serm. on Jan. 30. 166 8/9, on Judas 11. p. 2, 3.  The Christian Religion above all others hath taken care to preserve the Right sof Sovereignty, by giving unto Cesar the things that are Cesar's. And to make resistance unlawful by declaring, that those who are guilty of it shall receive to themselves; damnation. Of such men we have a description in this short, but smart Epistle, who believed it a part of their Saintship to despise Dominions, etc. 
P. 7, 8.  Whose design like that of Corah, was the sharing the Government among themselves, which it was impossible for them to hope for, as long as Moses continued a King in Jeshurun; nor were they awed by the solemn Vows and Promises they had made of Obedience to him; for factious men know, they must address themselves to the people, and in the first place persuade them, that they manage their interests against the usurpations of their Governors, while the people take a strange pride in hearing and telling all the Faults of their Governors. 
P. 11, 12. — The common grounds of all Seditions being usurpations upon the People's Rights, 
☜  arbitrary Government, and ill management of Affairs, as if they had said, we appear only in the behalf of the Fundamental Liberties of the People, both Civil and Spiritual.— That Moses was guilty of the Breach of the Trust committed to him, so that now by the ill management of his Trust the Power was again devolved into the Hands of the People, and they ought to take account of his Actions. 
Pag. 21. Cons. p. 22, 23, etc.  There were then two great Principles among them, by which they thought to defend themselves: 1. That Liberty and a Right to Power is so inherent in the People, that it cannot be taken from them. 2. That in case of Usurpation upon that Liberty of the People they may resume the Exercise of Power b● punishing those who are guilty of it. And I believe they will be found to be the first Assertors of this kind of Liberty that ever were in the world; 
☞  and happy had it been for this Nation, if Corah had never found any Disciples in it.— Of the later of the two Propositions, 
Pag. 26, 27, 28, 29.  it is said, that there can be no Principle imagined more destructive to Civil Societies, and repugnant to the very nature of Government; for it destroys all the Obligations of Oaths and Compacts, it makes the solemnest Bonds of Obedience signify nothing,— it makes every prosperous Rebellion just, etc. and if Corah, Dathan and Abiram had succeeded in their Rebellion against Moses, no doubt they would have been called the Keepers of the Liberties of ISRAEL.— The Supposition of this Principle will unavoidably keep up a constant Jealousy between the Prince and his People, and there can be no such way to bring in an arbitrary Government into a Nation.— Besides, this must necessarily engage a Nation in endless Disputes about the forfeiture of Power, into whose Hands it falls, whether into the People in common, or some persons particularly chosen by the People, etc.— but on the other side what mighty danger can there be in suppossing the persons of Princes to be so sacred, that no Sons of Violence ought to come near to hurt them? Have not all the ancient Kingdoms and Empires of the World flourished under the Supposition of an unaccountable power in Princes?— No inconvenience can be possibly so great on the supposition of this unaccountable power in Sovereign Princes, as the unavoidable Mischiefs of that Hypothesis, which places all power originally in the People, and notwithstanding all Oaths and Bonds whatsoever to Obedience, 
☞  gives them the Liberty to resume it when they please, which will always be when a Spirit of Faction and Sedition shall prevail among them. God, 
Pag. 34.  Numb. 26.9. interprets striving against the Authority appointed by him, to be a striving against himself— they who resist, resist an Ordinance of God, and they who do so, shall in the mildest sense receive a severe punishment from him, let the Pretences be never so popular, the persons never so great and famous; nay though they were of the great Council of the Nation, yet we see, God doth not abate of his severity upon any of these Considerations— nor hath the Christian Doctrine made any Alteration in these things. 
P. 39 — It would take up too much time to examine the frivolous Evasions and ridiculous Distinctions, by which they would make the case of the Primitive Christians in not resisting Authority so much different from theirs, who have not only done it, but in spite of Christianity have pleaded for it; either they wanted Strength or Courage, or the Countenance of the Senate, or did not understand their own Liberty. 
P. 40. — When all their Obedience was only due to those Principles of the Gospel, which made it so great a part of Christianity to be subject to Principalities and Powers, and which the Teachers of the Gospel had particularly given them in charge, to put the People in mind of, Tit. iii. 1. And happy had it been for us, if this Doctrine had been more sincerely preached and duly practised in this Nation.— 
* Id. Ser. on Nou. 5. 1673. p. 39  It is the Honour of our Church of England, that it asserts the Rights of Princes so clearly and fully without Tricks and Reservations; and all that mean honestly love to speak plainly. 
† Id. Ser. on Mat. x. 16. at Whitchall March 7. 1678/9.  That there might be no colour for any such Cavil against Christianity (as if it gave occasion to many Disturbances of the Civil Government) no Religion that ever was did so much enforce the duty of Obedience, as Christ and his Apostles did, and that upon the greatest and most weighty Considerations, for Conscience sake, for the Lord's sake, for their Religion's sake: for consider, I pray, if the Doctrine of Christ had given encouragement to Faction and Rebellion under pretence of it; if S. Peter himself had taken upon him to dispose of Crowns and Sceptres, or had absolved Christians from their Allegiance even to their greatest Persecutors; what Blot had this been even upon the whole Religion? such as all the Blood of the Martyrs could never have washed out. 
P. 50. — It is an intolerable Reproach to Christianity to impute their patiented Submission to Authority to their Weakness and want of force, which is all one as to say, they would have resisted if they durst.  
And the same Author, in his Grand Question, etc. p. 180, 181. says, That every new Modeller of Government hath something to offer that looks like Reason, at least to those whose interest it is to carry it on: and if no Precedents can be found, than they appeal to a certain invisible thing called the Fundamental Contract of the Nation, which being a thing no where to be found, may signify what any one pleases.— And pag. 75. I am of Opinion, That if he (i.e. the Author of the Letter, etc.) could be persuaded to produce this Fundamental Contract of the Nation, which I perceive he hath lying by him, it would not amount to so much as a blind Manuscript.  
Thus also he says in his Book called The Doctrines and Practices of the Church of Rome truly stated, p. 106. The Principles of our Church are directly contrary to them (i. e. deposing Principles) and our Houses of Convocation would as readily condemn any such damnable Doctrines as the University of Oxford: and all the World knows how repugnant such Principles are to those of the Church of England; and none can be Rebels to their Prince, but they must be false to our Church.   

SECT. XXV.  
Dr. Patrick, Dean of Peterborough, 
* Paraphr. on Prov. 24 21.  Take care therefore, my dear Child, that thy Religion, which teaches thee in the first place to worship, reverence, and obey the great Lord and Governor of all the World, make thee humbly obedient to the King, as God's Vicegerent here on Earth; and have nothing to do with those whose discontent with the present state of things, or their love of Novelty, makes them affect a change of Government, and departed from their duty both to God and Man. 
† Id. Pref. to the Paraphr. on Eccles. p. 16.  To this purpose the Preface to the Paraphrase on Ecclesiastes citys, and confirms the Opinion of Antonius Corranus, an excellent Person, a learned Spaniard, as the Paraphrast justly styles him, concerning that Book of Solomon's. This Tractate is truly royal, and worthy to be read perpetually, in this most turbulent Age, both by high and low; that from hence Subjects may learn to perform Obedience and the greatest Observance both in word and deed towards their Princes, choosing rather to bear and suffer any thing than to attempt Rebellion against them.— 
‖ Id. Per. & Annot. on Eccl. 8.2 p 216.  It is much safer and easier, as well as more honest, to submit and be quiet, than to contend and unsettle the Peace of Kingdoms, though Princes do not govern as they ought.— The Verse, says Melancthon, is a Sentence exceeding worthy of Consideration and Remembrance: and then gives the different Interpretations of it, and closes all thus. 
‡ P. 219.220.  Some may think, that I have dilated too much upon this Verse, but they may be pleased to consider, how useful, if not necessary it is at this time, when men begin again to plead the lawfulness of Resistance: which is so plainly condemned in this place, that the most learned Assertors of the Old Cause were extremely puzzled to make it agree with their Principles in the late Times of Rebellion. There is one, who (in his Book called Nature's Dowry, chap. 21.) calls in the Assistance of a great many Hebrew Doctors to help him to another Translation of the Words; and yet after all is forced to acknowledge, that our English is right enough, and is content to admit it with this Proviso, That the King manage well the Affairs of the Commonwealth; as much as to say, do what they would have him.— 
* Id. on v. 4. p. 221.  Who may say unto the King, What dost thou? i. e. first, who hath any Authority to call him to an Account? As much as to say, none hath but God alone: according to that of an eminent Rabbi, No Creature may judge the King but the holy and blessed God alone. To allow the People (either collective or representative) to have Power to do it, is to make them Accusers, Judges, and Executioners also in their own Cause, and that against their Sovereign: nor secondly, can any Man safely attempt it, but he shall meet with Punishment either here or hereafter; which is no new Doctrine, but the same with that of S. Paul (as Luther here honestly notes,) They that resist shall receive to themselves Damnation, which none shall be able to avoid. Thus much the Author of Nature's Dowry is forced to acknowledge from the evident Light he saw in this place. It is Wisdom (saith he out of Elisha Gallico, an Hebrew Interpreter) in a private man, when the Magistrate enjoins what is repugnant to God's Will, to remove out of his Dominions rather than contest with him. 
† Id. p. 223.  The wisest thing we can do when Princes require any thing grievous unto us, is not to rebel, but to watch the fittest opportunities to petition for redress, and that after such a manner as may not give offence. V 7. 
P. 224.  Luther refers wholly to the miserable Condition of a Rebel in this manner; He desires various things, and hopes for mighty matters by his Disobedience, but is mightily deceived; for of the very impunity which he promised himself he cannot be secure, etc. 
‖ Id. in Eccles. x. 20. Paraph. p. 277.  Curse not the King, etc. but notwithstanding all this, (viz. consuming the public Treasure, etc.) as I advised thee before not to rise in Rebellion against thy Sovereign; so now let me add, that it is very foolish, as well as wicked, to be provoked by this ill management, so much as to speak an opprobrious Word of him or his Ministers, etc. 
‡ Annot. in loc. p. 302.  But whatsoever negligence or profuseness and waste there be, it should not provoke any wise or good man, to speak contemptuously of his Sovereign, or of his Ministers. 
* P. 306.  It will not be unuseful, much less unseasonable, in such an unruly Age as this, to let the Reader understand how deeply the first Reformers of Religion laid this Precept to heart, by transcribing some of Luther's Admonitions in his Annotations on this Verse: The worse and the more malignant (says he) the World is, the more studious and laborious Solomon teaches us to be in the doing of our duty, particularly in honouring Magistracy, because it is a divine Ordinance, and the better part of the World, by which God manages all things under the Sun. But the Ungodly begin their Wickedness chief in the Contempt of Magistrates, when they hear how God blames and reproves them in the holy Scriptures; but it belongs to the divine Office to find fault with Magistrates, and to rebuke them; and therefore though thou hearest it, yet do not imitate it, for thou art not God, nor the Ordainer, no nor the Reformer, nor the Restorer of the divine Ordinance: but as God reproves them, so thee also in the holy Scriptures, that thou may'st do thy duty, and not meddle with what belongs to them.— The meaning therefore of Solomon is, I have spoken much of Princes, how they undo the World, but do thou reverence them notwithstanding that, for they are not an humane Ordinance, but a divine. St. Peter indeed calls the King an Humane Creature, because he is assumed from among men, but his Authority is divine: and though Princes be bad, they are to be honoured, because of this Ordinance of God. Why then wilt thou speak evil of those who are vexed with so many and great cares and labours for thy Peace, if they be good? And if they be bad and foolish, their own Impiety is mischief enough to them, and brings them into sufficient danger. Bear with them then, and compassionate them, rather than rail upon them and revile them, etc.  


Dr. Towerson on the fifth Commandment.  
Those Powers are to be looked upon as ordained by God, which came to that Power they have, as without any fraud or violence, so by the ordinary Course of God's Providence.— Upon which account, all those Powers must be looked upon as ordained by God, that either come to the Throne by a lineal Descent from former Kings, where the Kingdom is Hereditary; or by a free and unconstrained choice, where it is Elective. Part 5. p. 241.  
Pag. 251. There is no doubt it is in the Power of the Subject, who conceives himself not to have deserved it, so (by flight) to avoid, if he can, the falling under the Power of it (the Sword;) Our Saviour having expressly given leave, that if we be persecuted in one City, we should to save ourselves flee from that to another. As little difficulty should I find if that were the thing in question, to licence the avoiding the Prince's Severity, by appealing to his own Courts of Judicature, where that is by Law so allowed, as it is in several Cases here, that being not to be looked upon as a Resistance, much less an injurious one, which is with the leave of him against whom it is directed. But if the Question be concerning resisting by force of Arms, and so avoiding the severity of the Prince; so it is as certain both from the Scripture and Reason, that we ought not to avoid it, but rather with all readiness submit to the strokes of it.  
Pag. 253. For though it be true, that a Prince hath no Authority to inflict an unjust Punishment, yet he is privileged by the place he holds under God, from being subjected unto Man, and ought not therefore, by any force, to be brought into Subjection to him.  
Pag. 254. Whosoever resisteth evil Powers must be thought in a particular manner to fight against God.— What a disappointment must needs have been to the Counsels of the Almighty, if it had been permitted Christians to resist.   

Part 7. An Answer to several Pleas which are made in behalf of Resistance, etc.  
Pag. 257, 258. That which generally draws Princes to the persecuting of those that are of a different Religion from themselves, being not so much any hatred of their Religion, as the Jealousy they have lest under the Pretences of that, and the Assemblies which are made for it, some secret Design against the State should lurk; which Jealousy must needs be taken away, when it appears to them from undoubted Experiments, that they who do profess it, will not attempt any thing against them, how severely soever they may be handled by them.  
To all which if we add the story of primitive Times too, we shall not need to doubt of Religion's being more than secured by a patiented submitting to persecuting Princes; it being manifest from thence, that Christianity was so far from being destroyed by the Blood of its many Martyrs, that on the contrary it thrived and propagated itself by it.  
Pag. 260. From that second Plea pass we to a third, which is taken from those Oaths which Kings do commonly make (before they are solemnly crowned) of governing the People by the Laws; the Government (as some think) seeming thereby to arise from a Compact between them and their Subjects; upon the breach whereof on the King's part, it may be lawful for the Subject to departed from their Allegiance, and resist him in the Execution of his Power. For Answer to which, not to tell you what intolerable Mischiefs would ensue from such a Tenet, as often as any seditious Man should go about to persuade the People they were not so well governed as they ought; I will allege in behalf of our own Princes (farther than which we shall not need to look) that which will cut the Throat of this Objection; to wit, That our Kings are to as full purpose such before their Coronation as after; witness, not only their performing all the Acts of a King, but that known Maxim in our Laws, that the King of England never dies. From whence as it will follow, that as the Kings of this Nation own not their being such to any compact between them and their People, that upon any supposed breach thereof it might be lawful for the Subject to resist them; so also that the Oaths taken by them at their Coronation, are not to procure them that Power which otherwise they could not have: but for the encouraging the People to yield the more ready Obedience to them, which they may very well do, when they who are to govern plight their Faith and Reputation to govern them according to their own Laws.  
Mr. Scrivener, Book I. Part I. Of the Original Government. p. 93.  
The Arguments to affirm that the grosser Body of the People did first of all agree upon Government and constitute their Ruler, are 1. Ridiculous, 2. Sacrilegious and impious. 3. Impossible. 4. Pestilential and pernicious to all Government.  
'Tis a true Saying, It is more to make a King than to be a King. Still I hold-this, which I have not found shaken by the many Attempts of innovating Wits, That there is a real Paternal Power in lawful Princes.— For 'tis not Choice but Power that makes a King: and in this case no power at all is given, or can be given, nor in truth ought to be taken away, as the manner is, from Princes entering through the Populacy into the Throne; for God only is the proper and immediate Author of Right and Power, which he hath inserted into Parents over their Children, and hath proportionably prescribed to Kings and Princes, without ever advising with the People or expecting their Consent or Confirmation. This the Scripture itself calls Jus Imperii, or l●ss significantly with us, The manner of the King, 1 Sam. viij. 9 Not from the People but from God.  
Pag. 94. The most therefore that the People do when they act most in creating Kings, is, under God, to apply the Person to the Place or Office of Governing.  
Pag. 95. Grant that all Men were once, (but no body could ever tell when) and in a certain place, (but no body could ever tell where) equally free, or at least all of years of Discretion, which is most uncertain, it would be known first, how Men dare to be so presumptuous as to make such a breach of the Law of Nature as this must be? viz. To part with their Birth right, and to imbezzle that which God had given them concomitantly with their own Lives. And this is further confirmed from the impossibility as well as impiety of making any such Translation of Power from its natural Subject the People; because it cannot ever fairly or justly be brought about, seeing that the People cannot unanimously, much less ever did concur to the Election of any one Government or Governor. They cannot all give in their Votes to such an end; always some were dissenting; and if they did not enter their Protest against the proceeding of their Fellows, it must be because they were deterred, kerbed, and oppressed by a more prevalent Faction, obliging them and constraining them most unjustly to comply with their Opinions and Decrees: for there appears no sound reason why a more numerous and powerful Faction may not as well take away my Estate, because they are stronger than I, as take away my Birthright, which Liberty is here asserted to be. So that the very first step to Liberty must be founded in Injustice, in taking away that from me which I might no less in natural reason spoil them of; and in Servitude too, in bringing me, whom they acknowledge naturally free, into unwilling Subjection. Neither is the difficulty solved in saying, That Reason and Nature also require that for order sake and regulating humane Society, the minor part must yield to the major: for upon this Supposition indeed that Power is so absurdly and inconveniently posited, there doth presently appear such a necessity; but my Argument is taken from the absurdity of any such necessity of Nature's creating, that the Supposition is very false: and if it were true, yet were not that Maxim true which is here brought to control and correct the same; for Nature doth not teach us, much less necessitate us, in any case to follow the most numerous; but rather Reason and Experience, and the Judgement of diligent and wise Discussers of this Point inform us, That the Multitude are more inconsiderate, undiscerning, and injudicious than the fewer in number many times; the World being generally thicker set with Fools than wise Men, and Fools being commonly more apt to be led by Fools than with deeper and sounder Reasons of the Wise.  
Pag. 96, 97. The Right of Rule in the People is looked upon as by Nature and Divine Ordinance belonging to them, and therefore cannot [de jure] be transferred; or, if attempted, must needs, by the same Right be revocable.— Finding themselves most commonly destitute of that advantage, they proceed to expound it more to their purpose tyrannical, and boldly affirm, That by the People is not meant necessarily the most, but the best, and soberest, and godliest, and such only that study really the Good of Religion and the Liberties of the People. And are not these sine Do? Do not these popular Tenets hang well together, and end well, which in process of their own Reason and Practices, confute the very first Principle of all, viz. That People have an absolute supreme Power to frame Governments, when before they can bring matters to their intended conclusion, they are forced to deny them?  
Of the Obligations between the Governors and Governed, p. 103.  
It cannot either consist with the Law of God or Nations, to inflict Punishments on Princes Sovereign. Not but that, for instance, Murder, Adultery, unjust Spoil, and Robbery of the Subjects, may no less (considering the nature of the Crime) deserve such Punishment of Princes as they do 〈◊〉 People. But because there is none in such Cases that can or ought duly and regularly to execute such Laws, because there can be no such Execution without the Power of the Sword; and there can be but one proper Subject of that Power in any Republic.— And of all guilt, I know not whether any be greater than the assuming of such a Power, which no ways belongs to a Man: for better it were to take away ones Horse, or to ravish another Man's Wife, or to extort unjustly another's Estate, than to divest a Prince of his Right of Rule, and usurp it to himself; and that, first, because no Man's Estate, or any thing that is his, doth descend to him, or otherways become his, by the like divine Title as the Supreme Power rightly posited and possessed, doth to the Owner thereof; and therefore this being more sacred, the Invasion of this Right is much more wicked and unjust. Secondly, because a public mischief, and of general influence upon all, is much more intolerable than a private. But such a Violation of Princely Rights must of necessity draw a public mischief on the whole civil Body; I mean all the Subjects in such a Nation, who shall be distracted between the sense of Obedience known otherwise to be due, and the terror of usurped Power, threatening ruin to such as comply not with their Injustice.  
Pag. 104. Some late Demagogues have written, for the promotion of Religion, forsooth, as well as Civil Liberty, that to kill Tyrants (and here I will not show who they call Tyrants) is as good an act as to slay Wolves, Lions and Bears. But I would fain know whence such a Law proceeded, if not from Tyranny itself? Even such persons, who under colour of natural Law of returning evil for evil, and self-preservation, have done the greatest injustice imaginable, not only against the person persecuted, but the people, who never at any time had power so to deliver themselves, nor, if they had, did generally and unanimously, or could confer the same on the new Pretenders to it. That Law therefore of kill Tyrants invented by Tyrants, taketh place on the Authors of it as much as any body else; and where the like Power can be snatched up, may have the same event on popular Statesmen as well as Kings and Princes: For they are Tyrants too.   

Mr. Jos. Glanvil's Sermon of Christian Loyalty, published by Anth. Horneck. D. D. on Rom. 13.2. They that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.  
Pag. 153, 154. Which words were spoken in the days of Nero, who besides that he was an Heathen, was a Persecutor and a Tyrant, and the most infamous instance in Nature; and yet this Monster is not excepted as to the tribute of Obedience. Whereas had this been said in the days of such a Prince as our Charles the First, it might have been supposed that the virtue of the Person claimed the reverence and subjection, and not the Character of the Prince. And that 'twas damnable to resist because he was good; not because he was supreme: because he was a Nursing-father of the Church, not because the ruling Father of his Country. 'Twas an happy Coincidence therefore to secure the Authority of the Magistrate, which answers the greatest pretensions of Rebellion. If Religion be pretended, an Heathen must not be resisted: If Tyranny, 'tis damnation to oppose a Nero.  
Pag. 156. King's wear God's Image and Authority— but besides there is evidence enough in the nature of the thing to prove, that Kings have their Power and Authority from God, and are no Substitutes of the People.  
Pag. 157, 158, 159. They that Rule are God's Substitutes, and no Creatures of the People: for the People have no power to govern themselves, and consequently cannot devolve any upon another.  
Resistance is opposite to the Spirit of Religion: Religion is of a calm and pacific temper, like that of its Author whose voice was not heard in the street.— He commands the payment of all Duties to Cesar: He acknowledgeth pilate's Power to be from above: He commands his Disciples to pray for their Persecutors: He permits them to fly, not to oppose. He rebukes Peter 's violence to the High Priests Servant; and the revenge of the Disciples when they called for fire from Heaven.  
He paid Tribute, submitted to the Laws of the Sanhedrim, and to that unjust sentence against his life.  
This was his temper: and the Apostles who lived among his Enemies and theirs, and met with severity enough to have soured their spirits, and exasperated their Pens to contrary resolutions and instructions; yet as true followers of their dear Lord, they faithfully transmit to us what they had learned from him, viz. That we should obey those that have the rule over us: submit to every Ordinance of Man: pray for Kings and all in Authority: submit to Principalities and Powers, and to obey Magistrates.—  
And those Noble Spirits of the first Ages after, who began to be Martyrs as soon as to be Christians, who lived in the Fire, and went to Heaven wrapped in those flames that had less arder than their love: These, I say, amidst the greatest and fiercest fires that cruelty and barbarism had kindled, paid the tribute of a peaceable and quiet subjection to their Murderers, and made unforced acknowledgements of the right they had to their obedience.  
Pag. 157, 158, 159. Nor do we ever read of any attempts they made to free themselves by resistance, though (as Tertullian saith) they were in powerful numbers mingled in their Villages, and in their Cities, yea in their Castles and in their Armies: Yea, there is an illustrious instance of Passive Obedience in the Thebean Legion, whose tenth Man being executed for not offering sacrifice to Idols, they quietly submitted to the Cruelty. And a second Dicimation being commanded by Maximinian, the Author of the first, one of their great Commanders, (an excellent Christian) persuades them to suffer it with the same patience: because it was not with their Swords they could make their way to the Kingdom of Heaven, but by another kind of Warfare.—  
Pag. 163. By a dear experience we have learned, that 'tis better to endure any inconveniences in a settled Government than to endeavour violent alterations.  Doctor Anth. 
The Letter he makes his own, p. 478 and advices others to follow the Example of these Primitive Christians. p. 541.  Hornecks Letter to a Person of quality at the end of his best Exercise; speaking of the heavenly Lives of the Primitive Christians: he saith, 
Pag. 496. They looked upon Christianity as a Religion that taught them to suffer valiantly.—  
Pag. 534. 535. To their Princes and Magistrates, they were ever very submissive, and in all lawful things obedient to a tittle. In their Prayers they always remembered them, and though they persecuted and afflicted them, yet that did not abate their Zeal and Vows for their welfare and prosperity: Rebellion against their Governors they hated as Witchcaft, and ever thought it safer to suffer than to resist. Hence they paid Tribute without marmuring; for their opinion was, that no Man could have that Power, except it were given him from above. His Tyranny could not make them neglect their duty, nor his ill Government tempt them to forget their Allegiance; Where the Man was rough and hardhearted that was over them, they looked upon the Providence as a means to try their faith, and even then when they might have resisted and conquered, they would not, because they thought it was unsuitable to their Religion.—     

SECT. XXVI.  
Doctor Tennison says the same 
* Mr. Hobbs' Creed examined p. 149, 15, 151. — This then is the Doctrine of Politics, that Rebellion is not Iniquity, if upon probable grounds it becomes prosperous.— It is blamed as an opinion of Mr. White, That part-boiled Romanist, as he is called, that a dispossessed Prince ought neither to be desired, nor to endeavour to return, if the people think themselves to be well, and their Trade and Employment be undisturbed. And he adds, Who can answer, they shall be better by the return of the dispossessed party; surely in common presumption the gainer is like to defend them better than he, who lost it. 
☜ — Certainly for this Sentence published at such a time to this Nation, if for any other cause, those Books ought to be burnt in England, as well as some of them have been burnt at Rome; there is no tie so strong as that of Religion, 
p. 158, 159.  which eternally binds a conscientious Subject in Allegiance to his Sovereign, and Wars arise from men's self-interests and lusts; and true goodness is both the Creator and preserver of peace: unless a Man obeys for Conscience-sake, all the Cords of outward Pacts and Covenants will not hold him 
* V pref. p. 7.  etc.— Neither will such Covenants hold the people that pretend to Religion, if they be mis-taught, that God is glorified in their private good, and that their private good is to be valued before the life of a Prince, if they can safely deprive him of it.— What Hobbs hath written three times over in his the Cive, 
p. 161.  de Corpore Politico, and his Leviathan ought rather to be esteemed seeds of Sedition, than Elements of Government and Society; and I am sure among those Principles one is, that Government is founded in compact— The people, 
p. 167.  if they believed, that a company of Delinquents joining together to defend themselves by Arms do not at all unjustly, but may lawfully repel lawful force by force, they would soon be stirred up, and suffer none for whom they have respect, to be brought to justice.   

SECT. XXVII.  
Thus Doctor Hooper. 
* Serm. at Whitehal on Math. 22.21. p. 11.  Is he not the Vicegerent of God? Wherever therefore his Sovereign the Almighty hath not prevented him by any precedent Commands, there he hath right and liberty to put forth his, and in those cases to expect an active cheerful Obedience; 
☞  and that we should in no case, and for no reason resist.— Be this Civil Government heretic, or Infidel, we are not discharged of our Allegiance, we are obliged by the same divine Authority to preserve our Religion under it, and to continue to it our subjection, 
p. 18, 19 — the Church, of which we have the blessing to be Members, has restored to Princes, and those that are in Authority the full exercise of their lawful Power, their Countries and their people; no place privileged, nor person exempted; no foreign Potentate sharing the Authority, nor dividing their Revenue, 
☞  their Subjects bound in an Allegiance not to be withdrawn on any pretence of Schism, or Heresy, in the power of no Consistory to discharge. And here we see no politic reserve, that our Church hath not provided for itself any other refuge but in the providence of God, and the piety of the Civil Power. What was not her own, she hath given out of her hands; where she cannot communicate, yet there she will obey, and where she cannot obey, she is ready to endure, expecting her reward in Heaven; 
☞  not ignorant how much she suffers now from the contradiction of disloyal Men for the truth of this Doctrine, and how much by its meekness she stands exposed to future persecution; yet she professes to know too, that her Saviour's Kingdom is not of this World; that the rendezvouz against a Prince is not protected by being in a Church, turns not her Congregations into Armies, etc.— And though Parties seemingly opposite agree in the contrary Opinion, we take not that for an argument of its truth, equally detesting the holy League of the one, and the solemn League of the other.  
Doctor Harscard, Dean of Windsor. 
* Serm. before L. Mayor, 1680. p. 13.  Contempt of Government springs from that lewd Opinion, that Dominion is nothing else but strength and might; that Philosophy that resolves all Being's and Action's into matter and motion, lays the foundation too of all Obedience, not Conscience and divine Commands, 
☜  but the strongest Arm and longest Sword, only Subjects, because they are overpowered.— What doth vilify our Governors more than this Principle.— Whom we beautified before with the Titles of sacred and divine, but now are made a common lump only of strength and power, and are really weaker, because their Subjects too, like them, are only Arms, but no heart or Conscience, no internal Principle to oblige unto Obedience.— For if no inward persuasion or dread of an higher power, but only fear and interest, weakness and convenience are the bottom and reason of our Obedience; where these shall change, and the Man hath swelled his Coffers, procured firm Alliances, and mustered up his Armies and Confederates and other instruments of Rebellion, he may then by the Title of Power lay claim to Dominion, and set up for himself.— What signifies religious Oaths and solemn Vows to engage us unto Obedience, which is only an acknowledgement of weakness, if only external power must, be their keeper?—   

SECT. XXVIII.  
Doctor Falkner's Christian Loyalty is written wholly upon this Subject, proving, that Government is appointed by God, and is of divine Institution, owned so by the Christians who were persecuted by the Civil Powers; and his whole second Book is employed in showing the unlawfulness of Subjects taking Arms against the King upon any account; and this he proves from the obligation of Oaths, and solemn declarations from the Laws of Nature and humane policy, from the prohibitions of both the Old and New Testament, especially the New; proving that this resistance is not only sinful in private persons, but in the whole body of the people, and in subordinate Magistrates; and I would willingly see a sober Answer to that discourse, instead of puzzling the World with little distinctions of persecuting according to, or against Law.  
And in his Treatise of Reproach and Censure, he shows how careful our blessed Saviour was to pay all due respects to any person invested with Authority; and that St. Peter recommends a meek behaviour even towards them, from whom we receive hard measure; 
P. 94. — That such a continued respect, and practice of duty to Governors, even under hard usage is that, which Conscience to God will oblige to perform.— This duty of respectful submission is not founded upon the good temper of our Superiors, but upon the Authority they receive from God, and the Precepts which God hath thereupon given to us. 
P. 97. — Obj. But if Religion be concerned and in danger, doth it not behoove every good Man to be zealous, etc. Ans. 1. It is requisite he should be zealous in the diligent exercise of a holy Life, and in frequent and devout prayer, etc. But he must not be active as an evil doer in giving himself the liberty to behave himself undutifully towards his Superiors.— 2. Religion can never be so in danger, that God can need any sinful practices of Men to uphold his interest; his Kingdom is not so weak that it cannot stand without the affistance of the works of the Devil. 
P. 99 — 3. Religion can never be opposed with greater enmity and malicious designs, than it was when our Saviour suffered, and yet then he reviled not, 
P. 100  nor allowed St. Peter's rashness. The Jews aimed utterly to root out the Christian Name; and there were great oppositions against Religion, even fiery Trials, 1 Pet. 4.12. When yet Saint Peter requires Christians to follow the Example of our Lord's patience and meekness, and to reverence Superiors. 4. True zeal for Religion consists in pious and holy living, not in passionate and sinful speaking.—  
To Dr. Falkner I should join his Pupil Dr. Sherlock, but his Book of Non resistance is so strong, and his arguments from Scripture so cogent, that it is needless to make any extracts out of it; and till his Adversary writes both a more becoming, and a more demonstrative Answer, it will be still by all wise Men looked upon as unanswerable.   

SECT. XXIX.  
Among the unanswerable Treatises I also reckon Dr. Hicks, the Dean of Worcester's Jovian; for unless scurrility, confidence, and a desertion of the main Argument may pass for an Answer, the Reply, that is yet extant, deserves no Rejoinder. Out of that Elaborate Commentary on the Doctrine of Passive Obedience, I shall only quote one passage, because it is a History of the Author's Principles, and Resolution. I had rather die a Martyr than a Rebel; 
P. 259:  and I resolve by God's assistance neither to turn Papist, nor Resist: but if I cannot escape, I will suffer according to the Gospel, and the Church of England; and I will Preach and Practise Passive Obedience, after the example of the Prophets, and Martyrs, who suffered against Law: and in my most melancholy prospect of things, I can comfort myself with the hopes of a reward for dying at a Stake, which he shall never have for dying in the Field. To this purpose also the Sermon at Bow-Church, Jan. 30. 1681/2. Together with the same Author's Artillery Sermon: are worth the perusing.  
Dr. South. I have read heretofore of some, 
Serm. 2. p. 80, 81.  that having conceived an irreconcilable hatred of the Civil Magistrate, prevailed with Men so far, that they went to resist him, even out of Conscience, and a full persuasion, and dread upon their spirits, 
☜  that not to do it were to desert God, and consequently to incur Damnation. Now when men's rage is both heightened, and sanctified by Conscience, the War will be fierce: for what is done out of Conscience, is done with the utmost activity, and then Campanella 's Speech to the King of Spain will be found true, Religio semper vicit, praesertim armata, which sentence deserves seriously to be considered by all Governors, and timely understood, lest it come to be felt. 
P. 212. P. 236.  We have seen Rebellion commented out of Rom. xiii. He that makes his Prince despised, and undervalved, blows a Trumpet against him in men's Hearts, etc. 
* See Dr. Freeman's Servant before the L. Mayor. 1682. p. 8. P. 242, 243.  To imagine a King without Majesty, a Supreme without Sovereignty, is a Paradox, and direct contradiction.— The Church of England glories in nothing more, than that she is the truest friend to Kings, and to Kingly Government, of any other Church in the World.— It is the happiness of some Professions, and Callings, that they can equally square themselves to, and thrive under all Revolutions of Government: but the Clergy of England neither know, nor affect that happiness, and are willing to be despised for not doing so.— And so far is our Church from encroaching upon the Civil Power, as some who are back-friends to both would maliciously insinuate, that were it stripped of the very remainder of its privileges, and made as like the Primitive Church for its bareness, as it is already for its Purity, it could cheerfully, and what is more, Loyally, want all such Privileges, and in the want of them pray, that the Civil Power may flourish as much, and stand as secure from the assaults of Fanatic Anti-Monarchical Principles, grown to such a dreadful height during the Churches late confusions, as it stood while the Church enjoyed those Privileges.  
Dr. 
Serm. on Heb x. 36. p. 2.  John Moor. Our Saviour was the first, that did effectually recommend this Passive Virtue to the World, and furnished Men with such true Arguments to bear their Cross, as made the most afflicted state not only supportable, but to be preferred before the happiness of this life. 
P. 16, 17. — A good Man, when he is persecuted for his Religion, neither deserts it, nor by any unlawful means defends it. He will not renounce his Faith to escape Persecution, and yet he dreads by resisting of Authority to promote the cause of Religion; 
P. 19  it being a blasphemy against the Divine Wisdom and Power, to suppose God can stand in need of our sins to bring to pass his most glorious designs; and this he says of those, who under pretence of defending their Rights, or Religion, resist lawful Authority.— He then, in whom this virtue of Patience dwells, keeps a due regard to the commands laid upon him to submit himself to the Supreme Powers, and he dares not lift up his Hand against the Lords Anointed, 
☞  nor Levy War upon the most plausible account whatsoever: nay to him it cannot but seem a wonder, that the Doctrine of Resistance should have gone down so glibly with any, who have read the New Testament, and are baptised into the Christian Faith.— All Resistance to the Supreme Authority is unlawful— The Popes of Rome being the first pretenders from Scripture to a right to resist the Civil Power, 
P. 20, 21.  etc.— And it is most certain, that by the same Argument, they would take off their obligation to this plain Christian Duty, they may excuse themselves from their obligations to all the rest. Will they plead, that the Gospel is not a perfect Rule of Duty, and that the inspired Writers did not foresee, and provide for all cases, etc. Upon the same ground they dispense with one Law of Christ, they may dispense with as many as they please. 
P. 29. — If the Magistrates be Ordained of God, than it is no more lawful for an hundred thousand Men to resist him, than for twelve; and if we are bound to submit for Conscience sake, no increase of our numbers, or strength, can alter the Rule of our Duty, or take off the Obligation of Conscience. 
☜  So that had the Primitive Christians had more potent Arms than Nero, or Julian, yet no right ever could have accured to them thereby to oppose God's Ordinance, or to proceed against their Conscience. 
P. 30. — The Popes of Rome were the first pretenders from Scripture to a right not only of Resisting, etc. but of Deposing Kings. Knox, Milton, Rutherford, etc. 
P. 40.  could not have spit ranker venom at Kings, or spoke with greater contempt of their Authority, than Hildebrand.  
And in another place thus, 
P. 15.  It always holds true with respect to the Sovereign Power in any Country, what was said by Judge Creshald (Legacy p. 5.) both like a pious Christian, and an able Lawyer, concerning the Royal Authority of our Nation: that the Jura Regalia of our Kings are holden of Heaven, and cannot for any Cause Escheat to their Subjects; nor they for any Cause make any positive or actual forcible resistance against them: but that we ought to yield to them Passive Obedience, by suffering the punishment, albeit their commands should be against the Divine Law, and that in such Case Arma nostra sunt preces nostrae, nec possumus nec debemus aliter resistere, for who can lift up his hand against the Lords Anointed and be guiltless?  
And thus the Author of Jeremiah in Baca, or a Fast-days Work; Published for the Devout Members of the Church of England, as a Preservative for all them against Perjury and Rebellion speaks. Rebellious Perjuries, pag. 40, 41, 42, 43, 44.  
A further branch of Perjury there is, which in the late Rebellious days involved a great part of the three Nations, over and over. Some Popular wicked Men, Sons of Belial, contrary to the Oath of the Lord upon them, rose up against the Lords Anointed, drew in (against their Allegiance also) many, and many thousands of the People into that Rebellion and bloody War; and when through thy just judgement upon the three Kingdoms for former sins, those Perjured Rebellious Men had very far prevailed, and imbrued their Hands not only in the common blood of their fellow Subjects, but also in the sacred blood of their Sovereign, and driven all the Royal Family into Foreign parts; the daily practice was making and taking new Oaths, and imposing them upon the People, and then both breaking them themselves, and compelling others to break them.— O God 
☜  how many Rebellious Oaths were there framed contrary to that one rightful Oath of Allegiance, every of which later Oaths were direct and solemn Perjury.  
The dreadful effects of that Rebellion, and those Perjuries we now see: and we have all reason to fear the guilt of them will not cease operating to further vengeance upon the Nations, for that there are still left therein Men of like wicked Principles.  
But O God when thou makest inquisition for blood, shut not up the innocent with the guilty. The Established Church thou knowest all along abhorred, and withstood unanimously as one Man, those false, Treasonable and bloody practices, and chose the utmost sufferings rather than join therein, or in the least comply therewith.  
Notwithstanding we acknowledge the multitude of the Offenders was so great, that both the Rebellion, and the Perjuries may affect the whole Body of the Nation. For if thou wilt by no means hold them guiltless, who take thy name in vain, what may we all expect?   

SECT. XXX.  
Mr. Wake, 
* Serm. at Paris, Jan. 30. 1684/5 5. p. 3.  Speaking of the Murder of Charles the Marty●; Had an Infidel Nation risen up against him, or the chance of War cut him off,— we should soon have turned our sorrow into joy.— But that we, who were obliged by all the ties of God and Men to obey him, should destroy that life, for which we ought not to have refused any hazard of our own: that we, who were certainly his Subjects, and pretend to be Christians too, should violate all the Rights of Majesty, trample under feet all the Laws of the Gospel,— this raises those Clouds, that obscure so bright a Day. 
P. 10. — Long had the Trumpet been blown to War, and to Rebellion, the Church become Militant, and our Pulpits instead of setting forth the Gospel of Peace, spoke nothing but Wars, and Seditions, and Tumults to the People. Is there any one among us, that by the malignity of his Nature, the desperateness of his Fortunes, or a misguided Zeal, hath been actually concerned in this guilt? 
P. 17, 18. — Is there any one now present, who though unconcerned in that black Parricide, is yet involved in any of those Principles that lead to it, 
☞  hath assisted, approved, or encouraged those new Rebels, the Progeny of the same Old Cause, that have again so lately endeavoured to Crown the Son with the like Glory their Ancestors did the Father,— let me beseech them, either to sanctify the Fast with us, or not to join in the Celebration.— A Crime, 
Pag. 22.  which I should doubt, had exceeded the Power of any Repentance to expiate, had not the Apostles left us an Example, by exhorting the Jews to labour for a Forgiveness, 
Pag. 29.  even of their crucifying the Lord of Glory.— Was there ever Villainy like this, that a Christian Kingdom should break through all those Bonds of Duty and Obedience, which the more righteous Heathens have reverenced as sacred and inviolable; 
☜  that so many Oaths and Vows repeated with that frequency, taken with that solemnity, should all be insufficient to preserve our Fidelity; that Religion and Reformation, two things, than which none can be more excellent in themselves, nor are any more easily, and more dangerously abused, should be able to cheat us into wickedness, which the barbarous Scythians never heard of.  Wake's Defence of the Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England against the Exceptions of Monsieur de Meaux, etc. Licenced by C. Alston. 
The Peace and Liberty which we enjoy, 
Pag. 88 The Close.  we do not ascribe to their (i. e. the Papists) Civility: it is God's Providence and our Sovereign's Bounty, whom the Church of England has ever so Loyally served: whose Rights she asserted in the worst of times, When, to use our Author's own words, Perjury and Faction for this very cause, loaded her with all the Injuries Hell itself could invent. But we gloried to suffer for our Duty to him then, 
☜  and shall not fail, should there ever be occasion to do it again. And we have this Testimony from our King, which no time nor malice shall be able to obliterate: That the Church of England is by Principle a Friend to Monarchy; and I think cannot be charged to have ever been defective in any thing that might serve to strengthen and support it.  
And in the Tract.  
It is said in the Gospel, 
Pag. 72.  that Michael the Archangel disputing with the Devil, would not bring any railing Accusation against him, but was content to say to him only, The Lord rebuke thee. Because he looked upon God, as him to whom Judgement and Vengeance belonged, and yet we see that the Sons of Adam are bold and desperate enough, not only to condemn, but to destroy Dignities, which they ought to reverence, and to ruin them together with whole States, as their fancy leads them.  
Agreeable to what Dr. 
Dr. Beveridge's Serm concerning the Excellency and Usefulness of the Common Prayer. Nou. 27. 1681. Pag. 34. l  Beveridge hath upon the like occasion.  
What our grand Adversary had done before by the Papists, he afterwards brought about again by other means in the Reign of King Charles the First. For by what kind of Spirit the Common Prayer was then cast out, you all know, and some of you found by woeful experience. All that I shall say of it is only this, That the same Spirit that then stirred up them so violently against the Common Prayer, stirred them up at the same time to rebel against their King— contrary to all Law and Justice.— And whether that was the Spirit of Christ or Antichrist, God or the Devil, judge you.  
Dr. Ironside. 
* Serm. at Court, Nou. 23. on 1 Pet. 4.15.— p. 1, 6. P. 8, 9  S. Peter gives this Injunction as an Apostle, not as a Statesman.— Of all Principles, Obedience to Magistrates (the great Eyesore) and the Execution of Justice (the Support of the World) will be always necessary to be taught, and pressed upon the Conscience:— We are forbidden all kind of Revenge, when others injure us in our Names, Goods or Persons. This was the Doctrine of our Saviour, and this was the Practice of our Saviour.— Revenge is God's, and he executes it. 1. Immediately by himself, and that sometime; in this World, always in the next. 2. Mediately by the Power deputed to Men, and the Magistrates are called Gods in that respect. 
pag. 21. — Suffer we must for Truth, not defend, or propagate it by violence, and in this agree the Harmony of Confessions in all Reformed Churches, whatsoever some turbulent Spirits of Scotland have written to the contrary. 
pag. 27. — Inferiors have no Right to meddle with Superiors at all, unless it be to defend, and obey; nothing else, no not so much as to counsel, unless called to it, much less to reprove saucily, 
pag. 32.  or contumeliously to expose, etc.— It is very observable, how particular the Apostles are in laying out the respective Duties of Inferiors (Obedience in this World is the great thing) the Sins of Superiors are remitted to the other World, 
☞  and then great Men shall be greatly tormented. 
p. 35, 36, 37, 38. — The Acts of the Apostles, and the Life and Death of Christ are perfect submission to the Imperial Laws.— It is therefore a true and wise saying, 
☞  Sedition is worse than Murder: and it is pity the Saying is found so often in the Alcoran, and so seldom to be met with in the Practice of Christians.— There be three sins in the New Testament, which are threatened with signal Judgements in this Life. 1. The first is doing evil that good may come thereof, such men's damnation, saith the Apostle, is just. 2. Profaning the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper. 3. Profaning the Supreme Powers, they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. That is, these three sins make men liable, not only to the Divine Wrath hereafter (for so all sins without repentance expose to damnation) but usually they are also attended with signal Judgements in this life— and so let it be upon all the Troublers of the Earth, that our Kings may be at rest, and that we may lead a quiet life in all Godliness and Honesty.   

SECT. XXXI.  
Dr. Isaac Barrow: 
† Vol. 1. Serm. 10. p. 135.  Are Princes bad, or do they misdemean themselves in their Administration of Government, or Justice? We may not by any violent or rough way attempt to reclaim them, for they are not accountable to us, or liable to our Correction.— Do they oppress us, or abuse us; do they treat us harshly, or cruelly persecute us? We must not kick against them, nor strive to right ourselves by resistance— We must not so much as rail, or inveigh against them, we must not be bold, or free in taxing their Actions, we must forbear even complaining and murmuring against them, 
☜  we must not so much as curse them in our thoughts. To do these things is flat impiety against God, and an invasion of his Authority, who is the King of Kings, and hath reserved to himself the prerogative of judging, of rebuking, of punishing Kings, when he findeth Cause. These were the Misdemeanours of those in the late times— discovering therein great profaneness of mind, and distrust of God's Providence; as if God being implored by Prayer could not, or would not, had it been needful, without such irregular Courses have redressed those Evils in Church or State, which they pretended to feel, or fear. 
Pag. 136. — In the primitive times prayers and tears were the only Arms of the Church, whereby they long defended it from ruin, and at last advanced it to a most glorious prosperity.  
So Dr. Cave: 
‖ Primitive Christian. part. 3. ch. 4. p. 321.  There is scarce any particular instance, wherein the primitive Christianity did more triumph in the World, than in their exemplary Obedience to the Powers and Magistrates under which they lived, honouring their persons, revering their power, paying their Tribute, obeying their Laws, wherein they were not evidently contrary to the Laws of Christ; and when they were, submitting to the most cruel Penalties they laid upon them with the greatest calmness and serenity of Soul, 
Pag. 329, 330.  etc.— They were not patiented for want of Power, and because they knew not how to help it— Julian's Army, which was almost wholly made up of Christians, 
☞  withstood him only with prayers and tears, accounting this (saith S. Greg. Naz.) to be the only Remedy against Persecution. 
Pag. 351.  I verily believe, that had the Primitive Christians been no better Subjects than their Emperors were Princes, had they practised on them those bloody Artifices, which have been common among those that call themselves the only Catholics, that barbarous Dealing would have been a greater Curb to the flourishing of the Gospel, 
☞  than all the ten Persecutions; for how could an impartial Heathen ever have believed their Doctrine to have been of God, had their Actions been so contrary to all the Precepts of Natural Divinity.  
And in this matter does the Learned Dr. 
Dr. Dove's Serm. before the Sons of the Clergy. 1687.  Dove vindicate the Integrity of our Church in a few, but as significant Words as any of his Brethren, when speaking of some who suffered much for their Constancy to the Faith, and their Fidelity to the Crown, he terms them, Two inseparable Notes of a genuine Son of the Church of England.  
Dr. Puller: 
* Moderate. of the Ch. of Engl. ch. 12. § 5.  Other Sects deny the King's Supremacy in Matters Ecclesiastical, either claiming a Power of Jurisdiction over him, or pleading a Privilege of Exemption from under him, where as the Clergy of the Church of England, like good Christians, and good Subjects, neither pretend to any Jurisdiction over the Kings of England, nor withdraw their Subjection from them. 
† Sect. 6, 7.  And then he vindicates that Expression of Can. 1. of the Synod 1640. That the Order of Kings is most high and sacred.— The Moderation of our Church doth not favour any Doctrines, or Practices which are prejudicial to the safety of human Society in general— It doth no where pretend to remit the Divine Laws, or dispense with Oaths, or transfer the Rights of Kingdoms, etc.— Contrariwise it requires of all of its Communion to give the King such Security of their Allegiance and Fealty, as may be a sufficient Security to his Government.— 
‖ Chap. 17.  The Romanists and Separatists extremely agree in their Principles against the Civil Magistrate, according to that of Bishop Lany, 
* Bishop Lany's Serm. on 1 Thess. 4.11.  The Papists and Presbyterians hunt in Couples against the King's Power and Supremacy. It is admirable to see how the Commonwealths Men in the times of the late Rebellion received their Principles from the ancient and modern Writers of the Jesuits, and other Papists, and still agree with them in most of the Republican Doctrines, and Tendencies of them to the like Practices.— Both deny the Supremacy of the King; one attributes it to the Pope originally, the other to the People; and the same Arguments, which the Pope useth for his Supremacy over Kings, the Disciplinarians use for establishing their Sovereignty. The Pretence of the King's Authority against his Person was hatched under the Roman Territories, and was made use of in the Holy League of France. The Rules for making a King to be a Tyrant, and then ceasing to be a King; that it may be lawful to attempt any thing against his Person and Life, are so much the same, 
§. 20.  that they cannot be more.— I need not here relate, how many Doctrines of the Romanists tend to dissolve the very Bonds of relative Duty one towards another,— absolving People from their Oaths and Allegiance, No Faith to be kept with Heretics, etc. How do many Principles of our Enthusiasts and Separatists tend to destroy the Relations of King and Subject, Bishop and People, etc.   

SECT. XXXII.  
Dr. Scott. 
* Serm. July 26. 1685. p. 2. P. 13, 14.  Absalon accomplished his design, partly by declaiming against the Maleadministrations of his Father's Government, partly by promising them a thorough Reformation, if ever he arrived to be a Judge in Israel.— Every Man knows, or might easily know, if he were not extremely wanting to himself, that his King is the Vicegerent of his God, and that being so, he is indispensibly obliged by all the ties of Reason and Religion to submit to his Will, and reverence his Person, and bow to his Authority, and that he cannot lift up his hand against him without fight against God himself; the Truth of which is as obvious to our natural Reason, and as plainly asserted in holy Scripture, as of any Proposition in Religion: 
☜  so that I dare boldly affirm, a Man may find as many Pretexts for any Vice whatsoever, even for Drunkenness, Whoredom, or Perjury, as ever were made for Rebellion; and were I to set up for a public Patron of Wickedness, I hardly know a Villainy in nature so black and monstrous, which I could not more plausibly recommend to men's Reason and Consciences, than this of Resistance against lawful Authority; which is such a complication of Villainies, such a loathsome mixture of hellish Ingredients, as is enough to nauseate any Conscience but a Devil's. And though Conscience and Religion are the Colours it usually marches under, yet is the imposture of this Pretence so fulsome and barefaced, that no Man in his Wits can be innocently abused by it; for certainly that Man must have a great mind to rebel, his Will must have a strong Bias of Pride, or Discontent, Faction, or Ambition in it, that in despite of all the evidence from Reason and Scripture to the contrary, can persuade himself that it is lawful for him, and much less, 
P. 15, 16.  that it is his duty, to lift up his hand against his Sovereign. And therefore for Men to appeal to God in a Cause so apparently wicked, is not submissively to refer themselves to him, but openly to mock and affront him, and to make a vexatious Appeal to God's Judgement again in a Case which he hath so often and so expressly judged already, is a common Barratry; 'tis not to consult, but to tempt him, and under pretence of submitting to his determinations, openly to defy his Authority; in effect, it is to appeal from his Will to his Providence, and to bespeak him to declare himself against his own Declarations.— In the case of Rebellion there is not only a peremptory Disobedience to those Laws of God which require our dutiful Submission to our lawful Superiors, 
☞  but also a direct Renuntiation of the divine Authority itself; for all Sovereign Power is immediately founded in the Dominion of God, who being the supreme Lord of the World, no person can have right to govern in his Kingdom under him, but by Commission from him. King's therefore are only accountable to him; 
P. 17.18.  and if so, then for any of their Subjects to presume to call them to account by a public formed resistance, is to arraign God's own Authority, and invade his peculiar; it is to thrust him out of his Throne, and set themselves down in it; and then to summon his Authority before them, and require it to submit its awful Head to their imperious doom and sentence. While therefore we behave ourselves factiously and rebelliously towards those whom God hath set over us, we live as Outlaws in the Kingdom of God, without any respect to that visible Authority by which he governs the World: and if this be so, then for Subjects to rebel against their Prince, is neither better nor worse than to appeal to God against his own Authority, and to put this impious Case to him, Whether it be he or they that have the Right of Governing the World.  
I profess, 
* Id. Serm. on Prov. xxiv. 21. Ep. ded. P. 17, 19, 20, etc.  with the same sincerity as I would confess my Soul to God, that my design in this Discourse was only to promote the Peace and Happiness of Men.— These are the ways of knowing Men when they are given to change: 1. When Men who have actually changed the Government already, begin to re-advance their old Methods and Principles, it's a certain sign they are given to change. 2. When Men make that a pretence for public Clamour and Bustle, which themselves have little or no claim to, or regard for, that is, Religion; it's a certain sign they are given to change. 3. When Men pretend Religion or public Reformation, but pursue it by sinful and indirect means, it's a certain sign, etc. Now Religion is as great an Enemy to Lying and Rebellion, as it is to Popery. 4. When under pretext of reforming the Government, 
☜  Men reproach and vilify the Persons of their Governors. 5. When Men shift their Principles with their Interests, and to serve a turn can comply at one time with that which they condemn at another. Tho in following our Principles we may sometimes endanger our worldly Interest, and fall under the disgrace of a Rabble and the Persecutions of a prevailing Faction, yet our very Enemies will be forced to revere and honour us, to acknowledge that we are constant, and brave, and honest, and resigned to our own Principles. 6. and lastly, When Men, who in the ordinary course of their Conversation are proud and quarrelsome, and impatient of Contradiction, set up Pretences of Religion against the Government. 
† Id. Serm. on Rom. xiii. 1. p. 25, 26.  Consider, that upon our faithful Subjection to our Prince, the safety of our Religion depends; for there is nothing in the World can more endanger our Religion, than our making it a pretence for Rebellion; for hereby we inevitably expose it to the hatred of Princes, and do what lies in us to arm their Power against it. 
‖ Id. Artillery Serm. p. 31.  If you be courageous from a Principle of Righteousness, you will honour the King as well as fear God, and obey his Ordinances for God's sake; you will never conduct a rebellious design under the sacred Banner of Religion, nor pretend Loyalty to God to cover your Disloyalty to his Vicegerent; you will never press the Scriptures to fight against the King, 
Pag. 32.  nor arm his political against his personal Capacity, nor assume his Authority to cut off his Head; nor on the other hand will you ever allow him to be unkinged by the sentence of a domineering Prelate, etc. In a word, you will never confront those loyal Admonitions of S. Peter and S. Paul, with the treasonous Canons of the Councils of the Ungodly, nor levy Arms against your Prince upon that counterfeit Commission of his being pronounced a Heretic by a Congregation of Impostors— who would fain fetch Pretences for their Treasons and Rebellions from the most loyal and peaceable Religion that ever was.  
The ADDRESS of the University of Cambridge, presented by Dr. Gower then Vicechancellor, Sept. 18. 1681. to the King at Newmarket.  
Sacred SIR,  
WE your Majesty's most faithful and obedient Subjects of the University of Cambridge, have long, with the greatest and sincerest joy, beheld what we hope is in some measure the effect of our own Prayers, the generous Emulation of our Fellow Subjects, contending who should first and best express their Duty and Gratitude to their Sovereign; at this time especially, when the seditious Endeavours of unreasonable Men have made it necessary to assert the ancient Loyalty of the English Nation, and make the World sensible that we do not degenerate from those prime Glories of our Ancestors, Love and Allegiance to our Prince.  
That we were not seen in those loyal Crowds, but chose rather to stand by and applaud their honest and religious Zeal, we humbly presume will not be imputed to the want of it in ourselves, either by your Majesty or your People: for, Sir, it is (at present) the great honour of this your University, not only to be steadfast and constant in our Duty, but to be eminently so, and to suffer for it, as much as the Calumnies and Reproaches of factious and malicious Men can inflict upon us: And that they have been hitherto able to do no more than vent the venom of their Tongues; that they have not proceeded to Plunder and Sequestration, to violate our Chapels, rifle our Libraries, and empty our Colleges, as once they did, next to the overruling Providence of Almighty God, is only due to the Royal Care and Prudence of your most sacred Majesty, who gave so seasonable a check to the arbitrary and insolent Undertake.  
But no earthly Power, we hope, no Menaces or Misery, shall ever be able to make us renounce or forget our Duty. We will still believe and maintain, That our Kings derive not their Titles from the People, but from God; that to him only they are accountable; that it belongs not to Subjects, either to create or censure, but to honour and obey their Sovereign, who comes to be so by a fundamental hereditary Right of Succession, which no Religion, no Law, no Fault or Forfeiture can alter or diminish.  
Nor will we ever abate of our well-instructed Zeal for our most holy Religion, as it is professed and established by Law in the Church of England; that Church which hath so long stood, and still is the envy and terror of her Adversaries, as well as the beauty and strength of the Reformation.  
It is thus, Dread Sir, that we have learned our own, and thus we teach others their Duty to God and the King: in the conscientious discharge of both which we have been so long protected and encouraged by your Majesty's most just and gracious Government, that we neither need nor desire any other Declaration than that Experience, for our assurance and security for the future.  
In all which Grace and Goodness, Great Sir, we have nothing to return; we bring no Names and Seals, no Lives and Fortunes, well capable of your Majesty's Service, or at all worthy of your Acceptance; nothing but Hearts and Prayers, Vows of a zealous and lasting Loyalty; Ourselves and Studies, all that we can or ever shall be able to perform, which we here most sincerely promise and most humbly tender at your Majesty's feet, a mean and worthless Present; but such a one as we hope will not be disdained by the most gracious and indulgent Prince that Heaven ever bestowed upon a People.   

SECT. XXXIII.  
Dr. Grove. 
* Short def. of the Church and Clerg. of Engl. p. 81. p. 84.  This is the main occasion for which so many of the Conformists are clamoured against; they are presently branded for meddling with matters of State, if they do but teach their Hearers to be obedient to Magistrates, and are not furnished with Jesuitical Distinctions to show in what Cases it may be lawful to take up Arms against the King.— They are not enamoured with every fine Project that may be set on foot, neither do they admire those for the wisest of all that think themselves excellent at new modelling of States.— They suppose the King's Title may be good enough, though they do not know exactly how many Acres of Land may be held sufficient to confer a Right to the Sovereign Power. They understand very well, that there will be some casual Miscarriages in the administration of all humane Affairs, but they esteem it more becoming wise and good Christians to bear with those we are acquainted with, than to hazard the infinite mischiefs and inconveniences of a change, which it is impossible either to foresee or prevent: and therefore among the great Uncertainties and Vicissitudes of these earthly Concerns, they are verily persuaded, that our common Safety will be best preserved by a pious dependence upon the divine Providence, which they are not ashamed to own, though they should be laughed at for it by a few conceited scoffing Politicians.  
Mr. Hesketh. 
† Serm. on Jan. 30. bef. Lord Mayor 167●/●. p. 10. Cons. also his Serm. on 1 Pet. 2.15. p. 10, 11, etc. An. 1684. P. 13, 14.  Subjects are as equally obliged to assist their Kings in all straits and dangers, as not to resist, or rise up against them to bring them into the same, and their failure in the first is as criminal as their doing the second, and only differs from it as the Cause from the Effect; for therefore some Men are encouraged to attempt the latter, because others are negligent and failing in the former.— Some Men are apt to claim the honour of Loyalty, if they do not actually resist their King, as others, that venture their Lives and Fortunes to assist and vindicate them against those that do resist them.— But how pernicious this is to the Safety of Kings, and how contrary to the true notion of Loyalty, will soon be made appear.— All Nations have ever held the Persons of Kings to be sacred— and he that considers those Oaths, that Subjects bind themselves in to Princes, will clearly see, that thereby they are obliged, not only not to do violence to them themselves, but to do all that in them lies, that others also may not do it.— And when Duty is tied on men by Oaths, there to fail in it is not only common guilt, 
P. 17.  but died with a Perjury.— Tho much may be said for David's being actually in Arms against Saul, considering some Circumstances, yet considering the whole matter, we may safely pronounce of it, that it was certainly unjustifiable; for there were safer ways of avoiding the Displeasure and Anger of Saul, than by raisng an Army of Outlaws and vicious Persons, and appearing in actual Rebellion against him.— But if none of this were true, yet the least Evil that can be said, is, that he yielded not that Assistance unto Saul which he might have done, and by which possibly he might have averted Saul's sad Fate, etc. 
P. 22.  I think it neither difficult nor injurious— to show the Doctrines of the late Usurpers to be but the Transcripts of what the later Jews do fabulously report of the Power of their Sanhedrim over Kings. 
P. 22.  
☞  
P. 35.37. — The Parricide of Charles I. was committed by Men who must first offer Violence to their own Consciences, chase all remains of Justice and Compassion out of their own Breasts, before they could do this Murder, and cease wholly to be Men, that they might commence Devils: for truly I do not know how they can expect a better Name, whom no ties of Laws, no Bands of Conscience, no Obligations of Oaths can hold.— Were our Religion chargeable with this Fact, there needed no other thing to be pleaded against it; this alone could bar all its pretences of being a Christian for ever: for it is most certain, the Religion of the Blessed Jesus can be chargeable with no such thing; nay it is most obvious, that it takes all possible care to prevent them, that it secures Subjection and cheerful Obedience to Kings by the strongest ties possible, and makes it impossible for a true Christian to become Rebel upon any pretence whatsoever. Whatever Religion doth contrary to this, 
P. 37, 38.  is by that only Argument detected to be perfectly Antichristian.— I could easily make manifest how very unsafe all of them make the condition of things, and upon what weak and slippery grounds they found Subjection to them. It is the honour of the Church of England, that her Doctrines in this case are truly Christian and Primitive.— And it is certain when she fails to be so (i. e. loyal) she ceases to be, degenerates from herself, and doth justly forfeit their (i. e. Prince's) Protection.  
Dr. Freeman. 
* Sermon before L. Mayor, 1682. on Psalm 34.12, 13, 14. P. 8.  He that makes his Prince to be undervalved and despised, raises a Rebellion against him in men's breasts, beats him out of his Subjects hearts, and fights him out of their Affections; and having once dispossessed him of this his strongest Hold, 'twill be no hard matter to strip him of all his other Garrisons; neither his Person nor his Government can hope to be long in safety, when once they have wounded his Honour, and put his Reputation to flight; but in the Name of God What do people of this temper propose to themselves? Do they think that their Governors are not Men of passion and infirmities as well as others? Do they not know, that the Employments they are engaged in are so infinitely various and difficult, that they are scarce capable to be managed with that evenness and exactness, as may exclude all inconveniences? And is it not certain, that how ill soever the administration of public Affairs may at any time be under lawful Governors, 'tis yet far more tolerable, than even the reformation of an usurping Populacy?  


Dr. Littleton's Sermon at a Solemn meeting of the Natives of the City and County of Worcester. p. 17.  
Blessed Jesus!— This Evangelium Armatum, this Sanguinary Doctrine, was no Gospel of thy making, no Doctrine of thy teaching. Thy Doctrine was sealed with no blood but that of thy own, who waste the teacher of it, and that of thy Apostles and Martyrs, who were the propagators of it; and though thou saidst thou camest not to send peace, but a Sword; yet that Sword was not designed to fight with, but to suffer by; it was a Sword of a passive, not of an active persecution as to thy Disciples, by which they were to fall victims themselves, and not to sacrifice the lives of others. And p. 18. May God ever preserve his gracious Majesty and Us the sinful People of this Land from such villainous Attempts of his and our Enemies— I am hearty sorry, that any who delight to wear the name of Protestants— should give a just occasion for such a Charge.   

D. Morris, Chaplain to his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury in his Sermon on the 30. of Jan. 1682.  
The English Nation had been long held in singular Reputation; 
P. 24.  for good Natured and Loyal Courage, and not only the neighbouring Nations, but the more remote parts of the Earth have been witnesses of their Dutiful Affection to their Kings.— And p. 30. speaking of the Authors of that days wickedness, saith, Doubtless we have great reason to own the kindness of their Separation. They went out from Us, and would not be of Us; because our Doctrine was too Loyal and Passive for Men of so fiery Temper; and the greatest Tyranny they found in our Religion, was the Restraint that it laid on the Conscience of Men from resisting against the Higher Powers, etc. Pag. 33.— He who has no due Conscience of his Duty to his Prince, and obeys not for God's sake, but his own, is a Servant but during his own pleasure or Advantage.— Now let us learn the Necessity of joining Religion to Loyalty, to Fear God and the King together. It is the same Power that is to be Reverenced in both, they cannot be separated, but to the manifest disadvantage of all humane Authority.— Learn to detect all the plausible beginnings and Witchcrafts of Rebellion, and confirm ourselves with steadfast Resolutions of perpetual Obedience to our Sovereign.   

Dr. Lake's Sermon before the Lord Mayor, etc. Jan. 30. 1684.  
Tells us, It was a usual saying among the Rabbis, that no one can judge the King but he who is over all, God blessed for ever; and p. 22. — The Reformed Religion of our Church, gives no Rules, prefers no Examples, but what are obedient and Loyal ones. If any will convince our Church as accessary to any others, let them impeach our authentic Constitutions, her Doctrine, Worship or Discipline. Her Doctrine is contained in the 39 Articles, and Book of Homilies, which are of Age, and can speak for themselves. p. 22.— What our Articles do more concisely speak, the Homilies do more fully teach;— With an exact agreement to this Doctrine, is her Liturgy composed. p. 23.— Nor has the practice of the Children of this Church, ever run Counter to those excellent Rules.— And speaking concerning the villainy of that day, He adds, Shall we Curse, shall we detest the Men who acted or encouraged this Murder? No, p. 24.— But we will execrate those damnable Positions which gave occasion to it; those Positions which fix the Government in the people, and transfer to them a power to Curb, to Correct, to depose their Princes. You bloody, you Antichristian, you Hellish Doctrines, let there be no more Dew nor Rain upon you! let them not be diffused, nor propagate any farther, but whither and die. p. 29.— What remains, but that we ever detest and accurse their villainous suggestions, beware of the Witchcraft of Rebellion, and not suffer ourselves to be again charmed and tricked out of our Loyalty.  
Mr. Lynford. 
* Sermon 1679. bef. L. Mayor on 2 Chr. 20.17. p. 12, 13. etc.  Our great mistake is, that we dote too much upon these present Enjoyments, and are too fond of the things of this World, by which means it comes to pass that we stretch the Principle of preservation too far, and are often apt to conclude, that whatsoever seems fit and proper to work our present security, this we may lawfully and with a safe Conscience do. Now although our present danger may seem great enough, although Life, Fortune, Religion, all should appear to be at stake, and we can imagine within ourselves, that if such and such courses were made use of, we might escape. Yet that we ought nevertheless to stand still and make use of no means but such as are honest and lawful, I shall endeavour to evince from these following Considerations. First, Consider, that by doing any unlawful action we deprive ourselves of God's care and protection, etc. 2. Nothing can bring a greater scandal upon the Religion we profess, than for us to do any thing which is unlawful, although it be for our own preservation. All Sects and Parties do in all their undertake pretend Piety, etc.— But our Saviour hath given us a Caution not to judge of Men by their pretences, but by their actions etc.— Wheresoever therefore we observe Men to be covetous, and full of ambition, to allow Superstition and Idolatry, to be Factors for Schism and Rebellion, etc. Let them talk as much as they please of the Glory of God, by their Fruits we know them, they are ravenous Wolves in Sheep's clothing, etc.— We see how the Papists have misrepresented all our Actions,— And therefore nothing could be a greater gratification to them at this time, than to see us act any thing, which is either contrary to that duty which we own to God, or that Allegiance which is due to our Soyereign: what pleasure would they reap from an Insurrection, 
Pag. 17.  or popular Tumults, etc.— In vain do we call ourselves Protestant's, if we live otherwise than becomes true Christians, neither shall we be ever able to excuse ourselves either to God or Man, if to keep out Popery we are not afraid wilfully to commit any sin, or wickedness: such a way of proceeding, as it would on the one Hand confirm the Proselytes of Popery, and hinder them from renouncing their gross absurdities, so would it on the other Hand harden the Atheist in his lose, and debauched Principles, who with more boldnese than formerly would assert, that Religion was a trick of State, since the most Zealous Professors of it took so little care to observe its Precepts, and that Heaven, and the pleasures of another World were only Fable and Romance, since they who talked so much of them (whether Papists or Protestants) had nevertheless such a tender regard to the comforts of this life, and so kind a respect to their present Estates, and Fortunes, that for the preservation of these later, they did not scruple venturing the forfeiture of the former.— If therefore we have any kindness for that Religion we profess, if we would not make the name of Protestants as despicable as that of Papists, etc. Let us keep within those bounds of Duty which are set us, and although our condition may appear desperate, 
☞  let us resolve not to uphold it by any other means than what are allowed by God himself: his glory will be sooner advanced, and true Religion better propagated by suffering wrong, than doing wickedly. And therefore it was the constant practice of the Primitive Christians to submit to the most cruel Tortures, rather than by any unwarrantable action strive to avoid them: neither were there any more severely censured among them, than such who at any time for fear of Persecution warped from their Duty, by tamely complying with any Heathenish Custom. Nothing being more scandalous, than for Religious Professors to be guilty of such practices, as are most manifestly repugnant to their own Principles. 3. Consider, that to do evil, though for our own preservation, instead of procuring our peace, and settlement, would be most likely to unsettle, and ruin us; for having once broken down the fences of Duty, which are placed about us, who can tell where we shall stop or abide? Having allowed ourselves the liberty of doing one sinful action, we may easily be prompted on to commit a thousand; for the same pretences will justify all sins alike, and if for the sake of Religion a Tumult may lawfully be raised, a Rebellion also may be promoted, etc.     

SECT. XXXIV.  
Mr. Long is so well known for his Zeal in this good Cause, to all that have seen his answer to Johnson and Hunt, his no Protestant, but a Dissenters Plot, and other such Treatises, that it is wondered, that of late he should own himself the Author of the Solution of the Popular Objections, etc. In which he musters up for unanswerable Arguments the very same Objections of Julian, (of Persecuting according to, and against Law, etc.) which himself had formerly so luckily both answered, and exploded. But he tells us, that St. Austin wrote his Retractations, in which he corrected his errors: and he might have told the World too, that Bellarmine wrote his Recognitions, in which he multiplies, and confirms his Heterodoxies. I shall therefore briefly represent his former Judgement, out of one of his Printed Sermons. 
* On Sept. 9 1683. p. 13.  Rebels should show so much of ingenuity, and serious Penitence, as the Sorcerers did Act. nineteen. 19 Who burned their Books,— for I dare aver, that there are more Arguments for Resisting of Lawful Princes, which they cannot but know is threatened with damnation, Rom. xiii. 2. in the Books of some, who term themselves true Protestants, than are in all those, which are written by such as they justly condemn for Idolatrous, and Traitorous Papists. 
P. 19  What greater encouragement can be given Men pretending to Religion and Conscience, than when their Guides, 
☜  to whom they have committed the Conduct of their Souls, shall Prophesy lies in the name of God, and urge them to Rebellion by Scripture, and Examples.— They are like them in the Gospel, whom no Bonds, or Chains could restrain from practising the mischief they had imagined. No Obligation of Laws, of Conscience, of Fear, or Favour, no Oaths or Promises could hold them, but they mock God himself, that they may the more unsuspectedly destroy his Vicegerent. 
Pag. 22. — If the Principles allowed of in any Community of Men, 
☞  do countenance the Resisting, Deposing, and Mur hearing of Princes, be it on pretence of Heresy, or Tyranny, or for the good of the Kirk, reforming Abuses, or redressing Grievances, though there be but a few Actors, yet all are Criminals. When Absalon was Sacrificing at Hebron, 
P. 25, 26.  the Conspiracy was strengthened, saith the Text.— It seems, that Absalon had his Levites,— and these were they that strengthened the Rebellion. By him the People were instructed in their great Privileges, and Power, that there is Idolatry, and Superstition in the Church; Oppression and Tyranny in the State: that they ought to shake off these Yokes of Bondage, and vindicate themselves into the glorious liberty of the Sons and Daughters of God. 
P. 27, 28.  One tells the People, That they are the Original of Authority. 
☞ — That it is not against Scripture, or the practice of the Primitive Christians, violently to resist the Higher Powers, when they Persecute them for Religion, and when the Prince commands against the Laws of the Country; that Success justifies a good Cause, and to pursue it is to comply with the Will of God, and the Conduct of Providence. Under such Doctrines as these the Presses have sweat, the Church hath groaned, the People's souls been led Captive in Chains of darkness, and under these this horrid Conspiracy hath been hatched. The Devil himself, when he appeared in the Mantle of Samuel never did, nor could teach Saul more pernicious Doctrine than this.— Philostratus saith, that the murder of Domitian was more owing to the Doctrine of Appollonius, than the Hands of Stephanus, and Parthenius, who slew him.—  
Dr. Fowler. 
* Design of Christianity, chap. 16.  The most calm, meek, peaceable, gentle, and submissive temper recommended in the Gospel, did mightily declare itself in the Primitive Christians, that though they were for the most part sorely Persecuted, yet (saith Tertull) there was never any uproar, or hurlyburly among them, nor was this owing to necessity, as is plain from Tertullian, and the History of the Thebaean Legion. 
Chap. 24. p. 346. — It is the most strange, and unaccountable thing, for Men in defence or favour of that way of Religion, which they take to be most truly the Christian, to do that which is essentially, and in its own nature evil; for these things are quite contrary to the design of Christian Religion. 
Pag. 248, 249. — What Villainies are there, which the Pope and his Proselytes have stuck at committing for the propagation of their Religion? Such as exciting Subjects to take Arms against their lawful Sovereigns, to whom they are obliged in the Bonds of most solemn Oaths, etc.— I would I could say that of all that are called Christians, the Papists only are liable to this charge: but alas! It is too manifest to be denied, or yet dissembled, that not a few of those that profess enmity to Popery are sadly guilty, though not equally with the Papists in this particular.   

SECT. XXXV.  
The Author of The Faith and Practice of a Church of England Man. I pay all Men their deuce, all Officers, 
Chap. 3. p. 63, 64.  and Offices in Church and State, according to St. Paul's command, Rom. xiii.— I pay all Honour and Service to the King, as God's Vicegerent, and I cannot endure to hear him evil spoken of. 
P. 66. — I consider myself as to all the Capacities and Relations, that I am in the World, and endeavour to behave myself suitably to them— Which Duties are fully expressed in the excellent Book of the Whole Duty of Man, (and I am sure that excellent Book plainly asserts the Doctrine of Nonresistance)— I look upon Government and Magistracy as one of the most sacred things in the World, 
Chap. 6. p. 137, 138, 139. 140.  for it is of God's Appointment.— Of all kinds of Government I like Monarchy, which seems naturally to derive itself from paternal Authority.— And if there be any Right on Earth, surely Monarchy hath Right with us; and hath at least as good a Title to all its Powers, Rights, and Privileges, as any of its Subjects can have to their Honours, Properties, and Estates. The Monarchy of England being always esteemed as truly an hereditary and successive a Monarchy as any in the World, not liable to be disposed, alienated, or sold, nor depending on any Election, Choice, or Approbation of the People.— And according to this method our present King enjoys the Crown, who hath, as I believe, the truest and most ancient Right to his Crowns that any King in the known Parts of the World hath. 
P. 178. — Where Government in general (in Scripture) is established, and Obedience to Governors enjoined, it ought to be reckoned as spoken of our Governors and Government Ecclesiastical and Civil, as well as of any other in the World. 
Ch. 7. p. 198. — Whatever discouragement the Clergy of England have found, they still preach up and persuade Loyalty to the King, and by the Doctrine of Passive Obedience to temporal Authority keep People from Rebellion, notwithstanding they have so often been jeered and abused with it.  

* Serm. 2. of the unlawfulness of resist. Ep. Ded.  Mr. Payn. I think it my duty, as a Minister of that Church and Religion which hath been often the Mark, but never the Author of any Treason, to publish these Sermons.— And that none may be so malicious as to think we calculate our Sermons merely for the present Circumstances, as if the Pulpit were but a kind of a Weatherglass, wherein the Doctrine of Obedience to Governors is higher or lower to the temperature or variation of outward Affairs, I have put out a plain Sermon without any Addition, that was preached long before the Plot, etc.— When the ancient Christians were persecuted, 
P. 7, 8, 9  they endured unheard of cruelties from their Governors, 
☞  and this often, as they complained of in their Apologies, against Law too,— Such as would have stirred up those, who had power to defend themselves, had they not learned such Principles from their Religion, as forbade it.— we are under the obligation of Oaths, though there have been some, who have forgot all Oaths, and could as easily unloose them as Samson did his with's, and then set themselves free from the Precepts, 
☞  and Examples of Christ and his Apostles, by this colour and pretence, that the Government, under which they lived, was of another Nature, than ours in England, and that such is our Constitution, as makes all this impertinent, and of very little regard here. And by the same way might they not discharge Wives, and Children, and Servants, from those Duties the Gospel requires from each of them, because there was a great difference between the State and condition of those among the Jews, the Romans, and the Grecians formerly, and with us now.— And afterward he shows, 
Serm. 2. p. 22.  That neither in the Case of Religion, nor of Legal Rights, nor in the case of Natural Defence, and the otherwise remediless case of Mankind by the encroachments of Princes, 
P. 27.  it's any way lawful to take Arms.— And proves, that the Law of Nature, or of Self-preservation, does not allow of resistance, etc. And closes all with these good Prayers; God preserve Christianity from that reproach, 
P. 37.  and blasphemy, which these wicked Men have brought upon it. God preserve the Protestant Religion from that advantage, which is hereby given to our Enemies to destroy it.  

J. Kettlewell 's Measures of Christian Obedience.  
Book 2. c. 4. A Duty to Kings and Princes— being God's Vicegerents here on Earth— is a readiness and resolved industry to maintain and support them in their Persons and Government— not plotting and endeavouring ourselves to give away their Lives and Kingdoms unto others, or consenting to them that do so— not submitting and subjecting ourselves to them, but violently resisting and opposing them, is called by S. Paul resisting of Power, or standing up against it, Rom. 13.2. And this when it is made by great numbers, and goes on to extremities, when men are, as the Apostle there saith, set in array and posture of Defence against it, 
☜  and ready by force of Arms to wage War with it, is Rebellion.  
Book 3. c. 6. The first pretence whereby men justify to their own thoughts the indulgent Transgression of several Laws— is because those Transgressions wherein they allow themselves are necessary for the preservation of their Religion and of themselves in those times of danger and persecution wherein God's Providence has placed them.  
Religion is in danger, and like to be undermined by the close and subtle Arts, or overborne by the more open and powerful violence of strong and witty Enemies. And this is God's Cause, and Christ our Lord and Saviour's Interest. So that whatever is done here, we think is in Service of our Maker. If we fight it is his Battles.— Some on one Hand that call us Heretics— think no means sinful whereby they can weaken and divide. And others again even of our own selves, who justly abhor these damnable Instances of Disobedience, upon pretence of preserving or propagating Religion, in some furious and fiery spirited sort of Papists (for God forbidden, that we should think them all to be of this temper) do yet run into the same extravagance, which upon so great reason they condemn in them.  
For if we look into our zeal for the common Religion of Protestants, we shall find, that we transgress many, and those most material and weighty Laws of it, whilst we express our affection and concern to defend and preserve it.  
For doth not this pretence of preserving our Religion, carry us beyond all the Bounds of Peaceableness and good Subjection?  
Yea, I add further, that these same Fears for our endangered Religion transport us into the Transgression of sundry weighty Laws, which oblige us towards our very Enemies, who have contrived to destroy us.  
Thus full of Sin and Disobedience is this sanctified pretence. It is the Cover for every Offence, 
☞  and the common shelter for all Transgressions; for we boggle not at an● sin so long as it tends to preserve us in the prosperous Profession of our endangered or oppressed Religion.  
But if Men would consider calmly, and have patience to look beyond the surface and bare outsides of things, they would soon discern the vanity of this pretence, and how far it will be from excusing any such sinful and disobedient Practices, as they think to justify and warrant by it.  
For as for true and substantial Religion, for protection whereof they would be thought to venture upon all these Transgressions, it stands in no need of their help to preserve it in persecuting times, although they should use innocent and just means, not such as are sinful and disobedient; it would live then without their care, and whether they went about by any politic means to preserve it or no. For Religion is not lost when Religious Men are persecuted; it doth not suffer when they do that profess it, seeing it is not one jot impaired when Men are buffeted and imprisoned, nay, when they bleed and die for it. 
☞  Can the violence of Persecution have oppressed our Religion, it had been stifled in the Birth. For it entered in a persecuting Age, and yet was not overborn by the pressure of its Sufferings, but bravely overcame them. It begun, grew up, and conquered all the World in the very Heat of Affliction and Opposition; the more it was burdened, the more still it spread.  
And indeed what should hinder Religion from thriving in evil Times? For the same Religious Duties which are practised with more ease in prosperous, are exercised also, but with greater honour in an afflicted state of things.  
Nay, some of its more eminent Parts and noble Instances are not capable of being exercised at other times.  
It is not Religion then, whatever Men may vainly pretend, that makes them run into the Breach of Laws, and Contempt of Duty, lest they should suffer in the profession of it. For God and Religion own them no thanks for such a Course, because he is not honoured, 
☞  nor is strengthened and preserved but ruined and destroyed by it. But the true and real Cause of such Disobedience, whereof God and Religion are only the Colour and false Pretence, is plainly a great want of Religion, and of the Love of God, and too great a love of the World, and of men's own selves.  
Mr. Pelling: 
* Ser. on 30. Jan. 1683. on Rom. 13.2. p. 2, 3, 4.  Had not this Duty been a prime part of the Christian Religion, we cannot conceive, why such great care should have been taken to inform the whole World of it, especially in times which afforded not any common encouragement thereunto: Were it not a sad Truth, that some will believe no more of the Scripture, than will serve the present turn, we might wonder how it is possible for a Christian to be an undutiful Subject; so that it is not either ignorance that can excuse, or any allowable Principle of Christianity that can encourage Resistance; nor is it Zeal or Conscience that doth it, though that hath been pretended, but it is either a haughty and unmanageable Spirit, or an hankering after Spoil, etc. that have been the true Causes of those Riots, which have been so vexatious, so fatal to Sovereign Princes. It being otherwise impossible, that Men, whose Consciences are so enlightened by God's own Word, should be so blind, wicked and foolhardy as to rise up against their Prince at the manifest hazard of the greatest and most intolerable of all Evils, for that is the Rebel's portion, Damnation.— By Resistance is meant all undutiful, disobedient, and contumacious Behaviour, and in particular, all open, forcible, and violent Opposition, and by the Power is meant not only the Governor's Authority, but the Governor himself. Shall I take leave to give you a Paraphrase upon my Text. Why! 
☜  you shall have it not out of any single Commentator,— But out of an honest Statute of this Realm, which makes S. Paul's Divinity to be Law too— The Act declares, That it is not lawful upon any pretence whatsoever, etc. After that he proceeds upon the common Topics, that Power is God's Ordinance, etc.— and how reproachful Rebellion is to the Gospel, etc. 
Pag. 25. — Usurping and pretending Powers Men may be forced sometimes to be subject unto upon pain of Plunder and Sequestration, but the Supreme Power, the King, is he whom we must not refist, upon pain of Damnation.— Such was the Authority of Claudius, 
Pag. 27.  and such were his Ministers, 
☜  that they would not allow Christians either the Exercise of their Religion, or the Liberty of their Native Countries, or the protection of their own Houses; 
Pag. 29.30, 31.  and yet both Claudius and his deputies must be submitted to.— Obj. But when Religion is established by Law, than Resistance is not unlawful. Answ. 1. Religion was established among the Jews by the municipal Laws of that Country— And yet though several Kings introduced Idolatry among them, they did not resist; or if they rational; and it is my Resolution— to part with all that this World calls dear, even Life itself, rather than ever own their (i. e. the Papists) novel Doctrines for true, or submit to their Usurpations, or communicate in their idolatrous Worship: but yet for all this, neither for the Preservation of this our most holy and excellent Religion professed here in England, nor for the keeping out of Popery itself (and then I have named the worst thing that I can) will I ever by the Grace of God go beyond the Duty of my Calling, and that Station divine Providence hath placed me in; nor will I ever lift up my finger, or open my mouth, against the Lord's Anointed, whatever his Religion be, whether he hath any or none, whether he be a Nero or a Constantine, whether he rules by Law or against it; we must not wish him evil, no not so much as in our secret Thoughts, whatever hard things we suffer from him; we must not affront, disturb, or oppose his Government, or resist his Authority; and if we have not opportunity of flying from such a Persecution (as I now suppose, because I would put the worst Case that can happen) or cannot by prudence decline it, I know no other remedy the Gospel allows us, but meek and patiented Suffering for our Religion after the example of our blessed Lord and Master.— This is the plain loyal Doctrine of the Church of England, which her Ministers have always preached and defended both against Papists, and fanatics of all sorts, and for which such an Outcry and Clamour of late years hath been raised against the Clergy; and whenever we teach you otherwise, give me leave in God's Name to charge you all to forsake us, and despise us at as high a rate as our greatest Enemies can do; 
P. 31.  nay, if an Angel from Heaven preach any other Doctrine, let him be accursed.— Zeal for the best and the greatest things in the World will not excuse private men's taking upon themselves to reform public Abuses either against or without the consent of the supreme Magistrate; nor will it hollow any Action, for which we have not sufficient Warrant and Authority from God's Word.— For conclusion of all, Would we engage God's favour and protection— let us at all times adhere close to our duty, as well when it is against our temporal Interest, as when it is for it; let us inviolably in all things observe the Commands of our Religion, not only propose good ends, but be as careful to choose lawful means.    

SECT. XXXVII.  
I shall conclude this Chapter with the Doctrine of the Whole Duty of Man, which Book I look upon as a body of practical Divinity owned by our Church, and well spoken of even by our very Adversaries. 
Sund. 14. §. 5.  The Civil Parent is he whom God hath established the supreme Magistrate, who by a just Right possesses the Throne in a Nation; this is the common Father of all those that are under his Authority; and therefore we own him Honour and Reverence, etc. and Obedience (according to the Apostles, 1 Pet. two. 13. Rom. xiii. 1.) and it is observable, that these Precepts were given at a time when those Powers were Heathens, and cruel Persecutors of Christianity, to show us, 
☜  That no pretence of the Wickedness of our Rulers can free us of this duty: an Obedience we must pay, either Active or Passive; the active in the Case of all lawful Commands— But when the Prince commands any thing contrary to what God hath commanded, we are not then to pay him this active Obedience; we may, nay we must refuse thus to act— but even this is a Season for the Passive Obedience; we must patiently suffer what he inflicts on us for such refusal, and not to secure ourselves rise up against him— St. Paul's Sentence in this Case is most heavy, Rom. xiii. 2. They that resist, shall receive to themselves damnation. Here is very small encouragement to any to rise against the lawful Magistrate, for though they should so far prosper here as to secure themselves from him by this means, yet there is a King of Kings from whom no Power can shelter them, and this Damnation in the close will prove a sad prize for their Victories.— Whatsoever the Duty of the Prince is, 
☜  or howsoever performed, he is accountable to none but God; and no failing of his part can warrant his Subjects to fail of theirs.    

CHAP. VIII.  
TO these eminent Divines of our own Church I shall add a few of the most eminent of the Reformed Divines beyond Sea, to show herein the Harmony of the Confessions, as in other things between us and them, against the Papists. 
* In Rom. xiii. 1.  Erasmus I look upon to be one of the first Reformers, and he plainly asserts, That Christians ought to obey a Tyrant; if he says, Go to a Goal, they ought to go; if, Lay their Head on a Block, they ought to obey, etc. And to him I will join the other Writers, (whom Pool in 
† In loc.  his Synopsis hath quoted, viz. Grotius, Beza, etc.) Every man ought to be subject, i. e. to obey in things which are not against the Law of God.— But if Princes shall punish those that so obey the Law of God, they ought not to resist, but to suffer patiently.  
As to the Opinion of Luther, I refer the Reader to what Dr. Patrick hath cited out of him, p. 92, 93. And whereas it is objected against this, that Luther wrote a Book contra duo mandata Caesaris, and approved of the League at Smalcald, we must consider, that the Empire was Elective, and the Government upon condition, as appears from the Bulla aurea 
‖ Apud Goldast. to. 3. p. 429. , where it is said, Quod si nos ipsi, quod absit, etc. But if we ourselves, which God forbidden, or any of our Successors, which we hope will not happen, should in process of time contradict this Ordinance, retract it, or presume to violate it, we ordain, That it may be lawful for all the Electors, Princes Ecclesiastical and Secular, Prelates, Earls, Barons, Gentry, and Commons of our sacred Empire, without imputation of Rebellion or Infidelity, to resist, or contradict us and our Successors, etc.— And till the Germane Lawyers convinced Luther 
* Sleid. lib. 8. an. 1531.  of this, he refused to enter into the League, and taught, That Magistrates ought not to be resisted, and wrote a Book on that Subject. Nay, the Elector of Saxony himself, who was the Head of the League against Charles V did openly declare, that if Charles V were a proper Sovereign in their Principalities, then that it was unlawful to make a War against him. But whatever was done by the Germane Princes in that Conjuncture, I am sure it no way concerns us, whose Government is hereditary, and who have no such Authority to take Arms.  
Calvin himself, though so much censured for the Passage in the end of his Institutes, yet elsewhere 
‖ Ep. ded. ad Fran. I. Reg. Fran. ante Instit.  answers the Objection made against the Reformation, That it was the cause of many Tumults and Seditions, by showing, that the best of Men had been so accused, and that the Accusation was an ungrounded Calumny, etc.— If any under the pretence of Religion, do raise Tumults, if any Man make the free Grace of God a Pretext for their Licentiousness, let the Laws compel such Men to be quiet; let not the Truth be evil spoken of for the 
† Id. l. 17. an. 1546.  Wickedness of some profligate Men.— And if at last the Whispers of ill-minded Men shall fill your ears, so that we still must be enured to Bonds and Whips, and Tortures, and Manglings, and Burn, that like Sheep appointed to the Slaughter we must be reduced to the utmost extremity, we will with patience possess our Souls, and wait till the Lord will deliver us. And in that very Chapter of his Institutes, wherein he seems to make Kings accountable to their Subjects, as the Lacedaemonian Princes were; yet there he avers, 
‖ Inst. l. 4. c. 20. § 25.29.  That we ought to obey, not only good Princes, but those who do not their Duty, and that as to the point of Obedience of Subjects, there is no difference between the just King and the unjust.— That if we are severely tormented by a cruel Prince, if we are robbed by a covetous or a luxurious Prince, if we are slighted, and neglected to be protected by a slothful one, nay, if we are vexed by an impious and sacrilegious Prince for the sake of Piety and Religion, let us remember, that our Sins have deserved such Scourges from God; then let humility check our Impatience, and let us afterward consider, that we cannot help all this Evil; that there is nothing left, but to implore the help of God, in whose hands are the Hearts of Kings, etc.— When Princes do command any thing against God's Law, we are to obey God, and must in such Cases comfort ourselves, that we have obeyed God as we ought, while we suffer every thing rather than desert our Religion.  
Camero 
* In Rom. xiii. 1. Vot. pro pace, p. 662 , says Grotius, is of the same mind, and was much harassed for owning the Opinion: for when he asketh the Question, What shall we do with a Tyrant when he swerves from this rule of being a Minister for good? He answers, That it is our duty to submit.  
Is. Casaubon, 
* Epist. ad Front. Ducaeum, p. 732. Ed. ult. P. 749.  (Though not professed Divine, yet to be reckoned here) May God never permit, the God by whom King's Reign, may he never permit, that those Men, who are not well inclined toward their Prince, may light upon the Book of Mariana, or take Counsel from him, or any other such Writer. There are many at this day, acted by a preposterous Zeal, who under the pretence of Religion and Piety, dare engage in Rebellions, Treasons, most cruel Murders of the Innocent, subversion of lawful Governments, and the blackest Parricides of their Princes. St. Paul the Apostle, whom no Man will deny to have been acted by a most holy and fervent Zeal for Faith in the Son of God; being admonished, that there were some, who boasted that they approved of that old saying, Let us do evil that good may come thereof, cries out, that they speak Blasphemy, and that such men's damnation is just: as if he were pronouncing an Anathema Maranatha against such profane Men.— But our modern Zelots, how contrary are they to St. Paul?— They seem to have minded that one thing, that they might exclude the King from his rightful Succession, due to him by Inheritance, and by the Laws of the Land, etc.  
Peter du Moulin, 
* Vit. Molinaei. Lond. 4●. p. 707.  When he returned into France from England, with much grief saw the Protestants engaged in the Party of the Prince of Conde against the Queen Mother, which War was indeed raised against the King himself: and endeavoured both by his Sermons, and his Letters to remove them from so unlawful a design; 
† V Du Moulin answ. to Philan. Angl. p. 37.  and the King's Party owes it to him, that not one Protestant Town on this side the Loire joined itself to the Prince of Condé. And when he was forced to leave France, and fix at Sedan, the first Letter that he wrote was to the Commonwealth of Rochel, as it was then called.' To persuade them to Peace, to dissolve their Counention, and to throw themselves, as they ought, on the King's Mercy; advising them to obey the King, and thereby to take away all pretence from their Enemies.— And, if God saw fit, that they should suffer extremity; for every one that feared God, would be sure to suffer for no other cause, but for the Profession of the Gospel, etc. Nay du Moulin the Son says, 
Ubi Supr. p. 45.  that the actions of the Men of Rochel were disallowed by the best, and the most of their Church.— That they were exhorted to their Duty by their Divines.— And that this was the Sense of the National Synod, of which du Moulin was the Precedent but two months before he wrote his Letter.  
This also is du Moulin's Doctrine 
* P. 795, etc. Ed. Genev. 1635.  in his Buckler of Faith, That the Government of Kings is by Divine Right, and founded upon the Ordinance of God, and that God hath required Obedience to Magistrates, as to those whom he hath established: and that whosoever resisteth them resisteth God, and that those who affirm, that the Authority of Kings is of Human Institution, put Kings upon maintaining their Interests by force, etc. That that Allegiance of Subjects is firm which is incorporated in Piety, and is esteemed a part of Religion, and of the service which we own to God.  
And whatever the learned Hugo Grotius might have said in his Books de Jure Belli, 
Grot. in Mat. xxvi. 52.  & Pacis, in his later Works (wherein it may presumed he speaks his truest Sense) he asserts this Doctrine, which it appears, he had well studied, as if he had been a Member of the English Church, whose Articles and Polity he so well understood, and in whose Communion he resolved to have lived, had not God in his Providence ordered it otherwise. If it be once admitted, says he, that private Men, when they are injured by the Magistrate, may forceably resist him, all places would be full of Tumults, and no Laws, or Judicatures would have any Authority, since there is no Man, who is not inclined to favour himself. To this purpose 
* Vot. pro pace ad art. 16. pag. 66 〈◊〉, 662.  he censures the Practices, and Writings of many of the French Church, still excepting Camero: confirming his Opinion by the Authority of King James, and the Reasons of the University of Oxford, that condemned Paraeus' Book. 
† Animadver. in animadv. Riveti. art. 16. p. 644.  For both Christ, and his Apostles Peter and Paul, have Preached the Doctrine, that no force is to be opposed to the Supreme Power: and that we ought to own, and retain the Doctrine to be of Divine Right and Institution.  
The Opinion of Monsieur Bochart, the glory of the French Church this fully seen in his Epistle to Bishop Morley; who among other reasons refused to Communicate with the Reformed Church in France, because he thought, they asserted the Doctrine of Resisting, and Deposing Kings; but Bochart expressly avers, That the King is Gods Anointed, and Lieutenant, and so not in any case to be Resisted, since he is accountable to none but God. That he who rises against his Prince, is one of those Giants that fight against God. That David could not take away the Wife of Uriah. Nor Ahab seize Naboths Vineyard without being guilty of great sin: but that when Samuel, 1 Sam. viij. 9 says of the King, He shall take your sons, and your daughters, etc. He means, that when Kings commit such transgressions, they are as uncontrollable, as if the Actions had been lawful. That in such cases a Nation ought to call upon God, since there are no Human remedies against the force of a King; for if a King may be resisted, he cannot be a Sovereign, for where Subjects may Resist, they may Judge, and consequently the Sovereignty is in them. That when Julian Persecuted contrary to Law, none of his Soldiers risen up against him, though nothing was more easy, would they have undertaken it, since at his death it was plain, that almost the whole Army was Christian.  
David Blondel 
* De Formula Regnante Christo. Sect. 2. §. 16. p. 172. p. 184.  chastises Pope Gregory VII. as for many other Usurpations upon Princes, so for this among the rest, for saying, That a Prince hath his Power from the People, contrary to what S. Paul says expressly of Nero, that he was ordained of God; affirming further, that lawful Kings, being guilty of ill management of their Power, are accountable to, and shall be punished by God, who gave them that Power, 
Pag. 187,  but not to Men.— That this Opinion, that Kings were subject to any human Authority, was brought into the Church near 1100 years after our Saviour came into the World, when the Church could not be presumed to be in a better condition than it was, when it flourished in the former Ages of Christianity. And that no Man before Greg. VII. ever owned the Power of any Man over Kings. And this he proves from the Testimonies of Tertullian, 
Pag. 188.  Hosius of Corduba, Basil, Ambrose, Hierom, Arnobius junior, Cassiodore and others, who say, That King David was above the coercive power of the Law, nor could be called to account for his Faults. And therefore says in his Confession to God, Against thee only have I sinned. If Subjects offend against the Laws of Justice, the King corrects them: but if the King offends, who shall correct him? None but he who is Justice itself; all other persons are under the Restraint of Laws, but Kings only are reserved to the Tribunal of God; and therefore, while, according to the Apostle, it is a terrible thing to fall into the Hands of the Living God, it will be more terrible to Kings, who have none on earth their Superior, that may awe them, if they sin more licentiously, and heinously than others.  
He that will read the Sentiments of Sam. Petit on this Doctrine, let him consult his Treatise set out by his Nephew Sorbiere, called Diatriba de Jure, Principum edictis, Ecclesiae quaesito, etc. while Monsieur Allix says, 
Praefat. ad Determ. Joh. Paris. p. 61.  That the Determination that Kings may be deposed, is much worse than the most Heresies. And Dr. Bourdieu 
† Serm. on 29. May. 1684.  having asserted, That Religion teaches men to give Obedience to Pagan, Tyrannical, Persecuting, Heretical Princes; in his Epistle to the King avers, That it was reasonable, that he should publish to the World the Opinion of their disconsolate Churches upon the Doctrine of Obedience, which ought to be given to higher Powers. Thus he was instructed in his Infancy and Youth; thus he saw it practised in their Congregations and Assemblies; thus for many years himself had taught it, as he had read and found it contained in the Holy Scriptures.  
And to mention one unblassed Authority out of that suffering Church, instead of all the rest, take a few words of a pious Minister of theirs, smarting at the very time when he wrote, under the Severity of his Sovereign, and (as himself testifies) enjoying then the Protection of a Commonwealth. 
* Le Droit Souv. du Prince, etc. p. 15, 16.  No good man, (says he) ought to resist a Prince for any earthly Interest whatsoever; nay, nor for Religion neither, etc.— It may be objected, that the Doctrine of such absolute Power in Princes should give occasion to the increase of misery in such passive Churches. To which I answer, 1. That were it so, that such temporal misery should be increased by it, yet that countervailed not the necessity of recovering so many Souls without number from death temporal first, and afterwards from eternal. And again, speaking of the Authority of a Prince, as to the Essentials of Religion. 
† Pag. 33.  If a Prince will use force and violence there, all that we have to do, is to suffer with humility and patience both his threats and the worst he can do, not suffering his rigour to raise the least motion to Rebellion in us, and transport us to the least degree of outward resistance, any more than refusing to wound our Consciences with such Acts of Religion, as are contrary to the Faith we profess; and never had the Church of Christ had so many holy Champions as deserved the Name of Martyrs and Confessors, if they had not thought this Rule inviolably true. 
Pag. 36.  We must suffer all their displeasure even in case of these Essentials without murmuring, and sacrifice our Resentments to the Authority that afflicts us, according to the Commandment of God, which we keep in suffering so.— As for the things of this life, 
Pag. 40.  there is not one of them exempted from the Power of Princes; for as the Judgement of Conscience upon the Account of being peculiar to God alone, was the reason why the Essence of Religion was exempted from it; so the Cognizance of these things belonging to Princes, they are all of them capable to receive the impressions of their Power, pag. 53, 54. And again having described the Nature and Original of the most Sovereign and Absolute Power upon Earth, he adds, That in all States, where that Power is either already established, or where it is about to establish itself by such means, as nothing but an unjust Rebellion of Subjects can prevent, the Hand of God ought to be acknowledged in it, and the Secrets of his Providence adored, and our Sins forsaken, which provoke the King of Kings to permit such an Increase of Power, and try to obtain that Liberty of the Divine Mercy, which it is not lawful for us to give ourselves; and if it please not God to take off that Yoke from them that bear it, or to help them escape it that fly from it, it is matter of Conscience to undergo it, as a Chastisement of God's sending, and against which we cannot struggle, without opposing him who sends it. In a word, this Power is a Power of Impunity which Sovereigns have in respect of their People.    

The CONCLUSION.  
IT were easy to sum up the Arguments of these eminent Men, That Power is only from God, and therefore only accountable to him; that suffering for Righteousness sake is the Glory of Religion; that Resistance is a damnable Sin, that no Evil is to be done, that the greatest good may come of it; and that true Religion is tender of the Rights of Princes, and teaches Obedience to them for Conscience sake; and that the Devil of Rebellion does commonly transform himself into an Angel of Reformation. But these things are so plainly affirmed in the foregoing Discourse, that the Reader must be very weak, or very negligent that does not observe them.  
FINIS.   

Omitted by the Printer, Pag. 84. Line 15.  
Dr. Stillingfleet, In his Preface to the Jesuits Loyalty.  
THE same Learned Author, exposing the absurd, and inconsistent pretences of Loyalty in the Jesuits, makes choice of this method." To run the Parallel between the Deposing Doctrine of the Church of Rome, and the Commonwealth Principles, which he undertakes to prove, and effectually makes out to agree in these three particulars. 1. 
Pag. 4.  In setting up a Court of Judicature over Sovereign Princes. 2. In breaking the Oaths and Bonds of Allegiance Men had entered into. 3. In justifying Rebellion on the account of Religion. As to the first, The setting up a Court of Judicature over Sovereign Princes. The Jesuit, he observes, had endeavoured to come off by the idle distinction of a direct and indirect Power. And the Commonwealthsmen (says he) do herein agree with them: For they do not say that the People have a direct power over their Prince, (which were a contradiction in its self, for Subjects to command their Sovereigns,) but only breach of Trust, the People have an indirect Power to call their Princes to an account, and to deprive them of their Authority. 
Pag. 5. — The main thing to be debated is (says he) whether Sovereign Princes have a Supreme and Independent Authority inherent in their Persons or no: or whether they are to be accountable to others. That upon Maladministration they may be deprived of their Government. This is the first and chief Point, and the Republicans, and Asserters of the Pope's Deposing Power, are perfectly agreed in the Affirmative of the latter Question, and only differ as to the Persons in whom the Power of calling Princes to an account doth lie; whether in the Pope or in the People.  
And even as to this, they do not differ so much as Men may at first imagine. For however the Primitive Christians thought it no flattery to Princes, to derive their Power immediately from God, and to make them accountable to him alone, as being Superior to all below him, (as might be easily proved by multitudes of Testimonies:) Yet after the Pope's Deposing Power came into request, the Commonwealth Principles did so too; and the Power of Princes was said to be of another Original, and therefore they were accountable to the People. And having shown the Affinity of such Doctrines and Principles in both, by some Tragical effects of them, as well at home as abroad, he proceeds thus. 
Pag. 12. — If we inquire farther into the Reasons of these Pretences, we shall find them alike on both sides The Commonwealthsmen, when they are asked how the People having once parted with their Power, come to resume it: They presently run to an implicit Contract between the Prince and the People, by virtue whereof the People have a Fundamental Power left in themselves, which they are not to exercise, but upon Princes violating the Trust committed to them. The very same Ground is made the Foundation of the Pope's Deposing Power, viz. An Implicit Contract, that all Princes made when they were Christians, to submit their Sceptres to the Pope's Authority, etc.  
And where he reasons against these Principles from the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles. 
Pag. 15.  The Religion they taught (says he) never meddled with Crowns and Sceptres, but left to Cesar the things that were Cesar's, and never gave the least intimation to Princes of any Forfeiture of their Authority, if they did not render to God the things that are God's. Concluding that Head with this Reflection upon the whole. In my 〈◊〉 there is very little difference between Dominion being founded in Grace, and being forfeited for want of it.  
But than secondly, as to the breaking of Oaths and Bonds of Allegiance; he first lays down, That the Duty betwixt Princes and Subjects is natural and antecedent to their embracing the Christian Religion. And therefore secondly, the absolving Subjects from that, is in plain terms nulling the Obligation to a natural Duty, and taking away the Force of Oaths and Promises. And thirdly, That all Mankind are agreed, that it is a sin to break a lawful Oath, and the more solemn and weighty the Oath is, the greater is the Perjury.  
And then proceeds to show, that the Power which absolves from such Oaths is a Power of turning Evil into Good, and Good into Evil, of making civil Obedience to Princes to be a Crime, and Perjury to be none, and such as from the Schoolmen he proves to be greater than they allow of in God himself, 
Pag. 18.  where there is intrinsic Goodness in the Nature of the thing, and inseparable Evil from the contrary to it, As in the Case (says he) of Disobedience to Parents, and Violation of Oaths lawfully made; and after a clear Confutation of the Sophistry of Popish Casuists in this matter he concludes: Woe be to them that make good evil, 
Pag. 24.  and evil good, when it serves their turn. For this is plainly setting up a particular Interest under the Name of the Good of the Church, and violating the Laws of Righteousness to advance it. If Men break through Oaths and the most solemn Engagements and Promises, and regard no Bonds of Justice and Honesty to compass their Ends, let them call them by what specious Names they please, The Good Old Cause, or The Good of the Church, (it matters not which) there can be no greater sign of Hypocrisy and real Wickedness than this, etc. And lastly, as for the justifying Rebellion upon the account of Religion, having cited the 
Boucher. de justâ abdicat. Hen. 3  Sorbon Doctor, who not only called it lawful to resist Authority on the Account of Religion, but folly and Impiety not to do it, where there is any probability of Success. And said, that the Martyrs were only to be commended for suffering, because they wanted Power to resist. With a Note of Admiration, (says he) Most Catholic and Primitive Doctrine! And a little after, pag. 28. Cardinal Bellarmin having given his Reason, amongst others, for the Pope's deposing Power, Because it is not lawful for Christians to suffer an Heretical Prince, if he seeks to draw his Subjects to his Belief. The Learned Dean makes this Reflection upon it; And what Prince, that believes his own Religion doth it not? And what then is this, but to raise Rebellion against a Prince, wherever he and they happen to be of different Religions. With a great deal more to the same purpose, which it would be much more profitable for the Reader to learn from the ingenious Preface itself than from this imperfect Transcript of it.   

A CONTINUATION OF THE HISTORY OF Passive Obedience Since the REFORMATION.  
AMSTERDAM: Printed for Theodore Johnson in the Calver-Straet. 1690.   

A PREFATORY EPISTLE TO THE AUTHOR Of the First Part of the History of Passive Obedience.  
SIR,  
THE first part of the History of Passive Obedience, having been favourably received by the generality of Readers, though unjustly censured, and undeservedly reproached by some Men, who think themselves injured thereby; I have thought fit to publish a second Part of the same History, not doubting your leave for my so doing; wherein the Reader may find that Doctrine carefully, and at large deduced through the first Ages of our Reformation, down to the times of Archbishop Laud, (and from thence to the present time) to show the World, that the Opinion was not first hatched, and brought up in that great Man's days, who died a Martyr to the constitutions of our most excellent Church, and among them to the true Principles of Loyalty: Nor do I believe, that any one Primitive Doctrine, wherein we differ from the Papists can show (even in that Age, when the whole drift of our Writers was to expose and confute, the Romish Synagogue) more Authors, that uniformly assert it, than this of Nonresistance, as if God in his wise and good Providence had so ordered it, to stifle an Objection, which he foresaw would afterwards be made against it in the degenerate Ages of the same Church; nor is there need of any other Apology to you or the Reader, for my meddling with this Province (for my adding some Passages to what hath been already published, and illustrating, and enlarging others) since if the interest of truth be promoted, 
See the History unmasked.  it matters not how many are engaged in that service; nor that whether they are called Papists, Atheists, and Hobbists for their pains.  
I have often heretofore wondered at the assurance of the Romish Authors, who wrote against our Church a little after the Reformation, that they could so confidently accuse the whole Body of protestants, as the Preachers, and Practisers of Rebellion; (for so says Stapleton 
‖ Counterblast p. 20. , that Protestants obey no longer, than till they have power to resist: And Card. Allen 
* Answ. to the Just. of Gr. Bri. cap. 4. , that the Protestants are desperate and Factious, that as long as the Laws are  to them, they are obedient; but when the Laws are against them, and their Princes their Enemies, they break all the Bonds of Allegiance, despise Majesty, fill all places with Slaughters, Burn of Towns, and Robberies, and run headlong into the contempt of all things Civil and Sacred; to omit other Writers) when I seriously reflected upon the tumultuary reformations in many Countries, and the seditious Writings of Buchanan, Knox, Goodman, Whittingham, Junius Brutus, and others; I saw reason to cease my wonder at the accusation, though I can never enough admire the forehead of the Accusers, who at the same time, that they impeached the Protestants, were themselves guilty of Writing most Traitorous Libels, and promoting Sedition and Rebellion, as much as in them lay, against their lawful Sovereign. But whomsoever this accusation might concern in those days, I am sure, it did not touch the Church of England, of whose Loyalty her adversary Christopher Goodman gives a fair testimony, 
Of Obed. ch. 3. p. 30. Prat Gen. 1558.  even when he complains of it; The most part of Men (says he) yea and of those, who have been both Learned and Godly, and have given worthy testimony of their Profession to the Glory of God, have thought and taught (by the permission of God for our Sins) that it is not lawful in any case to resist, and disobey the Superior Powers, but rather to lay down their Heads, and submit themselves to all kinds of Punishment, and Tyranny;— and in the Margin he sets this note, this is dangerous Doctrine.  
And though it may be expected, that every Age will produce such Boutefeau 's, yet the Doctrine of the Cross, and the benefits of a patiented suffering of injuries will, I hope, be always so well understood in the World, that all the attempts of the Jesuits, and their Journeymen (for it is from their shop that these Wares come) will prove vain, and the true Catholic Doctrine of Passive Obedience will be still owned, still honoured, and when God calls to the performance of is practised;— the Christian Religion is soft and gentle, its Foundation was laid in the blood of its institutor, and our Holy Saviour, the superstructure cemented with the blood of an innumerable Army of Martyrs, and adorned with the patience of the Saints; and the more truly reformed Christianity is, the more like it grows to those admirable examples, the more meek and humble it is, and the better prepared for a state of suffering; but when Mammon finds a way into the House of God, and the Baptismal Vow is forgotten, when Men depend on their own Arts, and distrust God's Providence, when they dare fight for Religion, because they are afraid to die for it, and can allow themselves to do evil, that good may come thereof; it is no wonder, if Christianity be blended with the World, and made a pretence to serve the ends of pride and covetousness, of ambition and revenge; 
Sir Will. Temple's Obs. on the Netherl. c. 1. p. 57  according to the observation of a wise Statesman, with respect to the Netherlands, that whereas the Spanish, and Italian Writers, attribute the Revolutions in the Low Countries to the change of Religion, etc. That Religion without mixtures of ambition and interest, works no such violent effects, and produces rather the examples of constant sufferings, than of desperate actions.  
How truly Ancient, and Primitive the Doctrine of Passive Obedience is, comes not within the limits of this present History, but may be hereafter considered, by deducing it through the Writings and Practices of the earliest Christians down to the days of King Henry VIII. But those times in the esteem of John Goodwin were times of ignorance, and the truth was but in its dawn, and by a glimmering light Men were easily led out of their way; for he says, that the Primitive Christians (and among them he must include the Apostles, 
Anti-Cavalerism. Sect. 6.  though guided by the Spirit of God, which led them into all truth) knew nothing of this useful Doctrine of Resistance, that God had hid this liberty from the Primitive Christians, of the Subjects Power, and right to resist their Superiors, which he hath manifested to us; the commonalty of Christians, doing contrary to the will of their Superiors, being the Men, that must have the Principal hand in executing God's judgements upon the Whore. Rev. 18, 4, 5. and as John Goodwin slanders the Ancient Fathers, as a company of ignorant Men, so John Milton accuses the first Reformers, as the genuine assertors of the Doctrine of Resistance; for Salmasius having truly alleged, that the Doctrine of the Sacred, and Inviolable Authority of Princes was preserved pure, and uncorrupt in the Church; till the Bishops of Rome attempted to set up a Kingdom in this World Paramount to all Kings and Emperors; Milton replies, 
Defence. pro pop. Angli. p. 33.  that Salmasius strove in vain to transfer the guilt upon the Pope, which all free Nations, every Religion, all the Orthodox take upon themselves, and that he had as many Adversaries in this point, as there were most excellent Doctors of the Reformed Church: While a third Writer boldly affirms, 
Author of plain English. p. 7.  that the Doctrine of Nonresistance is contrary to the Fundamental Liberties of the Nation, and that they undid the Kingdom, who required the Oath contrary to the Fundamental Liberty of the Nation, whereby they would make the King, and them, who are commissioned by him to be as irresistible, as there severity against Dissenters would argue the imposers infallible.  
Thus in the Opinion of such Writers, Passive Obedience was the weakness of the Ancient Christians, and a sign, they were under a lower dispensation, and that to assert it necessary in this more enlightened Age is to contradict the most eminent Reformers, and the Fundamental Liberties of Nature; and if after all this some Men should be so resty, as to quote St. Paul to the Romans for their submission to Princes, 
Ubi sup. p. 38.  Goodman says, that Men are deceived into this submission by misunderstanding this place of St. Paul, and such like, It behoveth every Soul to be subject to superior Powers, because there is no Power but of God, for the Powers that be, are ordained of God, and therefore he, that resisteth the Power, resisteth the Ordinance of God; which words he elsewhere thus comments, 
Ch. 9 p. 410, etc.  that they require Obedience only to such Magistrates, whom God hath ordained over us lawfully according to his word, which rule in his fear according to their Office, as God hath appointed; and that Tyrants, Idolaters, Papists, and Oppressors are not God's Ordinance; if so, Satan must be obeyed, and his Infernal Powers; for they are Powers, and have their Powers also from God, and yet we must resist the Devil, for the Magistrate is ordained for good, and to such only must every Person be subject and Obedient. Such unhappy Commentaries do some Men writ, even on Holy Scripture itself, when their Interests incline their minds to wrest the Sacred Oracles; it were easy to prove this from Pope Hildebrand down through the Schoolmen, to the present time; as also to show, how Men by degrees came to despise, then to speak evil, and at last with violence to oppose Kings, but that it would swell this Preface to too great a bulk. While I must profess, I have met with an honester, and more Christian account of our duty in the Heathen Epictetus, whose words will serve for an excellent Commentary on St. Peter (not only to the good and gentle, 
Enchirid. c. 3●. p. 29, 30. ed. Ox.  but also to the froward) we must suit our duties to our respective relations; Have we a Father? we are commanded to take care of him, to yield to him in every thing; if he gives us ill Language, if he beats us, we must bear with him; but our Father is an ill Man? did nature give thee a relation to him as he is good, or rather as he is a Father?— not other Man can hurt thee, unless thou wilt thyself.  
Nor shall I mention, how dissonant to our Laws the resisting of Kings is (that is an undertaking recommended to the Gentlemen of the long Robe) while I further observe, that many of the Sermons, that recommend Nonresistance were Printed at the desire of the Two Houses of Parliament, others at the request of the Lord Mayor, etc. and all with Licence, which gives us the suffrages of all concerned in the publishing the discourses, as well as the Preacher; to which if we join the multitude of Addresses (I mean not of the life and fortune of Dissenters, who never cried Hosannah one day, but when they intended to cry, Crucify the next; but of those, who professed themselves true Sons of the Church) we cannot wish for a more full and particular Evidence; I have not always tied myself to the very words of the Authors, I cite (especially not to a literal translation, which savours of a mean pedantry) but I have not where wilfully falsified their meaning, or lessened their force; and having thus accounted for the equity, seasonableness, and integrity of this second Part, I conclude with that Passage of Mr. Philpot 's Letter; 
Apud Coverdale's collect. p. 217.  that every good Man ought not to hid his Faith, but to edify the Church of God by a true confession: for as St. Paul writeth to the Romans, the belief of the heart justifieth; to acknowledge with the mouth maketh a Man safe; (so he rendereth the Passage,) and he that walketh uprightly, walketh safely: For while the little policies of crafty Men, will at last expose and ruin them, integrity will be its own security.  
I have taken care, Sir, to correct the Errata of your first part, as of this second, while I hope, you, or some Friend for you will give speedily due correction to your many answerers (as one of them hath been already silenced) who by a Method peculiar to this Age, undertake to confute a History, not by proving the falsifications of the Author, or disproving the matter of fact, but by showing reasons, why what was said by some Men seven years ago aught to be unsaid, and retracted in this present juncture; as if the change of men's circumstances necessarily brought with it a change of that truth, which I thought eternal, and unchangeable. I am,  
Yours, etc.   

ADVERTISEMENT.  
The Historical and Miscellaneous Tracts of the Reverend and Learned Dr. Peter Heylyn, containing, I. Ecclesia Vindicata: Or, the Church of England justified, 1. In the Way and Manner of her Reformation. 2. In Officiating by a Public Liturgy. 3. In prescribing a set Form of Prayer to be used by Preachers before their Sermons. 4. In her Right and Patrimony of Tithes. 5. In retaining the Episcopal Government. 6. And the Canonical Ordination of Priests and Deacons. II. The History of the Sabbath; in two Parts. III. Historia Quinquarticularis: Or, an Historical Declaration of the Judgement of the western Churches, and more particularly of the Church of England, in the five Controverted Points reproached in these last times with the Name of Arminianism. iv The Stumbling-block of Disobedience and Rebellion, proving the Kingly Power to be neither  nor Subordinate to any other upon Earth. To which are added, V A Treatise de jure Paritatis Episcoporum: Or, a Defence of the Right of Peerage of the English Bishops: And an account of the Life of the Author. To be Sold by the Booksellers.   

A Catalogue of Author's.  

STephen Gardiner, and Bonner. P. 2  
Dr. R●bert Barnes the Martyr. P. 5  
Necessary Frudition of a Christian Man P. 9  
William Tr●da●e the Martyr. P. 11  
The Postil set out an. 1550. P. 15  
Bernard Gilpin. P. 17  
Bishop H●●per the Martyr. P. 18  
Bishop Coverdale. P. 22  
Bishop Latymer the Martyr. P. 23  
Archbishop Cranmer the Martyr. P. 25  
Judge Montague. P. 29  
Sir James Hales. P. 30  
The Norfolk and Suffolk Protestants. P. 31  
The Lady Jane Grey, and the D. of Suf. P. 32  
Bishop Rilley the Martyr. P. 33  
Bradford the Martyr. P. 34  
Laurence Saunders the Martyr. P. 35  
George Marsh the Martyr. P. 36  
Mr. Philipet the Martyr. ibid.  
The Fran●furt Confessors, viz. S●ory, Barlow, Cox, Becon, Bale, Parl●●urst, Grindal, Sandys, N●wel, W●●m, Jewel, etc. ibid.  
Thomas Be●on. P. 39  
The Homily against Rebellion. P. 43  
Bishop Jewel. ibid.  
Alexander N●wel. P. 45  
The exhortation to the North. Reb. P. 46  
Antonius Corranus. P. 47  
D●. ●●ng. P. 49  
Barthol. Clerk. P. 50  
Bishop Babington. ibid.  
Dr. Laurence Humfreys. P. 53  
Archbishop Baner●●t. P. 37, 54  
Dr. E●des. P. 55  
Bishop M●reton. P. 50  
Mr. Greenham. P. 60  
Archbishop Ab●●t. P. 61  
Bishop Barlow. ibid.  
Francis Merbury. P. 62  
Dr. John Do●e. P. 63  
King James. P. 64  
Sir John Hayward. P. 65  
Bishop Bilson. P. 71  
G●dman's Recantation. P. 74  
Oxf. answ. to the mille manus petition. P. 75  
Bishop Rudd. ibid.  
Doctor Field. P. 76  
Bishop Overal's Convocation Book. P. 77  
Deus, & Rex. P. 82  
Gabriel Powel. P. 84  
Oliver Ormerod. ibid.  
Albericus Gentrlis. P. 85  
Bishop Andrews. P. 88  
Rich. Thomson. P. 90  
Dr. Collins. ibid.  
Isaac Casaubon. P. 92  
Bishop Prideaux. P. 95  
Bishop Buckeridge. P. 98  
Bishop Godwin. P. 100  
Dr. David Owen P. 101  
Dr. John Downham. P. 104  
〈◊〉 Daws. ibid.  
Dr. Bois. P. 105  
Bishop Ablet. ibid.  
Bishop Bayly. P. 107  
Dr. Crackemherp. ibid.  
Dr. Featly. P. 108  
Pet. du Moulin, Sen. P. 109  
Pet. du Moulin, Jun. P. 111  
Bishop Mountain. P. 115  
Mr. Hayes. ibid.  
Mr. adam's. ibid.  
Author of a Discourse of Supreme Power, and Common Right. P. 117  
Sam. Oats. ibid.  
Mr. Robert Bolton. ibid.  
Mr. Faringdon. P. 119  
Mr. Chillingworth. ibid.  
Bishop Lake. P. 120  
Dr. Stephens. ibid.  
P. H. P. 121  
Dr. Swadlyn. P. 122  
Dr. Holiday. ibid.  
Mr. Berk●n●ead. P. 123  
Bishop Henry King. ibid.  
Dr. Gardiner. P. 124  
Dr. maine. P. 125  
Dr. Heylin. P. 126  
Sir Jo. Spelman. P. 127  
Sir Tho. Ashton. ibid.  
An Appeal to thy Conscience. P. 128  
Mr. Symmons. P. 129  
Bishop Rainbow. ibid.  
Mr. Sheringham. P. 130  
Mr. Allington. ibid.  
Mr. Jane. P. 131  
Bishop Sanderson. P. 132  
Judge Jenkins. P. 134  
Dr. Stewart. ibid.  
Bishop Brownrig. ibid.  
Bishop Hacket. P. 135  
Dr. Plume. ibid.  
Archbishop Sandcroft. P. 136  
Bishop Morley. ibid.  
Bishop Wren. P. 140  
Bishop Laney. ibid.  
Bishop Pearson. ibid.  
Bishop Turner. P. 141  
Bishop Fell. P. 144  
Bishop Thomas. ibid.  
Earl of Clarendon. ibid.  
Sir Robert Filmer. P. 146  
Sir Wid. Dugdale. ibid.  
Dr. Lake Bishop of Chichester. ibid.  
Dr. Allestrey. P. 147  
Dr. Sherlock. ibid.  
Dr. H. B●●shaw. P. 148  
Dr. Falkner. P. 149  
Bishop Crofts. P. 150  
Dr. Griffith. ibid.  
Dr. Jane. P. 151  
Dr. Outrant. ibid.  
Sir Orlando Bridgman. ibid.  
Sir Hencage Finch. P. 152  
The Harmony of Divinity, and Law. ibid.  
Mr. Foulit. ibid.  
Bishop Spratt. ibid.  
Dr. P●●●ck. ibid.  
Dr. Fitz-Williams. P. 153  
Mr. Wagstaffe. P. 154  
Dr. Bisby. ibid.  
Dr. Bernard. ibid.  
Oxford notes on Josephus. ibid.  
Dr. South. P. 155  
Several Addresses. P. 156  
Dr. Stillingfleet. P. 157  
Dr. Tennison. P. 163  
Dr. Patrick. P. 166  
Dr. Tillotson. P. 167  
Dr. Meggot. P. 168  
Dr. Hardy. ibid.  
Dr. Goodman. ibid.  
Dr. Burnet. P. 169  
Dr. Littleton. P. 172  
Dr. Will. Saywell, ibid.  
Dr. Dove. P. 174  
Dr. Maurice. P. 175  
Dr. Williams. P. 176  
Dr. Grove. P. 177  
Dr. Staince. ibid.  
Dr. Wake. P. 180  
Dr. Fowler. P. 181  
Mr. Evans. ibid.  
Dr. Comber. ibid.  
Dr. Pelling. P. 182  
Dr. Pierce. P. 184  
Dr. Whitby. ibid.  
Mr. L●ng. P. 185  
Dr. Fuller. ibid.  
Dr. Sclater. ibid.  
Dr. Hickman. P. 186  
Mr. Jos. Pleydall. ibid.  
Mr. Jemmat. ibid.  
Mr. Stainforth. ibid.  
Mr. David Jenner. P. 187  
Mr. Hancock. ibid.  
John Goodwin. P. 188  
Mr. Smalridge. ibid.  
Mr. Graile. ibid.  
Mr. Pomfret. P. 189  
Mr. Nicholas Claget. ibid.  
Dr. Carswell, Vic. of Bray. P. 190    


CHAP. I. The Doctrine of Passive Obedience in the Reign of King Henry the Eighth, when the Reformation of Religion was begun.  

SECT. I.  
THe two Hinges upon which the Papal Grandeur moves, are the Supremacy, and the Infallibility of S. Peter's Successor; by the first they affright Princes from attempting a Reformation, (since no Man ought to control his Superior, who could excommunicate, and depose him:) and by the second they exclude all complaints of inferior persons [for what alterations ought to be made in a Church that cannot err?] Hereby they formerly kept the world in ignorance, and a blind subjection for many Ages, till it pleased God in great mercy to instruct the world, that Princes were accountable to God alone, whose Vicegerents they were, and that all Bishops were in spiritual matters equally the Successors of our holy Saviour, and his Apostles; that no Man was free either from Vice or Error, and that the Popes in a more especial manner had been guilty of both Idolatry and Heresy, as well as gross and notorious Immoralities. Among the Princes of Christendom, King Henry the Eighth of England begun very early to assert his Rights; and the he made not a complete Reformation, himself dying in the Romish Communion, (as great Designs cannot be perfected in a moment) yet the present Age owes to that great Prince its thanks for his abandoning the Peope, his allowing the holy Scriptures in the English Tongue, his abolishing many Shrines and Images, to which the common People paid Idolatrous Worship, and many other such Blessings.  
In his days 
* Ann. 1536.  Stephen Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester, wrote his Book De Verâ Obedientiâ, to which Bonner wrote a Preface (a Book so well thought of by the eminent Protestants beyond Sea, 
Printed in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  that Melchior Gold●s●us hath given it a place in his accurate Collection of Writers for the Power of Kings against the Papal Usurpations) which Book was translated into English, anno 1553. and therein we are taught this Doctrine. In that place God hath set Princes, whom as Representers of his Image unto men, he would have to be reputed in the supreme, and most high room, and to excel among all other human Creatures, as S. Peter writeth, and that the same Prince's reign by his Authority, as the holy Proverbs make report; By me (saith God) Kings reign, insomuch that after Paul 's saying, Whosoever resisteth the power resisteth the Ordinance of God. Which Paul opening that plainly unto Titus, which he speaketh here generally, commanded him to warn all men to obey their Princes.— Paul without difference biddeth men obey those Princes that bear the Sword. S. Peter speaketh of Kings by name. Christ himself commandeth tribute to be paid unto Caesar, and checked his Disciples for striving who should be the greatest. Kings of the Nations (quoth he) bear rule over them; declaring plainly in so great variety of Degrees and Orders which God doth garnish this world withal, that the Dominion and Authority pertaineth to none but to Princes.  
But here some man will say to me, you travail about that, that no man is in doubt of; for who ever denied that the Prince ought to be obeyed? It is most certain, that he, that will not obey the Prince, is worthy to die for it, as it is comprehended in the Old Law, and also confirmed in the New Law. Obj. But we must see (will he say) that the King do not pass the Limits appointed him, 
☞  as though there must be an Arbiter for the ordering of his Limits: for it is certain that Obedience is due; but how far the Limits of requiring Obedience extend, that is all the whole Question that can be demanded.  
What manner of Limits are those that ye tell me of? Sol. seeing the Scripture hath none such, but generally speaking of Obedience, which the Subject is bounden to do unto the Prince, the Wife unto the Husband, or the Servant to the Master, it hath not added so much as one syllable of Exception, but only hath preserved the Obedience due to God, safe and whole, 
☞  that we should not hearken unto any man's word in all the world against God; else the Sentences that command Obedience are indefinite, or without exception, but are of indifferent force universally, so that it is but lost labour for you to tell me of Limits, which cannot be proved by any Testimony of Scripture.  
We are commanded doubtless to obey; in that consisteth our Office, which if we mind to go about with the favour of God and man, we must needs show humbleness of heart in obeying authority, how grievous soever it be, for God's sake, not questioning, nor enquiring what the King, what the Master, or what the Husband ought, or may command others to do; and if they take upon them either of their own head, or when it is offered them, more than right and reason is, they have a Lord unto whom they either stand or fall, and that shall one day sit in Judgement even of them.  
— We have by testimony of God's Word shown, that a Prince's mighty Power is not gotten by flattery, or by privilege of the people, but given of God.  
— Christ sought not an earthly Kingdom— but (the state of Orders remaining still) he set forth, and taught the Form of Heavenly Conversation— which he by his own do declared to consist in humility, and contempt of worldly things, when he suffered the most bitter, and cruel kind of Death for our sakes: and the points of Office of him that is his Vicar, are— to be in subjection, not to command Princes, but to acknowledge himself to be under their power, and commandment, not only when they command things indifferent, and easily to be done, but also when they command things not indifferent, so they be not wicked, in checks, in scourge, and beat unto death, yea, even unto the death of the Cross. Indeed these are Christ's footsteps.  
Now if it be objected against what hath been said, that the Author of the Treatise, Gardiner, was a virulent Papist; I answer, this strengthens the Authority; for the Testimony of an Enemy to the Truth of Religion is worth an hundred other Witnesses; and it is very remarkable, that a Romish Bishop should assert the Divine Right, and unaccountableness of Kings, when his Church teacheth him to believe, that the Pope hath power to depose Princes, and many of their eminent Writers affirm, that all power is originally in, and derived from the people.  
And if it be further objected, that Gardiner retracted, and disowned this Doctrine in the Reign of Queen Mary, I grant it, and I wish, that he and Bonner had been the only men in the world, who had altered their Opinions for the worse, being prevailed upon by the love of the world, which is the root of all evil. But Truth is never the less venerable, because some Professors of it have turned Apostates; Gardiner 's and Bonner 's Reasons 
* Vide Cranmers Translat. in praef. before his Book of unwritten Verities.  being so pithy, and Arguments so strong, as neither they themselves, nor any other after them, shall be able at any time rightly to assoil and answer. And it must be observed. that before they condemned these their Orthodox Tenets, they wilfully broke the Oaths which they had taken in the Days of Henry the Eighth; and the venerable Dean 
* Reproof of Dorman. p. 1.6. Lond. 1565.  Nowell thus urges the Argument. Ask your forsworn Fathers, with what face they did give to the King the Title of Supreme Head, did swear it to him, and so long time continued so calling him. If they did not so think, as they said, and had sworn, but dissembled deeply, ask of them with what face they played so false dissembling Hypocrites with their Sovereign Lord? Ask of them, what manner of Subjects they were all that while, feigning in face, in word, in writing, yea, and taking a Solemn Oath to be with their Prince therein, and being in heart, and deed on his sworn Enemy his side? But if they thought indeed, as they pretended in words, then ask of them with what face they did change their Copy, 
☞  and forswear the same, and themselves withal so easily afterward, yea, and compelled all others to be forsworn with them for company?— Than you shall find who they were that changed their Copy, and turned with the Wind, as the Weathercock— that so falsely swear, reswear, trieswear, and forswear themselves, and not content therewith, did by all most terrible Torments, and dreadful Deaths compel others to Perjury with them.  
And whoso considers Bonner's juggling, 
Fox Martyrs, To. 2. p. 1192, 1193. Edit. 1610.  anno 1547. with King Edward the Sixth's Commissioners, about the Injunctions; at one time protesting against them, at another recanting that his Protestation, swearing Obedience to the King, receiving his Injunctions, giving his assent and consent to the State of Religion then established, to the abolishing Images, abrogation of the Mass, setting up of Bibles in Churches, giving the Sacrament in both kinds, and such like. And then two years afterward, anno 1549. on the Death of the Lord High Admiral, and the many tumultuous Insurrections of the King's Subjects, neglecting to be present, or to officiate in his Cathedral at Divine Service, and permitting others to frequent the Mass, may see his temper throughly, and be convinced that his Authority is of no worth, while his Reasonings are unanswerable, it being unjust that his personal Faults should make void the weight of his Arguments; especially when he spoke not his own sense, but the sense of the whole Church of England; which will undeniably appear by the continuation of his story.  
For when Bonner was for his prevarication suspected, and complained of, and convened before the King's Council, among other Injunctions then given him, one was, that he should personally preach within three weeks after at Paul's Cross. And among the special points and Articles that were to be treated of by him in his Sermon, this was the first.  
1. That all such, as rebel against their Prince, get unto them damnation; and those that resist the higher Powers, resist the Ordinance of God; and he that dieth therefore in Rebellion, by the word of God is utterly damned, and so loseth both body and soul; and therefore those Rebels in Devonshire and Cornwall, in Norfolk, or elsewhere, who take upon them to assemble a Power and Force against their King, and Prince, against the Laws and Statutes of the Realm, and go about to subvert the State, and Order of the Commonwealth, not only to deserve therefore death, as Traitors and Rebels, but do accumulate to themselves eternal damnation, even to be in the burning Fire of Hell with Lucifer, the Father, and first Author of Pride, Disobedience and Rebellion, what pretence soever they have,— as Corah, Dathan and Abirom for Rebellion against Moses were swallowed down alive into Hell, although they pretended to sacrifice unto God. And 4. That our Authority of Royal Power is (as of truth it is) of no less authority and force in this our young Age, than is, or was of any of our Predecessors, though the same were much elder; as may appear by example of Josias, etc. How Bonner discharged his Obedience to these Injunctions, is not my present Province, the Martyrology will inform the Reader: but what is already related undeniably proves what was the Doctrine of the Church of England in those Days.  
Anno 1541. was Dr. Robert Barnes martyred, 
Vide his Life prefixed to his Works.  and at the stake he professed; That he never to his knowledge taught any erroneous Doctrine, but only those things which the Scripture led him unto; and that in his Sermons he never maintained any Error, nor gave occasion of any Insurrection,— but with all diligence did study evermore to set forth the Glory of God, the Obedience to our Sovereign Lord the King, and the true and sincere Religion of Christ— desiring the People to bear witness, that he detested and abhorred all evil Opinions, and Doctrines against the Word of God.— And his Writings are agreeable to his dying Protestation. In his Supplication to King Henry the Eighth, when condemned to die, treating of the Cruelties of the Popish Clergy, among other things, he says, If they cannot make a Man a Heretic, 
P. 183.  to colour and maintain their Oppression, they add Treason against your Grace, though he be never so true a Subject, and all unlikely to make any resistance, or to think any evil unto your Grace. 
P. 184. — Whereas it is they that go about to make Insurrection to the maintaining of their worldly pomp and pride, and not the true Preacher— Who is he that would be a Traitor, or maintain a Traitor against your most excellent and noble Grace? I think, no Man; yea, and I know surely, that no Man can do it without the great displeasure of the eternal God. For S. Paul commandeth straight unto all Christians to be obedient in all things, 
Rom. 13.  on this manner; Let every man submit himself to the authority of the higher power, for whosoever resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God; and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 
1 Pet. 2.  Also S. Peter confirmeth this saying, Submit yourselves unto all manner of ordinance of man, etc. Wherefore, if every man had the Scriptures (as I would to God they had) to judge every Man's Doctrine, 
☞  than were it out of question, that the Preachers thereof either would, or could make, or cause to be made any Insurrection against their Prince, seeing the self same Scripture straight commandeth all Subjects to be obedient unto their Princes, as Paul witnesseth, saying, Warn them, (saith he) that they submit themselves to princes, and to powers, and to obey the officers.  
Now how can they that preach, and exhort all Men to this Doctrine, cause any Insurrection, or Disobedience against their Prince.— Call to mind the old Prophets, and with a single eye judge, if any of them either privily, or apertly stirred up the People against their Princes. 
P. 185.  Look on Christ, if he submitted not himself to the high powers; paid he not Tribute, for all he was free, and caused Peter likewise to pay? Suffered not he with all patience the punishments of the Princes? Yea, Death most cruel, although they did him open wrong, and could find him guilty in no Cause. Look also on the Apostles— and if ever they stirred, by any occasion, the People against their Princes; yea, if they themselves obeyed not to all Princes, although the most part of them were Tyrants and Infidels. Consider likewise those Doctors, which purely and sincerely have handled the Word of God, either in Preaching or Writing; if ever by their means any Insurrection, or Disobedience rise among the People against their Princes: but you shall rather find, that they have been rather ready to lay down their own Heads, to suffer with all patience whatsoever Tyranny any Power would minister unto them, giving all People example to do the same.  
Now to conclude, if neither the Scripture, neither the Practice of the Preachers thereof teacheth, nor affirmeth, that the People may disobey their Princes, or their Ordinances, but contrariwise teacheth all Obedience to be done unto them, it is plain, that those Bishops, or rather Papists do falsely accuse those true Preachers and Subjects: which thing would appear in every Man's sight, if by their violence the Word of God were not kept under.  
Now is this the Doctrine, that I do Preach and Teach, 
☜  and none other as concerning this matter, God I take to record, and all my Books and Writings, that ever I wrote or made; and only I allow and favour them, which further this Doctrine of Christ; and of this I am sure, mine Adversaries, or rather Adversaries to Christ's Doctrine must bear me witness. After this he proceeds to demonstrate, that the Pope and the Papistical Bishops are they, who Preach to the People the contrary Doctrine; as that St. Peter exempts himself, and his Successors from being subject to Superiors, that Subjects may be disobedient to their own Lords, and that the Pope may Depose Kings, that he hath authority to break all Oaths, Bonds, and Obligations; and other such like positions, and then adds,— there is no Officer, that hath need to be afraid of Christ's Gospel, nor yet of the Preachers thereof; 
☜  but of those privy Traitors can no Man be too wary,— the Scripture commandeth us to obey to wicked Princes, and giveth us none authority to Depose them,— who was more wicked than Herod? and yet St. John suffered Death under him: Who was wickeder than Pilate? and yet Christ did not put him down, but was Crucified under him. Briefly, which of all the Princes were good in the Apostles days? and yet they deposed none: So that God's word, and their own learning, and the Practice of our Master Christ, and his Holy Apostles are openly against them; 
p. 190.  there is no People under Heaven, that more abhors, and with earnester heart resisteth, and more diligently doth Preach against Disobedience than we do: Yea, I dare say boldly, let all your Books be searched that were written this 500 Years; and all they shall not declare the authority of a Prince, and the true obedience toward him, as one of our little Books shall do, that be condemned by you for Heresy. 
p. 202. 204.  And then he impeacheth them of denying, that the King's Power is immediately of God; while it can never be proved, that ever we spoke against God, or our King.  
The same Learned and Holy Martyr in his Discourse, that men's Constitutions not grounded in Scripture, bind not the Conscience, is of the same mind.— If the power command any thing of Tyranny against Right, and Law, (always provided that it repugn not against the Gospel, 
p. 292. 293. 294.  nor destroy our Faith) our Charity must needs suffer it; for as St. Paul saith, Charity suffereth all things: also our Master Christ, If a man strike thee on the one Cheek, turn him the other: For if he doth exercise Tyranny, if he command thee any thing against right, or do thee any wrong, (as for an example, cast thee in Prison wrongfully) if thou canst by any reasonable and quiet means without Sedition, Insurrection, or breaking of the common Peace save thyself, or avoid his Tyranny, thou may'st do it with a good Conscience,— but in no wise, 
☞  be it right or wrong, may'st thou make any resistance with a Sword or with Hand; but obey, except thou canst avoid as I have showed thee; but if the Cause be right, lawful, or profitable to the Commonwealth; thou must obey, and thou must not sly without sin.— But suppose the King should condemn the New Testament in England; and command, that none of his Subjects should have it; is he to be obeyed or not?— this will be a great Scourge, and an intolerable plague.— My Lords, the Popish Bishops, would depose him with short deliberation, and make no Conscience of it; they have Deposed Princes for lesser Causes than this is a great deal. But against them will I always lay Christ's Fact, and his Holy Apostles, and the Word of God. If the King forbidden the New Testament, etc. under a temporal pain, or else under the pain of Death; Men shall first make faithful Prayers to God, and then diligent Intercession unto the King's Grace with all due Subjection, that his Grace would release that commandment; if he will not do it, they shall keep their Testament, with all other Ordinances of Christ, and let the King exercise his Tyranny (if they cannot fly) and in no wise under the pain of Damnation shall they withstand him with violence, but suffer patiently all the Tyranny, that he layeth on them both in their bodies and goods; and leave the vengeance of it unto their Heavenly Father:— But in no wise shall they resist violently, neither shall they deny Christ's verity, nor yet forsake it before the Prince;— neither shall they go about to Depose their Prince, 
p. 295.  as my Lords the Bishops were wont to do; but they shall boldly confess, that they have the verity, and will thereby abide. And this he proves by the examples of Peter, and John, and of Christ, of the three Children, and Daniel, and then adds; so that Christian Men are bound to obey in suffering the King's Tyranny, but not in consenting to his unlawful commandment; always having before their eyes the comfortable saying of Christ, Fear not them that can kill the body, which when they have done, they can no more do, etc.  
The Weapons used by the Martyrs in those Days were Patience and Prayers, and by those Arms they conquered their Adversaries. So when the Martyr Bilney, going to his death, was upbraided, 
Vid. Answer to Stephen Gardiner's Devilish Detection, fol. 203. b. edit. an. 1547.  that he, being accounted an holy Man, wrought no Miracles. He answered with a mild voice and countenance; God only works Miracles and Wonders, and he it is that hath wrought this one Wonder in your Eyes, that I being wrongfully accused, falsely belied, opprobriously and despitefully handled, buffeted and condemned to the fire; yet hitherto have I not once opened my mouth against any of you: this passeth the work of nature, and is therefore the manifest miracle of God, who will by my death, and suffering be glorified, and have his Truth enhanced. This was the true way to get the Crown of Martyrdom; and here you see the Patience of the Saints.   

SECT. II.  
The necessary Erudition of a Christian Man, though compiled anno Domini 1540, received not its Approbation in Parliament till ann. 154●, being Printed in May following by the King, Henry the Eighth's Order (who thought it so useful, that himself writes a Preface to it directed to all his faithful, and loving Subjects) with the Advice of his Clergy, as a Doctrine, and Declaration of the true Knowledge of God, and his Word, with the principal Articles of Religion; allowed also by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and the Nether House of Parliament. In which, says our Historian, 
Lord Herbert's Henry VIII. p. 495.  they handled all things with much moderation, the King having laboured first to make Tenants understood, then to have them observed. And though there be in it Accounts given of the seven Sacraments, the Doctrine of Purgatory, etc. yet the Ruin of the Popish Religion is unquestionably, under the Providence of God, much owing to the seasonable publishing, and dispersing of this Book (which came out both in Latin, for the Instruction of Foreigners, and English for the use of the Natives) nor was it to be expected, that Heterodoxies of so long continuance should all in a moment be condemned.  
In this Book the Exposition of the Fifth Commandment teacheth us thus: In this Commandment, by these words Father and Mother, is understood not only the natural Father and Mother, which did carnally beget us, and brought us up, but also Princes, and all other Governors, Rulers and Pastors, under whom we be nourished, brought up, ordered and guided. And by this word Honour, in this Commandment is not only meant a Reverence, and lowliness in words and outward gesture— but also a prompt and ready obedience to their lawful Commandments, a regard to their Words, a forbearing and suffering of them, an inward love and veneration towards them, etc. this is the very Honour and Duty, which not only the Children do owe unto their Parents, but also all Subjects and Inferiors to their Heads and Rulers.— And after this having fully shown the Duties of Children to their Parents, and Parents to their Children, from the Precepts and Examples of holy Scripture, it proceeds— This Commandment also containeth the Honour and Obedience which Subjects own unto their Princes; for Scripture taketh Princes to be as it were Fathers and Nurses towards their Subjects. Then reckoning up the several Duties of Princes, it adds— And all their Subjects must again on their parts, and be bound by this Commandment, not only to honour and obey the said Princes, according as Subjects be bound to do; and to owe their truth and fidelity unto them, as unto their natural Lords, but they must also love them, as Children do love their Fathers; yea, they must more tender the Surety of their Prince's Person, and his Estate, than their own, or any others, even like as the Health of the Head is more to be tendered than the Health of any other Member. And by this Commandment also Subjects be bound not to withdraw their said Fealty, Truth, Love and Obedience toward their Princes for any cause, 
☞  whatsoever it be; ne in any cause may they conspire against his person, ne do any thing towards the hindrance, or hurt thereof, nor of his Estate. And furthermore by this Commandment they be bound to obey also all the Laws, etc. made by their Princes and Governors, except they be against the Commandment of God.— They must also give unto their Prince aid, 
☞  help and assistance, whensoever he shall require the same, either for surety, preservation, or maintenance of his Person and Estate, or of the Realm.— And further, if any Subject shall know of any thing, which is, or may be to the noyance, or damage of his Prince's Person, or Estate; he is bound by this Commandment to disclose the same with all speed to the Prince himself, or to some of his Council; for it is the very Law of Nature, that every Member should employ himself to preserve an defend the Head.— And that all Subjects do owe unto their Princes and Governors such Honour and Obedience, as is aforesaid, it appeareth evidently in sundry places of Scripture, but especially in the Epistle of S. Paul (Rom. 13.) and S. Peter (1 Pet. 2.) and there be many Examples in Scripture of the great Vengeance of God, that hath fallen upon such as have been disobedient unto their Princes; But one principal Example to be noted, is of the Rebellion, which Chore, Dathan, and Abiron made against their Governors Moses and Aaron: For punishment of which Rebels, God not only caused the Earth to open, and to swallow them down,— but caused also the Fire to descend from Heaven, and to burn up 250 Captains, which conspired with them in the same Rebellion.  
And the Explanation of the Sixth Commandment saith thus; 
☜  Moreover no Subjects may draw their Swords against their Prince for any Cause whatsoever it be; nor against any other (saving for lawful defence) without their Prince's licence; and it is their Duty to draw their Swords in defence of their Prince and Realm, whensoever the Prince shall command them so to do. And although Princes, which be the Chief and Supreme Heads of their Realms, do otherwise than they ought to do, 
☜  yet God hath assigned no Judges over them in this World, but will have the Judgement of them reserved to himself, and will punish them when he seethe his time, and for amendment of such Princes that do otherwise than they should do, the Subjects may not rebel, but must pray to God, which hath the Hearts of Princes in his Hands, that he so turn their Hearts to him, that they may use the Sword, which he hath given them, unto his pleasure.   

SECT. III.  

* viz. Oct. 2. A. 1528. as Jo. Fox informs us in his Edition of the Works of Tindal, Berns, and Frith, An. 1573. p. 97.  Long before this time did the Martyr, William Tyndale, otherwise (as he says himself) called William Hychins, or Hitchins, publish his Book of the Obedience of a Christian Man, and in it asserts the same Doctrine, notwithstanding his many personal Sufferings, the Censure of his Books, and the public Condemnation of his Translation of the Holy Bible (
* viz. Oct. 2. A. 1528. as Jo. Fox informs us in his Edition of the Works of Tindal, Berns, and Frith, An. 1573. p. 97.  and it is worth nothing, that the Doctrine of this Book relating to Non resistance was censured by the Romish Priests of that time). In his Epistle to the Reader he says, 
† Vid. 1st. Part of Hist. of Pas. Obed. p. 20.  Let us therefore look diligently whereunto we are called,— we are called, not to dispute as the Pope's Disciples do, but to die with Christ, that we may live with him; and to suffer with him, that we may reign with him. We be called to a Kingdom that must be won with Suffering only, as a sick Man winneth Health.— Tribulation is our right Baptism, and is signified by plunging into the water; we, 
‡ p. 98, 99, 100  that are baptised into the Name of Christ (saith S. Paul) are baptised to die with him. 
●om. 6. — And this is the difference between the Children of God and of Salvation, and between the Children of the Devil and Damnation, that the Children of God have power in their Hearts to suffer for God's Word, which is their life and salvation, their hope and trust:— And the Children of the Devil in time of adversity flee from Christ, whom they followed feignedly.— God is ever at hand in time of need to help us.— Tyrants and Persecutors are but God's Scourge to chastise us,— and he lets them do, not whatsoever they would, but as much only as he appointeth them to do, and as far forth as is necessary for us; let us therefore arm ourselves with the promises both of help and assistance, and also of the glorious reward that follows.  
The same Martyr in his Prologue unto the Book saith; 
pag. 104, 105, 106.  I have made this little Treatise that followeth, containing all Obedience that is of God.— Now (as ever) the most part seek Liberty; they be glad, when they hear the unsatiable Covetousness of the Spirituality rebuked;— When Tyranny and and Oppression is preached against:— And therefore, because the Heads will not so rule, will they also no longer obey, but resist and rise against their evil Heads? And one wicked destroyeth another; yet is God's Word not the cause of this, neither yet the Preachers; for though that Christ himself taught all Obedience, how that it is not lawful to resist wrong (but for the Officer that is appointed thereto), and how a Man must love his Enemy, and pray for them that persecute him,— and how that all Vengeance must be remitted to God;— Yet the People, for the most part, received it not, 
☞  they were ever ready to rise and to fight.— Thus seest thou, that it is the bloody Doctrine of the Pope that causeth Disobedience, Rebellion, and Insurrection; for he teacheth to fight and to defend his Traditions,— and to disobey Father, Mother, Master, Lord, King, and Emperor,— where the peaceable Doctrine of Christ teacheth to obey, and to suffer for the Word of God, and to remit the Vengeance, and defence of the Word to God, which is mighty and able to defend it.  
And in the Treatise itself, Tyndale having first treated of the Duties of Children, Wives, and Servants, proceeds to discourse of the Obedience of Subjects unto Kings, 
pag. 109, 110.  Princes, and Rulers, out of Rom. 13. averring, That as a Father over his Children is both Lord, and Judge, forbidding that one Brother revenge himself of another; but if any cause of Strife be between them, will have it brought to himself, or his Assigns: So God forbiddeth all men to avenge themselves, and taketh the Authority of avenging to himself, saying, Vengeance is mine, I will reward.— For it is impossible, that a Man should be a righteous, an equal, or indifferent Judge in his own Cause, Lusts and Appetites so blind us.— God therefore hath given Laws to all Nations, and in all Lands hath put Kings, Governors, and Rulers in his own stead to rule the World through them; and hath commanded all Causes to be brought before them, as thou readest, Exod. 22. where the Judges are called Gods, because they are in God's room, and execute the Commandments of God: And in another place of the said Chapter, Moses chargeth, saying, See that thou rail not on the Gods,— c.— Whosoever therefore resisteth them, resisteth God, (for they are in the room of God) and they that resist shall receive their damnation.— Tho no man punish the breakers of the Law, yet shall God send his Curses upon them, till they be utterly brought to nought.  
Neither may the inferior person avenge himself upon the superior, or violently resist him, for whatsoever wrong it be; 
☜  if he do, he is condemned in the deed doing, in as much as he taketh upon him that which belongeth to God only, when he saith, Vengeance is mine, etc. and Christ saith, All they that take the Sword shall perish by the sword. Takest thou a Sword to avenge thyself? So givest thou not room to God to avenge thee, but robbest him of his most high Honour, in that thou wilt not let him be Judge over thee. If any man might have avenged himself upon his Superior, that might David most righteously have done upon King Saul, which so wrongfully persecuted David, even for no other cause, than that God anointed him King. Yet 
* 1 Reg. 24.  when God had delivered Saul into the hands of David,— and his Men encouraged him to slay him, he answered, The Lord forbidden it me, that I should lay my hand on him: And 
† Cap. 26.  when Abishat would have nailed Saul with his Spear to the ground, David forbade him, saying, Kill him not, for who shall lay his hands on the Lord's anointed, and not be guilty? etc.— 
* Pag. 111.  Why did not David slay Saul, seeing he was so wicked, not in persecuting David only, but in disobeying God's Commandments, and in that he had slain Eighty five of the Priests wrongfully? Verily for it was not lawful; for if he had done it, he must have sinned against God; for God hath made the King in every Realm Judge over all, and over him is there no Judge: He that judgeth the King, judgeth God, and he that layeth hands on the King, layeth hands on God, and he that resisteth the King, resisteth God, and damneth God's Laws and Ordinance. If the Subjects sin, they must be brought to the King's Judgement; if the King sin, he must be reserved to the Judgement, Wrath, and Vengeance of God: And as it is to resist the King, so is it to resist his Officer, which is set or sent to execute the King's Commandment.  
When 
* Luk. 13.  they shown Christ of the Galileans, whose Blood Pilate mingled with their own Sacrifice; he answered, Suppose ye, that those Galileans were greater Sinners, etc. this was told Christ no doubt of such an intent, as they asked him Matt. 22. Whether it were lawful to give Tribute to Cesar? For they thought it was no sin to resist a Heathen Prince, as few of us would think if we were under the Turk, that it were Sin to rise against him, and to rid ourselves from under his Dominion, so sore have our Bishops robbed us of the true Doctrine of Christ: But Christ condemned their Deeds, and also the secret Thoughts of all others, that consented thereto, saying, Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish; as who should say, I know, that you are within your Hearts such they were outward in their Deeds, and under the same Damnation; except therefore ye repent betimes, ye shall break out at the last into like Deeds, and likewise perish, as it came afterwards to pass.  
Hereby seest thou, that the King is in this World without Law; and may at his lust do right or wrong, and shall give Accounts but to God only.  
The same Martyr in his Preface to the Practice of Popish Prelates, set forth An. Dom. 1530. Unto all Subjects be it said, if they profess the Law of God, 
Pag. 342.  and Faith of the Lord Jesus, and will be Christ's Disciples; then let them remember, that there was never any Man so great a Subject as Christ was: There was never Creature that suffered so great Unright so patiently and so meekly as he: Therefore whatsoever they have been in times past, let them now think, that it is their parts to be subject in the lowest kind of Subjection, and to suffer all things patiently. If the High Powers be cruel unto you with natural Cruelty; then with softness and patience ye shall either win them, or mitigate their fierceness: If they join them unto the Pope, and persecute you for your Faith, then call to mind, that ye be chosen to suffer here with Christ, that you may joy with him in the Life to come.— If they command that God forbiddeth, or forbidden that God commandeth, then answer as the Apostles did, That God must be obeyed more than man 
Act. 5.  If they compel you to suffer unright, then Christ shall help you to bear, and his Spirit shall comfort you: But only see, 
☞  that neither they put you from God's Word, nor ye resist them with bodily Violence, but abide patiently, etc.— And as for Wickedness, whence it springeth, and who is the cause of all Insurrection, and of the fall of Princes, and of the shortening of their days upon the Earth,— thou shalt see in the Glass following.    

CHAP. II. The Doctrine of Passive Obedience in the Reign of King Edward the Sixth.  

SECT. I.  
IN the beginning of this pious Prince's Reign the Homily of Obedience was published; and in his Second Year, Ann. 1548. the King, 
Ch. Hist. Cent. 16. lib. 7. pag. 38 8/9.  says Fuller, by his Proclamation did for a while prohibit all sort of Preaching, that the Clergy might apply themselves to Prayer, and the Laity to Prayer, and hearing the Homilies: So venerable an esteem had the wise and good Men of that Age of the now so much despised Homilies; and I am enclinable to believe, one great reason why they have since fallen into Contempt is, because they so earnestly press Subjection to Authority, and forbidden Sedition and Resistance.  
Ann. 1550. Because of the scarcity of Preachers, it was ordained, 
Heyl. Hist. of the Reform. An. 1550. pag. 94.  That of the King's Six Chaplains, two should be always about the Court, the other four travelling abroad; the first Year two in Wales, and two in Lincolnshire; the second Year, two in the Marches of Scotland, and two in Yorkshire; the third Year, two in Devonshire, and two in Hamshire; the fourth Year, two in Norfolk, and two in Essex, etc. and so till they had gone through the whole Kingdom: so rare was Preaching in those days. To supply the want of which, the same Year a Postil, or Collection of most godly Doctrine upon every Gospel through the Year, was printed cum privilegio; and in the Sermon on the Gospel for the Twenty third Sunday after Trinity, the People are thus instructed in their Duty.— Here is to be noted the Difference that Christ maketh between the Kingdom of God, and this World; for he doth not only approve and allow this high Power and politic Life, but also confirmeth it; for the Kingdom of God or of Christ is spiritual,— and contrariwise, the Kingdom of the Emperor is worldly, it is visible, in which the Emperor himself governeth, and beareth rule mightily with his Lords, and Princes, 
Luc. 22.  as the Scripture witnesseth in another place, The Kings of the World have dominion over the People, and they that bear rule over them are called Gracious Lords. Nevertheless that Kingdom is of God, and established by God's Ordinance in such wise, that he that resisteth this Ordinance, 
Rom. 13.  resisteth God himself. Thinkest thou that Princes and great Lords in the Scripture are called God's in vain, and without a cause? 
Psal 81.  For if they be Gods, and are made by God Partakers of his Magnificence, then must they needs be in God's stead, whose room they bear; therefore seeing they rule in God's stead, it is both meet and convenient to give them that we are bound to give them; but what are those things? S. Paul setteth them forth, 
Rom. 13.  and saith, Give unto every Man his Duty, Tribute to whom Tribute belongeth, etc. Here thou hearest what thou art bound to give to high Powers: But peradventure thou wilt say, Shall I give Obedience unto a Tyrant, 
☞  or to an ungracious Prince or Lord? Yea truly, thou art bound both to give and obey him; for what hast thou to do with his Tyranny? If the Magistrate doth naught, and contrary to Equity, he hath a Judge, whom he must answer in that appointed day: Judgement is not here granted unto thee, except he constraineth thee to do any thing against God; then thou mayst say with the Apostles, We ought more to obey God than men: But if he constraineth thee to nothing against God, than hast thou here the Sentence of Christ, 
Act. 5.  Give to Cesar that belongeth to him, and to God that is Gods: Which Answer is so good and godly, that they that were sent of the Pharisees marvelled at it, and for because they could say nothing against it, they went their ways. God grant us his Grace.  
The Kings (saith Christ) of the Heathen bear rule over them; 
Serm. on S. Barthol. day.  and those that use Power over them, are called Gracious Lords. In which words Christ confirmeth the Civil Empires and Dominions of this World, but he approveth it not in the Apostles,— Doubtless unto Kings is the Sword given and committed, 
Rom. 13.  as S. Paul saith, to punish the evil, and defend the good and virtuous; and forasmuch as they have the Sword committed to them of God, and not of themselves; therefore we the residue of People must obey, and be subject to this Ordinance of God for Conscience sake.— Christ in this place acknowledgeth, that Kings and Princes and other Magistrates must have the Dominion, and that their Dominions and Regiments are God's own Ordinance.  
And having discoursed of Herod's Cruelty, 
Serm. on the Innocents' day.  and that there were doubtless many in that Age, that would be ready to destroy and root out, whom the World counts Heretics, he never thought of Resistance as a Remedy in such a case, but only of patience. This, I know, that we (with the Grace of God) shall be ready not only to suffer all Adversity for the Gospel's sake, but also to die for it; be Herod and all his ungodly Members never so mad with it.— 
* Serm. on S. Simon and Jude's day.  Christ in his Persecution, which surely is ever annexed to the Gospel in this World, commandeth us to take sure hold of his Word, as that only Comfort, whereby Christians in all Tribulations solace themselves.— For what shall hinder or hurt him that taketh hold upon the Word, and by Faith printeth it in his Heart.— 
† Serm. on All Saint's day.  Here in this life they shall be comforted by his Word, and in the World to come by his Bliss and eternal Life.  
On the first Sunday after the Epiphany, Ann. 1552. Bernard Gilpin the Father of the Northern Churches, and nominated to the Bishopric of Carlisle, though he declined it, preached before King Edward, and in his Sermon, 
Printed An. 1636. p. 31 2/1. 312.  as he freely reproved many other Vices, so did he also censure the Sin of Disobedience to Rulers. God's Word plainly tells us, that evil and dumb Pastors, and wicked Rulers and Magistrates are sent of God, as a Plague and Punishment for the Sins of the People.— Concerning the Civil Magistrates, it is plain in Job 34.30. that for the sins of the people God raiseth Hypocrites to reign over them; that is to say, such as have the bare Names of Governors and Protectors, and are indeed Destroyer's, Opprestors of the People, 
☜  Subverters of the Law, and of all Equity; and seeing it is so, so many as feel the grief and smart of this Plague, ought not to murmur, but patiently suffer, and be offended with their own Sins, which have deserved this Scourge and much more, and study for amendment, that God may take it away;— for if they continue, as they do, 
p. 313.  to murmur against God and their Rulers,— he shall for their punishment so multiply the number of evil Governors, unjust Judges, Justice's, and Officers, that as it was spoken by a Jester in the Emperor Claudius' time, the Images of good Magistrates may be all graven in one Ring. And it is remarkable, that the good Man closed his Sermon with these words, God save the King. 
p. 335.    

SECT. II.  
In the days of this good King the Godly Martyr Hooper, Bishop of Gloucester, 
Printed at Lond. 1583. first published, as I conjecture, an. 1549. when the Rebels were up in the West.  wrote a short commentary on the 13th. Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, which he dedicated to the Dean, Chancellor, and other Dignitaries of his Cathedral, as also to all Parsons, Vicars, and Curates within his Diocese, whom he exhorts to see, that the People know their commandments, and the works thereof appertaining to God in the first Table, that they honour no wrong or false God, nor yet the true God a wrong way;— and also that they avoid all such sins, as be contrary to the Commandments of God in the second Table; telling them, that for a help to them, and also to the People, he had set forth the 13th. Chapter to the Romans, which entreats of all the second Table; praying, and in the King's name commanding all Curates in his Diocese, that could not Preach, every day to read to the People that 13th. Chapter, as he had set it forth; and those, that could Preach, in their Sermons oftentimes to inculcate, and persuade this rule of obedience to the People; further enjoining his whole Clergy (that he might keep the People from the displeasure of God and the King, and himself from everlasting damnation) most diligently to teach the People this Chapter every week; one part of it the Saturday at Evensong, the other the Sunday at the Morning Prayer, and the third part the Sunday at Evensong.  
This Reverend Martyr on verse the first saith, that St. Paul pronounceth generally, that every Soul, i. e. every Man, should be obedient unto the higher power,— of what condition, state, and degree soever, he be— to the powers St. Paul commandeth obedience, honour, reverence, and love to be born; and this is especially to be noted in St. Paul, that he says simply and plainly, we should obey the higher powers, to confute, argue, and reprehend those, that cloak and excuse their inobedience, either for the age of the Rulers, or else for the conditions and manners of the Rulers:— the manners and conditions of the Magistrates do not excuse our inobedience, though they be naught; for Paul biddeth us to look upon the Power and Authority of the Higher Powers, 
1 Pet. 2.  and not upon their Manners; and St. Peter commandeth the Servants to obey their Masters, though they be evil; so Joseph obeyed Pharaoh, and Christ our Saviour Pilate, St. Paul the Emperors of Rome, Caligula and Nero; and when St. Paul commandeth us to be obedient, he meaneth, not only we should speak reverently and honourably of the Higher Power,— but to obey the Laws set forth by the Power, except they command things against God's Laws; then must we obey more God than Men; 
☜  and yet not to strive and fight with the Magistrates, but suffer patiently death, rather than to offend God, or else our obedience is nothing but hypocrisy and dissimulation. Who would accept his own Child's making of Courtesy, when all his facts be contrary to his commandment? What Masler would be content, or think his Servant doth his duty in putting off his cap, and in his doing contemneth all his Master's Laws and Commandments? the Laws of a Magistrate, if they be repugnant to the Word of God, they should not be obeyed; yet rather should a Man suffer death, than to defend himself by force, 
☜  and violent resisting of the Superior Powers; as Christ, his Apostles, and the Prophets did.  
On verse 2. Because that naturally there is in every Man a certain desire of liberty, and to live without subjection and all manner of Laws, except such as please himself, St. Paul is not content generally to exhort, and command all Men to obedience of the Higher Powers, but giveth many great and weighty causes, wherefore Men should be obedient, and in subjection to them. The first is, because the Office of a Magistrate is the Ordinance of God,— and therefore the Magistrate must be obeyed, except we will say, in some respects God is not to be obeyed;— therefore the Magistrates be called Gods in Scripture:— ungodly Princes God suffers, and appoints for the sins of the People; but let the King and Magistrate be as wicked as can be devised and thought, 
☜  yet is his place and office the Ordinance and Appointment of God, and therefore to be obeyed.— and in case they do any thing in their Offices contrary to the Word of God, although the Subjects may not, nor upon pain of eternal Damnation, ought not by force nor violence to resist the Officer in his High Power; yet they are bound to think, that God can, and will as well revenge the abuse of his Office in them, as punish the Subject for the disobedience of his ordinance towards the Higher Power. If it be true, that St. Paul saith, the higher power to be the Ordinance of God, it is very damnable iniquity, that for any private affection, or other unjust oppressions, for any Man to depose the Magistrates from their Places and Honours appointed by God; or else privily, or openly, craftily or violently to go about to change, or alter the State and Ordinance of God, etc. The second cause is, the great peril and danger it is to resist and disobey God's Ordinances; They that resist, shall receive to themselves damnation; as though he had said, lest ye should think it a light thing, but a trifling matter to withstand, and disobey the Magistrates; understand ye, that in so doing ye stand and fight against God, and therefore ye provoke Judgement and Vengeance against yourselves, and be culpable and guilty of God's everlasting displeasure, if ye repent not. Here St. Paul hath set forth the End, and success of Sedition, 
☞  Treason, Conspiracy, and Rebellion; that is to say, destruction both of Body and Soul; and who is able to contend and fight with God?  
On verse 5. One cause, wherefore we must obey, is the fear of pain and punishment, which the Magistrate must minister by the commandment of God, unto all such as disobey and contemn the Ordinance of God: the other is conscience; for although the Magistrate do not see nor know, how thou dost disobey and break the Order of God; or else, if thou couldst by power and strength overcome the Magistrates, yet thy conscience is bound to obey,— there be some so indurate and past grace, that think themselves not bound to obey this order, and Higher Power appointed and commanded of God; but doubtless those shall perish with their Captains, as Achitophel did with his Absalon; if the Higher Power command any thing contrary to God's Word, they should not be obeyed; notwithstanding there should be such modesty and soberness used, as should be without all violence, force, rebellion, as Peter and John used, 
☞  saying. God is more to be obeyed than Man; and so in saying of truth, they continued in the truth, without moving of Sedition, and suffered death for the truth, etc.  
Nor was this only this excellent Bishop's Opinion, while his King was of his Religion, and friend to his Person and Principles; but (as Truth is eternal and unalterable, so he persevered in this belief) when Queen Mary persecuted the Church of God, and this worthy Prelate in a particular manner; 
The Martyr's Letters Lond. 1564. 4to. p. 120.  for in his Letters just before his death set out, by Miles Coverdale Bishop of Exon his fellow Confessor, he frequently inculcates this Doctrine.— Remember ye be the workmen of the Lord, and called into his Vineyard, there to labour till eventide, that ye may receive your penny, which is more worth than all the Kings of the Earth; but he, that calleth us into his vineyard, hath not told us, how sore, or how fervently the Sun shall trouble us in our labour; but hath bid us labour, and commit the bitterness thereof unto him, who can, and will so moderate all afflictions, that no man shall have more laid upon him, than in Christ he shall be able to bear;— these days be dangerous and full of peril, 
p. 136.  but yet let us comfort ourselves in calling to remembrance the days of our forefathers, upon whom the Lord sent such troubles, that many hundreds, yea many thousands died for the testimony of Jesus Christ, both men and women, suffering with patience and constancy, as much cruelty as Tyrants could devise, and so departed out of this miserable World to the Bliss everlasting. 
p. 139. — Who would not now rather than to offend so merciful a God, fly this wicked Realm, as your most Christian Brother, and many other have done; or else with boldness of heart, and patience of the Spirit bear manfully the Cross, even unto the death?— Albeit I know, 
p. 141/2  that all those which seek God's honour, and the furtherance of his Gospel be accounted the Queen's Enemies, although we daily pray for her Grace, and never think her harm; but we must be content to suffer slander, and patiently to bear all such injuries. Nevertheless this is out of doubt, that the Queen's Highness hath no authority to compel any man to believe any thing contrary to God's word; neither may the Subject give her Grace that Obedience; in case he do, his Soul is lost for ever. Our bodies, 
☜  goods, and lives be at her Highness' commandment, and she shall have them, as of true Subjects; but the Soul of man for Religion is bound to none, but unto God and his holy Word. 
p. 148, 149 — Seeing therefore we live for this life among so many, and great perils and dangers, we must be well assured by God's word how to bear them, and how patiently to take them, as they be sent to us from God; we must also assure ourselves, that there is no other remedy for Christians in the time of trouble, than Christ himself hath appointed us. In St. Luke he giveth us this commandment, ye shall possess your lives in patience, saith he; in the which words he giveth us both commandment, what to do, and also great consolation and comfort in all troubles; he showeth also what is to be done, and what is to be hoped for in troubles; and when troubles happen, he biddeth us be patiented, and in no case violently, 
☜  nor seditiously to resist our persecutors, because God hath such care and charge of us, that he will keep in the midst of all troubles the very hairs of our heads, so that not one of them shall fall away without the will, and pleasure of our Heavenly Father.— Wherefore the Christian Man's Faith must be always upon the Resurrection of Christ, 
p. 150.  when he is in trouble; and in that glorious Resurrection he shall not only see continual and perpetual joy and consolation, but also the victory and triumph of all persecution, trouble, sin, death, hell, etc.— the pains also they vex us withal for the time, if they tarry with us as long as we live; 
p. 153.  yet, when death cometh, they shall avoid and give place to such joys, as be prepared for us in Christ; for no pains of the World be perpetual, and whether they shall afflict us for all the time of our mortal life, we know not; for they be the Servants of God to go, and to come as he commandeth them. But we must take heed, we meddle not forcibly, nor seditiously to put away the persecution appointed unto us by God; 
☞  but remember Christ's saying, possess your lives by your patience; and in this commandment God requireth in every Man and Woman this patiented obedience. He saith not, it is sufficient that other Holy Patriarches, Prophets, Apostles, Evangelists, and Martyrs continued their lives in patience, and patiented suffering the troubles of this World; but Christ saith to every one of his People, by your own patience ye shall continue your life.— Now therefore as our Profession and Religion requireth patience outwardly without resistance and force; so requireth it patience of the mind, and not to be angry with God, although he use us, that be his own creatures, as him listeth, etc.  
Nor is it to be pretermitted, that Miles Coverdale Bishop of Exon, who published the Letters of Bishop Hooper, and other the Martyrs, in his Epistle to the Christian Reader praiseth God for these and such other Monuments, which he had preserved and brought to light by his singular great providence; because the more nigh that men's words, and works approach unto the most wholesome say, and fruitful do of the old ancient Saints and chosen Children of God (which loved not only to hear his word, but also to live thereafter) the more worthy are they to be esteemed, embraced, and followed;— and we have just cause to rejoice, that we have been familiar, and acquainted with some of those, which walked in the trade of their footsteps; for the which cause it doth us good to read, and hear not the lying Legends of feigned, false, counterfeited, and Popish Canonised Saints;— but such true, holy, and approved Histories, Monuments, Orations, Epistles, and Letters, as do set forth unto us the blessed behaviour of God's dear Servants. By which it appears, that he was of their opinion in this, as well as other Primitive Doctrines of the Reformed Church of England, in opposition to the Novel, and false assertions of the Church of Rome; and so we have another eminent Confessor of those early days of the Reformation, attesting the truth in the point of Nonresistance.  
It is also remarkable, that at that time the Protestants were not contemptible party of Men in the Nation, that Queen Mary had been disinherited by Act of Parliament (a Bill of Exclusion passed into the formality of a Law) and that for illegitimacy, as it is their declared; that the Crown was given to another by the Will of Edward VI that Queen Mary was both a Papist and a Persecutor, and turned the Protestant Bishops out of their Sees, even before a Parliament made it Law; and yet the Holy Men of those days in their Letters to their Friends and Followers, treat only of Patience and Submission to Providence, of looking to our Blessed Saviour, and suffering without Murmuring, as he did, and that to resist even the Queen was a damnable sin; when they wanted not abettors, nor opportunities of conveying their thoughts privately to them, and I am sure they were not to seek for courage and resolution, who so frankly and undauntedly condemned the Popish Superstitions and Idolatries, when they had nothing in prospect, but Prisons and Executions; nay those Protestants, who had given their Votes for her Exclusion repent of their crimes, while others of the same belief stood by her in her distress, and placed her on her Throne.   

SECT. III.  
In the Reign of this Pious, and Learned Prince Edward VI Old Father Latimer 
* In Coverdale's Collect. of Letters. p. 56. , (that Old True Apostle of our English Nation and of Christ, as Bishop Ridley, his Fellow Prisoner, and Companion in Martyrdom calls him, that generous and honest Man; who when the Parliament Anno 1539. had confirmed the Six Articles (the Whip with Six Cords, as they were justly called) voluntarily chose to abandon his Bishopric, 
Godwin's Annals p. 172, 173. 229.  rather than conform to so unjust a Law, and abstained Ten years from Preaching, till after the death of Henry VIII. he was restored;) did notwithstanding his great plainness, dominari in concionibus, filling the Pulpit with a mighty Grace, nor was he wanting in those days to bear witness to this Doctrine; for in his explanation of that Petition of Our Holy Saviour's Prayer, Thy will be done, he says, Our Rebels, 
4th. Serm. on the Lord's Prayer. p. 142. Lond. 1635.  which risen about two years ago in Norfolk and Devonshire, they consider not this Petition; they said it with their lips only, but not with their hearts. Almighty God hath revealed his will, as concerning Magistrates, how he will have them to be honoured and obeyed; they were utterly against it; he revealed this his will in many places of the Scripture, but especially by St. Peter, where he saith, 
1 Pet. 2.13.  subditi estote omni humanae creaturae— that is to say in effect, be subject to all the common Laws made by Men of Authority, by the King's Majesty, etc. be subject unto them, and obey them, saith God— and here is but one exception, that is, against God; when Laws are made against God and his word, than I ought more to obey God than Man; 
☞  then I may refuse to obey with a good Conscience; yet for all that, I may not rise up against the Magistrates, nor make any uproar; for if I do so, I sin damnably. I must be content to suffer whatsoever God shall lay upon me, yet I may not obey their wicked Laws to do them; only in such a case Men may refuse to obey, else in all other matters we ought to obey, what Laws soever they make as concerning outward things we ought to obey, and in no wise to rebel, though they be never so hard, noisome, and hurtful. Our duty is to obey, and to commit all the matters to God, not doubting, but that God will punish them, when they do contrary to their office and calling; therefore tarry till God correct them, we may not take upon us to reform them, 
☞  for it is no part of our duty: If the Robels, I say, had considered this; think you, they would have preferred their own will before God's will? for doing as they did, they prayed against themselves.  

* Id. Serm. on Ep 21. Sund after Trinity p. 196, 197  Subjects may not of their own private authority take the sword, or rebel against their King; for when they rebel, they serve the Devil, for they have no commission of God so to do, but of their own head they rise against God, that is, against the King, to whom they own obedience, and so worthily be punished: therefore, good Christian People, beware of rebelling against our Sovereign Lord the King. 
‖ Id. 24. Sund after Trin. p. 216. — The calling of the Subjects is to be obedient unto the Magistrates, not to rebel against them; for if they do, they strive against God himself, and shall be punished of him.  
Another cause (why Christ was circumcised) is, 
Id. Serm. on the Twelfth day p. 291.  to be obedient unto common orders; therefore he would suffer rather to be circumcised, than to give occasion of hurly burly or uproar; for the will of the Father was, that Subjects should obey Magistrates, and keep orders; Subjecti estote cuivis potestati, be obedient unto them, etc. look what Laws and Ordinances are made by the Magistrates, we ought to obey them;— and this is to be understood as well in spiritual matters, as temporal matters; so far forth as the Laws be not against God and his Word: When they will move us to do any thing against God, than we must say, Oportet magis obedire Deo, quam hominibus, we must be more obedient unto God than Man; 
☞  yet we may not withstand them with stoutness, or rise up against them, but suffer whatsoever they shall do unto us; for we may for nothing in the World rebel against the Office of God, that is to say, against the Magistrate.    

CHAP. III. The Doctrine of Passive Obedience in the Reign of Queen Mary.  

SECT. I.  
UPon the Death of King Edward VI so prevalent were the two Families of Northumberland and Suffolk; that they made a great Party to oppose the legal Succession of the Right Heir, their abettors being countenanced, and encouraged by the last Testament of King Edward; but, as 
* Cent. 16. p. 1.  Fuller rightly observes, the Will of the Duke of Northumberland; but whatever was done in defence of the Lady Jane Grey, was contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England; which taught her Children better, and more wholesome Doctrine; and though Archbishop Cranmer were one of the Subscribers to that Will, and to the Letter sent after Edward the sixth's Death to Queen Mary; yet there is much to be said in Apology for him. For first, Cranmer 
‖ Heyl. Hist. of the Refor. p. 152. Fox, Burnet, and Godwin, etc.  of all the Privy Council was the last that stood out, having at first positively refused to sign the Will; and after much reasoning, and many arguments urged for the Queen's Illegitimation, required a longer time of deliberation; and at last, could be overcome by nothing, but the King's own restless importunity: To whom the Archbishop had (as he ought) a great regard, and this his resolution so prevailed upon his Judges, that, though at first they committed him to the Tower with the Lady Jane, 
Fox. tom. 2. p. 1289.  and the Duke of Northumberland's Sons for High Treason; yet, though they prosecuted his Fellow Prisoners on that Statute, they let fall their Action against him, and prosecuted him only for Heresy, to his great joy, as Fox relates it. The same 
‖ p 1698.  Author assuring us, that Dr. Heath, afterwards Archbishop of York, did affirm, to one of Archbishop Cranmers Friends; that notwithstanding his Attainder of Treason, the Queen's Determination at that time was, that Cranmer should only have been deprived of his Archbishopric, and had a sufficient Living assigned him— with commandment to keep his House without meddling in matters of Religion. Secondly, that the Archbishop was encouraged so to do, 
* Id. ibid.  by the Example of all the Nobles of the Realm, and the States and Judges (Sir James Hales only excepted, for the Lord Chief Justice Montague had, after much ado, subscribed) the Lawyers especially assuring him, that it was no breach of his former Oath so to do. And it is well known, that if any thing exasperated Queen Mary against him, it was not the signing of King Edward's Will, but her Mother's Divorce, which Cranmer so actively promoted.  
Thirdly, The Reasons were specious, both from 
* H●yl. Hist. Reform. ann. 1553. p. 151, 152. Burn. par. 2. p 223.  Law and Policy, as they were then styled that both the Sisters were declared illegitimate, and that by Act of Parliament; and that were they not so, yet being but of the half Blood to the King, by the Law they could not succeed: nor could any Foreigner by the same Law. And that the Duchess of Suffolk had waved her Title, and then the Right was in the Lady Jane: that this was the only way to preserve the Nation from the Vassalage and Servitude of the Bishop of Rome; and from subjecting the Realm to Foreigners, if the Sisters should marry out of it.  
Fourthly, 
Par 2 hist. l. 1. p. 224.  Dr. Burnet affirms, that as nothing, but the King's own importunities could prevail on the Archbishop, so it's probable, that he signed it only as a Witness, and not as Counsellor, according to a Distinction then found out by Sir William Cecil, Secretary of State.  
But lastly, This act was no Declaration of the Archbishop's Judgement in the Case of the Deprivation, Deposition, or resisting of Kings; against which he protested through the whole tenor of his life. He it was that was, if not the Author, 
* Fox. p. 1697.  yet the main Contriver, Approver and Publisher of the Book of the Reformation, the Catechism, with the Book of Homilies, as also of the Necessary Erudition of a Christian Man. In which Books the Power of Kings, and the Necessity of Obedience, together with the wretched Estate of Rebels, and such as resist Authority is plainly set forth. He calls the Insurrection against 
† Vide Herbert H●●●. 3. p. 457  King John (as much as others magnify it, and what followed it) plain Rebellion. And having contrary to that Truth suffered himself to be overpersuaded in this one particular, he publicly acknowledges to the World his Crime; and begs God's, and the Queen's pardon for what he had done; as appears by more than one of his Letters, which are preserved to this day, being set out by Miles Coverdale, Bishop of Exon, and some of them by John Fox; and by this in particular.  
Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, to Queen Marry.  
Most lamentably mourning, 
Covered. Collect. fol. 1, 2, etc.  and moaning himself unto your Highness, Thomas Cranmer, although unworthy either to write, or speak unto your Highness, yet having no person, that I know, to be Mediator for me, and knowing your pitiful Ears ready to hear all pitiful Complaints, and seeing so many before to have felt your abundant clemency in like case, and now constrained most lamentably, and with most penitent and sorrowful heart, to ask mercy and pardon for my heinous Folly and Offence, in consenting, and following the last Will of our Sovereign Lord King Edward the Sixth, your Grace's Brother, which Will, God knoweth, 
☜  God he knoweth, I never liked, nor never any thing grieved me so much, as that your Grace's Brother did; and if by any means it had been in me to have letted the making of that Will, I would have done it; and what I said therein, as well to his Council, as to himself, divers of your Majesty's Council can report, but none so well as the Marquis of Northampton, and the Lord Darcy— which two were then present at the Communication between the King's Majesty and me. I desired to talk with the King's Majesty alone, but I could not be suffered, and so I failed of my purpose; for if I might have communed with the King alone, and at good leisure, my trust was, that I should have altered him from that purpose; but they being present, my labour was in vain. Then, when I could not dissuade him from the said Will, and both he and his Privy Council also informed me, that the Judges, and his Learned Council, said, That the Act of entailing the Crown, made by his Father, could not be prejudicial to him, but that he being in possession of the Crown might make his Will thereof; this seemed very strange to me; but being the Sentence of the Judges, and other his Learned Council in the Laws of this Realm (as both he and his Council informed me) methought it became not me, being unlearned to the Law, to stand against my Prince therein; and so at length I was required by the King's Majesty himself to set my hand to his Will, saying, that he trusted, that I alone would not be more repugnant to his Will, than the rest of the Council were (which words surely grieved my heart very sore) and so I granted him to subscribe his Will, and to follow the same; which, when I had set my hand unto, I did it unfeignedly, and without dissimulation: for the which I submit myself most humbly unto your Majesty, acknowledging mine Offence with most grievous and sorrowful Heart, and beseeching your mercy and pardon; which, my Heart giveth me, shall not be denied unto me, being granted before to so many, which traveled not so much to dissuade both the King and his Council, as I did. And whereas it is containad in two Acts of Parliament, as I understand, that I with the Duke of Northumberland should devise, and compass the Deprivation of your Majesty from your Royal Crown, surely it is untrue; for the Duke never opened his mouth unto me to move me any such matter, nor I him; nor his Heart was not such towards me (seeking long time my Destruction) that he would either trust me in such a matter, or think that I would be persuaded by him. It was other of the Council that moved me, and the King himself, the Duke of Northumberland not being present. Neither before, neither after had I any privy communication with the Duke about that matter, saving, that openly, at the Council Table, the Duke said unto me, that it became not me to say to the King, as I did, when I went about to dissuade him from the said Will.  
Now as concerning the State of Religion, as it is used in this Realm of England at this present; if it please your Highness to licence me, I would gladly write my mind unto your Majesty. I will never, 
☞  God willing, be Author of Sedition, to move Subjects from the Obedience of their Heads and Rulers, which is an Offence most detestable. If I have uttered my mind to your Majesty, being a Christian Queen, and Governor of this Realm (of whom I am most assuredly persuaded, that your Gracious Intent, is above all other things, to prefer God's true Word, his Honour and Glory) if I have uttered, I say, my mind unto your Majesty, than I shall think myself discharged; for it lieth not in me, but in your Grace only, to see the Reformation of things that be amiss. To private Subjects it appertaineth not to reform things, but quietly to suffer that they cannot amend; yet nevertheless to show your Majesty my mind in things appertaining unto God, methink it my Duty, knowing that I do, and considering the place which in times past I have occupied. Yet will I not presume thereunto without your Grace's Pleasure first known, and your Licence obtained, whereof I, most humbly prostrate to the ground, do beseech your Majesty, and I shall not cease daily to pray to Almighty God for the good preservation of your Majesty from all Enemies, bodily and ghostly, and for the increase of all Goodness, Heavenly and Earthly, during my life; as I do, and will do, whatsoever come of me.  
From Oxford, Apr. 23.  
And in his Letter to the Lords of the Council, 
Ibid. Fol. 16. & apud Fox. tom. 2. p. 1331.  a little before his Martyrdom, sent by Dr. Weston, and by him opened, and kept, he expresseth himself after the same manner: In most humble wise sueth unto your Right Honourable Lordships, Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, beseeching the same to be a means for me unto the Queen's Highness for her mercy and pardon. Some of you know, by what means I was brought and trained unto the Will of our late Sovereign Lord King Edward the Sixth, and what I spoke against the same; wherein I refer me to the Reports of your Honours.  
And if still this particular Act of the Archbishop be urged, as an Argument what his persuasion was as to the Rights of Monarches, it may as well be argued, that Popery was then the true Religion, because he once signed the Articles of it; whereas his Recantation, and his voluntary burning of his Right Hand were a true Discovery of his disowning the one, as this his reiterated Application to the Queen for her pardon, is a demonstration of his renouncing the other.   

SECT. II.  
And as the Archbishop refused a long time to sign this Will; so the Lord Chief Justice 
* Heylin. ubi supr. p. 152. & Fuller. Ch. hist. l. 8. p. 2, 3, etc.  Montague refused for a long time to draw it up, nor would at last be brought to a compliance, till he had his pardon signed for so doing, and had been called Traitor by the Duke of Northumberland for his refusal; his own Narrative, which Fuller hath published, declares, That being an old weak man, and without comfort, in great fear and dread, as were his Brethren, with weeping eyes and sorrowful hearts they devised the said Book according to such Articles as were devised with the King's proper hand above and beneath, and on every side, (he thinking in his Conscience, that the King never invented this matter of himself, but by some wonderful false compass) Montague determining with himself to be no Executor of the said Device, whatsoever should chance of it.— Nor did he ever execute any Commission, Proclamation, or other Commandment from the Lady Jane, or her Council, but commanded his Son, and Heir, with twenty Men, to join himself with the Buckinghamshire Men for the Defence of Queen Mary.  
By this it appears, that it was fear that swayed the greatest part of the Council, and Judges at that time; I say, the greatest part of the Judges, because * Sir James Hales, one of the Justices of the Common Pleas, 
Heyl. ubi supr. ann. 1553. p. 192, 193. Fuller ubi supr. p. 6. B●unet. par. ●. l. 1. p. 223. Fox. tom. 2. p. 1392.  carried the Honour of a resolute and constant Man; a Man both religious and upright, whom no importunity could prevail upon to subscribe contrary to both Law and Conscience, and though he was afterward most unworthily requited by Queen Mary for it, yet the Council would not find a Bill against him for High Treason upon this very account. He was a Man, 
* Tom. 2. p. 1278, 1282.  says Fox, both favouring true Religion, and also an upright Judge, as any hath been noted in this Realm. Of both which excellent Qualifications he gave a public demonstration, in that after the Queen's countenancing and establishing of the Mass, he at a public Assize in Kent gave Charge upon the Statutes made in the time of Henry the Eighth, and Edward the Sixth, for the Supremacy, and Religion: for which, notwithstanding he had adventured his Life in Queen Mary's Cause, in that he would not subscribe to the disheriting of her by the King's Will, he was imprisoned in the Marshalsea, Counter and Fleet, and cruelly handled.  
It is true, the Severities of his Usage in Prison, and the frightful Accounts, which the Warden of the Fleet gave him, of the Tortures appointed for Heretics, made him very melancholy, in as much as he was, as Fox continues his Story, being perverted by Dr. Day, Bishop of Chichester, 
* Fox. tom. 2. p. 1331, 1393.  etc. contented to say as they willed him (or as Bishop Ridley, in his Letter to Archbishop Cranmer, words it, he recanted, perverted by Dr. Moreman.) And so just sometimes are God's proceed with even a good man, when he forsakes the ways of Truth, as to leave him to walk in the paths of his own choosing to his ruin: 
† Cons. Bradfords' Letter in Coverdale's Collect. p. 312.  for the Consideration of this Apostasy so wrought upon him, that he attempted in Prison to dispatch himself with a Penknife, and after his Releasement was found drowned in a small River.   

SECT. III.  
And having entered into this Story, I shall proceed a little further to show, how the Protestants of 
* Id. ibid. p. 1279, 1280. Heyl. Bar. Full. ubi supra.  Suffolk were the Men, who first resorted to Queen Mary, when she was at Fremlingham Castle, and gave her such aid and assistance, as dispirited Northumberland and his Army, and baffled all the Designs of her Adversaries. And that it may be fully known, what Principles swayed those good Men to assist their lawful Prince, though a known Papist (and of a severe temper) against an Usurper (a professed Protestant, and of other most amiable Qualifications) it is worth the considering, 
* Fox tom. 2. p. 1726, 1727.  that when about the latter end of 1555, or the beginning of 1556, Commissioners were sent by Queen Mary and the Council into Norfolk and Suffolk, (among other Counties) to inquire of matters of Religion, an humble Supplication was exhibited by certain Inhabitants of the County of Norfolk, wherein they profess,' That they were poor men, but true, faithful and obedient Subjects, who as we have ever heretofore, so intent we with God's Grace, to continue in Christian Obedience unto the end; and (according to the word of God) with all reverend fear of God to do our bounden duty to all those superior Powers, whom God hath appointed over us, doing as S. Paul saith, 
Rom. 13.  Let every soul be subject, etc.— These Lessons (right honourable Commissioners) we have learned of the holy Word of God in our Mother Tongue, 1. That the Authority of a King, Queen, etc. is no tyrannical Usurpation, but a just, holy, lawful and necessary Estate for man to be governed by; and that the same is of God, the Fountain and Author of Righteousness. 2. That to obey the some in all things (not against God) is to obey God; and to resist them, is to resist God: 
☜  therefore as to obey God in his Ministers and Magistrates bringeth life; so to resist God in them bringeth punishment and death. The same Lesson have we learned of S. Peter, saying, Be ye subject to all human Ordinances, etc. 
1 Pet. 2. — After which, with the Resolution and Courage of true Christian Confessors, they profess, That the Religion lately set forth by King Edward, is such, in our Consciences, as every Christian Man is bound to confess to be the Truth of God to embrace the same in heart, to confess it with mouth, and (if need require) lose and forsake, not only House and Land, etc. but also (if God will so call them) gladly to suffer all manner of Persecution, and to lose their Lives in the Defence of God's Word and Truth.— We have learned the holy Prayer made for the Queen's Majesty, wherein we learn, that her Power and Authority is of God, therefore we pray to God for her, that she, and all Magistrates under her, may rule according to God's Word.— We think, at present, the unquiet multitude had more need to have these things more often, and earnestly beaten and driven into them (especially given in many places to stir, and trouble) than to take from them that blessed Doctrine; whereby only they may to their Salvation be kept in quiet.— After which, reflecting upon the Assistance which they and the Suffolk Men gave the Queen against the Lady Jane Grey, they subjoin, We protest before God, we think, 
P. 1728.  if the holy Word of God had not taken some root among us, 
☜  we could not in times past have done that poor Duty of ours, which we did, in assisting the Queen, our most dear Sovereign, against her Grace's mortal Foe, that then sought her Destruction. It was our bounden Duty, and we thank God for his Word and Grace, that we then did some part of our bounden service— all our Bodies, 
P. 1729.  Goods, Lands and Lives are ready to do her Grace faithful Obedience, and true service of all Commandments, that are not against God and his Word. But in things that import denial of Christ, and refusal of his Word and Communion, we cannot consent or agree unto it; for we have bound ourselves in Baptism to be Christ's Disciples, etc.— We learn that true Obedience is to obey God, King of all Kings, and Lord of all Lords; and for him, in him, and not against him and his Word, to obey the Princes and Magistrates of this World, who are not truly obeyed, 
☞  when God is disobeyed, nor yet disobeyed, when God is faithfully obeyed. We think not good by any unlawful Stir or Commotion to seek remedy; but intent, by God's Grace, to obey her Majesty in all things not against God and his holy Word.— If Persecution shall ensue (which some threaten us with) we desire the Heavenly Father (according to his promise) to look from Heaven, to hear our cry, to judge between us and our Adversaries, and to give us faith, strength and patience, to continue faithfully unto the end, and to shorten these evil days for his chosen's sake.  
It is also remarkable, that the Generality of the common People stood firm to their Duty in those days, and that the Council themselves at last repent of what they had done, and proclaimed the Queen (as did also Northumberland at Cambridge) and when Sir Thomas Palmer, 
Fox. pag. 1280.  who was condemned to die (with the Duke and Sir John Gates) was to be beheaded, and he professed his Faith, that he had learned in the Gospel, (which Dudley shamefully had renounced, if he ever sincerely professed it) so he lamented, that he had not lived more Gospel-like; and I doubt not but he meant it of his Rebellion.  
Nay, the Lady 
* Letter to her Father, in Fox. p. 1291. See Godwin's Annals, ann. 1553. Id. p. 1334.  Jane herself averrs, that her death was hastened by her Father: That she was innocent of the fact, being constrained, and continually assayed, that she only seemed to consent, and therein grievously offended the Queen, and her Laws, (as did also her Father, the Duke of Suffolk, at his death, acknowledging, That he had offended the Queen, and her Laws, and thereby was justly condemned to die, desiring all men to be obedient, and praying God, that his death might be an example to all men.) Having, as she says, out of Obedience to her Father and Mother, grievously sinned, and offered violence to herself. Averring further, that her enforced Honour never blended with her innocent Heart. 
P. 1293. — For as Fox observes, she and her Husband did but ignorantly accept that, which the others had willingly devised, and by open Proclamation consented to take from others, and give to them. By which last passage, 
pag. 1289.  and by his calling Sir Thomas Wyat's Conspiracy a Rebellion (as it truly was, though he be mistaken in saying it was entered into for Religion, as the first part of this History makes appear, Wyatt himself condemning it on the Scaffold, 
l. 8. p. 14.  says Fuller) I am inclined to reckon that industrious Martyrologist among the other assertors of this truth; and having thus occasionally mentioned Sir Thomas Wyatt, I cannot but subjoin my conjecture, that he was much swayed in his Undertaking, by a Book written by Theodore Basil, and published Ann. 1543. dedicated to Wyatt, called The true Defence of Peace; wherein he magnifies the Love that every one owes to his Country, and how honourable it is to fight and die for it.  
And it is further observable, 
Id. p. 1893.  that when he and his Army came into Southwark, and sent word to Dr. Sands (Mr. Saunders, and other Preachers Prisoners there) that the Gates should be set open for them all, Dr. Sands answered, I was committed hither by Order, I will be discharged by like Order, or I will never departed hence; and so answered the rest, despising even Liberty itself from an unjust imprisonment, to which they were confined by their lawful Prince, when it was offered them by a Rebel. 
Id. p. 1896. — And when Sir William Saintloe was accused by the Council, that he knew of Wyat's Rebellion; he protested he was a true man both to God and his Prince, defying all Traitors and Rebels: And the Lady Elizabeth (afterward Queen) acquitted herself with a becoming bravery of the same Accusation.   

SECT. iv  
As Cranmer and Ridley were always dear Friends, Colleagues in the holy Episcopal Office and Dignity, and Fellow-Confessors and Martyrs; so did their Opinions exactly conspire in this Point. For in his 
* In Coverdale's Collect. f. 56. & apud Fox. tom. 2. pag. 1570.  Letter to Dr. Grindal, then at Francfort (afterward Archbishop of Canterbury) Ann. 1555. he prays hearty for the happy Delivery of Queen Mary (when it was generally believed she was with Child) though he knew it would bring him the sooner to the Stake;— Post partum Reginae, quem jam quotidiè expectamus, quemque Deus pro sui nominis gloriâ dignetur benè illi fortunare, etc. i. e. After the lying in of the Queen, which we every day expect, and which may God for the glory of his Name vouchsafe to make happy to her; we shall then immediately look for nothing else, but a triumphant Crown of our Confession in the Lord against our ancient Adversary: And by this he made amends for his preaching up the Lady Janes Title at S. Paul's Cross, in which matter, as Bishop Godwin 
† Annal. An. 1553.  says, I wish, he had not erred.  
To what hath been said of Saunders, Bradford, and others, in the first part of the History, may be added, that such as was their belief, when they were admitted to a Conference one with another, such also was their Faith in this Point, when they singly gave their Judgement. Mr. Bradford in his Letter to the City of London, 
Ap. Fox. tom. 2. pag. 1477. and in Covered. Coll. p. 25 4/●.  Feb. 11. 1555. My right dearly beloved, let us hearty bewail our Sins, repent us of our former evil life, hearty and earnestly purpose to amend our Lives in all things, continually watch in Prayer, diligently and reverently attend, hear, and read the holy Scriptures, labour after our Vocation to amend our Brethren; let us reprove the Works of Darkness, let us fly from all Idolatry, let us abhor the Antichristian and Romish rotten Service, detest the Popish Mass, forsake their Romish God, prepare ourselves to the Cross, be obedient to all that be in authority in all things, that be not against God and his word; for then answer with the Apostles, 
☞  It is more meet to obey God than man; howbeit, never for any thing resist, or rise against the Magistrates; avenge not yourselves, but commit your Cause to the Lord, to whom Vengeance pertaineth, and he in his time will reward it.  
And when Weston told Bradford how the People were by him procured to withstand the Queen, 
Ap. Fox. tom. 2. pag. 1471. Ap. eund. p. 1476. and Cover. p. 294.  Bradford answering again, bade him Hang him up as a Traitor and a Thief, if ever he encouraged any to Rebellion.— And in the Postscript to his Mother, Brethren, and Sisters, he exhorts them to be obedient to the higher Powers, that is, In no Point, either in hand, or tongue, rebel, but rather, if they command that, which with good Conscience you cannot obey, lay your Head on the Block, and suffer whatsoever they shall do or say; by Patience possess your Souls. And of the Will of King Edward the Sixth, 
Ap. eund. p. 148 6/7. and Cover. p. 287.  he gives his opinion in his Letter to Sir J. Hales, wherein after he had given him excellent Advice, and set forth the Advantages of Persecution for a good Cause, and commended him, that he judged after Faith's fetch (as he styles it) and the effects or ends of things, looking not on the things which are seen, but on the things which are not seen; he adds, Let the Worldlings weigh things, and look upon the Affairs of Men with their worldly and corporal Eyes, as did many in subscription of the King's last Will; and therefore they did that, for the which they beshrewed themselves: But let us look on things with other manner of Eyes, as (God be praised) you did, in not doing that which you were desired, and driven at to have done: You than beheld things, not as a man, but as a man of God, etc. 
Ap. Fox. p. 1494. Covered. pag. 282, 283. — And in his Admonition to certain professors and lovers of the Gospel, to beware they fall not from it, in consenting to the Romish Religion: Among other holy Exhortations and Cautions, my dearly beloved repent, be sober, and watch in Prayer, be obedient, and after your Vocations show your Obedience to the higher Powers in all things that are not against God's Word, therein acknowledge the sovereign Power of the Lord; howbeit, so that ye be no Rebels, nor Rebellers for no Cause, 
☜  but because with good Conscience you cannot obey, be patiented Sufferers, and the Glory and good Spirit of God shall dwell upon us.  
In his Meditation on the Fifth Commandment, 
v. Meditat. on the Lord's Pr. and Com. printed London, 1622. pag. 117.  written in the days of Edward the Sixth, (See pag. 123.) he thus devoutly expresses himself; In this Commandment thou (O good Lord) settest before mine Eyes them, whom thou for Order sake, and the more commodity of man in this life hast set in degree and authority before me, comprehending them under the name of Father and Mother, that I might know, that— I am of thee commanded to do that which is most equal and just (as the very Brute Beasts do teach us) that with childly Affection and Duty, I should behave myself towards them, i. e. I should honour them; which comprehendeth in it Love, Thankfulness, and Obedience, and that, 
☜  not so much because they be my Parents (for it may be they will neglect the doing of their Duties towards me), but because thou commandest me so to do, whatsoever they do. 
pag. 118, 119. — And whereas thou addest a Promise of long Life, we may gather, that a civil Life doth much please thee, and receiveth here Rewards, especially if we lead it for Conscience to thy Law: And on the contrary part, a disobedient Life to them that be in authority, will bring the sooner thy Wrath and Vengeance in this Life. Thus speaks the holiest and devoutest of all Queen Mary 's Martyrs, as 
* Ch. Hist. l. 8. p. 21.  Fuller styles him.   

SECT. V  
To the holy Bradford it is requisite to join his dear Friend the zealous Laurence Saunders, the man of God, who, said he, was in Prison, 
† Ap. Fox. tom. 2. p. 1358.  till he was in Prison, so fervently did he covet Martyrdom) they both being entrusted at the same time with the Cure of Souls in the City of London; he in his Letter to the Professors of the Gospel in the Town of Litchfield, thus exhorts them to steadfastness in the Faith, and Patience; And now dearly beloved, 
Covered. Coll. Pag. 188.  we be taught by that heavenly Spirit, which our God hath given unto us, to seek Comfort in these times of Affliction, not in hope of Rebellion, or fulfilling unprofitable, yea, pestilent Welsh Prophecies; but in the most comfortable and glad tidings of the heavenly Promises assured in his dear Christ.— Let us most obediently kiss the Rod of our heavenly Father, by obedient Submission to avoid all extremity, that man may do unto us, rather than to forgo Faith and a good Conscience.  
When the good Bishop of Rome was hurried to Martyrdom in the Decian Persecution, his Deacon S. Laurence would not be left behind: Nor is it fit that Laurence Saunders should appear without his Curate (and Brother in Sufferings) George Marsh, 
Ap Fox. tom. 2. p. 1426. Covered. page 671.  who in his Exhortatory Letter to the Professors of God's Word and true Religion in Langhton, after much Discourse about Martyrdom, Patience, and Resolution, says, Give yourselves continually to all manner of good Works, amongst the which the chiefest are to be obedient to the Magistrates, 
☞  sigh they are the Ordinance of God, whether they be good or evil, unless they command Idolatry and Ungodliness, that is to say, things contrary unto true Religion; for than ought we to say with Peter, We ought more to obey God than man; but in any wise we must beware of Tumult, Insurrection, Rebellion, or Resistance. The Weapon of a Christian Man in this matter ought to be the Sword of the Spirit, which is God's Word, and Prayer coupled with Humility and due Submission, with readiness of Heart, rather to die than to do any Ungodliness. Christ also teacheth us, that all Power is of God, yea even the Power of the wicked, which God causeth oftentimes to reign for our Sins and Disobedience towards him and his Word. Whosoever then doth resist any Power, doth resist the Ordinance of God, and so purchase to himself utter Destruction and Undoing.— We must honour and reverence Princes, and all that be in authority, and pray for them, and be diligent to set forth their Profit and Commodity.— And thus I commend you, Brethren, unto God, 
Fox. page 1428.  and the word of his Grace, etc. And in another Letter of his to several of his Friends, he exhorts them, Obey with Reverence all your Superiors, unless they command Idolatry or Ungodliness.  
Thus also that hearty and zealous man of God, Mr. Philpot, Archdeacon of Winchester, 
Covered. page 222.  in his Letter to the Christian Congregation, discoursing of the Excuses men make use of to hid their Sins, says, Another sort of Persons do make themselves a Cloak for the Rain, under the pretence of Obedience to the Magistrates, whom we ought to obey, although they be wicked: But such much learn of Christ, to give to Cesar that that is Cesar's, and to God, that that is due to God: And with S. Peter, to obey the higher Powers in the Lord, albeit they be evil, if they command nothing contrary to God's Word, otherwise we ought not to obey their Commandments, although we should suffer death therefore; as we have the Apostles for our Examples herein to follow, who answered the Magistrates, as we ought to do in this case, not obeying their wicked Precepts, saying, Judge ye, whether it be more righteous, that we should obey men rather than God.  
Nor was this Doctrine peculiar to these few Confessors in that general Persecution; for Rogers, the Proto-Martyr of that Reign; Dr. Tailor of Hadley, Crome, Laurence, and others, as appears by the first 
* page 23.  Part of this History, were of the same mind; the contrary Doctrine among those, who called themselves Protestant's, being then hardly hatched, or but just out of the Shell. Thus the Primitive Martyrs, who never declined going to a Stake, unanimously declared, that no man of their Society was imprisoned, or brought to suffer, as a Traitor against the Government, for they had learned to die, not to fight for Religion.   

SECT. VI  
It cannot be denied, that John Knox was an early Opposer of this truly Christian, Apostolical, and Primitive Practice, as the account of the Troubles of 
* v. first part of Hist. page 25/6.  Francfort declares: But we ought withal to consider, what our most worthy Primate, Archbishop Bancroft well observes 
† Danger. Posit. etc. lib. 2. c. 1. ; that whereas such dangerous Doctrines as these [The Authority which Princes have, is given them from the People, and upon occasion the People may take it away again.— That evil Princes, by the Law of God, aught to be deposed.— That when Magistrates cease to do their Duties (in deposing evil Princes) than God gives the Sword into the People's hands; and such other like dangerous Positions, as he truly calls them] were owned by the Genevians, and many of the English that were fled to Geneva in the Reign of Queen Mary;' that the rest of the learned Men, that fled in that Queen's Reign, as John Scory, William Barlow, Richard Cox, Thomas Becon, John Bale, John Parkhurst, Edmond Grindal, Edwin Sandys, Alexander Nowell, Robert Wisdom, John Jewel, and very many more, having no great affection to Geneva, bestowed themselves in Germany, especially at Zurich, Basil, and Francfort; and maintained the Reformation of the Church of England in King Edward 's time; 
☜  they used in their holy Assemblies the form of Service, and order of Ceremonies, which were then established; and they utterly misliked and condemned the aforesaid Propositions, as very seditious and rebellious, according to the judgement of all the Reformed Churches (for aught I can learn) both in Germany and elsewhere, except Geneva, and her Offspring; besides they of Francfort (as it appeareth) notwithstanding their grief, that they were constrained to leave their Country for their Conscience; yet in the midst of all their Afflictions they retained so dutiful Hearts to Queen Mary (imitating therein the Apostles and Disciples of our Master) as that they could not endure to hear her so traduced into all Hatred and Obloquy, as she was by the other sort. Mr. Knox coming upon occasion from Geneva to Francfort, was by these grave Men accused of Treason (as he himself confesseth) for Matters that he had published in print against their Sovereign and the Emperor, and was fain thereupon to fly thence to Geneva:— So that by this and the former Letter of Bradford, etc. we may plainly see, what was the uniform Belief of the English Confessors in those days of Persecution, both those who were in England, and those who had fled thence for Righteousness sake, and for a good Conscience.  
Nor can I find any true Son of our Church, that asserted the contrary Doctrine, unless we must except Bishop Poinet in his short Treatise of Politic power and true obedience, in which it is Thetically laid down, that it is lawful to depose an evil Governor, and to kill a Tyrant. But I cannot believe the Book to be his. 1. Because Printed (as I think) after his death Anno 1556. he dying at Strasburg April 11. of the same year, and the Preface to his Book seems to acknowledge it. 2. Because (if I conjecture aright, by the character) Printed at Geneva, (where two years afterward) Anno sc. 1558. both Knox's first blast of the Trumpet against the Regiment of Women, and Goodman's Book of Obedience first saw the light, and Ant. Gilbie's admonition to England and Scotland to call them to repentance; and thirdly, because it wants that learning and acumen, that discover themselves illustriously in his other Writings; and the Doctrine is contrary to that Bishop's Practices, 
l. 2. hist. Reform. p. 271.  Dr. Burnet acquitting Bishop Poinet of having any hand (as he was accused) in Sir Thomas Wyat's Rebellion; and how easy is it in a disturbed Age, for Zealots to Father on a dead Bishop such Tenets, as he neither owned nor defended? but if after all this, Bishop Poinet be the genuine Author of that Treatise, it is but the example of one, and that no Old Man, (for he died before he was forty) maintaining a Paradox against all the other the venerable Martyrs, and Confessors of that time.   

SECT. VII.  
Among those pious Exiles, Thomas Beacon was one; who having been in the beginning of Queen 
* Fox. tom 2. p. 1281.  Mary's Reign, committed to the charge of the Lieutenant of the Tower, with Bradford and Vernon, went afterwards into Germany, whence upon Queen Elizabeth's advancement to the Crown, he with many other Exiles returned into this Kingdom. I shall at present omit, what he in his Anthology out of the Works of Lactantius hath cited out of that Father, and give an account of what he declares to be his own Sentiments: In his Governance of Virtue, Sect. 
Tom 1. oper. f. 263. Lond 1564.  against Rebellion and Disobedience, he thus instructs us. If the Devil, that old Enemy of Mankind, and troubler of all good orders, go about to put in thy head, that the Magistrates, and High Powers do not their duty in the right Government of a Commonwealth, 
☜  but too much cruelly oppress their Subjects, and that therefore they may justly rise and rebel against them; and take upon thee of thy own private authority to redress things, that are amiss in the Commonwealth, take heed that thou by no means consentest to his most subtle and wicked temptation, whereby he goeth about to throw thee into everlasting damnation both of Body and Soul, besides the shameful death, that thou shalt have in this World, and the loss of all that ever thou hast; but content thyself with thy vocation, labour diligently and quietly for thy living to maintain peace, pray for the High Powers, think that cross to be laid upon thee for thy Deserts, amend thy life, humbly lament thy cause to God, who will not leave thee succorless, and defend thyself against Satan, and all his crafty suggestions with these Scriptures following, 
f. 264. — after which he citys very many places of the Holy Writ to confirm what he had said, both Precepts and Examples, out of the Old and New Testament.  

* Catech. p. 343.  Did not Christ teach Obedience toward the Higher Powers, did he not pay Tribute, & c? Did not the Apostles of Christ in like manner, both teach and do?— neither lack we in the Holy Scriptures Histories, which do manifestly declare what a great Sin Disobedience is, and how grievously God hath punished it,— the Histories of Dathan, and Abiron, Zimri, and Baasa, etc. confirm this,— it is good to follow the example of David, 
☜  which shown such honour and reverence unto King Saul, being both a Wicked Ruler, and also his mortal Enemy; that he would not once hurt him, nor yet suffer any other to do it, although he had sufficient opportunity, and occasion at divers times to have slain him if he had been minded; The Lord forbidden, said he, that I should lay my hand on him; again, kill him not, for who, saith he, shall lay hands on the Lord's Anointed, 
2. Reg. 1.  and not be guilty? as the Lord liveth, he dieth not, except the Lord smite him, etc.— and this Doctrine he confirms by many other examples, both under the Law and the Gospel, 
Id. Tom.  and closes all with the example of the Thebaean Legion; so vigorously did our Forefathers thunder with it. Is the Magistrate appointed of God an Officer, 
1. f. 437. Obj.  or is he rather a Tyrant Usurping Power and Authority over other Persons against all Right and Law? Ans. He is ordained of God to be a Ruler over his People, and no Man hath justly Rule and Authority in any Commonwealth, which is not ordained of God. Obj. But what if the Magistrates be evil, wicked, ungodly, tyrants, haters of the truth, oppressors of the poor, etc. are they also appointed of God? Ans. In Job it is thus written, for the sins of the People doth God make an Hypocrite to Reign over them; and God himself says by the Prophet, I shall give them Children to be their Princes, and Babes shall have Rule over them; the People also shall be peeled and polled, etc.— Our Saviour Christ confessed, that the Authority which Pilate had, although a wicked and ungodly Person, was from God, 
☞  and he willingly suffered death under that Tyrant; neither do we read, that the Apostles at any time did reject, and cast away the Regiment of the Heathen Rulers, as a thing unlawful, but they rather exhorted the Subjects to obey them, so far as they commanded nothing contrary to God's word, to honour them, to pray for them, to give them tribute, etc.— Thus we see, that not only Godly, but also ungodly Princes; not only righteous, but also unrighteous and wicked Rulers are given us of God: the one, I mean the good, for the favour which God beareth towards us; the other, I mean the evil for the anger and displeasure, that he hath towards us, when he sees us disobedient to his Laws and Ordinances.— 
† f. 504.  Subjects from the very heart must love, and reverence the civil Magistrates, as the Ministers and Vicars of God.— and if it be their duty to love and reverence, and honour the Higher Powers with a true and inward affection of the heart, then may they not hate them, and unworthily speak of them.— 2. 
* f. 505.  Their next duty is to pray for them, that God may be with them, assist them, and defend them, etc.— 3. They must humbly obey them, and that not for fear of punishment, but for conscience sake; for as God hath commanded the Magistrate to rule, so he hath commanded to obey; this commandment of God may by no means be disobeyed; for to disobey the Magistrate is none other thing, than to disobey God, whose Minister the Magistrate is, and whose Office he executeth. And having proved this by several places of Holy Scripture, he subjoins: If this Obedience were throughly grafted in the hearts of Subjects, all murmur, tumults, commotions, seditions, insurrections, etc. should soon cease in the Commonwealth.— they should soon cease, for they should never be attempted; but whosoever through the motion of the Devil, enterprise such things against the Magistrates, 
☜  they always come to a miserable end; so far is it off, that they have good success in their wicked and damnable attempts, as Histories of all Ages do evidently declare, etc.— 4. The Office of Subjects is willingly, and without grudging to bear such burdens, and pay such charges, as the Magistrates shall reasonably require of them, etc. but Qu. 
f. 506.  But may the Magistrate take away the Subject's goods at his pleasure? Answ. Nothing less, for there is a propriety of goods and possessions, as well in the Subject, as in the Magistrate; so that if the Magistrate do unjustly take away his Subjects goods, he is a Tyrant, and shall not escape the terrible indignation, and fierce Plagues of God, as we may see in the History of King Ahab, and Naboth the Jesreelite, etc.— 5. and finally, it's required of Subjects, that they do not blaze nor publish abroad, but rather conceal and hid the faults, oversights, and negligences of the Magistrates, etc. This was the Doctrine, which the Catechists of those days taught the People.  
And as Men were taught to believe in those days, 
‖ Id. tom. 2. op. f. 211. in the pomander of Prayer.  so were they also taught to pray. As it is thy Godly appointment, O Lord God, that some should bear rule in this World to see thy Glory set forth, and the common peace kept; so it is thy pleasure again, that some should be Subjects and inferiors to others in their vocation, although before thee there is no respect of Persons, and forasmuch as it is thy good will to appoint me in the number of Subjects, I beseech thee to give me a faithful, and an obedient heart unto the High Powers, that there may be found in me no disobedience, no unfaithfulness, no treason, no falsehood, no dissimulation, 
☜  no insurrection, no commotion, no conspiracy, nor any kind of Rebellion in word, or in deed against the Civil Magistrates; but all faithfulness, obedience, quietness, subjection, humility; and whatsoever else becomes a Subject, that I living here in all lowliness of mind, may at the last day through thy favour be lifted up unto everlasting Glory, where thou with the Father, and the Holy Ghost livest, and reignest very God for ever. Amen.  
The same Author in his Treatise, 
Tom. 3. f. 499, 500  called the Glorious Triumph of God's most Blessed Word, introduceth the Holy Scriptures thus vindicating themselves. Now as touching that mine adversaries say, that I and my Preachers teach disobedience unto the High Powers, and encourage their Subjects rather to make Insurrection against them, than they should lose any thing at all of their sensual pleasures; I know not, if mine Enemies in any point have uttered their maliciousness against us, than in this one thing; that ye may know, how they shame nothing at all to lie, hear, I pray you, the sum of our Doctrine concerning this matter; 
Rom. 13.1 Pet. 2.  Let every Soul be obedient to the Powers, that bear rule, etc. again, be ye obedient to every humane creature, etc.— here have I given you a taste of Doctrine concerning the duty of Subjects unto the High Powers; what disobedience do ye perceive by these words, that we teach? do we move the Inferiors, and the base commonalty, or any other unto such carnal liberty; that for defence of the same, they should either show disobedience, or make Insurrection against the head Rulers, as our adversaries falsely report of us?— who brought the Higher Powers again unto the true Authority, which God from the beginning gave them, but I, and my Ministers? contrariwise, who usurped this Power, and brought the Magistrates in Subjection, but these Enemies of God's Word? who goeth about to maintain it still, but they only?— I alone, and my Ministers have set the Princes again in their Authority, and valiantly delivered them from the Tyranny of the Papists, as ye may perceive not only in our Sermons, but also in our Writings.    

CHAP. IU. The History of Passive Obedience in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth.  

SECT. I.  
THE Jews say, that before one Prophetic light was by death extinguished, another was set up to illuminate a degenerate World; and thus did God in his mercy order it in our Church; though many eminent Confessors commenced Martyr's under Queen Mary, yet the divine goodness did not leave itself, and the truth without Witnesses, who for a while sung the Songs of Zion in a strange Land, but upon the advancement of Queen Elizabeth to the Throne of these Nations, they returned to vindicate that faith, which was once delivered to the Saints, and for which they had earnestly contended, being ready to resist unto blood; and because the Churches most eminent, and most envied Advocate, was Bishop Jewel, I shall begin the History of this Reign, with an account of his Sentiments. When I have recited a Passage or two out of the Homily against Rebellion, which are omitted in the first part of this History.— The first Author of Rebellion, the root of all vices, 
p 4th.  and the Mother of all mischief was Lucifer, first God's most excellent creature, and most bounden Subject, who by rebelling against the Majesty of God, of the brightest and most Glorious Angel, became the blackest and most foul Fiend and Devil, and from the height of Heaven is fallen into the Pit, and bottom of Hell;— though not only great multitudes of the rude and rascal Commons, but sometimes also Men of great Wit, Nobility, and Authority; have moved Rebellion against their lawful Princes; though they should pretend sundry causes, as the redress of the Commonwealth, or Reformation of Religion, 
☜  though they have made a great show of Holy meaning, by beginning their Rebellion with the counterfeit Service of God, and by displaying and bearing about divers Ensigns and Banners; which are acceptable unto the rude ignorant common People (great multitudes of whom by such false pretences, and shows they do deceive and draw unto them) yet were the multitudes of the Rebels never so huge and great, the Captains never so noble, politic, and witty, the pretences feigned to be never so good and holy, yet the speedy overthrow of all Rebels, of what number, state, or condition soever they were, or what colour or cause soever they pretended, is, and ever hath been such, 
☜  that God doth thereby show, that he alloweth neither the dignity of any Person, nor the multitude of any People, nor the weight of any cause, as sufficient, for which Subjects may move Rebellion against their Princes:— and how severely the same Homilies censure, 
p. 6.  and condemn the Barons, who broke their Oath of Fidelity to their natural Lord King John, is acknowledged by all Men.  
Bishop Jewel in his justly admired Apology taking notice, 
p. 34. etc. edit. Lond 1581.  that among many other false accusations then laid to the Charge of the Church, this was one, that its members were turbulent, snatching Sceptres out of the Hands of Princes, Arming their Subject against them, rescinding their Laws, and changing Monarchies into popular Government; whereby the minds of Princes were exasperated to believe, that every Protestant in their Jurisdiction was their Enemy and a Rebel; subjoins, that it would have been most troublesome to those good Men, to be so odiously accused of so grievous a crime as Treason, had they not known, that Christ himself, and his Apostles, and an infinite number of pious Christians had been accused of the same crime; for though Christ had taught the World, to render to Caesar, the things that are Caesar's, yet he was accused of Sedition, and the desire of reigning, and it was loudly cried at the Tribunal, If thou let this man go, thou art no friend to Caesar; and though the Apostles constantly taught Men to obey Magistrates, that every Soul ought to be Subject to the higher powers, and that not only for wrath, but for conscience sake, yet they were said to stir up the People, and to invite the multitude to Rebellion. So did Haman accuse the Jews, Ahab accuse Elias, and Amasias the Priest accuse the honest Prophet Amos; in short, Tertullian says all the Christians of his time were so accused.— as also did the ancient Enemies of Christianity, Symmachus, Celsus, Julian, Porphyry accuse the Christians of their Ages;— so that the charge is not new, nor can it seem strange,— though our very Enemies cannot deny, that in all our discourses and writings, we diligently admonish the People of their duty, to be obedient to Princes and Magistrates, though they are wicked, 
p. 84, etc.  etc.— If we are Traitors, who honour our Princes, who pay them deference and obedience in all things, as much as is lawful for us to do by the Word of God, who pray for them, etc. what are they, who have not only done all that we speak of, but also have approved of such proceed?— We neither throw off the Yoke, nor disturb Kingdoms, we neither set up Kings, 
☞  nor dethrone them, nor transfer their Empires, nor give them Poison, nor make them to kiss our Feet, nor tread on their Necks. This rather is our Profession, this is our Doctrine, that every Soul, whosoever it be, whether a Monk, or Evangelist, or Prophet, or Apostle, aught to be subject to Kings and Magistrates.— we teach publicly, that obedience ought to be paid to Princes, as to Men sent by God; and that whosoever resisteth them, resisteth the Ordinance of God. These are our Institutions, these Doctrines are illustrious in our Books, in our Sermons, and in the manners, and modesty of our People.  
The same admirable Prelate in his Epistle Dedicatory to Queen Elizabeth, before his defence of the Apology is still of the same mind; blaming his Adversary Harding for debasing the Majesty of Kings. 
‖ sol. 318.6.  Mr. Harding concerning the Majesty and Right of Kings tells us; they have their first authority by the positive Law of Nations, and can have no more power, than the People hath, of whom they take their Temporal Jurisdiction; as if he would say, Emperors and Kings have none other Right of Government, than it hath pleased their Subjects by composition to allow unto them; thus he says, and says it boldly, as if God himself had never said, per me Reges regnant, by me and mine authority Kings bear rule over their Subjects; or as if Christ our Saviour had never said unto Pilate the Lord Lieutenant, thou shouldst have no power over me, were it not given thee from above; or as if St. Paul had not said, there is no power but only from God,— they also hold, that the Pope is the Head, and Kings and Emperors the Feet.— If this Doctrine may once take root, 
☜  and be freely received amongst the Subjects, it shall be hard for any Prince to hold his Right.  
And in his Defence he declareth himself to be of the same mind. 
part. 1. p. 15.  Mr. Harding knoweth right well we never Armed the People, 
☜  nor taught them to rebel for Religion against the Prince; if any thing have at any time happened otherwise, it was either some wilful rage, or some fatal fury, it was not our counsel, it was not our Doctrine; we teach the People, as St. Paul doth, To be subject to the higher powers, not only for fear, but also for conscience; we teach them, that whoso striketh with the sword, (by private authority) shall perish with the sword; if the Prince happen to be wicked, or cruel, or burdenous, we teach them to say with St. Ambrose, Arma nostra sunt preces, & lacrymae, tears, and prayers be our weapons; and when 
‖ p. 16.  Harding himself had said, that he condemned all such attempts, that any Subject or Subjects whatsoever of their own private authority, should take Arms against their Prince for matters of Religion.— why, (replies Jewel) except you only the case of Religion? Is it lawful by your Grant for the Subject in any other case, either of Life, or of Government, to Arm himself against his Prince? and would you thus persuade the People? Is this your Religion? Is this your Doctrine?  
Anno 1565. Alexander Nowell, Dean of St. Paul's, set forth his reproof of Mr. Dorman 's proof; and in it vindicates the Church of England from the scandalous imputation, 
pr. at Lond. 4 to. p. 94, 95.  that it taught Men to be Rebels. Corah, Dathan, and Abyron, rebelled against Moses and Aaron, who were specially by God appointed to be their Governors and his Ministers; but what appertaineth that to us, who do obey our natural Prince appointed by God to be our Governor, and all, as well Civil Magistrates, as Ecclesiastical Ministers of God under our Prince? And therefore do we, as we must needs, renounce the authority of that foreign Usurper of Rome,— it is you Papists, that are the Successors of the Rebels Corah, etc. who leaving the Obedience due to your own natural Princes, for the serving of a Foreign false Usurper of Rome, do rebel, not only against Moses, that is to say, your Governor by God appointed, but against God himself also;— we acknowledge, that as Moses and Aaron were God's Ministers by him appointed to govern his peculiar People Israel; so hath God likewise appointed to every several Country their Moses and Aaron, their Princes and Pastors or Bishops; which ought likewise to be obeyed, as Moses and Aaron were to be obeyed of the Israelites; and that those, who do disobey them, do sin by Rebellion, 
☞ p. 96.  as did Corah, &c— as we are most far from Rebelling against our natural Sovereign, and other of God's Ministers appointed to govern us, and therefore no partakers of Corah, and his fellows Rebellion; so trust we in God to be most far from their most horrible destruction, and we give warning to Mr. Dorman, etc. who for maintenance of a Foreign Pharaoh against their conscience (as is to be feared) do disobey their own natural Prince, and that upon a pretence of holiness and spirituality, and are therein most like to Corah, etc. (rebelling against their own special Governors by God appointed, as they did) that they make speed by unfeigned repentance to mollify God's most just wrath, that they follow not Corah, etc. in horrible damnation, as they have followed them in damnable Rebellion.  
Anno 1569. an exhortation to the Queen's Majesties poor deceived Subjects of the North, drawn into Rebellion by the Earls of Northumberland, and Westmorland was printed by allowance, and in it they are thus accosted. Christians I cannot term you, that have defaced the Communion of Christians, and in destroying the Book of Christ's most Holy Testament, renounced your parts by his Testament bequeathed unto you;— their pretences were, the foul disorder of the Realm, much impoverished, far indebted, the defrauding of due execution of Justice, that no Subject can have his Right by Law, but falsely, whereas they are better taught, far doth the proportion of duty of Subjects to the Prince, exceed the duty of Servants to Masters, or Children to Parents, yea, or of Wives to their Husbands; the very nearest conjoining in humane fellowship, even so far as a Realm exceeds a private Family; but if one of your own Servants, Children, or Wives, should do that without your will, nay against your will and express commandment, that your Captains and you have attempted without, and against the Queen's Highness pleasure, would you account them good Servants, good Children, or good Wives?— if they shall put on armour and weapon, and become terrible, or threaten force to the Master, Father, Husband, or the rest of the Family, if the case were your own, you would more mislike it.— The Prince is the Husband of the Common wealth married to the Realm, and the same by ceremony of a ring;— shall you resist her authority, and refuse her blessing, and say you be her good children? Shall your Captains forsake her Service, and say they are good Servants?— note withal, how likely they are to profess a true Religion, that hold this Principle, 
☜  to keep no faith, use no loyalty, regard no oaths and promises made with attestation of God, and avowing themselves to renouncing of Heaven, and to eternal damnation;— they regard no Religion, that go so irreligiously to work, all is but show and hypocrisy.— Reed, I beseech you, the excellent Treatise of Sir John Cheek Knight of the hurt of Sedition; there see, as in a glass, the deformity of your fault, etc.— an unnatural hope it is, and a beastly to join with any strangers to the spoil of their own Country; but such is the nature of that false Religion, to regard no Country, faith, nature, or common honesty.   

SECT. II.  
Antonius Corranus of Sevil, a Learned Spaniard (an excellent Person, as Dr. Patrick with reason calls him) spent much of his time in England; and, as appears by his Writings, very well understood our Doctrine; after he left his Country for the sake of a good Conscience, he Preached ten years in France (as he did also for some time in Flanders) still reserving himself (when God should give him an opportunity) to Preach to his own Countrymen, which he afterwards did for two years in London, till that Congregation of Exiled Spaniards was dissolved; after which an 1571. he was chosen by the Templars to read his Lectures among them (and their choice was confirmed by Edwin Lord Bishop of London.) In the first year of his Ministry, he expounded the Epistle to the Romans, and out of that larger Commentary, he Printed an. 1574. a Theological Dialogue (between St. Paul, and one of his Roman auditors) for this, among other reasons, that it might witness the purity of his Doctrine, and how much he abhorred the Opinions of the Sectaries, that then disturbed the Church.  
In this Dialogue, having shown from the close of the 12th Chap. that we ought to overcome our Enemy's perverseness, and malign temper by our goodness and patience, he continues to Paraphrase the 13th Chapter thus,  
Rom. I could wish from my Soul, that this Doctrine so useful, and necessary to our quiet were embraced by all Men; but (O horrid wickedness!) many of our Church begin not only to revenge themselves on their Persecutors, but dare take Arms, and resist the Magistrates and Judges, that hinder the Preaching of the Gospel.  
Paul, They who think, that the sufferings of Christians hinder the propagation of the Gospel, are extremely deceived, for the blood of the Martyr's waters the Garden of the Church;— but do you, who love Religion mind this Precept, that every one that hath given up his name to Christ, be subject to the higher Powers; for why are they placed in a superior Station, but that their inferiors may be subject unto them?  
Rom. But what if Princess, either Hereditary or Elective, be evil or cruel, must we obey them?  
Paul, What should hinder? for we are not to consider our Rulers as private Men, but to reverence them as constituted by God, for there is no power, but what is of God:— if they, inclined by the fear of God, promote piety, their example does great good; but if they do otherwise, we ought to consider, the Vengeance of God, who for the Sins of a Nation sets over them Hypocrites and Dissemblers: But even this Dispensation of God brings with it advantage to the godly.  
Rom. Then you, S. Paul, are of that opinion, that it is not lawful to take Arms against Princes and Magistrates, though they hinder the Gospel, and would Murder and destroy us?  
Paul, That is my opinion; and this I add, as a conclusion, Whosoever resisteth the Power, resisteth the Ordinance of God, and they that resist shall receive to themselves Damnation, and that justly; for since God is the Author of this Order, they who rebel against the Magistrates, wage War against God himself, and shall bring upon themselves great Calamities.  
Rom. O the deplorable state of this Age! In which we see so many civil Wars, popular Seditions, Treasons, cruel Murders of Princes, and more than barbarous Massacres perpetrated on Subjects.  
Paul, All these things probably fall out for the Sins both of the People and Rulers: The People forgetting their Duty, despise the Authority of the Prince; and the King on the contrary forgets his Obligations, and rages like a cruel Tyrant.— wouldst then therefore (and when I speak to you, I speak to all Men) not dread the Power, do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise, and a reward from it; so far oughtest thou to be from opposing it.  
Rom. A most excellent method of bearing this Yoke, which would otherwise be insupportable;— but men are wise too late: Would to God this Doctrine were as much engraven on men's Hearts, as it finds a place on their Tongues; for by this means it would soon come to pass, that the Minds of Christians would enjoy much inward Peace, and the Commonweal much Advantage.  
Paul, Wheresoever you are, inculcate this Sentence in season, out of season, beseech, reprove, and teach, that the Magistrate is God's chosen Minister, appointed and preferred by him to the Office of governing, for the punishment of them that do evil, and for the comfort of them that do well: If therefore thou do evil, fear, for he bears not the Sword in vain; for God, who hath advanced those Powers, hath armed them with the Sword of Justice.— That I may sum up all in a few words, we ought to be subject to the Powers, not only for wrath but for Conscience sake; for it is the Duty of a Christian to be subject to his Superiors.  
Rom. You therefore believe, that we must obey Magistrates, not only for fear of Punishment, but for greater Reasons; because, though the Magistrate have no power over Conscience, yet, because he is the Minister of God, no one with a good Conscience can resist him.  
Paul, That is my Opinion; and for this Reason, to show the inward Obedience of your Mind, do you pay Tribute, etc. So that learned and pious Paraphrast in opposition to the many false Glosses put upon the Words of the holy Apostle.  
John Young, Doctor of Divinity, preached before the Queen, the Second of March, 1575. on Psal. 131. Lord, I am not high minded, and he tells us, the occasion of writing the Psalm was, That there were certain Parasites and Flatterers attending upon King Saul; who, maligning David, because that by Almighty God's special appointment he was anointed King over Israel, and seeking to bring him into discredit, and into hatred with his Prince, did insinuate, that he did secretly practise the Deposing him from the Kingdom, and the advancing of himself ambitiously to the same: Therefore the Prophet declares their Suggestions to be most false and slanderous, and himself to be innocent from that great Offence.— S. Austin saith, He that will go about to  and fulfil (as all other) so that ambitious and arrogant desire, shall find it a Toil of all Toils, such a Labour, as Samson or Hercules, never achieved.— This desire of Honour, Rule, Principality, worldly Glory, and Renown, is in the Heart of Man (if it be once possessed therewithal) a Worm that dyeth not, etc.— Now David, when he saith, He did not exercise himself in such great matters, etc. his meaning was, that he did never seek (as he was most falsely and unjustly charged by some) to advance himself ambitiously to the Kingdom, King Saul, his Master, being alive; because he knew well enough, that it was too great for him to wield, and too high also for him to aspire unto.— Such was the Humility of this excellent Man, the Friend of God, to the utter Condemnation and Confusion of all those, whose whole study and endeavour evermore hath been, and is at this day, to undermine those which be in authority, to invade and occupy other men's Kingdoms, to wring the Sceptre and Sword out of Prince's hands.— This is a Vice never enough to be detested, considering the manifold and great Mischiefs which have come thereby to Heaven, to Earth, to Angels, to Men, to all Kingdoms and Commonwealths, to the whole World.— This ambitious Man is a Thief, is a Homicide, if it lie in his power, he is a Regicide, he is the Parricide of his Country.— I will only put you in mind of one only Lesson, which we are taught by this Verse, which is this, that it is much better for us sperare, quàm aspirare, to trust in Almighty God, than to aspire; for in aspiring there be many Inconveniences,— but the anchorhold of Hope is firm and sure, etc.  
Bartholomew Clerk, 
Fidelis servi subdito inside'i responsie. Lond. 1573.  anno 1573, writing against that virulent, though learned Rebel Saunders, avers, That the Majesty of Princes is by no means to be violated; if they are good, we are to thank God, who hath blessed his People with so divine a Benefit; but if they are evil, we are to submit our Necks to their Tyranny, or to fly to another City; we must at no time make resistance by Force and Arms, by Tumult and Slaughter: For this we ought to believe, that evil Kings are appointed by God for the punishment of our Sins, and are sent into the World as God's Scourges.   

SECT. III.  
Anno 1590. Dr. Babington printed his Questions and Answers upon the Commandments (he being the Year after made B. of Landaffe, and saccessively of Exon and Worcester) and on the Fifth Commandment he says, 
p. 2●2.  That by Parents are meant such, as are so by Dignity and Office; such as are Magistrates over the People, Masters over their Servants, 
p. 203.  etc.— Magistrates are only to be obeyed in the Lord; 
p. 208.  contrary to Pretty and Charity must neither they command nor we do.— Many Servants take their Master's Unkindness for an excuse of their Disobedience or Infidelity in their Services, which indeed must not be so, saith S. Peter, but be they never so froward, yet we must do all Duty, if we be Servants, and even joy hearty in that Cross, that notwithstanding our faithful and painful Duty, we suffer;— for we serve not them, but God in them. And whereas some may be apt to limit this Doctrine to Servants, and to exempt Subjects, who are by parity of reason obliged; the same Bishop in his Notes on Exodus 18. says, 
p. 27. ●. ed. Lond. fol. 1637.  The Duty of Subjects toward their Governors is 1. To think most reverently of their Places, as an Authority appointed of God for our good; and, not as some Men do, outwardly to obey them, and inwardly to think them but necessary Evils: For S. Peter's words teach more, when he saith, Honour the King; and Solomon, when he biddeth, Fear God and the King; for in the word Honour, Peter includeth sinceram & candidam existimationem, a sincere and unfeigned reverence of them; and Solomon, joining the King with God, showeth a holy and reverend regard of him to be due to him from men subject to him: that also in S. Paul hath great efficacy in it, not for fear, but for Conscience sake; as if he should say, even what duty is done, 
☜  or left undone to him, is done or left undone to God himself, from whom their Authority and Power is; whosoever therefore the person is, the calling is of God.— Agian, after this inward reverend Conceit must follow outward Obedience to their Laws, in paying Tribute, etc. Let every Soul be subject to the high Powers, saith the Apostle, because, he that resisteth, 
☜  resisteth to his own damnation. The Magistrate may sometime be weak, but God will ever be strong to punish any Contempt of his Ordinance: In no case therefore may we intrude ourselves into their Offices, and meddle with public matters, without a calling: For this is not to obey them, but to rule with them; what is amiss, to them must be signified, and their help expected, unless they appoint us; and then we are not private Persons any more, but public for such business;— be they never so evil, yet their place is of God, by whom only Kings do rule, 
Dan. 2.23.37.  either to our good in his Mercy, or to our punishment in his Justice; Tyrants are suffered sometimes to rule for the punishment of the evil, and the reward of the good, saith S. Ambrose; but how, will you think, 
l. 2. de Cain & Abel, c. ●.  for the reared of the good? The same Ambrose notably saith for answer, Never did the Gentiles more for the Church, than when they commanded the Christians to be beaten, proscribed, and killed, for than did Religion make that a Reward, an Honour, and a Crown, which infidelity reputed a Punishment. S. Austin saith, There is no Power but of God; and therefore our Saviour told Pilate, He could have no Power at all over him, except it were given him from the Father; but God doth suffer the Hypocrite to rule for the Sin of the People, and therefore that Sin must be taken away, that the Plague of having a Tyrant Ruler may cease.— What manner of King was Nez buchadnezzar, etc. if a King shall do, as it is said, 1 Sam. 8.11. etc. he is God's Instrument thus to chasten us; and though things do not show what he ought to do, yet they show, what Subjects ought to suffer without Disloyalty, if they be done: Read Jerem. 29.7. God forbidden, saith David, that I should lay my hand on the Lord's Anointed; and yet Saul sought his Life. Who shall lay his hand on the Lord's Anointed, and be guiltless? etc. The Wife is not freed from her Husband when he is ill, nor the Child from his Father, no more are Subjects from their Prince: But in such cases God the only Helper is to be thought of, and prayed unto, who can give a Moses for a Pharaoh, an Othniel for a Cushan, who can bring down the Pride of Tyrus by the Egyptians, and then of the Egyptians by the Assyrians, the Assyrians again by the Chaldeans, by the Medes, and Persions, etc. yet carrying a gracious Ear, and Eye to Prayer proceeding from a penitent Heart, 
〈◊〉. Not. 〈◊〉. Gen. 14. page 43, 44.  etc.— Rebellion is a bad course to get Liberty, where Subjection is due: For Rebellion God never loved, never prospered, but ever plagued; and the fearful destruction of Corah, and his Company, Absalon and his Company, etc.— say as much. Papists charge us that we are no good Friends to Princes and Rulers, and it is no News to hear it of them; Elias had such measure measured unto him. Micheas,— all of them faithful to Princes, ever were so accused. We say the Doctrine of Rome is no Friend to Princes (and here he instances in the treasonable Books and rebellious Insurrections of the Papists, and adds) show the Princes the Gospel hath deposed; show the Princes, that Popery hath not wronged: It is our Doctrine that we firmly hold, and they fully defy, That he that taketh the Sword, shall perish with the Sword; i. e. he that taketh it without the bounds of a calling, warranting him (and that calling he afterward says, is only the Prince's Order) as all Rebels ever do, that he which resisteth the Superior Powers, resisteth the Ordinance of God, and to his own Damnation; that we ought to obey and be subject, not for Fear, but for Conscience sake; that the Weapons of Subjects be but Prayers and Tears, etc. See then, whether Popery, or God's holy Gospel, which we hold, stand better with the safety of Princes, and flourishing Estates of Kingdoms, etc.   

SECT. iv  
Among the Works of Dr. Laurence Humfreys, 
Preached at Oxford, 1588.  which he published against the Romanists, his seven Sermons on 1 Sam. 26.8, 9, etc. To persuade Obedience to Princes, etc. are not the least considerable. In which, having in the Epistle Dedicatory commended that Saying of S. Ambrose, Rogamus Auguste, non pugnamus; We beseech, O Emperor, 
P. 22, 23.  we fight not: and in the first Sermon mentioned the many Rebellions of the Papists, he says, Such a Catholic Faith must be maintained by such Catholic Means, namely, by open Rebellions, privy Practices in a Catholic and Universal Manner, that is, by all unlawful Means, 
P. 24. — That when Scruples arise against such traitorous Enterprises, than the Pope hath this Religion and Omnipotency, 
P. 32.  that he can dispense with any Oath.— In the second Sermon he teacheth every one his Duty: It is lawful for a Magistrate to put to death a Malefactor— otherwise no Spirit, no Reason, no Friend, no carnal Respect can authorize any Man of his own Head, or his private affection, to draw weapon against any man, much less against a double and compound person, 
P. 34. etc.  as the Prince established by Law and public Authority.— If Christ found fault with his Servant (Peter) fight in his own quarrel, 
☜  host much more will he be angry with them, that take weapon against his anointed Prince, his Lieutenant in the Earth?— What do these Giants and Tyrants of the World think? Or what do they esteem of the Blood of a Prince? Or what do they imagine of the Ordinance or Institution of Princes? Are they Upstarts by themselves, & c.? No, it is only the Ordinance of our living God. 
P. 36, 37 — By Office he representeth God, he is God by name,— Saul himself is named here the anointed of the Lord, so are all other Potentates, that are by their Vices evil Men, yet by Office the Ordinance of God: 
Prov. 8. Job 34.  By me rulers reign; the Hypocrites rule not without him.— And why are the bad as well as the good advanced? Austin gives two Reasons hereof; It is not unjust, that wicked men receive power to hurt, both that the patience of the good may be tried, and the wickedness of the evil punished.— And if they are set up by God, they cannot fall, but by God. 
P. 43. — What were the Magistrates in the time of Peter and Paul, but Heathen and Tyrants, as Nero and such others, and yet Paul exhorts every soul to be subject to the higher powers: and whosoever resisteth, etc.— Even Nabuchadnezzar, a Tyrant and Infidel was to be prayed for.— Chrisostome amplifyeth the excellent Integrity and Faithfulness of David toward Saul the anointed, 
Serm 3. p. 56.  in that David did this in the Old Testament, where some revenge was in a sort permitted, etc. But to kill him, or any the anointed of the Lord, is contrary to the Law of Nature, and all Laws.— Those that are disloyal, and Rebels, are not good Christians. 
P. 63. P. 78. P. 106. — We of this Land do swear and protest in the name of Christ, a fidelity to God, to the Prince, and to our Country; this Oath must be kept. Many Laws have been made against Treason and Rebellion, yet the unbridled and cruel Subjects have always unkindly and unnaturally conspired against their Prince, and against their own Country.— Our King Ethelred complains in an Oration in this sort: We are overcome of the Danes, not with Weapon, or force of Arms, but with Treason wrought by our own People.  
Anno 1593., 
Reprinted 〈◊〉. 1640, etc.  Doctor Richard Bancroft (afterward Bishop of London, and Archbishop of Canterbury) published his Dangerous Positions, etc. the whole Design of which Treatise is to expose, and' condemn the Republican Principles, then newly broached in England, by the Lovers of the Geneva Platform. I have already (in the Reign of Queen Mary) given his Sentiments of the Proceed of the English Exiles at Francfort against Knox, whose Principles were so infective, that they inflamed his own native Country, and threw it into a most unnatural Rebellion; of which their Ministers were the prime cause, and shall add his sense of those seditious Doctrines and Practices. 
* Lib. 1. cap 3.  But because some peradventure will labour to excuse these Proceed, and to colour the same with some pretence of zeal, and great desire they had to be delivered from Popish Idolatry and Superstition; I have thought it convenient to let you understand how far they are from making any such pretences in their own behalf, and with what new Divinity Positions Mr. Knox and Mr. Buchanan have amplified the Geneva Resolution, 
☞  (viz. That if Princes refuse to reform Religion, the Magistrates and People may lawfully do it by force of Arms) to the Justification not only of their said Attempts and Actions, but also many others of the like nature. 
Ch. 4. — And afterward he mentions their Positions, That Princes for just causes may be deposed— That it is not Birthright only, nor Propinquity of Blood, that makes a King lawfully reign above a People professing Jesus Christ.— If Princess be Tyrants against God and his Truth; their Subjects are freed from their Oaths of Obedience.— The People are better than the King, and of greater Authority, etc. Of all which, and many the like Propositions he averrs, that they tend to the disturbance and utter overthrow of the freest and most absolute Monarchies that are, or can be in Christendom, and that they are contrary (he was sure) both to the Word of God, and to all the Laws and Customs of this Realm.— But I must transcribe the greatest part of the Book, should I cite all that is to my purpose in it, while I leave to the Reader's private Consideration that, and his other excellent Treatise called, a Survey of the pretended Holy Discipline. And if I mistake not, by his directions the Account of Hacket's, Coppinger's and Arthington's Treason was drawn up, and Printed in the Book called Conspiracy for pretended Reformation; the Design of which is expressly against the Doctrine of taking up, Arms against the Lord's anointed, especially on the Account of Religion.   

SECT. V  
Anno 1594, Dr. Richard Eedes, 
Printed with five other Sermons, London, 1604. p. 70, 72, 73, 74.  Dean of Worcester Preached before the Queen on Isai. 49.23. Wherein he says, That the Strength even of Heathen States was in their Religion, by the which they were persuaded, that their Princes were the Children of their Gods, and their Laws drawn from the Oracles of some Divine Power. They found by experience, how hard it was for men to be brought to obey men, unless they had the authority of more than men, etc. And what doth more teach either Obedience or Peace than the Religion of Christ?— Obedience is rightly called Nervus Imperii, the Sinew and Strength of a Kingdom, as well because it is grounded upon the Obedience of Christ, who, as Bernard noteth, Ne perderet Obedientiam, perdidit vitam, did rather choose to lose his life, than to leave his Obedience. As also because it requires in Christians Obedience without respect of persons to all (without difference of Degrees) higher Powers, Rom. 13.2. Without exception against their Qualities, not only to them that are good and courteous, but to them also who are froward, 1 Pet. 2.18. 
☜  And that in all things, Tribute to whom tribute, etc. and that not with eye-service, as men-pleasers, etc. and that not because of wrath, but for conscience sake, Rom. 13.5. That if all the Laws and Policies of States and Kingdoms were gathered into one, they could not be so strong to work peace, and to persuade Obedience, as these few, but very forcible Rules of the Religion of Christ.— How much therefore is it to be lamented, that in so great Light there should be so little Fruit— That whereas the Truth of Religion is the Preserver of Government, and the Mother of Obedience, the name of Religion is made the Firebrand of Kingdoms, and the armour of disobedience; and that not only to maintain the Tyranny of that Usurping Power, who takes upon him to Depose Kings; but also to bring in that Anarchy of factious Subjects, who presume to give Laws to their lawful Princes: Wherein, besides that it is true, which Leo wrote unto Theodosius, private causes are handled with pretence of Piety, and every Man makes Religion, which should be the Mistress, the Handmaid of his affections; it is intolerable to see how far some busy heads fetch the beginning of Kingdoms, 
p. 7●. Vindic. contr. Tyrant. Bach●n. de ju●e regin.  and so, as they please, the right of Kings, from the pleasure of the People— how contemptuously they term the titles of honour and reverence, the solecisms of the Court;— how seditiously they give wings to ambitious humours, to plead the right of a laconical Ephory against Kings, but for themselves; and to arm that beast of many heads the multitude, which ever goes, as Seneca, not whither it should, but whither the stream bears it, against (that, which to want of judgement is ever most heavy) the present Government; Whereas the right rules of Religion, give no remedy to Subjects against the Highest Authority, 
☞  but the necessity of either suffering or obeying; and therefore they, that open that gap, whether it be to the Tyranny of ambitious Popes, or to the Anarchy of seditious Subjects, howsoever they pretend the name of Religion, they shall sooner prove themselves to have no Religion, than that there is any defence for them in the Religion of Christ; which teacheth, as to be thankful to God for good Princes, so to be patiented of those, whom in anger, as the Prophet Hosea speaks, 
Hos. 13.11.  he setteth over us for the punishment of our sins, and against whom the first Professors of our faith had no weapons, but prayers and tears; 
p. 2. — the same Author in his first Sermon before King James saith, that promotion comes neither from the East, nor from the West, nor from the South, but from God. Ps. 73.6. that their power is of God, Rom. 3.1. and their judgement's God's judgements. Deut. 1.17. and that therefore they, who resist them, not only by a consequence resist the ordmance of God, Rom. 13.2. but God in them, as he told Samuel, they have not rejected thee, but me. 1 Sam. 8.7.  
The Reverend Bishop Moreton begun very early to assert this Doctime in his Writings, and he lived long enough to assert it by his sufferings, being a great sharer in that affliction, which in the great Rebellion the Doctrine of resistance brought upon both the King and the Church. Anno 1596. he published his Solomon, or a Treatise declaring the shake of the Kingdom of Israel, 
pr. Lond.  as it was in the days of Solomon. Wherein he proves, after the words as it was in the days of Solomon, insert these following, that the Kingdom of Israel was a most true, and lively picture of the State and Crown,— one egg being not more like another, than the State to that, under which we live;— so that all his arguments without any further comment, are applicable to our Kingdom; and whereas he foresaw, 
‖ Ep. ad Lect.  that it would be objected to him, that he gives the Christian Magistrate, especially in great and absolute Monarchies greater authority, than seems to stand with the good of the Church, or the truth of God's Word,— he desires the Reader, not to attribute it to flattery, but to a constant and settled persuasion,— he intending in publishing the Treatise, the good and peaceable State of the Kingdom, and the maintaining of that powerful and majestical Authority, whereunto it hath pleased God to make us subject;— and in the discourse he affirms, 
† Sect. 2. p. 4, 5.  that Magistracy is not a mere device of Man, as they, who contemn, and labour to overthrow all Authority, speaking evil of those things, which they know not, have imagined; but an ordinance of God. Rom. 13. there is no power but of God, he therefore that resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God. Obj. But it cannot be showed, that it was ever established by God throughout the World (except only among the Jews) but was invented, and continued by Men excelling others in strength and ambition. Answ. The abuses of Magistracy, though many and grievous, 
p. 6.  cannot take away the lawful use of it;— and although Magistracy hath been by the express commandment of God established only in the Church, yet it belongs as much to Infidels; for it is instituted by God, not as he is the Saviour of his Church, but as he is the Creator, and Preserver of all Men. 
p. 7. — God sets up this his Ordiannce among Infidels by the light of nature remaining in the minds of Men, etc.— When the People set one over them, 
Sert. 4. p. 17.  reserving to themselves Authority, either to displace or control him, or if need be, to rise up in arms against him, and to lay violent hands upon him, they give unto him but improperly the name of a King.— Obj. 
Sert. 5. p. 18.  But was there no authority to restrain a King, if at any time he should be impious, or unjust in his Government,— otherwise the People might be miserably oppressed, Religion defaced, yea, all things turned upside down, and in the end the Commonwealth utterly overthrown. Wisdom, therefore, Reason, and Necessity, the Glory of God, and the good of Men required, that there should be in Israel, some Authority either in the People, Priest's, Senate, or inferior Magistrates against those Kings, who did degenerate into violent and bloody Tyrants. Answ. This reason hath carried many headlong in heat to condemn, and reject utterly these absolute Monarchies as Tyrannical and Barbarous, etc. but we ought not to suffer ourselves to be deceived by any appearance to judge that to be unlawful and profane, 
☞  which God, by establishing it in his Church, 
p. 19  hath showed to be holy and lawful,— the authority of a King over his People was no less than is the authority of a Father in his Family in respect of his Children; who, if he do injuriously entreat any of them,— or live any way disorderly, it is the duty of his Children, if not with silence to suffer it, yet with great modesty to admonish him of it; but if they should join together, and offer any violence unto him, especially if they should throw him out of his house, all Men would count them rebellious, and ungracious Children; 
☞  but if they should take his life from him, they were to be esteemed notoriously wicked, yea rather as Monsters, 
p. 20.  worthy to be abhorred of all Men:— no Subject of what place soever, no not the whole People jointly could lawfully use any violence against the King's Person, or proceed, and that the King might (though not lawfully in respect of the law of God, of Men, or of Nature, yet) safely, and freely in respect of his Subjects, 
p. 21.  do whatsoever pleased him, according as Jacob foretells Gen. 49.9.— the dealing of God himself doth prove the same, who when he purposed to preserve David against the fury of Saul, 
☞  would never suffer him to oppose Ceila, or any other of Saul's Cities against him, but made him fly first into the mountains and deserts, and afterward out of the land to the Philistines; yea David, although he were appointed by the express Word of God to succeed Saul in the Kingdom, yet he was so far from laying violent hands upon him, that his heart smote him, 1 Sam. 24.6. i e. his conscience did accuse him, that he had behaved himself disloyally against the King, in that he had offered violence to the King's Garment, because that was as a threatening of death unto him, and a great disgrace; yea further we do not read, that God did ever by any of his Prophets stir up his People to maintain his true worship by violence against the Kings, or ever reprove them, because they had suffered them to set up Idolatry, 
☞  which is an evident proof of this point; for if it had been lawful to resist in any case, then surely in the maintenance of the true worship of God, 
p. 22.  and of his Glory.— no Man, no company of Men could for any offence committed by the King, either against God or Man, the first or second Table, call him to account, summon him to appear in judgement, or use any manner of violence, either in word or deed against him:— To the Kings of Israel, neither the Kingdom was given, 
Sect. 6. p. 23. Sect. 7. p. 28.  nor the conditions imposed by Man, but by God, and therefore they could not forfeit their Kingdom to Man, but only to God;— but what was the behaviour of Loyal Subjects in such cases? the weapons, which God gave unto his People, wherewith to defend themselves against the Tyranny of their lawful Kings, were these. 1. wisdom, carefully to avoid all occasions of the King's anger and injury. 2. to avoid and decline from the violence, and injury itself by flying. 3. the third remedy, where the second is wanting, is patience to suffer with a quiet mind the violence or injustice of the King, which could not be by wisdom either prevented or avoided. 4. the last remedy is to appeal from the unjust Sentence of the King, not to any Man, or to any Court here on Earth, but to the King of Kings, even to God himself, whose ears are always open to hear those who are oppressed; this remedy is the last, and therefore not to be used, but in cases of greatest extremity, whenas the violence is too too grievous, shameful, and to Man's infirmity altogether intolerable; 
p. 29.  this means did Samuel commend unto the People; whereby they should ease themselves of those intolerable burdens of tributes, which their King would lay upon them. 1 Sam. 8.18. saying, than you being thus oppressed by your King, shall not rebel against him, but shall cry unto the Lord. Where it is added, that God will not hear them, when they cry, this is meant, that could not afterwards put down their Kings, neither be freed from their Tyranny.  
The same Reverend Prelate in his Encounter against Parsons, 
p. 187.  says diversity of Religion, changeth not the natural right of Inheritance; this ancient Doctrine the Protestants still follow, they still acknowledged Henry the fourth of France, when he revolted from them; but the Romanists would not admit him, while he professed himself a Protestant.  
And in his Causa Regia (his answer to Card. Bell. 
Lond. An. 1620. c. 1. §. 21. p. 26  book de Officio Principis Christiani) written by him, when he was Bishop of Coventry and Litchfield; he shows, how vain that compact (whether tacit or expressed) is whereby Kings, as Bell. says, stand bound to the Pope, so that by virtue thereof, whenever they turn Heretics, or would make their Subjects such, he may deprive them of their Kingdoms; and whereas the Cardinal cited that of our Holy Saviour, whosoever doth not hate father and mother, etc. is not worthy of me; he answers, 
☜  that only' signifies, that we ought not to obey our Parents in those things, which they command contrary to the true Faith; but by no means (what Bell. compact implies) to rob our Parents of their Possessions, 
c. 2. §. 9 p. 73, 74. — that Christ exercised his Priestly Office not actively in Deposing Princes, but passively, by giving his life, as became a good Shepherd, for his Sheep;— and when the Apostle armed St. Timothy, he gave him not a temporal Sword, to hurt any Man, but a Spiritual, to be exercised in suffering; for so he commands him, 2 Tim. 4.5. Watch thou in all things, endure afflictions.— 
† E Greg. Tolesano de rep. c. 7. §. 1●.  And for 300 years after Christ, though the Christians suffered innumerable, and most cruel torments (20000 being slain at one time) yet they never plotted against the Laws, the Magistrate, the Emperer, or his ●●enrity in the least degree; but by this argument they personaded Men to turn to Christianity, as to the best Religion, because it t●●k Men off from ambition, and a desire of change, and taught Men to obey Magistrates;— and accordingly (as Nicephorus relates) the Christian, that but pulled down the Edict of Dioclesian at Nicomedia, was looked upon by his fellow Christians to be justly executed for the Fact;— it therefore behoves Princes to consider, 
c. 2. Sect. 16. p 83.  in what a slippery place their Sacred Majesty stands, if this Principle of Deposing Princes, unheard of in the Church of Christ for 1000 years be true; and this he confirms by the authority of the Fathers, 
c. 6. Sect. 14. p 255.  especially St. Ambrose, who is famous for this saying against the Goths, My tears are my weapons, such are the defence of a Bishop, 
☞  any otherwise I dare not resist.  
Many other passages might be transcribed, were not what is already cited more than enough, since the Author's practice was so solemn, and unquestionable a confirmation of his Opinion, and his other Books (especially his discovery of Romish Rebellious Positions, with his full satisfaction against Parsons, etc.) a proof, that he never lived to repent of so truly Primitive, and Apostolical Doctrine.   

SECT. VI  
Mr. Greenham in his short form of Catechising. 
Lond. 1599 4 to p. 412, 413.414.  Qu. What do you understand by Father and Mother in the fifth Commandment? Answ. Not only my natural Parents, but those whom God hath set over me for my good, as Magistrates, etc. Qu. What be the duties of Servants toward their Masters? Answ. Servants ought in fear, and trembling to submit themselves to the instructions, commandments, and correction: of their Masters. Qu. What if Parents or Masters do not their duty to their Children and Servants? Answ. Yet they must obey them for Conscience sake to God's Ordinance. Qu. What if they command unjust things? Answ. Then they must obey God rather than Men, and submit themselves to their corrections.  
Archbishop Abbot An. 1600. published his Lectures on Ionas, 
Lon. 1600. lect. 20. p. 432.  and I shall only cite one Quotation out of him. Athanaric King of the Goths, seeing the triumph of the Emperor Justinian at Constantinople, broke forth into these words, The Emperor without doubt is a God upon Earth, and whosoever shall stir his hand against him, shall be guilty of his own blood.  
In the same year on March 1st. being the first Sunday in Lent, Dr. William Barlow, (afterwards Bishop of Rochester, 
Pr●at Lon. 1601.  and then of Lincoln,) Preached at Paul's Cross (a little time after the Execution of the Earl of Essex) on Matth. 22.21. and therein he well instructs us,— it pleaseth God to be called a King in Heaven. Ps. 20. and the King is called a God on Earth. Ps. 82. Therefore he which denieth his duty to the visible God, his Prince and Sovereign, cannot perform his duty to the God Invisible; certainly a mind inclined to Rebellion was never well possessed of Religion;— they therefore, who with Sheba, 2 Sam. 20.1. will make a secession from their Prince— or with Jeroboam, and the ten tribes will turn from him, because he hath turned his Father's scourges into Scorpions. 1 Reg. 12. They, who think, that they may either kill their Liege, or shall from him, or depose and thrust them out of their Seat, or expose them to danger or fear, are guilty not only of Rebellion, but of Irreligion,— the Jesuit Parson's al. Doleman dedicates his Book to the Earl of Essex (a Principal, if not the only poison of the Earl's heart) wherein he would prove, that it is lawful for the Subject to rise against his Sovereign, etc.— my exhortation to you is, beloved, that you will believe Jesus rather than a Jesuit, who willeth his Disciples, and all Christians to possess their Souls in patience. Luc. 10. albeit they be persecuted even to death by their Princes; and St. Paul, who adjudgeth him to damnation, who resisteth the ordinance of God. Rom. 13. If you desire some stories of Scripture; Saul an Apostate rejected by God, not dejected by Samuel: Jeroboam plagued, not dispossessed; Ahab reproved by Elias, not deprived; Nebuchadonosor punished from Heaven, not deposed by his Subjects; the Law of God is straight in this case, it bridles the mouth, that it speak not evil of the King. Exod. 21. It binds the heart, not to imagine evil against him. Eccl. 10.— the sum of this part is that of the Prophet Daniel 2.21. that the Inthroning and Deposing of Princes, is God's only Prerogative Royal; and the conclusion shall be an argument, that if obedience be due unto Caesar, a Tyrant, and a Foreigner; much more are we to perform it to our Prince, etc.   

SECT. VII.  
Thus also says Francis Marbury in his Sermon on Eccl. 10.20. 
〈◊〉 1602.  at the Spittle on Tuesday in Easter Week, Printed by authority; the Principal question of this Chapter— is that Subjects that are Godly wise, aught to repress in themselves all insurrection of mind against the supposed scandals of civil administrations, and against the do of Princes, and that a disloyal thought ought not to be lent thereunto,— it being insinuated by an evil subject, that it is impossible to stand contented in a Government, that perverts and inverts the use of preferments and abasements, aiming perhaps at something done by Solomon in his uxoriousness, at the instigation of his Idolatrous Wives;— and that the state of the Country is depraved by the riotousness and dissoluteness of the Governors,— but God gives us no dispensation for any cause to disreverence the Prince, 
☞  except that we be able to show, that we do it at God's Commandment,— the Men of God, when they have by mistaking exceeded towards a Ruler (though a wicked one) have used diligence to excuse themselves, and to avoid the scandal; so St. Paul, Act. 23 5. and David was cut in his heart, because he had cut off the lap, that was in Saul 's Garment; 
☞  so that if to refuse God be ungodliness, than it must needs be so to admit a contemptuous thought of a Prince, in whom God offereth himself unto us— and it is sure, that they are ungodly Men, 
1 Sam. 10.27.  which offend in this kind, that the Holy Ghost calleth them Sons of Belial, i. e. unyoked Persons, which refuse to be under the yoke of due obedience,— as for the allegation made by Heretics of Conscience to God, when no disobedience to God is required, it is in great Hypocrisy that God is alleged; for are they not put together in the Scripture, fear God, and the King, and departed from the seditious, or as the Text hath it, from the various, from those that divide these duties so, as if they could not consist together; and did not both Peter and Paul require so much, when Kings were Enemies of the truth, and of the Salvation of their Subjects? Verily when Men make their excuse by God in this they tell a lie for the Almighty, as Job says in another matter, for that which is Caesar 's may be given to Caesar, without the least breach of allegiance to Almighty God; and it is most true, that chrysostom saith on the 13th to the Romans, subjection to Princes overturneth not Religion; a point belike, that in those days stood in need stall, and successively to be urged; for the Greek Scholiast, likewise in his Collect on the same place to the Romans, hath it near word for word; and he saith after, that St. Paul taketh great care to urge it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every where; neither was this (as Jerome supposeth) by reason of the continuance of any old Heresy, but because St. Paul saw, that this sin would universally, and successively assail;— and therefore as Men hinder the work of godliness in themselves, they must keep tenderly in the reins of their consciences the reverence of their Prince.— Whosoever doth vilipend his Sovereign in his conscience, is either an Atheist, or a Hypocrite;— the causes of Sedition and Rebellion are. 1. Pride,— there are, that go under the name of resolute, that give occasion to upbraid the Land, as Ezekiel upbraided Jerusalem, there are in thee that have despised father and mother, 
Ez. 22 7.  that speak scornfully both of Queen and Council. 2. Lack of Wisdom in not discerning the policies of Princes. 3. lack of compassion in not weighing their temptations, and their necessities. 4. lack of equity, when the Subject blames his Prince for his own fault. Lastly, forgetfulness of their benefits, which is unthankfulness,— in my Text the Lord threatens the depravers of Kings and Magistrates, the foul of the Heaven shall carry the voice, etc.— this notes the heinousness of the Sin; for the Holy Ghost is not wont to bewray Men for trifles— and is strong evidence, that the maligning of Higher Powers is in the Catalogue of those sins, which, though they escape Man, yet the vengeance of God doth pursue, and as it were bring back again to the judgement seat; it matters not, what plausible shows there be to do such things, for the event discovers, that they are but shows. Absalon seemed to have a just quarrel against Amnon for lying with his Sister, especially his pernicious impunity considered by reason of David 's indulgence, but Absalon 's matter was not Amnon 's incest, but Amnon 's Seniority; he was betwixt Him and the Crown, for the Event declared, what an hater of incest Absalon was by his behaviour to his Father's Concubines; and the Lord discovered by his Insurrection against his Father, that it was ambition, that made him to kill his Brother.  
Dr. John Dove in his Sermon about divorcement at Paul's Cross 1601. says, that some Men will prove Rebellion, and High Treason out of the Scriptures, that the People are above the King, and citys in the Margin, Vindiciae contra Tyrannos.    

CHAP. V The History of Passive Obedience during the Reign of King James.  

SECT. I.  
WHEN God of his great mercy had taken to himself our illustrious Queen Elizabeth in the beginning of the Year 1603. her undoubted Successor King James published the same Year a little, but accurate Treatise entitled, The true Laws of free Monarchies, which is an exact Comment on 1 Sam. 8.11, etc. where Samuel shows the Israelites, what would be the manner of the King that should reign over them, that if he made their freeborn Children Bondmen, vers. 11, etc. and seized their Estates by Injustice and Violence, vers. 14, etc. they should be allowed no other remedy in that day of their Calamity, but to cry unto the Lord, vers. 18. and to punish them for their Contempt of his immediate Conduct, God threatens he will not hear them. In this Book, says the learned John Forbes, 
Duplies to Henderson. p. 20.  he doth at length demonstrate, That in a free Monarchy (such as he proveth his Kingdom of Scotland to be) the Subjects for no occasion, or pretext whatsoever may take Arms, without power from the King, and much less against him, whether he be a good King or an Oppressor, etc.— and comprehendeth the sum of all his Discourse concerning this matter, in these words following: Shortly then to take up in two or three Sentences, grounded upon all these Arguments, out of the Law of God, the Duty and Allegiance of the People to their lawful King: Their Obedience, I say, aught to be to him, as to God's Lieutenant on Earth, obeying his Commands in all things, except directly against God, as the Commands of God's Minister; acknowledging him a Judge set by God over them, having power to judge them, but to be judged only by God, to whom only he must give account of his Judgement; fearing him as their Judge, loving him as their Father, praying for him as their Protector; for his continuance, if he be good; for his amendment, if he be wicked; following and obeying his lawful Commands; eschewing and fleeing his Fury in his unlawful, without resistance, 
☞  but by Sobs and Tears to God; according to that sentence used in the Primitive Church in the time of the Persecution: Preces & lacrymae sunt arma Ecclesiae; i. e. Prayers and Tears are the Arms of the Church. And the Book itself speaks out, The Wickedness of the King can never make them, that are ordained to be judged by him, to become his Judges: And if it be not lawful to a private man to revenge his private Injury upon his private Adversary (since God hath only given the Sword to the Magistrate) how much less is it lawful to the People, or any part of them (who all are but private men) to take upon them the use of the Sword, whom to it belongeth not, against the public Magistrate, whom to only it belongeth.  
But should I transcribe every Passage out of that accurate little Treatise, I should swell this Volume, and tyre the Reader, whom I therefore refer for his further satisfaction to the Work itself, in which, and his other Works, the King hath shown himself as a learned man styles him, A Pillar of the Church; 
Oweni Antipar. Pag. 117, 118.  a Support to a ruinous Commonwealth; a brave Champion of Christ against Antichrist, and the new Arians; an invincible Defender of Kings against the Papal Tyranny, the Impostures of the Cardinals, and the Seditions of the Puritans; the Restorer of the Episcopal Dignity, and the Defender of it against Presbyterian Anarchy, the Defender of the Catholic Faith, and the truly peaceable King.  
R. Doleman, i. e. Parson's having published his Conference concerning the Succession to the Crown of England, Ann. 1594. (a Book from whence most of our modern Enemies of the true Rights of Princes have borrowed both their Arguments and Authorities) Sir John Hayward, Ann. 1603. sets out his Answer to the first part of that Conference (which was reprinted Ann. 1683. for the satisfaction of the zealous Promoters of the Bill of Exclusion): The Book was written, as himself in his Dedicatory Epistle tells the King, in Defence of the Authority of Princes, and of Succession according to proximity of Blood; and to maintain, that the People have no lawful Power to remove the one, or repel the other.  
The Jesuits main Argument is, 
Hay● p●●. 1. Ed 〈◊〉 and p 3●●  that Succession to Government by nearness of Blood, is not by Law of Nature, or Divine, but by the humane and positive Laws of any Commonwealth, and consequently, that it may upon just Causes be altered by the same, changing the fashion of Government, and limiting the same with what Conditions they please. But the learned Civilian confutes the Opinion with much Reason, 
Pag. 6.  and many very pertinent Authorities; he grants, That it is inconvenient to be governed by a King, who is defective in Body or Mind; but it is a greater inconvenience by making a Breach in this high point of State, to open an Entrance for all Disorders, wherein Ambition and Insolency may range at large.— When S. Peter terms Kings a Human Creature, 
c. 2. p. 39, 40, etc.  1 Pet. 2. he means not as you interpret, a thing created by man— Is a brutish Creature to be taken for a thing created by a Beast?— If so, than all Creatures should be called Divine, because they were created by God, to whom it was proper to create.— And S. Paul says, Rom. 13. That all Authority is the Ordinance and Institution of God.— It is evident, that in the first heroical Ages, the People were not governed by any positive Laws, but their Kings did both judge and command by their Word, by their Will, by their absolute Power,— without any restraint, or direction, but only of the law of Nature;— and when it grew troublesome and tedious for all the People to receive their Right from one man, Laws were invented, as Cicero saith,— and when any People were subdued by Arms, Laws were laid like Logs upon their Necks, to keep them in more sure Subjection.— Parliaments in all places have been erected by Kings;— so that neither Laws nor Parliaments were assigned by the People for assistance and direction to their Kings.— We must judge Facts by Law, and not Law by Facts, or Example, which Alciat and Deciane do term a Golden Law, because there is no Action either so impious or absurd, which may not be paralleled by Examples. 
Pag. 46.  I never heard of Christian Prince, who challenged infinite Authority without limitation of any Law, either Natural or Divine; but where you term it an absurd Paradox, that the People should not have power to chasten their Prince, and upon just Considerations to remove him, I am content to join with you upon the Issue: 
Pag. 47. — Had you no Text of Scripture? no Father of the Church? no Law? no Reason to allege?— Do not the Apostles (1 Pet. 2.10, 13. Judas 8. Rom. 13. Tit. 3.1. 1 Tim. 2.1.) oblige us to pray for and obey Kings? But perhaps you will say, that the Apostles did not mean this of wicked Princes; the Apostle speaks generally of all. S. Peter 1.2.18. makes express mention of evil Lords: And what Princes have ever been more either irreligious or tyrannical, than Caligula, Tiberius, Nero, the Infamy of their Ages, under whose Empire the Apostles did both live, 
Pag. 50, 51.  and write?— I will give you an Example of another time, Nabuchadnezzar King of Assyria, wasted all Palestina, took Jerusalem, slew the King, burned the Temple, took away the holy Vessels and Treasure; the residue he permitted to the Cruelty and Spoil of his unmerciful Soldiers, who defiled all places with Rape, Ruin, and Blood. After the glut of this Butchery, the People which remained, he led Captive into Chaldea, and there commanded, 
☜  that whosoever refused to worship his Golden Image, should be cast into a fiery Furnace: What Cruelty, what Impiety is comparable to this? And yet the Prophets Jeremy (c. 29.7.) and Baruch (c. 1.11.) did write to those captive Jews, to pray for the Prosperity and Life of him and Baltasar his Son, that their days might be upon Earth, as the days of Heaven: And Ezekiel (c. 17.) both blames, and threatens Zedekiah for his Disloyalty in revolting from Nabuchadnezzar, whose Homager and Tributary he was: What Answer will you make to this Example?— Princes are the immediate Ministers of God, and therefore he calls Nabuchadnezzar his Servant; and the Prophet Esay calls Cyrus, a profane and heathen King, the Lords Anointed:— In regard hereof David calls them Gods: And if they do abuse their Power, 
☜  they are not to be judged by their Subjects, as being both inferior, and naked of Authority; because all Jurisdiction within their Realm is derived from them, which their presence only doth silence and suspend: But God reserveth them to the sorest Trial; horribly and suddenly (saith the Wise man) will the Lord appear unto them, and a hard Judgement shall they have. 
Pag. 52. — If he commandeth those things that are lawful, we must manifest our Obedience by ready performing: If he enjoin us those Actions that are evil, we must show our Subjection by patiented enduring: It is God only who setteth Kings in their State; it is he only who may remove them. 2 Chron. 1. Prov. 28.2. 2 Chron. 28.6.— And therefore we endure with patience unseasonable Wether, unfruitful Years, and other like Punishments of God; so must we tolerate the imperfection of Princes, and quietly expect either Reformation, or else a Change: This was the Doctrine of the Ancient Christians, 
Pag. 53.  even against their most mortal Persecutors.— In a word, the current of the Ancient Fathers is in this Point concurrent; insomuch as among them all there is not one found (not any one; one is a small Number, and yet I say confidently again, there is not any one) who hath let fall so soose a Speech, as may be strained to a contrary sense: How then are you of late become both so active and resolute to cut in sunder the Reins of Obedience, the very Sinews of Government and Order? 
Pag. 54. — Neither was the Devil ever able, until in late declining times, to possess the Hearts of Christians with these cursed Opinions, which do evermore beget a world of Murders, Rapes, Ruins, and Desolations: For tell me, What if the Prince, whom you persuade the People you have power to depose, be able to make and maintain his Party?— What if other Princes, whom it doth concern, as well in Honour, to see the Law of Nations observed, as also in policy, to break those Proceed, which may form Precedents against themselves, do adjoin to the side? What if, whilst the Prince, and the People are (as was the Frog and the Mouse) in the heat of their Encounter, some other Potentate play the Kite with them both, as the Turks did with the Hungarians? 
c. 3. p. 57, etc. — That Princes may be chastised by their Subjects, your Proofs are Two; one is drawn from certain Examples; the other from the good Success and Successors, which usually have followed.— Slender Threads to draw any Man to your Opinion.— There is no Villainy so vile, which wants Example;— and by the secret, yet just Judgement of God, divers evil Actions are carried with appearance of good success. 
Pag. 61. — When Saul persecuted David, he defended himself no otherwise than by flight: During this pursuit, Saul fell twice into his power; once he did not only spare, but protect him; the other time his Heart did smite him, for that he had cut away the Lap of his Garment; lastly, he caused the Messenger to be slain, who upon request, and for pity, had furthered (as he said) the Death of that sacred King. We have a Precept of Obedience, which is the Mould wherein we ought to fashion our Actions. God only is superior to Princes, who useth many Instruments in the execution of his Justice; but his Authority he hath committed unto none. 
Pag. 68  The Examples of Suintilla, and other Gothick Kings in Spain is answered, by saying, that the Kingdom was not then settled in Succession. And then he shows the illegality of the Proceed against King John, 
Pag. 72, 73, 74, 75.  Edw. 2. and Rich. 2. and adds, Three Causes are commonly insinuated by you, for which a King may be deposed, Tyranny, Insufficiency, and Impiety: But what Prince could hold his State, what People their Quiet assured, if this your Doctrine should take place? How many good Princes doth Envy brand with one of these Marks? What Action of State can be so ordered, that either blind Ignorance, or set Malice will not easily strain to one of these Heads? Every execution of Justice, every demand of Tribute, or Supply shall be claimed Tyranny: Every unfortunate Event shall be exclaimed Insufficiency: Every kind of Religion shall by them of another Sect be proclaimed Impiety.— But are not Princes subject to Law, 
C 4. p. 81, 82, etc.  and Order? Answ. I will not deny, but there is a Duty for Princes to perform; but how prove you, that their Subjects have power to depose them, if they fail?— The people may so give away their Authority, that they cannot resume it, and few Princes in the World hold their Estates by Grant of the people.— If the Prince hath no power, but by Commission from the People, than all Estates are popular.— Our Laws do acknowledge supreme Authority in the Prince within the Realm and Dominions of England; neither can Subjects bear themselves either superior, 
1 El. 1.  or equal to their Sovereign, or attempt violence either against his Person, or Estate.— No Prince is Sovereign, 
C. 5. p. 92.  who acknow ledgeth himself either subject, or accountable to any but to God.— Did David bear Arms against his Anointed King? 
☜  Did he ever lift up his Eye lids against him? Did he ever so much as defend himself otherwise than by flight?— What then shall we say unto you, who, to set up Sedition and Tumult, abuse all Divine and Human Writings in whatsoever you believe will advance your purpose? who spend some Speech of Respect unto Kings for Allurement only, to draw us more deep into your deceit? etc.— The Coronation Oath is only a free, 
P. 102.  Royal Promise to discharge that Duty which God doth impose— The Prophets, 
P. 105.  the Apostles, Christ himself hath taught us to be obedient to Princes, 
☜  though both Tyrants and Infidels. This aught to stand with us for a thousand Reasons, to submit ourselves to such Kings, as it pleaseth God to send unto us, without either judging or examining their Qualities: their Hearts are in God's Hand, they do his Service, sometimes in preserving, sometimes in punishing us.— If they abuse any part of their power,— let them assuredly expect, that God will dart his vengeance against them with a most stiff and dreadful Arm. In the mean season we must not oppose ourselves otherwise, than by humble Suits and Prayers, acknowledging that those Evils are always just for us to suffer, which are many times unjust for them to do.— If we break into disorder, we resemble the Giants, who sealed the Skies. 
C. 6. 116, 117. — It was alleged in behalf of some Cities in France, that they were not Rebels, because they had not professed Allegiance unto Henry the Fourth: but the chiefest Lawyers of our Age did resolve, that forasmuch as they were original Subjects, even Subjects by Birth, they were Rebels in bearing Arms against their King, although they had never professed Allegiance.— But the admission of the people (say you) hath often prevailed against Right of Succession. 
☞  So have Pirates against Merchants, so have Mutherers and Thiefs against true meaning Travellers. 
Chap. 8 p. 146, 147. — But may not a man trespass on such Laws for the good of the Realm? Answ. What Conscience can any men have in defiling their Faith? Such Consciences you endeavour to frame in all men, 
P. 156, 157.  to break an Oath with as great facility, as a Squirrel can crack a Nut.— In what a miserable condition should Princes live, if their State depended upon the pleasures of the people, in whom, company takes away shame, and every man may lay fault on his Fellow? How could they command? 
P. 164.  Who would obey?— c.— It seems strange to reason to plant Religion under the Obedience of Kings, not only careless thereof, but cruel against it. But when we consider, that the Jews did commonly forsake God in prosperity, and seek him in distress; that the Church of Christ was more pure, more zealous, more entire, I might also say, more populous, when she traveled with the storm in her face, than when the wind was either prosperous or calm.— We may learn thereby, no further to examine, but to admire, and embrace the unsearchable Wisdom and Will of God. 
P. 170. etc. — God hath taught by the Apostle S. Paul, that whosoever resists the higher powers (which at that time were Infidels) receive unto themselves damnation. 
☞  You teach, that whosoever doth not in the like case resist, doth damnably offend; were not the Spirit of Division, otherwise called the Devil, seated in your Soul, you would not thus openly oppose the Settling of your rotten Brain, against the express and direct Sentence of God.— The Apostle teacheth us to be obedient to higher powers for conscience sake, and not for any private respect. 
P. 173, etc. — You, whose Office is to pray, to instruct Men in pure Devotion, to settle their Souls in piety and peace,— you take upon you the Policies of State, you read and deface the Reputation of Kings, you make yourselves both Judges and Moderators of all their Actions, allowing them to fly no further, than you give them Wings. You dispose not only their Affairs, but their Crowns at your pleasure; you hunt them not to covert, but to death.— You train up your Followers in the high mystery of Treason.— To these ends you wrist Scriptures, you corrupt Histories, you counterfeit Reasons, you corrupt all Truth.— And all, you say, is directed to a holy and religious end. Away then with your Devotion, and so we shall be rid of your dangerous Deceit.  
This was his Opinion in the Days of King James; nor was it newly taken up to comply with that Prince: for, 
Ep. Dod. ante Answ. to Doleman.  as Sir John Heyward himself informs us, he wrote his Account of the Deposition of King Richard the Second, and the Usurpation of King Henry the Fourth, to show, that the People have no lawful power to resist their Prince, nor to hinder the Succession according to Proximity of Blood.   

SECT. II.  
On S. James' day, being July 25, of the same year, was this Learned Prince crowned, 
Pr. London. 1604  the Sermon on that Solemnity being Preached by Dr. Bilson, Bishop of Winchester, on Rom. xiao. 1. The powers that are, are ordained of God. In which we are told; That the likeness, which Princes have with the Kingdom of God, and of Christ, consists in the Society of the Names and Signs which they have common with Christ; in the Sufficiency of the Spirit, wherewith God endueth them; in the Sanctity of their Persons, which may not be violated; in the Sovereignty of their Power, which must not be resisted. 
☜ — By the anointing of King's God hath taught us, that their persons, once dedicated to his Service, are, not only protected by his stretched-out Arm, but are, and aught to be sacred, and secured from the violence and injury of all men's hands, mouths and hearts; Touch not mine anointed, 
P. 105.  saith God by his Prophet, which is chief verified of Princes, whom God anointeth to be the chiefest of his People.— Neither is violence only prohibited towards them, but all offence in speech, or thought.— Yea, the very Robes, which they wear, are sanctified.— The Sovereignty of their Power will soon appear, as well by the persons subjected, as by the things committed to their Charge, Let every soul be subject, etc. He that brings an Exception, useth but a Delusion, says Bernard, for who can lose what God hath bound; neither is this an Exhortation to Obedience, but a plain Injunction. You must needs be subject, etc. You must imports a necessity; for conscience, declares a Duty to God; the danger of resisting being as great as the Commandment of obeying is straight. Whosoever resists, resists the ordinance of God; and they, that resist, shall receive to themselves judgement. 
☜  Dare any man promise himself success, and protection in Conspiracy and Treason, when the Spirit of God so plainly threatens ruin, and condemnation to all that resist, whosoever they be.— To maintain Peace and Tranquillity, God hath allowed King's power over the Goods, Lands, Bodies and Lives of their Subjects: and what private men may not touch without theft and murder, that Princes may lawfully dispose, as God's Ministers, taking vengeance on them that do evil. 
☞ — He that resisteth and dishonoureth them, resisteth and dishonoureth the Ordinance of God, to his own confusion in this life, where Princes are permitted to revenge the wrongs done to them; and in the next, where God everlastingly punisheth the contempt of his Ordinance.— What kind of Honour is due to Princes, is shortly delivered in that Commandment, Honour thy Father. 
Rom xiii. 1. — The Apostle in this place nameth three things due to Princely Dignity, Subjection, Honour and Tribute; teaching us, that Princes must be obeyed with Conscience, Reverence and Recompense.— It is therefore sin to despise, or refuse their Laws, commanding that which is good, and likewise to resist, or reproach their Power, punishing that which is evil even in ourselves.— Howbeit when Princes cease to command for God, or bend their Swords against God, whose Ministers they are, we must reverence their Power, 
☞  but refuse their Wills. It is no resistance to obey the greater before the lesser, neither hath any man cause to be offended, when God is preferred. Yet must we not reject their Yoke with violence, but rather endure their Swords with patience, that God may be Judge between Prince and People, with whom is no unrighteousness nor respect of persons.— The man of sin hath not more grossly betrayed his pride, and rage in any thing, than in abasing the Honour, and abusing the Power, and impugning the Right of Princes, by deposing them from their Seats, and translating their Kingdoms to others, by absolving their Subjects from all Allegiance, and giving them leave to rebel, by setting his Feet in Emperor's Necks, and spurning off their Crowns with his Shoe, etc. In all which he hath showed himself like himself, to yoke whom God hath freed, and to free whom God hath yoked; to deject whom God hath exalted, and to erect whom God hath humbled; to challenge what God hath reserved, and to cross what God hath commanded.  
And whatever Citations may be made out of this Learned Prelate's Book, Of the true Difference, etc. Printed at Oxford 1585., in Quarto, and the next year at London in Octavo, to prove the contrary Yenet, the Quoters, and some of them, I fear, wilfully mistaking what he says of such Republics and States, in which upon the Invasion of Sabjects' Privileges they are allowed by fundamental, written, known Compact (as in Germany by the Bulla Aurea) to resist, as if it were applicable to free Monarchies, and particularly to England, contrary to his own express Assertion; 
* P. 518, 519, etc. where be proves it at large.  That the Subjects in England have not that lawful Warrant to draw their Sword without consent of their Prince, as the Germans have, without consent of the Emperor. He also teaches us our Duty, agreeable to the holy Scriptures, and primitive Antiquity in many places of that Book. 
† P. 339, etc.  What Question can this be between the Prince and the People, whether the Magistrate shall be deposed? since God hath expressly commanded the People to be subject to the Sword, and not to resist. Against which Precept no earthly Court may deliberate, 
☜  much less determine to break his Law, or licence the People to frust are his Heavenly Will.— It is one thing to disbud then the Conscience from obeying the Evil which a Prince commandeth, which a Priest may do, and another thing to take the Prince's Sword out of his hand for abusing his Authority, which the Priest may not do.— Manasses was carried Captive out of his Realm in the midst of his furious Idolatry; and yet in his absence and misery no man stirred against him, but his Kingdom was reserved for him, until he was released out of Prison, and sent back from Babylon. It was therefore not for fear of Death, but for regard of Duty, that the zealous Priests and Prophets submitted their persons to those wicked Princes, whose Idolatry they reproved with the loss of their lives.— 
P. 359.  If the Prince wilfully maintain Heresy and open Impiety, the Bishops are to reprove, admonish, etc. but still they must serve him, honour him, pray for him, and teach the People to do the like; 
☜  and with meekness enduring what the wrath of the Prince shall lay upon them, without annoying his person, resisting his power, discharging his Subjects, or removing him from his Throne. Which, says he to the Jesuit) is your way of censuring Princes. 
P. 366. P. 382. — The Church of Christ offers not any Example of resisting and deposing Princes for a thousand years. 
☜ — It is not enough for you, to have Laws of your own making to licence you to bear Arms against your Prince, you must have God's Law for your Warrant, or else you may come within the compass of heinous and horrible Rebellion.— Theoph. 
P. 384.  (that is the Protestant Interlocutor) That's the Case, which you take in hand, that the People may punish the Prince offending, as the Prince may the People. Phil. (i e. the Jesuit.) Either the people, or none must do it. Theoph. And seeing the people may not do it, it is evident, that God hath reserved the Magistrate to be punished by himself, and not given the people power over their Prince. 
P. 502. — Do not with violence restrain them, but in patience possess your own souls. This is the way for all Christian Subjects to conquer Tyrants, and this is the Remedy provided in the New Testament against all Persecutions, not to resist Powers, which God has ordained, lest we be damned; but with all meekness to suffer, that we may be crowned. 
P. 512. — If Princess presume to violate the Dominion, which God hath reserved to himself, we may not rebel, (that's your Jesuitical Doctrine) but disobey them in that, or any point, that is prescribed by man against the will of God, and submit ourselves to endure persecution for righteousness sake. 
P. 541. — If Princess embrace the Truth, you must obey them; if they pursue Truth, you must abide them.  
And these Passages, with what hath been formerly cited out of the said Book, will, I think, sufficiently vindicate both the Author and his Doctrine, from all that is usually objected against them. Especially if we consider, that when the Jesuit had quoted Goodman's Book of Obedience, as applauding Wyat's Rebellion, the Protestant answers,  
It is much that you measure the whole Realm by one man's merit; 
Par. 3. p. 273 274.  and more, that you draw the words, which he spoke, from the meaning which he had, to warrant your Rebellions. The party, 
☞  which you name, at the same time took Queen Mary for no lawful Prince, which particular and false supposal beguiled him, and made him think the better of Wyat's War; but our Question is of lawful Princes, not of violent Intruders, and therefore Goodman's Opinion, which himself hath long since disliked, is no way serviceable to your Seditions; or as it is in the Margin, Goodman's private Opinion, long since corrected by himself, cannot prejudice the whole Realm. Goodman did not hold, that lawful Princes might be thrust from their Crowns, but that Queen Mary was no lawful Magistrate.  
One of his great Arguments against her, being taken from her Sex, which was made by God, as he dreamt, uncapable of Government; this being one of his, and Knox's beloved Paradoxes: but he lived to repent and retract them.   

SECT. III.  
To give the King at his entry into England, a Specimen of the temper of the Zealots, they tendered him a Petition called the Mille manus Petition (as if they would have intermixed their desires with threaten) by telling the King, that 1000 Ministers, 
An. 1603.  (as they loved to be called) had influence enough on many thousands of People, to incline them to give disturbance to his Government, (if he did not comply with their requests) to which the University of Oxford wrote a full and satisfactory answer; wherein they affirm, that the Presbyterians allow the King, not potestatem Juris, 
p. 29.  but only facti, while they make him a maintainer of their proceed, but no commander in them; and all the while the King submits his Sceptre unto the Sceptre of Christ, and licks the dust of the Church's feet (for which they Quote T. C. lib. 1. p. 180.) This assertion they condemn together with the other Antimonarchical, Antiepiscopal Doctrines of that Petition; nor was this the sole judgement of that Famous University, but of her Famous Sister at Cambridge, whose Epistle is published at the end of that answer, and wherein they aver, Quicunque Ecclesiae Anglicanae doctrinam, vel disciplinam, vel ejus partem aliquam legibus publicis stabilitam, etc. that whosoever shall by writing, speaking, or any other way publicly oppose the Doctrine, or Discipline of the Church of England, or any part thereof established by public Laws, shall be uncapable of taking any Degree, and suspended from any Degrees he hath formerly taken. Dated Octob. 7. 1603.  
Dr. Anthony Rudd Bishop of St. 
pr. at Lond. 1604.  David's Preached before the King May 13. 1604. on Ps. 101. v. 2. and in it gives an account of David's demeanour both before, and after he attained the Crown of Israel; and among other things, he commends him for his patiented waiting on God till Saul's Death; 
p. 26, 27.  David had given proof of his rare patience in his distressed Estate, during the expectance of the Kingdom of Israel; for though in that Interim of sundry years attendance after that Samuel had Anointed him, 
☜  before the Crown fell unto him by the death of King Saul, he sustained many grievous troubles, inconveniences, and dangers; yet he still possessed his Soul in patience without seeking unlawful means to hasten his own advancement, by the making away of his Sovereign. Insomuch as though Saul, who deadly pursued him, was twice by the Providence of God offered into his hands, that he might have d●ne his pleasure with him, first in the Wilderness of Engedi, and secondly in the desert of Z●ph, yet he spared his life, and did no violence to his Person, leaving him to God's Judgement, and referring his own cause to God's merciful providence, patiently attending the Lord's leisure, till he should vouchsafe to come, and put him in possession of the Kingdom.  
To King James at his first coming to the English Throne, the Learned Dr. Feild was a Chaplain, as he was also an eminent Champion for the Church against her adversaries of Rome; and his arguments against the Usurpations of the Popes are equally cogent against the Republicans. 
* of the Church l. 5. c 45. p. 610.  If they shall say, that Sovereign Princes are subject to none, while they use their authority well; but that if they abuse it, they lose the independent absoluteness thereof, their saying will be found to be Heretical; 
☜  for if upon abuse of mdependent Authority, they that have it, lose and forfeit it ipso facto, then authority, and abuse of authority, at least extreme abuse of it, cannot stand together; which is contrary to that of St. Augustine, where he saith, nee tyrannicae factionis perversitas laudabilis erit, 
de bono consugali c. 14.  si regiâ clement●● tyrannus subditos tractet, nec vituperabilis ordo regiae potestatis, si rex crudelitate tyrannicâ saeviat; aliud est namque injustâ porestate justè velle uti, & aliud est justâ potestate injustè velle uti. i e. ●●ther shall the perverseness of Tyrannical Usurpation ever be praise worthy, 
☞  though the Tyrant use his Subjects with all Kingly clemency; nor the order of Kingly Power be ever subject to just reprehension, though a King grow fierce and cruel like a Tyrant; for it is one thing to use an unlawful Power lawfully; and another thing to use a lawful Power unrighteously, and unjustly.   

SECT. iv  
After the happy discovery of the damnable Gunpowder Treason, and the just execution of the wretched miscreants, that were engaged in it; the Parliament met at Westminster, which had been first summoned Anno 1603. and with it a Convocation; the Members of which reslecting upon the horrid design of Garnet, and his Accomplices, thought themselves in justice to their Sovereign, and their own Principles obliged, when they met, to censure and condemn such Doctrines, as led Men to such Rebellious Practices; hereupon the Prolocutor of the lower house, Dr. Overall (than Dean of St. Paul's, afterwards Bishop of Coventry and Litchfield, then of Norwich (whose vast learning gives him a character beyond all, that can be said of him here) drew up a Treatise, which being reviewed by the Upper House of Convocation, was mutually agreed on, and declared to be the Sense of the Church of England in that very Sunod, which made the Canons, that as yet are looked upon as the Code of our Church; a Manuscript of which Acts, 
This Book is since Printed by W. Kettilby an. 1690. lib. 1. c. 2.  and Canons having been happily put into my hands, I cannot but think myself obliged to transcribe some Passages, that discover the belief of our Church representative at that time.  
They positively assert; that God having created our first Parents, and purposing to multiply their seed into many Generations, for the replenishing of the World with their Posterity, did give to Adam for his time, and to the rest of the Patriarches, and chief Fathers successively before the Flood, Authority, Power, and Dominion over their Children, and Offspring to Rule, and Govern them;— adding further, 
Can. 2.  if any Man shall affirm, that Men at the first without all good Edacation or civility ran up and down in Woods and Fields, as wild creatures, resting themselves in Caves and Dens, and acknowledging no Superiority one over another, until they were taught by experience the necessity of Government; and that thereupon, they chose some among themselves to order and rule the rest, giving them power and authority so to do; and that consequently all civil Power, Jurisdiction, and Authority was first derived from the People, and disordered Multitude; or either is originally still in them, or else is deduced by their consents naturally from them, and is not God's Ordinance originally descending from him, and depending upon him, he doth greatly err.  
Thus they account for the Government of the old World; nor did the Flood alter the nature of Authority, or alienate the Rights of Princes; for say they, If any Man shall affirm, 
Can. 6.11.  that the civil Power and Authority, which Noah had before the Flood, was by the deluge determined, or that it was given unto him again by his Sons or Nephews; or that he received from them the Sword of his Sovereignty; or that the distribution of the World to his three Some, did depend upon their consents; or received from them any such authority, as without the same it could not lawfully have been made;— or that this Power, etc. did not proceed from God, or were not properly his Ordinance, but that they had the same from the People, their Offspring; he doth greatly err.  
Besides, it is generally agreed upon, 
cap. 16.  that obedience to Kings and Civil Magistrates, is prescribed to all Subjects in the 5th Commandment. Ex 20.12. where we are enjoined to Honour our Parents; whereby it follows, that subjection of Inferiors unto their Kings and Governors, is founded upon the very law of Nature; and consequently that the sentence of Death awarded by God himself against such, as shown themselves incorrigibly disobedient to their Parents, or cursed them, or struck them, was likewise due unto those, who committed any such offences against their Kings, and Rulers, being the Heads and Fathers of their Commonwealths and Kingdoms; which is not only apparent by way of consequence, but likewise by example, practice, and precept; as where Shimei is judged to die for cursing of David the Lords Anointed; where David himself, appointed by God to succeed King Saul, would not be induced by any persuasions to lay violent hands upon his Master the King. If any Man therefore shall affirm, 
C●n. 16.  that it was lawful in the Old Testament, either for Children or Nephews, to have been disobedient to their Fathers, being their chief Govern●rs from the Creation till Moses 's time or afterward, either for the Children of Israel, either under Moses, Joshua, the Judges, or their Kings to have been disobedient to them in their lawful commandments, or to have murmured or rebelled against them; or that it was in those times more lawful unto Subjects for any cause whatsoever, either to curse their Princes, Kings, or civil Governors, 
☞  or to bear arms against them, or to depose them from their Kingdoms, or Principalities, or to lay violent hands upon their Persons, than it was in the said times lawful upon any occasion for Children, either to have cursed their Parents, or to have rebelled against them, when they did reprove or correct them, or to have withdrawn themselves from their subjection, saying unto them (they being private Men) we will be no more your Children, or you shall be no more our Fathers; or (bearing civil authority over them) we will depose you from your Government over us, and will be no longer ruled by you; or to have offered any violence to them, or to have beaten them, and much less to have murdered them, he d●th greatly err.  
After this, they deduce the Scheme of Paternal and Regal Government, through the several Ages of the Church, down to the time of the Jewish Kings; and, when they considered the case of Uzziah, who for offering to burn Incense on the Altar (which was peculiarly the Priest's Office) was by God smitten with leprosy, 
● 1. Can 22  they aver, if any Man shall affirm, that Azariah, and the other Priests used, or that they lawfully might have used any violence, or force against the King's Person, either in hindering him for burning of Incense, 
☞  or in thrusting him out of the Temple, or in compelling him to dwell apart in a house, as he did (though he was a leper) if he had not of himself yielded to the observation of the law in that behalf, or that he was deprived of his Kingdom, either by the said streke of God, or by his dwelling in a house apart; or that any thing, which the Priests than did, might have been a lawful warrant to any Priest afterward in the Old Testament, either to have deposed by sentence any of their Kings from their Kingdoms for the like offences, or to have used arms, or repressed such their unlawful attempts by forcible ways, though they had imagined, the same might have tended to the preservation of Religion; or that either before that time or afterward, 
☜  any Priest did resist by force of Arms, or depose any of the Kings either of Israel, or of Judah from their Kingdoms, though the Kings of Israel all of them, and fourteen of the Kings of Judah were open and plain Idolaters, he doth greatly err. 
Can. 23. l. 1.   
And because against this the Case of Athaliah might be objected, they say further, if any Man shall affirm, that Jehoiada, and his Wife did amiss in preserving the life of their King Joash; or that Athaliah was not a Tyrannical Usurper (the right Heir of that Kingdom being alive) or that it was neither lawful for Jehoiada, and the rest of the Princes, Levites, and People to have yielded their subjection unto their lawful King; nor having so done, and their King being in possession of his Crown, to have joined together for the overthrowing of Athaliah the Usurper, or that Jehoiada the High Priest was not bound, as he was a Priest, both to inform the Princes and People of the Lords promise, 
☜  that Joash should Reign over them:— or that this fact, either of the Princes, Priests, or People was to be held for a lawful warrant for any afterward, either Princes, Priest, or People, to have deposed any of the Kings of Judah, who by right of Succession came to their Crowns, or to have killed them for any respect whatsoever, and to have set another in their places according to their own choice; or that this example of Jehoiada, or any thing else in the Old Testament did give them to the High Priest any Authority to dispute, determine, or judge, whether the Children of the Kings of Judah, should either be kept from the Crown, because their Fathers were Idolaters; or, being in possession of it, should be deposed from it, in this respect, or any other respect whatsoever; he ●oth greatly err 
Can. 25.   
— If any Man shall affirm, that it is lawful for any Captain, or Subject, high or low whosoever, to bear Arms against their Sovereign, 
cap. 28.  or to lay violent hands upon his Sacred Person— he doth greatly err:— and this Doctrine is earnestly inculcated in many other places. The Israelites in Egypt, after Joseph's death, being oppressed very tyrannically many ways, did never rebel against any of those Kings, but submitted themselves to their authority, though their burdens were very intolerable, both in respect of the impossible works imposed on them, and because also they might not offer sacrifices unto the Lord (a special part of God's Worship) without apparent danger of stoning to death; besides, it may not be omitted, when God himself sent Moses to deliver them from that servitude, he would not suffer him to carry them thence, till Pharaoh their King gave them licence to departed.  
When Alexander the Great, 
l. 1. cap. 30.  having overthrown Darius, sent to Jaddus (the High Priest, and Prince of the Jews) to assist him in his Wars, and become tributary to the Macedonians, as he had been to the Persians; 
Jos. Ant. l. 11. c 8.  he returned for his answer, that he might not yield thereunto, 
☞  because he had taken an Oath for his true Allegiance unto Darius, which he might not lawfully violate while Darius lived, being by flight escaped, when his Army was defeated. 
Can. 30.  If any Man shall affirm, that Jaddus the High Priest did amiss in binding his obedience to King Darius by an Oath; or that he had not sinned, if he had refused, being thereunto required, so to have sworn; or, having so sworn, he might lawfully have born Arms against Darius, or have solicited others, whether aliens, or Jews thereunto; he doth greatly err.  
And agreeable hereunto they tell us, was the belief and practice of our Blessed Saviour, and his Holy Apostles under the Gospel. If therefore any Man shall affirm, 
Can. 2. l. 2.  that our Saviour did exempt himself from the obedience due to the civil Magistrate; or did any way, or at any time encourage the Jews, or any other, directly, 
☞  or indirectly, to rebel for any cause whatsoever against the Roman Emperor, or any of his subordinate Magistrates; or that he did not very willingly both himself pay tribute to Caesar, and also advise the Jews so to do, or that, when he willed the Jews to pay Tribute to Caesar, including therein their duty of obedience unto him, he did not therein deal plainly, or sincerely, but meant secretly, that they should be bound no longer to be obedient unto him, but until by force they should be able to resist him; or that he did not utterly, and truly condemn all devises, conferences, and resolutions whatsoever, either in his own Apostles; or in any other Persons for the using of force against civil Authority, or that by Christ's Word, all Subjects of what sort soever without exception, ought not by the law of God to perish with the Sword, that take, and use the Sword for any cause against Kings, and Sovereign Princes, under whom they were born, or under whose Jurisdiction they do inhabit;— or that Christ did not well, and as the fifth Commandment did require, in submitting himself, as he did, to Authority, although he was first sent for with Swords and Staves, as if he had been a Thief, and then afterward carried to Pilate, and by him (albeit he found no evil in him) condemned to death; or that by any Doctrine or Example, which Christ ever taught, or hath left upon good record, 
☜  it can be proved lawful to any Subjects, for any cause of what nature soever, to decline either the Authority and Jurisdiction of their Sovereign Princes, or of any their lawful Deputies, and inferior Magistrates ruling under them; he doth greatly err.  
If any Man shall affirm, 
Can. 6. l. 2. — that the Subjects of all the Temporal Princes in the World, were not as much bound in St. Paul's time to be subject unto them, as the Romans were to be subject to the Empire, not only for fear, but even for conscience sake; or that St. Paul's commandment (by virtue of his Apostleship, and assistance of the Holy Ghost) of obedience to Princes, than Ethnics, is not of as great force to bind the Conscience of all true Christians, as if he had been then summus Pontifex;— or that the Primitive Church was not as well restrained de Jure by the Doctrine of Christ's Apostles, as de facto from bearing Arms against such Princes, as were then Ethnics, and transferring of their Kingdoms from them unto any others;— or that the Apostles at that time, if they had found the Christians of sufficient force for number, provision, and furniture of Warlike Engines to have Deposed those Pagan Princes, that were then both Enemies, 
☜  and Persecutors of all, that believed in Christ; would (no doubt have moved, and authorised them to have made War against such their Princes, and absolved them from performing any longer that obedience, which they (as Men temporising) had in their Writings prescribed unto them; or that, when afterward Christians were grown able for number, and strength to have opposed themselves by force against their Emperors, being Wicked and Persecutors, they might lawfully so have done for any thing, that is in the New Testament to the contrary; he doth greatly err.  
If any Man shall affirm, that it is not a most profane impiety, 
Can. 10. l. 2.  tending altogether to the discredit of the Scriptures, for any Man to hold, that St. Peter and St. Paul had so instructed the Christians in their times, as that they knew, if they had been able, they might without offence to God have deposed Nero from his Empire; or that the Christians in Tertullian's time, when they professed, that notwithstanding their numbers, and forces were so great, as they had been able to have distressed very greatly the Estate of the Emperors (being then Persecutors) they might not so do, because Christ their Master had taught them otherwise, ought not to be a sufficient Warrant for all true Christians to detest those Men in these days, and for ever hereafter, who contrary to the Example of the said Christians in the Primitive Church, and the Doctrines of Christ, which were then taught them, do endeavour to persuade them, when they shall have sufficient Forces, to rebel against such Kings and Emperors at the Pope's commandment, and to thrust them from their Kingdoms and Empires; 
☞  or that this devilish Doctrine of animating Subjects to Rebellion (when they are able) against their Sovereigns, either for their Cruelty, Heresy, or Apostasy, was ever taught in the Church of Christ by any of the Ancient Fathers, during the Reigns of Dioclesian, or Julian the Apostate, or Valens the Arrian, or of any other the Wicked Emperors before them; or that it is not a wicked perverting of the Apostles words to the Corinthians, (touching their choice of Arbitrators to end dissensions among themselves, rather than draw their Brethren before Judges, that were Infidels) to infer thereof, either that St. Paul intended thereby to impeach in any sort the Authority of the Civil Magistrates, as if he had meant they should have chosen such Judges, as by civil Authority might otherwise have bound them, than by their own consents to have stood to their award; or to authorise Christian Subjects, when they are able, to thrust their Sovereigns from their Royal Seats, and to choose themselves new Kings in their places; he doth greatly err.  
But it were requisite to transcribe almost that whole admirable Treatise, should I give the Reader a view of all those passages, that vindicate the Divine Right of Kings, and assert the necessity of Subjects being obedient to them; while I forbear in expectance, that the most venerable owner of that great Treasure, will very speedily make the World happy in the publication of so elaborate a work.   

SECT. V  
Some few years after this, King James ordered to be Printed, and had in every Church, a little Treatise called Deus & Rex, which was published both in Latin and English (and, as I am very credibly informed, drawn up by Bishop Overal) which was reprinted in English Anno 1663. by the especial command of King Charles II. and therein the Nation is taught their duty toward their Superiors thus; In the Allegiance of a Subject to his Sovereign, the evil he is to eschew, is. 1. Evil in action; 
p. 15, 16. edit. 1663.  for he is not to touch him with any evil touch, not to stretch out his hand against his most sacred Person, nor so much as to affright, or disgrace him by cutting the lap of his Garment. 2. Evil in words; for he is not to curse his Ruler. 3. Evil in cogitation; for he is not to curse the King in his thought; (and all this is proved by many Texts of Scripture placed in the Margin.) Now if the Subjects of our Sovereign out of their Allegiance to His Majesty are to succour, and defend him even with the hazard of their lives, etc. and the bond of this Allegiance is inviolable, and cannot by any means be dissolved, then etc. Eccles. 8.2. 
p. 17.  is an evident Testimony, that Kings are subject unto God, 
☜  and have no mortal Man their superior, who may require of them an account of their do, and punish them by any Judicial Sentence,— which Doctrine is excellently confirmed by the instance of David in the case of Uriah, and the Prophet Nathan 's carriage towards him; after which 'tis said, that God only gave unto Saul Kingly Power, and not the People, 
p. 19 p. 29, 30. etc.  who are said to make him King; i. e. approving him, as made by God, etc. But was not Saul a Tyrant, a bloody Oppressor; did not the blood of so many Innocents' cry to God for vengeance, and by his special commandment (whoso sheds man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed) deserve death? Yet David by God's own appointment designed to the Kingdom says, the Lord keep me from doing that thing unto my Master the Lord's Anointed, etc.— the Bishop of Rome, (and by parity of reason, any other Person, 
p. 35.  if I Judge aright) cannot dispense with the Law of Nature, which from the first beginning of the reasonable Creature is unchangeable; nor with the Moral Law of God, whose Precepts are indispensible; but the duty of Subjects in obedience to their Sovereign, is grounded upon the Law of Nature, beginning with our first beginning; for as we are Born Sons, so are we Born Subjects. 
p. 38. Obj. — But is there no means to stay the fury of a Sovereign command, if he should be so tyrannous, and profane, as to endeavour to oppress the whole Church at once, and utterly to extinguish the Light of Christian Religion?— Princes in their rage may endeavour wholly to destroy God's Church, 
Ans.  but in vain, because Christ hath so built it on a Rock, that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it;— and when they do labour to effect so heinous an impiety, the only means we have to appease their fury, is serious repentance for our sins, which have brought this chastisement upon us, and humble prayer unto God, who guides the hearts of Princes like Rivers of Waters. You know, how before the coming of Christ, the Jewish Church by the command of Ahasuerus, was to be destroyed, 
Esth. 4.  both young and old, etc. here the whole Church by the barbarous designment of Ahasuerus seemed to be in the very Jaws of death, yet they take no arms, they consult not how to poison Ahasuerus or Haman, they animate no desperate Person suddenly to stab them, but there was only great sorrow among them, and fasting, and weeping, etc.  
This Book gave so much disgust to a party of Men in this Kingdom, that they could not be quiet, till something was Printed under the name of an answer to it (though every Pamphlet, that is so called, does not deserve that name) and to make it pass the more plausibly, it assumes the same title, Deus & Rex, and is said to have been Printed at Colen, An. Dom. 1618. the Author of which (though unquestionably a Papist, as appears by many passages in the Book) affirms, 
p. 13.  that the Scots had undoubtedly the true spirit of the Gospel, who professed (and for it he quotes Knox 's History of the Scotch Church) that they would be Subjects to no one, unless they could enjoy their desired Reformation; 
p. 19  and that the former Dialogue falsely asserts, that Kings have their Power only from God, and are accountable only to him; and that the duty of Subjects cannot be dissolved, if the King turns Tyrant, Infidel, Heretic, or Apostate; and that Kings are not to be deposed, or resisted, unless by prayers and tears, though they are fallen into so much impiety and madness, as to seek the ruin of the Church, and the destruction of Religion: Which Assertions the Author condemns, but with no reason, and a great deal of injustice, while he owns, and improves the Romish Doctrines of resisting, and deposing Princes in many places, so easily are Men inclined to be despisers of Dignities, and blasphemers of Dominions.  
Gabriel Powel says, 
De Adiaplyris, Lond. 1606. c 8. §. 34 p. 69  that when St. Paul bids us be obedient for conscience sake, that he means, we must no way offend the Magistrate by rebelling against him; but that we must keep a good Conscience in his sight, who hath set the Magistrate over us— 
‖ §. 93. p. 71.  for his Power is from God,— and to the just praise of our Reformation, he adds, 
* c. 9 Sect. 35. p. 79  that no Church in Europe reformed herself more orderly, than the Church of England; in which nothing was done tumultuarily, by force and arms, or by fraud; but all alterations were made by the supreme Power of the Nation, agreeable to the Word of God, and the Example of the Primitive Church.  
Oliver O●mered in his picture of a Papist; It is not lawful for Subjects to attempt the murdering of their Sovereign for Religion sake, or for any pretence whatsoever. Go with cresset, and torchlight throughout the whole Book of God, and throughout the spacious volumes of the Ancient Fathers, and tell me, whether any Priest, Levite, Evangelist, Apostle, Ancient Father ever hath taught, counselled, and much less practised the like, I say not against Lawful Magistrates, 
☜  but tyrannous Rulers, and such as were reprobated of God, 
p. 176. — the Prophet Isaiah complained of the Exactions, and Oppressions of the Kings of Israel, showed them their faults, and admonished them of God's vengeance; but he did not animate, encourage, and incite the People to avenge themselves of their Princes, and to lift up Arms against them;— the Prophets Amos, Micah, and Zephaniah give sufficient testimony, that the Rulers in their times were very wicked Men, and such as did grind the faces of the Subjects; and yet all this notwithstanding they did not advise the Subjects to mutiny, or rebel against their Princes.— When Rome was pure and primitive; you shall find, 
p. 179.  the arms of the Church were tears and prayers; but now they are degenerate from their former purity, and openly threaten the lives of Kings.— the ancient Romans shall in judgement rise against you, and condemn you; for they conspired not the death of Pagans, Infidels, and Tyrants, that made havoc of the Church of God, etc.   

SECT. VI  
Among these Divines I will place one Civilian, the famous Albericus Gentilis; who, though Born in Italy, yet lived long in England; the King's Professor of the Laws in the most Famous University of Oxon, of which he was one of the greatest Ornaments. I shall not mention, what he says on this subject in his Books de Jure belli; since he hath undertaken it professedly in his three Royal Disputations, 
London 1605. 4 to.  as he calls them; in the first of which, treating of the absolute power of a King (wherein his Notions are very agreeable to the Sentiments of his Master King James in his true law of free Monarchies, to which he refers) he affirms, that he is absolutely supreme, 
p. 9, 10, 17.  who acknowledges nothing above him, but God, to whom only, and not to any other he is to render an account.— he confesses there were some Magistrates improperly called Kings, such as the Kings of Sparta, and of Egypt, to which last there were laws set how far they should walk, and how often bath themselves, who might be accused when they were dead, and being convicted be denied decent Burial; but those do not deserve to be called Kings, whose Subjects pay them no more obedience, than they please.— A Prince is a God upon Earth, his Power is greater, than either that of a Father of old over his Children, or that of a Master over his Servants. All Princes are feudataries to God, 
p 17.  to whom they ought to render an account of their Government, who is their only Judge, 
p. 34. — 'tis a Maxim in the Civil Law, Princeps legibus solutus est, a Prince is free from laws; the Greek Interpreters understand it, of his freedom from Penal Laws; for a Prince hath no Judges, who can compel him; others, that he is exempt from the coaction, not from the direction of the law,— but all agree against any force to be used against him.  
This, and much more to this purpose, the Reader will meet with in that first disputation; while the third treats largely, how unjust any violence is, 
p 39 p. 100  which Subjects use against their King,— by King, he says, he means such a Prince, as hath no Superior, no Judge, or Governor over him; he means also a lawful Prince, not a Tyrant; but such a lawful Prince who rules Tyrannically, i.e. seeks the destruction of the Commonwealth. It is a fundamental and unquestionable Law, that Men ought to honour their Prince, 
p. 101, 102.  and not to speak evil of him,— and that what injuries ought not to be done to a Parent, 
parad. 3.  ought much less to be done to a Prince; but no Man, says Tully, can take away the life of his Father without great sin. This perhaps he spoke like a Stoic, but it was also spoken like a great Lawyer; for the Roman Lawyers were great followers of that Sect of Philosophers; 
Rom. 13. — the Power of a Prince is by Divine Right, not by the sole Constitution of Men.— Suppose a Prince going about to destroy his own Country, 
p. 103.  as Nero did, even Tyranny is more tolerable than Anarchy; 〈◊〉 what happened when Nero was slain? In the Reigns of the three following Princes, 
p. 105, 106, 107.  which lasted but a few Months, more blood was spilt, than in the 14 years of Nero 's Government. When it is objected, that we own more to our Country than our Prince, he flatly denies it,— affirming, that the very Heathens knew, that God sent evil Princes, and that to reclaim Men from their sins; and that God hath left us remedies for such evils, such as repentance of our Vices, obedience to our Sovereign, 
☞  thereby to incline them to be kind, and gentle; patience to take off the edge of their fury, 
p. 112.  and sighs, and tears.— If the case of the Low Countries be objected, and that our excellent Queen Elizabeth both praised, and defended them; the same answer must serve for this, as for all examples; that we must judge not according to examples, but according to Laws: or the case of the Men of Libnah, who rebelled against Jehoram, 2 Chron. 21.10. be insisted on, we must answer, says Drusius (and so we have another witness to this truth, the Learned Drusius) that every action, that is related in Holy Scripture, is not praised, nor was the cause good, that because the Prince had deserted the true Religion, therefore they might desert him,— for the Christians did not desert the Apostate Julian, 
☞  and that action is not to be made a pattern, that is done contrary to reason and law; nor does our defence of the Dutch confirm the Justice of their cause; for we may justly defend those, who themselves are engaged in an unjust War, 
p. 116.  as I have in more than one place proved as to this fact of Queen Elizabeth.— If Equals have, no power one over another, how much less hath an inferior power ove● his superior, a Subject over his Prince? he shall be restrained by his superior, who is God,— is it not in every Man's mouth, that a Prince hath no other Judge but God?— Shame and conscience, 
p. 118. p. 121, 122 123.  and honour may check them, but not their Subjects.— Obj. But do not Aquinas, Luther, Peter Martyr, and Beza allow of resistance? Answ. the book de regimine Principis is not Aquinas 's, says Sigonius (lib. 17. the regn. Ital.) Luther was deceived by the Germane Lawyers, and brought to alter his opinion for the worse, and what he spoke he said only of feudataries, and of a Defensive War. Martyr was swayed by examples, not reason; as if because the Jews resisted the Macedonians, and Romans, whose Subjects they were not, therefore Subjects may resist their lawful Sovereigns,— the example of St. Ambrose does not reach this case, for he used no force, nor had he any right to deny the temple to the Emperor, which was his,— and Beza says only, 
p. 12●. etc.  that the Laws must authorise such resistance.— But there are cogent reasons to incline to the practice of Passive Obedience. 1. It is a rule, that we must not speak evil of the Prince. 2. Force towards a Father is unlawful, therefore towards a Prince. 3. A less evil is not to be removed, if a greater will follow. 4. If a Man in defence of his Mother ought not to resist his Father, neither ought he to resist his Prince in defence of his Country. 5. No one can depose a Prince, but he, who made him; but the People did not make him, etc. 6. No evil is to be done, that good may come of it. 7. How can a King have absolute Power, when he hath so many Ephori over him, as he hath Subjects? 8. The Authority of the Ancients, Plato, and Tully.— If it be objected, that Plato says, that Parents, when they grow mad, must be restrained; and that others say, that a Tyrant is a Madman: I answer, we constitute a Guardian over a mad Prince; 
☜  but we deny that a cruel Tyrannical Prince is to be reckoned a Madman. Plato and Tully, and Bartolus are of the opinion, 
p. 132.  that there can be no just cause of rebelling against, or resisting a Prince. The sentence of Mr. l'Hospital is observable, that the Faction of the League was very potent; the defence the Huguenots made, seemed necessary, but that only the King's cause was just; that both the Hugonots and Leaguers, were guilty of waging War against their King; but the Hugonots in a lesser degree, because the necessity of self defence is more excusable, than the Ambition of a Crown; bu● no Cause was just, but the King's; for there cannot be any just cause of resisting a lawful Prince.   

SECT. VII.  
The treasonable Design of Garnet, and his Accomplices, gave occasion to the making, and imposing the Oath of Allegiance, as good Laws generally own their Rise, and Original to men's ungoverable Passions, and irregular Manners; but no sooner did the Oath appear, but out came two Breves of Pope Paul the Fifth, to forbid the taking of it: and Cardinal Bellarmine's Letter to the Archpriest Blackwel upon the same Account. To these Adversaries that Learned King wrote an Answer, Tripici nodo triplex cuneus, and immediately Books multiplied on both sides to a great number, Bellarmine, Gretser, Suarez, Eudaemon, Johannes, Scioppius, Becanus, Parsons, and others attempting to relieve the baffled Papacy; while Bishop Andrews, Bishop Barlow, Bishop Buckeridge, Bishopt Abbot, Bishop Moreton, Bishop Prideaux, Isaac Casaubon, Burhil, Thompson, Collins, and others, stoutly defended their King, as they ought. And though their Arguments seem particularly leveled against the Papists, yet by parity of reason they condemn all such for the like Opinions and Practices, whoever asserts, or is guilty of them. It were a Subject worth a wise man's pains, who had abilities and leisure, to give an accurate Account of that Controversy; but I shall only cite the Authors, as they occur, and make for the present purpose. The King's Opinion we need not doubt of, since the severest Enemies of this Doctrine confess, that it hath been a commendable policy in Princes to popagate such Opinions, nor have the Atheistical Politicians spared even Solomon himself, as he served his own, and not the interest of Truth, when he said, By me Kings reign. Bishop Andrews' Sentiments have been published in the first part of this History, to which may be added other Passages in the Writings of the same Author: 
* Vol. of Serm. p. 803, 804.  Upon misconceiving this point, some have fallen into a fancy, that his anointed may forfeit their Tenure, and so cease to be his.— If after he is anointed he grow defective,— prove a Tyrant, fall to favour Heretics, his anointing may be wiped off, or scraped off, than you may write a Book de justa abdicatione, make a holy League, etc.— but it is not Religion, nor Virtue, nor any spiritual Grace, this Royal Anointing. Christus Domini is said, not only of Josias, a King truly Religious, but of Cyrus, a mere Heathen; not only of David, a good King, but of Saul, a Tyrant, even when he was at the worst.— Unxit in Regem, Royal Unction gives no Grace, but a just Title only; it includes nothing, but a just Title; it excludes nothing, but usurpation; God's claim never forfeits, his Character never to be wiped out, or scraped out; nor Kings lose their Rights, no more than Patriarches did their Fatherhood. 
P. 809. — Never was any truly partaker of the inward anointing of a Christian Man, but he was ever fast and firm to the Royal Anointing.  
The same excellent Prelate in his Answer to Tortus (or Cardinal Bellarmin's Book against King James' Apology for the Oath of Allegiance, says, That Subjects are bound to obey their Prince by all Law, 
London 1609. p. 16. 36.  Natural, Moral, Civil, Municipal, That Christ never interdicted any Subject's Obedience; his Father sent him not into the World on this Errand, nor did he send any of his Followers; 
P. 43. — Let the King be a Heathen, he ceases not to be a King; let him be a Julian, an Apostate, which is worse than a Heathen,— yet he is a King still, 
☜  and against even such it is not lawful to take Arms, nay, it is a sin, not to take Arms in their defence, when they command us. 
P. 110. — Both Papists and Puritans conspire the hurt of Kings, as Herod and Pilate agreed to murder Christ;— both being equally injurious to Kings, in striving to rob them of their Authority.— Kings in their Kingdoms are God's Vicars. 
P. 158, 161. — And the ancient Christians cheerfully obeyed them— A forced Obedience rather becomes the Devil, than a Christian, for they are subject against their wills; but to the praise of Christianity, the Christians in the Infancy of the Church were so sincerely obedient, that their Enemies could not bespatter them; and so cheerfully patiented, that their Enemies were forced to admire them.— And it is blasphemy against Christ to think, or say, 
P. 321.  that he would have any one, that is his Vicar, to hinder Subjects from being true to their Prince, or Kings from being safe. 
P. 384, 385. — Kings derive their Authority from God, the people confer nothing upon them, they are God's anointed, not the people's;— the Form of Government may be from men, but the Authority is always from Heaven.  
Anno 1610, The same Learned Prelate published his Answer to Cardinal Bellarmin's Apology, and therein avers, 
† C. 2. p. 58.  That every Subject is bound by his Allegiance, not to suffer any one who shall endeavour either to depose his Prince, or to dispose of his Kingdom; he is bound to oppose himself against any Invader, neither to absolve himself from his Allegiance, nor to suffer himself to be absolved by any other; not to take Arms against his Sovereign, but to defend him from all violence in his Crown and Person, and to discover all Conspiracies. 
P. 132. — To render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's. The Apostles did so to Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero, Domitian. The Martyrs did so to Commodus, Severus, Decius, Dioclesian. The Fathers did so to Constantius, Valens and Anastasius. Nay, the Popes themselves did so to the Arians, to Theodoric, and the Goths; in their times the contrary Doctrine was reckoned to be Heresy. These were the Sentiments of that great man, than whom, while he lived, the King had not a more Loyal Servant, nor the Church a more Learned Prelate, as the Editors 
‖ Ep. Ded. R●gi.  of his Opuscula, with Justice, aver.  
When Becanus, a busy Jesuit, had undertaken to answer this admirable Prelate's Books against Bellarmin, Rich. Thompson, an. 1611. wrote his Vindication, 
P. 20.  and smartly censures his Adversary, for saying, That in England we swear Allegiance to our Kings upon these two conditions: 1. As long as we stay in England. 2. As long as he maintains the true Religion. Both which Propositions, as he says, are most false; and then he proceeds to confirm his Hypothesis, proving, in pursuance of his Design, 
P. 27.  That to the Oath of a Papist no regard ought to be had; for who can believe, 
☞  whether he swears truly, and from his Heart, who defends the Lawfulness of a mixed Proposition, of which one part is spoken, 
P. 44.  the other reserved?— The Text, Touch not mine anointed, only concerns Kings, and in the whole Bible none are called the Lord's anointed, but Kings. And Rabbi Levi Ben Gershon, the Jew, hath commented more honestly, and more like a Christian, on 1 Sam. 12.24. than the Fathers of the Society of the Jesuits. 
P. 78, 79, 83.  All Princes, even Pagans, have a supreme Power over all their Subjects, and in all Causes, and Proscribere, & non posse proscribi propria sunt Regum timendorum in proprios greges, & ad ipsos coelitùs delapsâ autoritate, ac peculiari quâdam ratione spectant, i. e. To punish others, and not to be punishable themselves is the peculiar Right of Kings, derived unto them from above.  
Nor was Becanus the only Antagonist, that Bishop Andrews met with in this Cause, Eudaemon Johannes, a Cretan, and a Jesuit (and he needs no other Character) undertakes the Defence of Garnet, and the Censure of Allegiance, him Dr. Samuel Collins, the public Professor of Divinity at Cambridge, 
Cantab. 1612.  undertakes, wherein he averrs, 
* Par. 2. p. 52.  That the Jesuit had belied King James, when he called him a Follower of Knox, to whose Opinions he was always most averse, detesting both him and his Followers, whom he, upon all occasions, rather punished, than countenanced,— 
† Par. 3. c. 72. p. 252.  Show me, that there is any such power, I do not mean only in private persons, but in the Pope, or in any other mortal, to depose, 
☞  or to murder a King.— If a King do not his Duty, he is to be left to the Divine Tribunal: Against thee only have I sinned, says David; for he was a King, says S. Hierom, and had no one whom he might fear. Understand it of coercive power, not only not to punish, but also not to upbraid him, for who shall say to a King, why dost thou so? Eccl. 8.4. And who can resist him? Prov. 30. 
P. 2.3. — But you have found out this pretty Distinction, that as long as a King remains a King, let him be never so tyrannical, his Subjects dare not oppose him, but when the Pope deposes him, than it is lawful boldly to oppose him: (And I would fain know, where the odds is, if the Pope, or the people depose him) so that if the Commons have power, and the Pope consent, and no danger of scandal follow, the murder of Kings is lawful and honourable.— Consider with yourself, 
P. 254.  what a gap you open to popular Licentiousness, when you praise those Men, who magnify the parricides of Princes?  
The same Author in his Epphata to F. T. being a Vindication in English of the same Prelate, vindicates the same Doctrine; 
Cambr. 1617.  in his Epistle Dedicatory he says, That though Kings die like men (i. e. Quatenus homines, non quatenus Reges) yet we are to remember, that they fall like one of the Principes, i. e. one of the Angels, says the Cardinal himself, among others, on that Psalm, who, we know, are not judged, till God judges them: though no doubt but that aggravates their Judgement so much the sooner.— It were worth the considering, what correspondence such Grounds have with the ancient Doctrine, which the Cardinal, and his Followers would seem so close to follow. Of chrysostom, 
☜  that a Sovereign King is accountable to none (not only to his Subjects, but) not so much as to his Successor (as David said, that he is to be judged by God only.) The same Chrysostom noting, that whereas the Psalmist passes over other miracles of the Wilderness in deep silence, he insists only on the Death of Og and Sehon, two mighty Monarches, because King's lives are so wholly in God's Hands, and the Disposition of them is always miraculous, reserved and appropriated to God himself. Of S. Basil, that a King is subject to no Judge. Of Ambrose, that nullis tenetur Legibus, not only the King of Israel, but not the King of Egypt. Of the Pope in Theodoret, who told Theodosius, that it was not lawful to implead a King, not only in his person, but not personating another, not fictione juris, as the Lawyers say.— 
‖ Ch. 1. p. 58, 59  Now Obedience is become among the Ceremonies, and the honouring of our Parents, i. e. in truth, of our Princes, Patres Patriae, by ancient stile, 
☜  (and so Ezechias called the Priests his children, 2 Chron. 29.11.) is as subject to alteration, as the Sabbath Day.— And because the Jewish Ceremonies may not only be omitted, but may not be retained without heinous crime, therefore it shall be Conscience to wax wanton against Princes, to shake off their Yoke, yea, merit, virtue, and what not?— as if the Precept of honouring Parents, which is the primum in promissione, Ephes. 6. were now secundum in omissione, after that against Images, 
P. 60, 61, 62.  which is usually canceled in the Popish Catechisms.— Against the Emperors under the Old Testament there was no rising up;— and as for the Emperors in the New Testament, though as they were Heathen, they were neither by Christ, nor his Apostles obeyed, I hope, Sir, 'tis enough that they were not resisted.— Kings, when transported by Error, they forsake their Duty, 
Pag. 75.  yet forfeit not their Supremacy;— We yield no Abdication of our King, 
☞  though his Fault be Heresy, remembering that, Deus defendit oleum suum, as Optatus says, and Caesar non desinit esse Caesar, even in Alto Gentilisino, as our Saviour acknowledged of him, Matt 22.— So beinous is the Heresy of Deposing Magistrates for moral Misdemeanours.— A bad Head, I should think, which the Body will be the better for the cutting off.— No Iniquity can abolish Authority:— And if it be objected, 
Pag. 94. P. 137. 139.  that Kings must be hampered with a coercive Power, or all must run to nothing, and the Church be clean extinguished:— It is answered, The Church gains by Patience in Persecution, therefore she loses by Resistance and Opposition.   

SECT. VIII.  
Among these domestic Champions of the King, and the Truth, it may not be amiss to reckon an eminent Foreigner (if I may call Isaac Casaubon so, who lived some Years in this Kingdom, and died here, one of the Glories of his Age; before he came into England, he just after the Quarrel between the Pope and the Republic of Venice, 
An. 1607.  printed a Discourse, De Libertate Ecclesiastica (or rather but a part of a Discourse); for whereas he promises Eleven Chapters, the first three are not entirely printed, the rest being stopped at the Press by Order of the French King; though as imperfect as the Book is, Goldastus hath thought it worth a place in his Collections) and in it he shows, that the true Church of God never usurped the Rights of Kings, 
* Ad Lect. p. 6. Pag. 12.13.  while the Pope's spoil Kings of their Liberty and their Majesty too; for under them it sometimes happens, that Kings may be safe, but they can never be secure; for they so value this Liberty, that to defend it they tumble all things upside down, mingle Heaven and Earth, things sacred and profane:— And whereas our holy Master's Precepts ought not to be contradicted, since he hath joined his Example to his Commands, and recommended to us the Love of our Enemies, Subjection to the Powers ordained of God, 
☞  and Obedience to them for Conscience sake; they to build up, and to confirm this Liberty (unknown to the Primitive times) do every where enkindle Wars, become a Terror to Kings and Princes, dispense with their Subject's Allegiance, and arm them against their own Sovereigns, and pretend, that to violate all Laws divine and human, is a holy undertaking, and most acceptable unto God.— As ifby an ill management of supreme Authority, 
Pag. 17.  the Authority were forfeited.— And if once Princes shall suffer the Foundations of their Government to be shaken in the minds of their Subjects, their Government and Empire must of necessity reel and totter, and fall into the dust.— God commands all orders of Men to render to Cesar the things that are Cesar 's; 
Pag. 69.  and, let every soul be subject to the higher powers, etc. therefore Gregory Nazianzen says, that the Civil Magistrate doth reign together with Christ; nor does it make any difference, that some Kings arrive to the Throne by hereditary Succession, others by Election, a third sort by Conquest; for though God in the establishment of a King (as in the Ordination of a Priest) uses the Ministry of men; yet it is impious, not to acknowledge, that the Dominion and Power is received originally from God: By God King's reign, as the holy Scriptures in almost infinite places do testify. 
P. 102, 103. — The Primitive Christians did so use the World, as those that used it not, as S. Paul advises; for while their Zeal for Piety was flagrant, while the Innocency of their Manners, their mutual Love and Affection, their unfeigned Humility, 
☜  their constant Meditation on the Joys of Heaven, their Fidelity and Obedience to their Princes, as far as their Conscience would give them leave, lastly, their incomparable Constancy, in suffering all manner of Torments for the true Religion, made them every day a Spectacle to the whole World, they ravished their very Enemies to admire them and their Virtues; these were the beginnings of Christianity; this the infant Age of the Church, whom Tortures made happy, Infamy glorious, the Contempt of Gold rich, and the Crown (not of a Kingdom, but) Martyrdom made august.  
And as Truth is the same in all Climates, so was this learned Man, in whatsoever place Providence fixed, for, when he came into England, he had the same Notions, as fully appears by his Epipistle to Fronto Ducaeus, written Ann. 1611. wherein, discoursing of S. Gregory Nazianzen's Observation of old, that men's. preposterous Zeal had destroyed their Charity; he adds: But Good God 
Pag. 82 Lond. 1611.  Had the Father lived in our Age, what Complaints would he have made? To see so many Men, acted by a preposterous Zeal, under the pretext of Religion and Piety, most wickedly, and irreligiously, not only break the Peace of the Church about Trifles; but undertake Rebellions, Treasons, most cruel Massacres of innocent People, overthrowing of lawful Governments, and the Murder of Princes:— this is your privilege at this time of day, (as he addresses himself to the Roman Catholics) that not only the grave Citizens and Senators of a Nation assembled in a general Convention (though what they should do of this kind is unlawful), but even the Mobile assume to themselves a Power of Abdicating Kings, forfeiting their Kingdoms, and giving them to whom they please, and of abolishing all Laws under the pretext of Piety; which Villainy no Religion (though never so profane and impious) except yours (meaning the Popish) ever allows, 
P. 100, etc.  or hath ever formerly allowed. Garnet 's chief Crime was, that he had either forgotten or neglected S. Paul 's Advice, consenting to the doing of evil, that good might come thereof;— this he ought not to have done, had he demonstrated himself a true follower of Jesus Christ; for what Precept or Example bade he of our holy Saviour for his so doing? Who was a Lamb without blemish,— and reproved the preposterous Zeal of James and John, the Apostles with, You know not what spirit you are of, i. e. You think your Zeal is commendable, which hates the Samaritans, and would destroy them; but I do not require such a cruel, sanguinary, and destructive Zeal from my Followers; what I require is Charity, that is Patiented, Edifying, and which covers a multitude of Sins; this I approve of, and this I would have practised by those, to whom I am to leave my Peace:— This he would not have done, had he remembered, 
P. 104, 105.  how severely our holy Saviour chastised Peter, when he rashly cut off Malchus 's Ear.— But Zealots are very seldom removed from their purposes by any consideration of Laws, either divine or humane; whatever School teaches this Doctrine is not Christian, it is the School of Antinhrist, and of Satan, for the Devil was a Murderer from the beginning, 
☞  a true Abeddon and Apollyon; but the Doctrine of our holy Saviour Jesus Christ is perfectly contrary to this; for he prescribed no other remedy to his Disciples against all manner of Injuries, but Flight, Patience, and Prayers; that rejoicing in hope, being patiented in Tribulation, and praying continually, as the Apostle advises, they might triumph over all their Adversaries: These were the only Arms that the Apostles used, wherever they laid the foundations of the Gospel; these were the only Weapons which the Fathers of the ancient Church only knew; no man took Arms, or raised Rebellion against his Prince; these were the fruits of the Hildebrandine Doctrine, which flies at the Crowns of Emperors, Kings, and Princes, etc.   

SECT. IX.  
Against this modest and learned Epistle of Isaac Casaubon did Eudaemon Johannes write, which Dr. Prideaux 
* Pr. at Oxford, 1614 c. 2. p. 76.  (afterward the King's Professor of Divinity, and Bishop of Worcester) answered, in which he compares the Jesuits, and Buchanan, and Knox together, branding them justly with the name of Traitors, as King James had done before him; and avers, 
P. 107.  that the Popish Writers bred in the School of Hildebrand, call a lawful King a Tyrant, if excommunicated by the Pope; whereas, a Tyrant, according to the Doctrine of the Sorbon, and of the Men of ancient sincerity and simplicity, is opposed to a lawful Prince, and signifies one who hath invaded an Empire that is not his own, by Force and evil Arts;— and then adds, If an Apostate should reign in France, 
P. 109.  or England, who exceeded Julian, or the Grand Signior, it is not the duty of his Subjects to dethrone him:— For, who can lift up his hand against the Lord's anointed, and be innocent? 
☜  Did the Israelites attempt any thing against Nabuchadnezzar, or the Christians against Julian, and the Heathen Emperors? Did they use any other Weapons besides their Prayers and their Tears?— Let us use these Arms, and if the King do amiss, let us expect when God will punish him, let not his Subjects tumultuously oppose him: And whereas Mariana had affirmed, 
P. 123.  that when Princes openly invade the Rights of their Subjects, and there is no other way left to maintain the public Safety, than it is lawful to take Arms, and murder Kings; he replies, here is no mention made of the Patience of the Subjects, the just Judgements of God, the Obligation of Oaths, the sacred Authority of Princes conferred on them immediately by God, the Duty of Subjection, not only when we live easy under the Government for our Profit, but when we suffer under it for Conscience sake;— by the Maxims of the Jesuits, 
P. 130, 131.  the People are made the King's Judges, to inquire into his Faults, and to punish him, as they think fit, when he does amiss:— What difference is there, if this be true, between the Rights of Princes and their Subjects?— A Subject breaks the Laws, and he is punished by the King; the King violates his Promises, and his Subjects tell him, We will not have this Man longer to rule over us: Admirable security of the Persons and Crowns of Princes! We obey our Princes for Conscience sake, 
P. 60.  we believe them to be immediately constituted by God; if they rule well, they are God's greatest Blessing; if they degenerate into Apostasy or Tyranny, they are God's Scourges to punish the Sins of a People; as 
* Rom. 13. and in 1 Pet. 2.  Calvin says truly; If a King abuse his Power, he shall render an account to God in time, but for the present he doth not lose his Authority.— We urge not Compact, but we pour out our Prayers; our Bishops do advise, not threaten.  

† Id. Serm. on Gowry's Conspir. p. 4, 6, 7.  The same learned Bishop, in his Sermon on the 5th. of August, at S. Mary's, before the University, preaches the same Doctrine: When occasion is offered (howsoever they otherwise strive to appear good Subjects) Traitors will be ever ready to vent their Treasons.— Hypocritical Traitors watch their times, and are ready to vent their Villainy upon the least advantage.— In the 2 Kings 19.37. (where we read, that Adrammelech and Sharezer slew their Father at his Devotions) instead of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his Sons in the Original, we find the Vowels set in the Te●● (which is somewhat strange in that tongue) without their Consonants; 
☞  perhaps to intimate closely, that so many Circumstances, concurring otherwise for the aggravation of the offence, as Subjects to lay violent hands on a King, and that in the Temple, and that at his Devotions; to add further, that it was done by his own Sons, however it be more vocal than the Blood of Abel, yet the manner of setting it down should show it also to be scelus infandum, a Wickedness too monstruous to be fully expressed.— Two Sons there were that David had, whom he especially (as it were) doted upon, above the rest of his Children, Absalon and Adonijah, and both of these take their advantages (as far as in them lay) to tumble their aged Father down from his Throne, and bury him alive, to make way for their prodigious and preposterous Purposes: the former by the People's favour, which he had gotten by his Hypocritical Popularity; the latter by his Father's Feebleness, backing himself by the countenance of wicked Joab and disloyal Abiathar; this hard measure received good King David, at the hands of those of whom he best deserved: He saw the Law of Nature violated, Conscience (of so heinous a Fact) contemned, his Indulgence repaid with monstrous Ingratitude, his tried Valour outbraved by his own Subjects. 
Pag. 8. — But the Judge of all the World is not subject to like Passions with us; none shall touch his Anointed for evil, but evil shall hunt those wicked Persons to destroy them. 
P. 10. — Godoliah was too confident on his own Innocency, and the Loyalty of those that spoke him fair;— but the event proved it too true; for his security gave the advantage, which the Traitor taking, performed that most wicked Design, which made all the miserable remnant of Israel to smart for it. 
P. 11, 12. — They who hold such Grounds in their Schools, that the Pope may make void the Oath of Allegiance, that Subjects have taken to their lawful Princes, that upon a pretence they are fallen from the Church, and turned Heretics, he may depose them;— and that being so deposed, they may be lawfully murdered by their Subjects: What hope may remain, that such, so bred, so taught, so believing, will ever prove loyal?— A Traitor is a man of Belial, 
P. 16, 18.  who to the disgrace of himself and his whole Family impiously conceius, and rebelliously vents his Hatred and Disloyalty against his lawful Sovereign.— Treason is of a deeper tincture (than other Sins) deserving a heavier doom, and therrfore of all true Christians the more earnestly to be detested. 
P. 22, 23. — Had these Men remembered what the wise King Solomon had left them for a better direction, Prov. 8. By me King's reign, etc.— they might have found, that the bond of Obedience to Princes is not so loosely knit by God, that Subjects may dissolve it at their pleasure, or upon any Discontent, or Injury, whatsoever cry, we have no part, and renounce our Inheritance; for as a Head never so rheumatic, and the fountain of all Diseases in the rest of the Members, may not be therefore parted from them for fear of a worse inconvenience, neither can the Members upbraid it (as the Apostle, and Nature teach us) with these contemptuous Words, 
☜  I have no need of thee: So the Head in the Body politic must keep his place howsoever, till that highest Authority take it off, who first set it on, to change it for a better; the more pernicious in reformed States and Commonwealths is the wicked band of Antichrist, who take upon them to sever those whom God hath so linked together. What other conclusion do they drive at in all their Volumes against the King's Supremacy, and Subjects Oath of Allegiance, but to make their Follower's conceit, that they have no part in King James.   

SECT. X.  
William Barclay, though a Romanist, having written Six Books against the Enemies of Monarchy, Buchanan, Junius Brutus, Boucher, and others, Cardinal Bellarmine thought himself so nearly concerned in the Controversy, as to write an Answer to the learned Scotchman, Barclay being dead, Dr. Buckeridge, Bishop of Rochester undertook the Papal Champion, 
Lond. 1614  and in Two Books fully handles the Power of the Pope, in deposing Kings; and having asserted, 
* Lib. 1. c. 1. p. 11.  That Authority and Obedience are Relatives, grounded on the Commandment of Honouring our Parents, and 
† C●p 8 p. 1●0, etc.  that all the Ancients were of this opinion, that Kings were inferior only to God, and superior to all other Persons, and therefore could be deposed only by God, (because Inferiors have no Authority over their Superiors) and that their Misdemeanours are not punishable by their Subjects, since they have no Judge but God alone; he citys S. 
‖ Lib. 2. c. 3. p. 217.  Paul, Rom. 13.1. that there is no power but of God, and that this is a general Sentence, and that therefore the Power of Kings is from God, and not from the People:— He that resists, resists the ordinance of God; this also is a general Sentence, and binds all Traitors and Parricides, who conspire against the Lord's Anointed, who raise Seditions and Tumults, take Arms, and muster Forces against Kings, though they be excommunicated and deposed. 
Lib. 2. c. 6. p. 281.  And when Bellarmine had objected, that the Power of Kings is not immediately from God; because Men by a certain natural instinct choose themselves Magistrates, by whom they are governed: He proves at large, that though the form of Government (i. e. whether it be a Monarchy, Aristocracy, or Democracy) be from Men, yet the Power is alone, and immediately from God.— Every King sits on his Throne as a God (I have said, ye are gods) but can the People choose and constitute a Deputy in God's stead? Can they erect God's Throne, and communicate his Power to Men without his consent? Power therefore is immediately from God, although it be given to this or that particular Person by the mediation of the People. 
P. 282. — Paternal and regal Power are the same in essence, though they differ in extent; what a Father is in one Family, that a is King in many Families; what then? Did the Power of Adam over his Sons and Nephews, and all mankind, depend on their consent, or did it flow from God and Nature? 
☞ — And are hereditary Princes, who are not made, but born so, made Kings by the consent of the People, when in the same instant, in which the Father dies, the Son is King? 
P. 289. — If the Power of Kings be not instituted by men without God, neither can it be destroyed by men without God: Grant we the Proposition true, that God doth give Kingdoms to the Subjects with the consent of their Subjects: 
P. 290.  for God can confer and transfer Kingdoms by Men and without them, by second Causes and without them; but because God doth this sometimes by the consent of the People, as he transferred the Kingdom of Saul to David, and the Kingdom of Joram to Jehu, and sometimes doth it without the People's consent, as he transferred the Kingdom of the Canaanites to the Jews, that of the Medes to Cyrus, that of the Persians to Alexander, and of many other Kingdoms, to the Romans; will it therefore follow, that it is lawful for the People, without God, without any express relation of his Will, to dethrone their Kings, and take from them their Authority? 
☜  If God and the People make Kings, than the People without God, and without an express revelation of his Will cannot depose their Kings;— God is the chief and principal Agent, the People are only God's Instrument; as therefore the Instrument doth nothing without the Artificer, so whither can the People do any thing in this case without God.— After this he proves, 
Lib 2. cap. 20. pag. 614, 615.  that both the Jews and Christians did bear with, as their Duty obliged them, idolatrous and tyrannical Kings; and then adds, to this practice of the Church, and of all Antiquity, the best Interpreter of Scriptures, I will subjoin the Institution of Kings, All power is of God, it is his Ordinance, and whoso resists it, resists the Ordinance of God: From the same God had David and Samuel, Solomon and Jeroboam, Hezekiah and Ahab, Manasses and Josiah, Nero and Constantine, Julian and Theodosius, their Authority; of good Kings it is said, By me Kings reign: Of evil Kings, I have given them a King in my wrath: Good Kings are given in mercy; evil Kings in fury; but all are given by God, therefore all must be obeyed, although not in all things; we must not resist any, but must either do that which the King commands justly, or suffer what he cruelly inflicts: For the Obedience of Subjects falls under the divine Precept, natural or moral, in the Fifth Commandment, which is also confirmed by Christ in the Gospel, by his Precept, Give to Cesar the things that are Cesar 's; and by his Example, who paid Tribute, and suffered a most shameful Death under Pilate, who rather forfeited his Life, than he would forfeit his Obedience; and by his Apostles, Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers, to Heathens, and infidel Persecutors, who endeavoured to draw their Subjects over to their Infidelity: Such a one was Nero, such were the rest of the Persecutors; and yet these were to be submitted to, not only for Wrath, but also for Conscience sake.  
Fear God, honour the King; and of this Honour the chiefest part is Obedience. These divine Precepts, natural, moral, evangelical, are indispensable, and bind the Conscience; nor is it likely, that God, and Christ, and the Apostles would have delivered such Precepts, as they would not have to be observed by Christians.— If thy King be good, he is thy nursing Father; if he be evil, he tries thee; if he be a Persecutor, he exercises thee; if he be godly, he is exercised with thee: What can a Christian Soul here contemn? Will it contemn its nursing Father, who affords it Necessaries, that it may be brought to Heaven? Or will it contemn him who tries it, who exercises it under the Cross, that it may shine gloriously in the Kingdom of Heaven?  
— The Enemies to this Doctrine, are 1. the Anabaptists and Libertines, who disown all Magistracy, and throw off its Yoke; and of Stephen of Hallestat who would have none but good Magistrates obeyed. 2. All Seditions, Tumults, Wars, etc. by means of which, the Christian Religion is evil spoken of among the Heathen, as if it were a traitorous Religion, and an Enemy to Kings, the Name of God is blasphemed, and the Enemies of the Gospel encouraged to persecute the Church.  
As to the instance of Athalia, 
Lib. 2. cap. 38. p. 919.  he avers, that she was Queen only de facto, and not the jure, having cruelly against Nature slain the Sons of Ahaziah her Son, being incited by Ambition, that she got the Kingdom by Tyranny, without any Right or Title, that she kept it by Force and Arms, that she was not a lawful Queen, but a most wicked Usurper.— There is a vast difference between a Tyrant that hath a just Title to his Crown, and a Tyrant who hath no Right, 
☞  who hath usurped a Kingdom by force; if a lawful King turn Tyrant, neither his Bishops, nor his Nobles, nor his People, can compel him to rule according to Law; God only can restrain him, who gives such a King in his fury, and for the Sins of a Nation causes a Hypocrite to reign over them; for such a Tyrant, having a just Title to his Throne, is ordained by God, and he that resists him, resists the Ordinance of God; but if any Man usurp a Kingdom by Force and Tyranny, he is not a King, but an Enemy, and it is lawful for any man to resist him, as he would do an Enemy.  
Francis Godwin, 
Ann●●s of Q. Marry, pag. 266, 267.  Bishop of Hereford, published his Annals, An. 1616. and therein treating of the Lady Jane's assuming the Crown (which he truly says, she was forced by her Parents, and Friends Ambition, to accept, and which she received with Tears, but resigned with Joy) and the march of the Duke of Northumberland's Army against Queen Mary, to whom the Londoners, when they marched through the City, did not wish success, he observes the Londoners stood very well affected in Point of Religion, so did also for the most part the Suffolk and the Norfolk Men, and they knew Mary to be absolute for Popery; 
☞  but the English are in their due respects to their Prince so loyally constant, that no regards, no not pretext of Religion can alienate their Affections from their lawful Sovereign, whereof the miserable Case of the Lady Jane will anon give a memorable Example; for although her Faction had laid a strong foundation, and had most artificially raised their Superstructure, yet as soon as the true and undoubted Heir did but manifest her Resolution to vindicate her Right, this accurate Pile presently fell and dissolved, as it were in the twinkling of an Eye, and that chief by their endeavour, of whom for their Religion the Lady Jane might have presumed herself assured:— And the learned and godly Prelate Ridley (who, I wish, 
☜  had not erred in this matter) when he preached up the Lady Jane's Title, 
P. 270.  was scarce heard out with patience by those, who were his particular Charge.— And as the Earl of Arundel said, the Friends of Northumberland had no regard to the Apostolical Rules, That Evil must not be done, that good may come thereof; and that we must obey even evil Princes, not for Fear, but for Conscience.   

SECT. XI.  
Anno 1610. Dr. David Owen (the only Bachelor of Divinity) published at Cambridge a little Treatise, called, Herod, and Pilate reconciled, to show the Concord of Papist and Puritan (against Scripture, Fathers, Councils, and other Orthodoxal Writers) for the Coercion, deposition, and killing of Kings; and the Title is a sufficient declaration what the Author's judgement was (the Book itself being in many places, both as to Argument and Style, very agreeable to the Treatise, called Deus & Rex, set forth by the King's Order) he proves in the First Chapter, that Kings are not punishable by man, but reserved to the Judgement of God, by the Testimony of the Holy Scriptures; and in the subsequent Chapters he proves the same by the Testimony of the Fathers, and other ancient Writers; and he briefly gives his Opinion, 
* P. 24.  Chap. 4. but very fully: Be the King for his Religion impious, for his Government unjust, for his Life licentious, the Subject must endure him, the Bishop must reprove him, the Counsellor must advise him, all must pray for him, and no mortal man hath Authority to disturb or displace him.  
The same Author, Ann. 1622. printed at Cambridg his Antiparaeus, in confutation of 
† Ambergae, 1612.  David Paraeus' Book (De Jure Regum & Brincipum contra Bellarminum, Becanum, etc.) who disallowing the Pope's Claim, invested the Power over Princes in the People; In the Preface of this Book, the Dr. shows the consonancy, and agreeableness of the Popish and Disciplinarian Principles, and in the Book refutes from the dictates of nature, 
Thes. 1. p. 3, etc.  the laws of Nations, Civil and Canon, Scriptures, Fathers, and most eminent Reformed Divines, that the Power and Jurisdiction of Kings is not founded in compact (as if the Majesty of Princes were derived from the People, and limited by them) but that, 
P. 16, 17.  as God is the Supreme Lord of all, who judges all his Creatures, and is judged of none; so Kings and Princes, who judge and punish others, can be judged and punished by no one, save God alone, to whose only power they are subject; this David understanding, though guilty of Adultery and Murder, implores the divine mercy, against thee only have I sinned; for I acknowledge no other Superior on Earth, but thee, who can call me to account, give sentence against me or punish me for my sin.— the reason is, the King is the head of the body politic, but the members ought not to judge the head, because they are subject, nor to cut it off, for than they cease to be members; and this the Heathen Poet knew, and averred, that Kings have a power over their several Subjects, but God only hath an Empire, and Authority over Kings.  
Nor will the public safety and tranquillity be maintained without such an unaccountable power in Kings; for the Monarch, who is opposed by his rebellious Subjects, although they are much too strong for him, will call to his assistance all his neighbouring Kings, and Confederates, will list Foreign Forces to vindicate himself, and the miseries of such a War will be a poor comfort to such an infatuated Nation. 
P. 18. — but suppose there were such a power in the People to call their Kings to account, which we ought not to grant, 
☞  Nero perished, but the case of Rome was not bettered by it; for in the next year after his death it felt more calamities, and was imbrued in more blood, than in the whole nine years of Nero 's Tyranny.— Rome, when she cast off her Kings, did not abrogate, 
p. 19  but change the Tyranny, and Athens drove out one Tyrant, and brought in thirty. 
☞ — I do confidently assert, that all Tyranny, whether it uses violence against God or Man, aught to be suffered; ought not to be abrogated, till he puts an end to it, who alone girds and ungirds the loins of Kings. 
p. 20.  Solomon was guilty of Polygamy and Idolatry, but lost not his Crown and Dignity: Ahab slew Naboth Tyrannically, Banished, and put to death the Prophets, persecuted the true Religion, and established the Worship of Baal by his Authority, but neither the inferior Magistrate, nor the People presumed to resist his Tyranny; it is true Jehu did so, but it was not by any power, that the Laws gave him, but by an extraordinary Commission from Heaven; and that which could not then be done without an Oracle from Heaven, cannot now be done without the contempt of God's Majesty, the contumely of Kingly Power, and the ruin of the Commonwealth. Christ who lived under the Empire of Tiberius, the Authority of Herod, and Government of Pilate; 
p. 22.  the Apostles, who flourished under Caligula, Claudius, Nero, and Domitian; the Primitive Christians, who lived under Persecutors for three hundred years; Liberius, Hosius, Athanasius, Nazianzen, and many other Fathers, who for a thousand years after the Birth of Christ, watered the Church with their holy Lives, and sound Doctrine, were all ignorant of this Mystery, (that Princes may be resisted by their Subjects) if they are blessed, who suffer persecution for righteousness sake, 
p. 25.  than they undoubtedly shall not be blessed, who refuse to suffer persecution for righteousness sake; for in that they will not suffer, but rise against their Persecutors, they are convinced of sin, and acquire to themselves damnation. But are not Princes under the power of the Law? Yes, 
P. 41.  under the directive, not under the compulsive power of the Law. 
P. 43. — but have not Princes given their Subjects many, and must they be suffered to invade them? it is very hard that Princes own voluntary concessions, should be made use of to their detriment, to encourage their Subjects to Rebellion and Parricide; but whatever Princes do, as the Laws are derived from them, and they are the interpreters of them, so, though they voluntarily submit to their direction, they cannot be compelled so to do; the concessions of a Prince to his Subjects, 
P. 55.  do not give them a right to call him to account. Tyrants (who are in possession of lawful power over us, we are commanded to obey, forbidden to resist; 
☜  for in the Holy Scripture we find no distinction between a good Prince, and an evil Tyrant, as to the honour, reverence, and obedience, that is due to them; it is not lawful therefore to draw the Sword against them, because they that resist, resist God, and shall receive to themselves damnation; but no law of God, or Man hath set over us private Tyrants, Usurpers, or Domestic Thiefs, we are under no obligations to them, we own them no obedience, nor are we any way, either out of reverence to their power, or necessity of submission, but that we may repel force by force, 
P. 65. — one Apostle forbids all resistance, another commands obedience to Superiors, neither of them make any distinction between good and bad, and they speak to all Inferiors indifferently, to Lay and Clergy, to Men of all Orders, Degrees, and Dignities; that Man therefore distinguishes ill, where the Law of God admits of no distinction,— in such a case God allows us flight, 
P. 80.  and patience, and prayers, and tears; Christ provided for his own safety by flight; the Martyrs by patience offered their Souls to God, and the prayers of the Church have always prevailed over its Tyrannical Persecutors.   

SECT. XII.  
Anno 1613. Dr. John Downham's sum of Sacred Divinity was published, in 
* Come. on the 5th. Command. P. 177.  which starting the usual objection, what must be done, if Princes command things unlawful, such as with a good conscience we cannot yield unto? he answers, in such cases we are patiently to abide the punishment; in which doing we no way violate the obedience due to them, as the Apostle directs. 1 Pet. 2.19, 20.  
Anno 1614 
Printed at Oxford. 1614 P. 86.  Lancelot Dawes, sometime Fellow of Queen's College, Preached two Sermons at the Assizes held at Carlisle, the second of which had for its subject Psalm. 82.6, 7. I have said, ye are Gods etc. and in it we are informed, that Princes have their Authority only from God; for 
‖ Ja. 1.17.  if every good, and perfect Gift be from above, even from the Father of Lights, much more this excellent and supereminent gift of governing God's People must proceed from the fountain;— the reason of all the sins that were committed in Israel, is often in the Book of Judges ascribed unto this, 
Judg. 17.6, 18. etc. P. 99  that they wanted a Magistrate: there was at that time no King in Israel,— by me Kings reign, etc.— it is not for a Magistrate to debase himself, neither is it for others of what reputation soever, to equalise themselves with the Judge, whom God hath placed over them— and this is not only meant of Godly and Religious Magistrates, 
P. 100, 101. 1 Sam. 8.  but of Wicked and Ungodly Governors too, such as are described by Samuel, which take men's Sons— and Fields, and Vineyards, etc. the reason is, because the bad, as well as the good are of God, the one he gives in his love, the other in his anger,— and be they good or bad, we have no commandment from him, but parendi & patiendi, of obeying them, when their Precepts are not repugnant to God's Statutes, and of suffering with patience whatsoever they shall lay upon us; it was a worthy saying of the Mother of the two Garacs, when they kept Sigismond in Prison, 
Bentin. ●er. Hung. ●ec. 3. l 2.  that a Crowned King, if he were worse than a beast, could not be hurt without great injury done to God himself; a lesson, which she learned from David, whose heart smote him, when he had out the lap of Saul 's garment, because he was the Anointed of the Lord; although he himself was before that time Anointed to be King over Israel, and was without cause hunted by Saul like a Pelican in the wilderness, and an Owl in the desert.  
Then to draw thy sword, and to seek perforce to depose such as God hath placed over thee, either because they are not suitable to thy affections, or not faithful in their places, what is it, but with the old Giants to fight with God— the weapons of a Christian in this case (when such a case doth happen) must be preces & lacrymae, prayers, that either God would turn the heart of an evil Magistrate, or set in his room a Man David like after his own heart; and tears for his sins, which as they are the cause of War, Famine, Pestilence; and all other calamities, so are they also of Wicked and Ungodly Magistrates. 
P. 102.    

SECT. XIII.  
To what hath been cited out of Dr. Bois in the first part of this History may be added; In Holy Bible we read, 
Bois on Ps. 47. P. 936.  that David would not suffer his Enemy Saul, though a wicked King, to be slain, when he was in his hands, for that he was the Lord's Anointed; he had sanctitatem unctionis, albeit he had not sanctitatem Vitae. i e. he had an holy calling, though not an holy carriage, wherefore David said, who can lay hands on the Lord's Anointed, and be guiltless; and if Heathen Emperors in the Primitive times, and ungodly Kings in all Ages ought to be thus obeved, how much more a Christian, and Virtuous Prince? etc.  
After the death of Robert Abbot Bishop of Salisbury were his Academic exercitations against Bellarmine, 
Lon. 1619.  and Suarez concerning the supreme power of Kings printed, a work [as it is called in the Epistle dedicatory] agreeable to the Laws of Nature and Religion, and very seasonable; the Author of which having been the King's Professor of Divinity at Oxford, 
* Prelec. 1. Sect. 4. p. 4.  vindicates the power of Kings, and affirms, 
* Prelec. 1. Sect. 4. p. 4  that Pope Hildebrand (Hellbrand Luther calls him) that the first, who assumed to himself the Power of Deposing Princes, and absolving their Subjects from their Oath of Allegiance, which Doctrine Sigebert a Writer of that Age calls Novelty and Heresy; 
Sect. 5. p. 6, 7.  and when he treats of Rom. 13.1. be subject to the higher powers, etc. he says, by Powers are meant Kings, and Monarches, as the Word is used Luc. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they that exercise authority, etc. in which words Kings by a certain circumscription are defined, because power belongs only and properly to them; thus Origen, Ambrose, and Aquinas understood the words; and Kings are not only called powers, but also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in St. Peter 1. ep. 2. supereminent powers, because in their Kingdoms they have power over all Persons, being constituted the supreme, and over all, and to whom it is given to exercise that power over all.— for Kingly Majesty is absolutely eminent, and above all, being so constituted by a supreme right, for as 
* in Rom. 13.  St. Ambrose says, it hath the Image of God, that all others might be under one, to whom, because he is God's Vicegerent, every Soul ought to be subject, as unto God. This Sentence of St. 
☞  Ambrose lays the unquestionable foundation of Kingly Power; for it expresses, that in the Power of a Monarch the Image of the Divine Majesty appears, and that King's exercise a Power over Men delegated unto them in God's stead, and therefore must be superior to all Men, because nothing can be higher than God, whose Deputies Kings are; 
P. 12.  this also is the Doctrine of Optatus, St. John Chrysostom, Agapetus, and other Fathers; and so destructive have the Romanists thought it to their pretensions, 
☞  that the Spanish Index Expurgatorius, hath ordered this sentence to be blotted out of Antonius his Melissa (though the sentence be in two other Fathers, viz. Agapetus, and Maximus) A King hath no superior on Earth. 
Prelec 2. Sect. 4. p. 19 — and though Kings may be made by Men, yet their Power is from God, by whose Providence and Conduct they are advanced to those dignities by Men, and whom God, either in Mercy, 
Job 34. Prelect. 3. Sect. 1. p. 25.  or in anger decrees to rule, even that God, who makes a Hypocrite to reign for the sins of a people.— Now the Supremacy of Kings, and the subjection of every Soul to them are so joined, that the King cannot be said to be supreme, unless every Soul be subject to him; nor will the duty of subjection agree to every Soul, unless the King be invested with this Supremacy, 
Sect. 3. p. 21. — for all Men (universim omnes, & sigillatim singuli) whether singly, or contained in a body, are bound in conscience by this Apostolical Precept, to pay the duties of subjection, and observance to Kings. and whereas Bellarmin (as others) urged the deposition of Athaliah, 
Sect. 5. p. 33.  to prove the lawfulness of Dethroning Princes, he answers, that Athaliah had no right to the Crown, that she had the Kingdom by violence, that the true King lay hid, that by her Parricide and Treason she had made herself guilty of death by the Law, and aught to have suffered; 
Prelect. 4. Sect. 3. p. 44. p. 47. — and that word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (Power) which St. Paul uses, never signifies force and violence, but a just Power, which must be lawful, because it is from Heaven,— that Christ was subject by the law to the Power of Pilate,— and the Apostles to the Heathen Princes. 
Prel. 5. Sect. 1.2. p. 70, 71. — and that in the Primitive Church, there were no Traitors, who either openly or privately contrived, or attempted any thing against the Life or Crown of the Emperor, when they wanted neither numbers nor force, but they durst not turn Rebels or Traitors, 
☜  lest by breaking the command of Christ they should lose Heaven, and Bellarmin belies them, when he says, they wanted not a right, nor good will to depose Kings, but only forces sufficient, 
P. 73. — it was of old their Doctrine, that the Church ought not to rebel against Princes, and this the Gospel taught them; let them therefore show from the Gospel, that it is lawful, for else let a Man pretend to Inspiration, if he speaks from himself, and not from the Gospel, believe him not, says St. Chrysostom; 
Prelect. 8. Sect. ult. p. 96.  and having shown from David's saying, against thee only have I sinned, that Kings are accountable only to God, he closes his Lecture with these words.— a King is under the coercion of no Laws, because there is no power among Men on Earth, that can punish him, so that when Kings transgress, we must expect the judgements of God upon them.   

SECT. XIV.  
In the same year, Dr. Lewis Bayly Bishop of Bangor, set forth the Practice of Piety, 
‖ P. 479. edit. 1675.  in the end of which he shows, that the Doctrine, which St. Paul taught the Ancient Church of Rome, is diametrically opposite in 26 fundamental points of true Religion, to that, which the new Church of Rome teacheth and maintaineth; and the 24th is this, that every Soul must of conscience be subject, and pay tribute to the Higher Powers, i.e. the Magistrates, which bear the Sword. Rom. 13.1, 2, etc. and therefore the Pope, and all Prelates (and by parity of reason all other Subjects) must be subject to their Emperors, Kings, and Magistrates, unless they will bring damnation upon their Souls as Traitors, that resist God and his Ordinance,— and therefore let the Jesuits, 
P. 480.  etc. take heed and fear, lest it be not Faith, but Faction, not Truth, but Treason, not Religion, but Rebellion; which is the cause of their deaths. 
☜ — because they cannot be suffered to persuade Subjects to break their Oaths, and to withdraw their Allegiance from their Sovereign, to raise Rebellion, to move Invasion, to stab and poison Queens, to kill and murder Kings, etc.  
Some years before this, Dr. Richard Crackenthorp Preached at Paul's Cross viz. Mar. 24. 1608. and in his Epistle Dedicatory he affirms, 
pr. Lond. 1609.  that his desire therein was to testify his unfeigned love, first to God's truth, and then to the Peace of our Jerusalem, and in the Sermon he commends King James' Book, of Free Monarchies, but especially his Learned Apology for the Oath of Allegiance, and proves, that as Solomon had his Kingdom neither from the Priest, nor the People, but immediately from God— so the Scriptures call Kings the Ministers, or Lieutenants of God, Rom. 13.— and that all the Ancient Fathers did believe, that the Imperial Authority of Kings was immediately, and only derived of God, immediately depending of God, and of God alone.— this was the judgement and just defence of all the Christians, and of the Church at that time.— and to prove this to be agreeable to the Law, he citys a Statute made 16. Ric. 2. c. 5. of purpose to keep sacred and inviolable the Sovereignty, and regality of this Kingdom; 
☞  it was therein declared, that the Crown of England hath been so free at all times (not then only, but which is specially to be remembered at all times) that it hath been in subjection to no Realm, but immediately subject to God, and to none other, in all things touching the regality of the same,— in defence of which Statute they in the Parliament then Assembled promised to live and die, as it is there noted; by all which it is evident, that this Doctrine, which is now at Rome counted most ridiculous, it in itself most sacred, as being grounded on the Scriptures of God, and as most sacred hath been embraced by all the Christians in the Primitive Church; taught, and maintained with a general consent by the Ancient and Godly Fathers in their several Ages, and Successions; constantly defended by whole Kingdoms and Empires, and that under pain of High Treason to the Gainsayers thereof, even in those latter times also, when superstition had dimined, but not quite extinguished, and put out the Truth.— that cannot possibly be true loyalty, or sincere obedience, which ever attending to an higher command, includes in it, as in a Trojan Horse, that condition of rebus sic stantibus, durante beneplacito, or the like— out of which, if strength and opportunity might serve,— they might let out whole Armies, and Troops of Armed Men, suddenly to surprise both Church and Kingdom, and much more to that purpose. To Dr. Crackenthorp it is requisite to join his Friend Dr. 
P. 334 ed. Lon. 1675  Daniel Featly, who in his Handmaid to devotion, on the Feast of the Fifth of November gives all good Christians this useful admonition. All that fear God, aught to abhor, and detest all Traitorous and Bloody conspiracies against the Prince and State, because God strictly forbids, dreadfully threatens, miraculously discovers, and severely punishes all Treasons, and Conspiracies, as we see in Corah, Absalon, Adonijah, Zimri, the Servants of Ammon, Sullam, Haman, the servants of the Nobleman in the Parable, Judas: for God forbids conspiracies, Touch not mine Anointed, etc.   

SECT. XV.  
The Famous Peter du Moulin the Father (the Cicero of the French Churches) was by King James made a Prebendary of the Church of Canterbury, and gave that Prince no reason to repent of his favours to him, vindicating on all occasions both the interests of the Church, and the Person, Power, and Writings of the King; nor were his Books, and his Actions dissonant one to the other, for he never sided with, never encouraged the Commonwealth of Rochel (as it was called) and in his works Orthodoxly States the Catholic Doctrine of Government, and confutes the objections of its adversaries; thus in his Buckler of Faith, etc.  
Buckler of Faith. He lays down briefly, but fully, 
‖ Lib. 2. Sect. ult. p. 556, 557. Lon. 1623. in Engl.  first the Opinion of the Romanists, and then the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches, as to the right of Kings, Thomas the chief Schoolman (says he) avers, that the Power of Princes, and Sovereign Lords, is but a humane constitution, and proceedeth not from God; and with him agree Bellarmin, and Arnoux; their reasons are. 1. That the first King, that was in the World, Nimrod, made himself King by force. 2. That the greatest part of Empires were erected by Conquest. 3. That Kings are established by humane means, whether they attain to the Crown by Hereditary Succession, or by Election, since there is no rule in the Word of God, that bindeth to follow an Hereditary Succession more than an Election. 4. That there is no express command set down to obey Henry, or Lewis, or to acknowledge this, or that Man more than another to be King. 5. That for these reasons St. Peter calls the Obedience to Kings an Humane Order; while we on the contrary maintain, that Obedience due to Kings proceedeth from the Divine Law, and is grounded upon the Ordinance of God, and whom no Man may resist without resisting God. Rom. 13.1, 2. and St. Peter in the same place, which they object against us, will have us yield Obedience to the King for the Lord's sake; and although Nabuchadnezzar was an ungodly King, a scourge used by God to destroy Nations, nevertheless God speaks thus unto him by his Prophet (Dan. 2.37.) Thou, O King, art a King of Kings, etc.— as to their reasons. 1. It is false, that Nimrod was the first King in the World, for the Fathers, and Heads of Families were Kings, Priests, and Sovereign Princes of their Families, Men living after the Flood Five or Six hundred Years, long enough to see a multitude of their own Children, over whom they were to exercise their paternal Power. 2. As to the establishment of Government in Conquest, I say, that those, whose Countries a strange Prince seeketh to invade, do well to defend themselves; and if in that defensive War the Usurper chance to be slain, he is justly punished; but if he get the upper hand, if the Race of the Ancient Possessors of the same Country be clean extinguished, if the States of the Country assembled together, do agree upon a new form of Government, and if all the Officers throughout the Country have taken their Oaths of Fidelity to the New King, than we must believe, that God hath established such a Prince in that Kingdom, than I say, that the People ought to yield to the will of God, who for the sins of Kings, and of their People transposeth Kingdoms, and disposeth of the Issues of Battles at his will and pleasure; as to the third, it belongs not to the Question, whether a King succeed by Inheritance, or by Election, but whether by the Ordinance of God we ought to obey him, when he is established therein? while our Adversaries will have the Power of Popes to proceed from the Ordinance of God, though they enter into the Papacy by Election, and too often by indirect means, etc. 4. Tho there be no command to obey Henry, or Lewis, it sufficeth there is a commandment to obey the King, and to keep our Oaths of Fidelity made to the King, and by consequence to be faithful to that King, to whom we swear Obedience and Loyalty; [nay by this argument no King of this age were to be obeyed, because we do not find his name expressly set down in Holy Writ] nay no Man were bound to fear God, or to believe in Jesus Christ, because the Scripture doth not particularly ordain, that Thomas, Anthony, or William should fear God, or believe in Jesus Christ; it sufficeth, that the Word of God containeth general rules, which bind particular Persons without naming them. 5. St. Peter calls the Obedience, that Men own to Kings, an humane Order, either because Kings command divers things, which by their own nature are not derived from the Divine Law (as suppose, to forbid to go by night without a Candle) or because they attain to that Power by humane means, which hinders not, but that their Power is grounded upon the Word of God, after they are once established; for the Question is not touching the means, whereby a Prince attains his Kingdom (i. e. whether by Hereditary Succession, or Election] but what Obedience is due to him, after he hath attained thereunto, whosoever buildeth the Authority of Kings upon Man's Institution, and not upon the Ordinance of God, cuts off three parts of their Authority, and bereaveth them of that, which assureth their Lives, and their Crowns more than the guards of their Bodies, or puissant Armies, which put terror into Subjects instead of framing them to Obedience; then the Fidelity of Subjects will be firm and sure, when it shall be incorporated into piety, and esteemed to be a part of Religion, and of the service, which we own unto God.  
The same excellent Person in his rejoinder to de Balzac after he had asserted, that the Jesuits teach the Murder of Princes, 
‖ Letter 2d. ed. Lon 1636. Eng p. 73, 94, 95.  and that their Schools have produced many King-killers; he proceeds to vindicate the French Church from de Balzac's imputation (who professes himself incensed against the Authors of the troubles in France, though he acquits du Moulin's Person, as one, who made the subjection due to Sovereignty a part of the Religion, which he taught) affirming, that Obedience to our Sovereigns is a thing just and necessary; that to find out an occasion of Rebellion, either in a Man's own Religion, or in that of his King, is to make insurrections to defend Religion by courses condemned by the same Religion; such as these, being perplexed in their own particular Affairs, hope to find ease in troubled waters, and to save themselves amidst a confusion; never yet did the cause of God advance itself that way. Moses had power to inflict grievous punishments on Egypt, and her King, notwithstanding he would never deliver the Children of Israel out of Egypt, without the permission of the King.   

SECT. XVI.  
And though this famous Man Peter du Moulin had one Son, Lewis, who applauded the Regicides, translated Milton, and bespattered the best Church in Christendom, yet God blest him with another, of his own Name and Principles, who in his Letter (as he calls it) of a French Protestant to a Scotchman of the Covenant, 
Printed at Lon. 1640.  disproves their pretended conformity with the French Churches in the points of Church Discipline, and Obedience to Superiors, averring solemnly, 
P. 2.  that it was ever far from our wishes, that your conformity with the Reformed Churches of France, should be misapplyed as a pretence of your expelling your Bishops, much less a precedent for you to take Arms against your Gracious Sovereign. 
P. 37, 38. — take it for granted, that the Orders imposed upon you by His Majesty are Ungodly, and Antichristian; are you therefore allowed to defend Religion with Rebellion? will ye call the Devil to the help of God? Sure it is a prodigious kind of Christian Liberty, for a Subject to draw his Sword against his Sovereign; you, that stand so much upon the point of conscience, ought ye not to be subject for Conscience sake? 
☞  Were your Sovereign unjust and froward, and his commands injurious unto God, had ye instead of our pious defender of the Faith, a fierce Dioclesian, illud solis precibus, & patientiâ sanari potest, nothing will mend it, but prayers and patience; it is Beza's counsel to the discontented Brethren of England, conformable to that of St. 
1 Pet. 3.17.  Peter, for it is better, if the will of God be so, that ye suffer for well doing, than for evil doing; if the Sovereign come to kill the Subject for his Religion, the Subject must yield him his throat, not charge his Pike against him; and this he proves by Calvin's Practice and Writings, 
P. 38, 39, 40. — the Churches of France, have lately declared to His Majesty's Ambassador there, their utter dislike of the Insurrection of Scotland, under pretence of a Covenant with Christ. 
P. 41. — there can be no just cause to take Arms against a Lawful Sovereign,— after this he treats of the French Protestants taking Arms, 
P. 46.  and concludes, that till the Reign of King Lewis, the Arms of the Protestants were either justifiable, or excusable, but their Wars in his time were neither, and they prospered accordingly. 
P. 48. — the French Protestants had to do with a King of a contrary Religion; they were incensed by many wrongs and oppressions; they were in danger to lose with their Forts and Towns, their Liberty, their Religion, and their Life, the privileges which they enjoyed, were rewards of their long Services; by the Charter of Rochel, when they yielded to Lewis XI. it was granted to them, that they should be no longer the King's Subjects, 
☞  than the King should maintain their immunities; and yet these true reasons, and just fears could not justify their defensive Arms against their Sovereign, but they were condemned by the best of their own, and of their neighbours, and God shown his dislike by the ill success he gave them. And much more to this purpose is to be seen in his answer to Philanax Anglicus, and in his Regii sanguinis Clamor ad caelum contra Parricidas Anglicanos; 
Hagae Com. 1652 C. 1. 〈◊〉 5.  (for that being is du Moulin juniors, and not Alexander Morus', as was conjectured) affirming with the Apostle, that even the Jews would not have Crucified the Lord of Glory, had they known him, while the Parricides of King Charles I. wittingly, and wilfully Murdered their Lawful King, and with the King beheaded also the Church of England, and brought upon the neighbouring Protestant Churches abundance of Dishonour, and much danger, while the same madness was imputed to all the Reformation, which had only infected a few, who falsely called themselves Reform.— Nothing hath happened since the beginning of the World, more contrary to the glory of God, or that hath cast a greater blot upon holy Truth; while the Wickedness defends itself by the Doctrine of the Gospel, and is said to be perpetrated to vindicate the Protestant Religion, to the just indignation and abhorrence of all the foreign Churches, for which reason Salmasius, 
P. 7.  Heraldus, Porree, and others wrote smartly both against the Men, 
P. 17.  and their villainous Principles: It is a Law, not only written, but born with us, and springs from the most pure fountains of Nature, That it is a most horrid crime for Subjects to punish their Princes; and therefore we do too much honour to Parricides, when we use Arguments against them; for as Aristotle says, they, who doubt, 
1 Top. c 9  whether God is to be worshipped, or Parents to be honoured, are not to be convinced by Reasons, but by Scourges; and Salmasius hath proved by unanswerable Reasons, by divine and human Authority, that the Majesty of Kings is unaccountable, and that Subjects have no manner of Authority over them. 
Cap. 2. p. 29, 30. — There is no fallacy of Satan, which more prevails upon good Men, to engage them in an evil Cause, than when Men contrary to God's Word believe, that it is lawful to do evil, that good may come thereof, and that God hath need of our sinful assistance to promote his Kingdom, and that whatever is designed to promote God's Glory, immediately commences good. 
P. 52. — the Judges at Westminster were turned out by the Army; because, being consulted, they had given this opinion, that to judge the King was against the Laws of England. 
Cap. 5. p. 107. — to argue from Providence, and Success to the goodness of a Cause is impudent; one man is hanged for that, by which another gets a Crown. Junius Brutus by expelling the Kings of the Family of Tarquin saved his Country; another Brutus' by murdering a Tyrant ruined it; perhaps the later Brutus did an act of justice, when he slew an Usurper; but the first was very unjust, who drove away a lawful King— by the murder of King Charles I. 
Cap. 6. p. 121.  the Parricides taught the rest of the World, that Kings may be guilty of breach of trust to their People, that the People are their Judges, and may condemn and execute them; and these Tenets, they are not ashamed to own in their Writings, that they had freed the World of its old Superstition, that Kings are only obnoxious to God, and can be punished only by him, that they had set an example to all other Nations conducive to their safety, and to be dreaded by all Tyrants; as Cromwell wrote to the Scots after Dunbar fight,— what an occasion of insulting is hereby given to the Papists to say, 
Cap. 7. p. 135.  this is the Religion, which brings down Reformation to us from Heaven; these are the Men, who cry out against the Usurpations of the Popes upon the Crowns, and lives of Princes; only, that they might themselves have that power over Kings, when they had snatched it from the Pope: But the Papists would suggest this with less fierceness, if they remembered that those few, who left us in this point, went to them, and borrowed their Weapons from them. 
C. 8 p. 148. — these Monsters do not content themselves with being simple Parricides; but they turn Rebellion into a Doctrine of the Church, and would fain defend it, as the uniform belief of the Reformed.— much more to the same purpose may be found in the same Book, which I recommend to the Reader's perusal; the Learned Author of which wrote after his Father's Copy; and therefore I have joined them together, though according to the exact rules of Chronology, I should have given the junior du Moulin a place in the next Reign.    

CHAP. VI The History of Passive Obedience during the Reign of King Charles the Martyr.  

SECT. I.  
WEre we to judge of the righteousness of any Cause, and of its being acceptable to God, by the prosperity of its outward circumstances; and to entitle Heaven to the owning of all the designs, which providence promotes, (as some Divines both then, and since have argued, more consonant to the Doctrine of the Alcoran, than the Holy Gospel;) then the most Excellent Prince Charles I. was a vile Malefactor, and fell justly a sacrifice to the rage of his rebel Subjects; but the true Sons of the Church were of a more Orthodox belief, and chose rather to suffer with their Master the Lord's Anointed, than to enjoy the ease and preferments, which then were the rewards of perfidiousness and disloyalty; as the first part of this History hath amply proved.  
And though Dr. Sybthorp's Sermon called Apostolical Obedience, was severely censured (nor is it fit to defend every Proposition in it) yet the then Bishop of London Dr. George Mountain, approved it publicly in Print, as a Sermon learnedly and discreetly Preached, 
Testim. ante contion.  and agreeable to the Ancient Doctrine of the Primitive Church, both for faith and good manners, and to the Doctrine established in the Church of England; and therefore, under his hand gave authority for the Printing of it. Ma. 8. 1627.  
Mr. Hayes. Can any thing privilege Loyalty toward Kings, 
Serm. at St. Mary's Oxon. on Esth. 1.15 1624. p. 3, 21.  Eminence and Alliance might be fair pretences; but neither of these could yield Queen Vasthi advantage,— but what? shall any dare to limit Sovereignty, and prescribe Majesty its duty? shall he, that enjoys the subjection of others by the Law, be subject himself to the Law? no, in no other sense, than that of Aquinas, not that the Law should lead him by compulsion, but lead him by directive persuasion; if he conform his actions to the prescript of the Laws, it is of his own accord; if he do not, is he liable to account? Yes, but it is only to God; against thee only have I sinned, says King David. Ps. 51. those modest times had not the face to capitulate with their Sovereigns; the pride of Faction had not yet hatched this rebellious Doctrine, 
☜  that if Kings obey not Laws, Subjects have leave to disobey their Kings; no, let it glory in no Ancienter Author, than New Rome, and in no better success, than confusion, and seeing it owes itself to Jesuited Patrons, let it be banished this Land together with their Persons.  
Mr. adam's.— When Saul was in David 's hands, 
In 2d. ep. of Peter pr. 1633. p. 755.  his Men allege God's promise, and the advantage concurring,— and what was David 's charm, to allay the fury of those raging Spirits? he is the Lord's Anointed: Saul did not lend David so impenetrable an Armour, when he ran to encounter Goliath, as David lent him in the plea of his Unction.— not one of the discontented Outlaws durst put forth a hand of violence against him; the image, and impress of that Divine Ordinance strikes such an awe into the hearts of Men, that it makes even Traitor's cowards; so that instead of smiting they tremble, like those, whose Office it is to suffer, not to do; fear God, honour the King; there was never Man that feared God, but he also honoured the Prince.— But let us hear, 
P. 759, &c  what the Synod of Hell can plead for disobedience, how if the Prince be bad, an Enemy to truth and goodness, a Ravisher, a Persecutor, raising powers for the extirpation of the Gospel; here, if ever a Subject may renounce all Allegiance, for here is power against power, Man against God, and the Subject of both left to follow either. Answ. in this straight some, for fear of the King, Shipwreck their faith, and these are Traitors to God; others by a defensive sword in their hand Rebels to the King: 
☞  there is no question, but God must be obeyed even against the King, when the King commands things against God.— what then, shall we resist him with violence; no, God never Warrants that practice, no not against a Prince, that denies him; there is an active Obedience, and a passive, I may not execute his impious commands, I must suffer his unjust punishments.— the vices of Men cannot frustrate the institution of God; peruse Mat. 5.44. and Rom 12.17. this will tie the Hands of Christian Subjects; Samuel offered not to depose Saul, though the express Sentence of God had cast him off, and he was Excommunicated by a higher power than ever came from Rome, Saul lived, and died a King,— this he illustrates by the examples of the Jews, and Primitive Christians; and adds, what resistance did those Primitive Christians make to those barbarous outrages, but praying for the Emperor's life, when under the Emperor's command they were bleeding to death; neither did they suffer, because they were not able to resist, but it was their Doctrine, etc.— Christians never prove losers, but when they unjustly sight for their own preservation, provide we the buckler of patience, not a sword.— when the decree was gone out by Ahasuerus, this was their refuge, preces & lacrymae,— the Apostles could work miracles, yet they resisted not the ordinate powers; this charge St. Paul gives the Romans, even while Nero was their Emperor, a Monster, whom divers held to be Antichrist;— that Religion than cannot be right, that pulls down Princes; seeing neither Moses in the Old Testament, nor Christ in the New, nor Levite, nor Prophet, Apostle, nor Disciple, either counselled or practised against Government; which should decide the point, that hath cost the Lives of so many Christians, and still threatens more Tragedies, 
P. 763. — there was never Prince, to whom some Belialist took not some exceptions,— it were ill with Princes, if their state depended on the good liking of their Subjects:— Subjects unfaithful at the heart, may be without the suspicion of their Prince; but they beheld Rebels in the Court of Heaven; we be bound to be subject not only for wrath, but for conscience sake. In all the time of David 's prosperity there was no news of Shimei, he looks like a fair Subject; but he, that smiles on David in his Throne, 
P. 821.  cursed him in his Flight.— there is no security in that Subject's Allegiance, that hath not God in his Conscience, — he that poisons the People with the male opinion of their Prince, is the most dangerous Traitor; to rip up the faults of Kings is bold Impiety, but to charge them with faults they have not, is shameless Blasphemy.   

SECT. III.  
To this purpose also, the Author of a discourse concerning Supreme Power, and common right calculated for the year 1641. but published an. 1680. is very full and pertinent: I must recommend the Book to the Reader, while I cite only one passage out of it. King's have a right of security against all Violence, 
P. 33.  they are above all humane judicature, and only under God, as the People are under them; for which God styles himself, Lord of Lords, and King of Kings.  
Sam. Oats Chaplain to Sir Francis Walsingham, 
Lond. 1633. fol. P. 206, 207, etc.  and other Persons of Honour, in his Seventeenth Sermon on S. Jude's Epistle, v. 8.— Our Lord Jesus performed all Obedience to Rulers, even then, when they were Heathen, and knew not God; his precept was, Give to Cesar the things that are Caesar's— his practice, he paid tribute, and Paul 1 Tim. 2.1. willeth the Ephesians to pray for them, even then, when like Manasses, they poured out blood like water, and made Towns and Cities swim with blood, as he did Jerusalem; when like the Chaldees, 
☜  they gave the dead bodies of God's Servants unto the Fowls of the air, and the Flesh of his Saints unto the Beasts of the field: When, like Antiochus, they burned all Libraries, and consumed the days of the Christians like smoke, and their Bones were burnt like an hearth, when they were like Pelicans in the Wilderness, and like Owls in the Deserts; when they did eat ashes like bread, and mingled their Drink with weeping, and to show the constant practice of this, not to go back, like the shadow of Ezekiah 's Dyal, to the time of the Law; the Jews are commanded to pray for Nabuchadnezzar, though, as a Man, he deserved not the Name of a Man but a Beast; yet, as a King, he is called the Servant of the Most High God.  
Mr. Rob. Bolton, Bachelor in Divinity, and Preacher of God's Word at Broughton in Northamptonshire, in his Epistle Dedicatory to the Honourable Sir Rob. Car, Gentleman of the King's Bedchamber. A gracious Man about a Royal Person, is a goodly sight, and full well worth even a King's Ransom. For never any, except himself truly fear the great God of Heaven, can possibly be cordially and conscionably serviceable to any of our earthly Gods: A Principle so clear and unquestionable, that no Man of Understanding, and Master of his own Wits, except himself be notoriously obnoxious, can have the face to deny it. Please they may, be politicly plausible, flatter extremely, and represent themselves to ordinary observation, as the only Men for Loyalty and Love; but if we could search, and see their hearts, we should find them then most laborious to serve themselves, and advance their own Ends, when they seem most zealous for their Sovereign's Service. Achitophel, in the sunshine of Peace and Calmness of the Kingdoms, did accommodate himself to the present, both in Consultations of State, and religious Conformity; but no sooner had this hollow-hearted Man espied a dangerous Tempest, raised by Absalom's unnatural Treachery, but he turned Traitor to his natural Lord: When he observed the Wind to blow another way, he followed the blast, and set his Sails according to the Wether; which made David after complain; but it was thou, O Man, even my Companion, my Guide, and Familiar: We took sweet Counsel together, etc. Wherefore let great Men, without Grace, profess and pretend what they will, and protest the Impossibility of any such thing; as Hazael did in another Case; yet ordinarily, in such tumultuous times, and of universal confusion, for the securing of their temporal happiness; which without timely turning on God's side, is all the Heaven they are like to have in this World or the World to come. I say upon a point of great Advantage and Advancement with safety, they would fly from the declining State and down-fall of their old Master, though formerly the mightiest Monarch upon earth, as from the Ruins of a falling House. And it can be no otherwise; for they have no internal Principle, or supernatural Power, to illighten and enable them to set their shoulders against the Torrent of the times, and be overflown with it. But now, he that truly fears God, would rather lose his high Place, nay his Posterity; as much Heartsblood, if he had it, as would animate a whole Kingdom, than leave his lawful Sovereign Lord in such a Case, upon any terms, though he might have even the Imperial Crown set upon his own Head. For, Conscience, that poor neglected thing, nay, in these last and loser times, even laughed at by Men of the World; yet a stronger tie of Subject's hearts unto their Sovereigns, than Man or Devil is able to dissolve; ever holds up his Loyal Heart erect and unshaken, when all Shebnas, haman's, and Achitophel's would hid their heads, and shrink in the wetting. Which Conscience of his, if upon such occasion he should unhappily wound, he knows full well, it would follow him with guilty Cries, for his so base temporising and traitorous flinking, all the days of his life.  
Mr. 
To. 2. Ser. 8. p. 637.  Faringdon. If we make no better use of our Liberty, than to fling it over our shoulders, and wear it as a Cloak of Maliciousness, the spirit is ready to pull it off, and tell us our duty, that for all our liberty we are to serve one another; that Christianity destroys not relations of Son to Father, of Servant to Master, of Wife to Husband, of Inferior to Superior, but establisheth them rather,— and his Practice was according to his Doctrine, for he was an Eminent Confessor to Loyalty in that great Rebellion, as was also his dear Friend Mr. Chillingworth, between whom there was a great Sympathy of Sentiments and Sufferings; for both were harassed for Preaching the same truth, 
His first Servant before the King on 2 Tim. 3.1, 2, etc. p. 6, 7, etc.  especially the later; but nothing could affright him from his duty, which obliged him freely to reprove the vices of the Age, he lived in:— the chief actors in this bloody Tragedy, which is now upon the Stage, who have robbed our Sovereign Lord the King of his Forts— of the Persons of many of his Subjects, and as much as lies in them, of the hearts of all of them, is it credible, that they know and remember, and consider the example of David recorded for their instruction, whose heart smote him, when he cut off the hem of Saul 's garment;— they, that make no scruple at all of fight against his Sacred Majesty, and shooting Muskets, and Ordnance at him (which sure have not the skill to choose a Subject from a King) to the extreme hazard of his Sacred Person, whom by all possible obligations they are bound to defend; do they know, think you, the general rule without exception, or limitation left by the Holy Ghost for our direction in all such cases, who can lift up his hand against the Lord's Anointed, and be innocent? 1 Sam. 26.9. or do they consider his commands in the Proverbs of Solomon (24.21.) my Son, fear God and the King, and meddle not with them, that are given to change; or his counsel in the Book of Ecclesiastes (8.1.) I counsel thee to keep the King's commandment, and that in regard of the oath of God; or because they possibly may pretend, that they are exempted from, or unconcerned in the commands of Obedience delivered in the Old Testament, do they know, and remember the Precept given to all Christians by St. Peter, submit yourselves to every Ordinance of Man for the Lord's sake, etc. or that terrible Sanction of the same command, they that resist, shall receive to themselves damnation, left by St. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans, who then were the miserable Subjects of the worst King, the worst Man; nay I think, I may add truly the worst Beast in the World; that so all Rebels mouths might be stopped for ever, 
☜  and left without all colour and pretence whatsoever, to justify resistance of Sovereign Power. Undoubtedly if they did know, and consider, and lay to heart these places of Scripture, or the fearful judgement, which befell Corah, Dathan, and Abiram, for this very sin, which they now commit, and with a high hand still proceed in, it would be impossible, but their hearts would smite them, as David 's did upon an infinitely less occasion, and affright them out of these ways of present confusion, and eternal damnation.   

SECT. III.  
Dr. 
10 Serm. Pr●at Lon. 16, ●. P. 100L.  Arthur Lake Bishop of Bath and Wells. Magistrates are from God, and he resides among them, Magistrates must proceed like God— God can, and will redress the evils, that spring from them, because he is Sovereign in, and over those places and persons, which are misgoverned by them; 
P. 131. — what is our lesson? truly first, as Nazianzen advises, as near as we can, though we cannot as constantly as God, not to have a heart, and not a heart; but to say with King David, I have sworn, and am steadfastly purposed; it were to be wished, there were such a constancy in our Oaths; so many would not retract the Oath of that Allegiance, which they own without an Oath.  
Dr. 
Sermon at St. Mary's Cambr on Judg. 21.25. 1642. p. 27, 28, 29.  Stephens. The King's Commission is signed from Heaven, by me Kings Reign, his Authority is conferred by Heaven, he is the Anointed of the Lord; his power descends from Heaven,— obedience to him is required from Heaven. 1 Pet. 2. it is the will of God, that you submit yourselves to the Government of your Kings. I have heard the Prophet David suspected by some, as partial in his own cause; just like the Northern Borderers, who conceived the Eighth Commandment (thou shalt not steal) to be none of God's making, but foisted in by Henry the Eighth, to shackle their thievish fingers;— but I dare oppose the 13th Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans against the power of Men, or Devils, which would trample upon the necks of Kings,— suppose thy King very wicked, he hath more need of thy Prayers to make him better; suppose him to be a Tyrant, he will give thee the fairer occasions to exercise thy virtue of patience; suppose him to be a Persecutor, he'll do thee a courtesy, he'll send thee to Heaven by violence— Saul was an unnatural Tyrant against his own Son Jonathan, 
P. 30, 31. ☞  a bloody Persecutor of the Priest's of God, a Sacrilegious Usurper of their Holy Offices, a demoniacal furious Man possessed with a Devil, and on David 's part, his life was sought for, and by sparing Saul he should undo himself; he had all the opportunity that might, and security could administer unto him, he was Saul 's adopted Son by Michal 's Marriage, he was a Successor to the Kingdom by the Prophet's Unction, and yet for all this, who can lift up his hand, etc.— are we Christians, do we know the virtue of an Oath? What think we then of the Solemn Oath of our Allegiance? an Oath, which can receive no dispensation, no absolution from any power whatsoever.— contrary to the assertions of Bellarmine, and Parsons is the established Doctrine of the Church of England in the 37 Article; the King's Majesty hath the chief Power in this Realm of England, and his other Dominions, and is not, nor aught to be Subject to any jurisdiction whatsoever.— the six parts of the Homily against Rebellion are so full and apposite, that we must either disclaim them from being the Interpreters of the Doctrine of our Church, or sit down convinced in the manifest truth of this assertion, etc. Consider seriously, against whom would you take up Arms? 
Id. Serm. on Judg. 4.23. p. 78.  is it not against the Power, against the Ordinance of God?— they are Men before God, but they are Gods before Men.— the whole earth combining could not make St. Bernard willingly offend his King, and shall the fear of a threatened plundering make us oppose our King?— shall the common rout persuade me to go to Hell for company?— 'Tis true, God sometimes refines his Church in the Furnace of Persecution, neither then does he leave it naked, and disarm it; but what are the Church's weapons? St. Ambrose had his dolere potero, potero flere, his sighs, and groans against the Gothish Soldiers, St. Bernard fought to death against Lewis of France, non scutis, aut gladiis, sed precibus, & fletibus, prayers and tears were his Sword and Buckler. Nazianzen overcame Julian, but it was lacrymis ubertim effusis, by softening his Adamantine Heart with salt drops from their eyes; thence flows the only Sea, we can overthrow Pharaoh 's Host in.—   

SECT. iv  
P. H. Corah of the tribe of Levi joined with Dathan, etc. 
Sermon at Cambr. 1640. on Numb. 16. 3. p. 5, 6.  of the tribe of Reuben— the Levite, or Clergy alone would have wanted power and strength, the Laity, or Reubenite alone could not have had so fair a colour, and cloak of Religion to cover their rebellious practices; but both joined together make a strong Faction, and a fair show,— our surest course is to judge men's Persons by their actions; if their actions be unsound and irregular, 
P. 10. 2. p. 11, etc.  if they gather themselves together (against God's express word, and commandment) against their Prince and Sovereign, be their outward appearance never so specious, we may assure ourselves, that they neither fear God, nor regard Man, but only to serve their own turns.— if God in absolute and unlimited terms pronounce, 
☜  whosoever resisteth the Power, resisteth the Ordinance of God, I cannot see, how the goodness of the end, be it Religion or Reformation, or the common good can warrant any such resistance from the transgression of God's Ordinance, 
P. 15. cons. the place.  unless these, and the like limitations had been specified, and annexed to the Command, Law, or Ordinance of Almighty God, etc.  
Anno 1643. Dr. Thomas Swadlyn Printed three Sermons entitled the Sovereign's desire, and Subjects duty; (and himself was a Confessor at that time, being Imprisoned for his Loyalty, as he declares in his Epistle, which he dedicates to the World) wherein having proved, that all Power is from God; especially Monarchy, he shows, that every Soul is to be subject, howsoever a King may deal unjustly with them, 
Serm. 2. on Rom. 13 1. p. 25.  either. 1. By violating the Laws, and enforcing their Consciences, or. 2. By depriving them of their Goods by extortions, and imprisoning their Persons; and though in the former of these cases he may not be obeyed, yet in neither of these cases may he be resisted. But what are we to do then? Why, we may either fly away, as David did from Saul; if we do not, than we must suffer, but at no hand may we resist.— When St. Paul says, let every soul be subject, he means. 1. Let every Soul honour the King. 2. Let every Soul obey the King in things lawful and indifferent. 3. Let every Soul be subject to the King in commands unlawful, i. e. let every Soul patiently suffer, when he cannot actually do.  
If the commands violate the Conscience, 
Id. Ser. 3. p. 29. 31, ●3, 38.  yet there the Power may not be resisted, for to resist the Power is a sin second to none, but Sacrilege; the highest crime against Heaven is Sacrilege, and the next crime to this, is Rebellion against, or disobedience unto the Majesty of Earth, and whosoever resists the Higher Powers, resists both God and the King,— the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and signifies, whosoever contrary orders, or orders against the Laws, or the Arms of the chief Magistrate, he resists the Higher Powers, whether it be in subtlety of counsel, or obloquy of speech, and if so, much more a heinous crime is it to take up Arms against the King.— I have not spoken this to flatter Kings; no, they shall die like Men, but to inform you;— he that presumes, sins against the justice of God; he that despairs, sins against his Mercy; but he, that resists the Power, sins against the Power of God; and he, that dares take Arms against the King, would, if he could, take Arms against God too; and therefore as damnation is due to every sin, 
Sermon at Whitehall March 22 1639. p. 18, 19  so especially to this sin, the sin of Rebellion.  
Dr. B. Holiday Archdeacon of Oxford, to strike one's Father was death by the Law, to curse one's Father was death by the Law, etc. the Law then for the Son, and the Subject being the same; where is the love? where is the fear? where is wisdom? where is grace? where is nature? are they not all fled from a rebellious heart? had zeal anciently armed itself against Sovereignty, we had never heard of a Calendar of Saints. 
P. 28. — Salus populi suprema lex includes in it the safety of the head;— and for the members of the body to rise against the head, is it not unnatural? is it not frenzy?— let them remember the breach of Israel, 
P. 30.  which did first wilfully departed from their Sovereign, and afterwards unwillingly, whilst perforce, from their Country; and that afterwards in two hundred years they had both many more, and worse Kings than Judah had; and were at last seized on by the divine judgement, to the instruction of others, but their own ruin;— we may not do evil, 
Id. Serm. at Oxf. May 21. 1643. p 42 Sermon at St. Mary's May 19 1644. p. 65, 66.  that good may come thereof;— royalty must not down for the advancement of Religion— object Rebellion, and ye object all crimes,— it is nearer to a flout, than a truth to call a Rebel, a Christian.— they will ask, what is the final cause of a King? and they will answer, the People's welfare certainly, a true answer, and as certain an imperfect one; the People's good is an inferior purpose of Majesty; the representation of the Divine Majesty is the highest purpose of Humane Majesty— when in all causes, a King is next under God Supreme Governor, how can the People, whether single, or united, 
P. 91.  be the Governor of that Governor? a great Council may be the adviser of a Prince, but as the Statute Law of our Prayer binds us to confess before God, it is God, that is the only Ruler of Princes. 
Id. Serm. at Chr. Ch. Nou. 10. 1644. p. 106. — a King Absalon would be,— not of God's making, for he had made David; not of David's making— a King than he could be made only by the People, and the Devil, whilst by the People and Treason, whilst against the consent of God and David.  
Mr. Berkenhead. 
Serm. on Nou. 3. 1644. at Chr. Ch. Oxon. p. 13.  However we must perform active Obedience to such Princes only, as far as lawfully we may, so long as they are not set in competition with God; yet we must perform Passive Obedience, and absolute subjection, even if they should command the most unjust, superstitious, idolatrous, profane, and irreligious things, which can be imagined; yet, I say, we must not Rebel, unless we will renounce Christianity; but we must let this be the touchstone of our subjection, even our patiented and constant sufferings.   

SECT. V  
Dr. Henry King Lord Bishop of Chichester. They, 
Sermon at St. Paul's Mar. 21. 1640. p. 11.  that lift up their hands against the King in public Rebellion, or their tongues in murmur against his Commands, or their hearts in disobedient, and discontented thoughts are as ill Subjects to God, as to the King: you need not ask, whom have they resisted? St. Paul tells you Rom. 13. they have resisted the Ordinance of God; for he hath his Power from God.— Men like the mutinous Israelites, 
P. 36.  upon all occasions of pretended discontent, cry down Moses, and set up an Idol made out of popular votes and contributions, 
Id. Serm. before the King May 29. 1661. p. 22, etc.  to what Votes soever Elective Rulers own their Sceptres, Succession is the Vote of God, who both declares the right, and then continues it, as his donation.— Crowns conferred by other hands sit lose, and tottering upon the head of such, as wear them; I will give it, keeps them fast. this is the great Charter, by which Kings hold the right to their Kingdoms, by me King's rule— where are those then, who place the right to dispose Kingdoms in the Popes, or those in another extreme, who entitle the People to this power; a strange prodigy in opinion not heard of, till those Men came into the World, who (as was falsely alleged of the Apostles at Thessalonica Act. 17.6.) turned the World upside down, placing the feet above the head, and subjecting the Higher Powers, contrary to the rule of God, to the People, who by his command ought to be subject unto them.— when the rebellious Israelites in Moses' absence, would needs make a God, that is, a Leader or Ruler to go before them, they contributed their earrings to the carrying on that design; but the effect and issue of that contribution was only a Calf. I beseech you, remember from all our contributory Plate, from the silver basin, even to the smallest bodkin, whether we have any productions amongst us better than this. 
P. 30. — Men, who decry the Pope, yet cry up themselves into an Authority as great as his, not only over the People, 
Id. Visit. Sermon at Lewis Octob. 8. 1662. p. 43.  but over the Prince— whatsoever therefore teacheth— Children Obedience to their Parents, Subject's Loyalty toward their Sovereign; whatsoever teacheth the afflicted patience, the happy temperance, the faithful perseverance, and all sorts of People Charity, is that sound Doctrine, which we must Preach, the Congregation learn.  
Dr. Gardiner. It is high time for Sovereign Majesty to send a strict injunction of taking heed, 
Sermon at St. Mary's Ox. on Act Sund. 1622. p. 25, etc.  that we poison not our studies with the Writings of Puritan, and Jesuits; for the one, no less than the other, under colour of Zeal, and pretence of Holy Discipline corrupt, and spoil green age, before it can discern, and season new Vessels with unseasonable liquor, witness that detestable and traitorous instruction, encouraging Subjects to resist their supreme Rulers, when they are notoriously taxed of injustice and cruelty; so that Kings according to them shall be no longer Kings, than they serve their turns; are not these Gospelers, where they broach such Tenets, mere Popes? are they not like to Antichrist, that sits in the Temple of God, but advanceth himself against all that is called God? or do they not work like Samson, who laid hold on the Pillars, whereon the house did stand, that overthrowing them, the house, and the men might fall into a common ruin? I am sure, God's word says, Touch not mine Anointed, and do my Prophets no harm; and this Commandment of Obedience is without distinction. Jeremy chap. 29. commands the Israelites, even those, which were Captives under Heathen Kings, not to resist, but to pray for them, and for the Peace of Babylon; and it is acceptable to the Lord, says St. Paul (1 Tim. 2.) not that ye resist, but that ye make supplications and prayers for Kings, and for all that are in authority, the Prophets, the Apostles, and Christ himself subjected themselves to the Power of Magistracy, and therefore when the Disciple did draw his Sword in Christ's defence, he was commanded to put it up;— the examples are not to be numbered of God's punishments upon those, that have resisted authority by God ordained and established: In the Old Law it was death, if a Man had resisted the Higher Power. Corah with all his, was consumed with fire, Dathan and Abiram were swallowed up of the earth, because they seditiously resisted Moses and Aaron: We know what end Absalon came unto, when he had expelled his Father out of his Kingdom; what seemed more goodly to the eye of the World, than that notable act of Brutus and Cassius, who destroyed Caesar reputed a Tyrant, and yet that those their do were not allowed of God, the end declared; wherefore it is not lawful to resist supreme Rulers, the they swerve from the line of justice; for it pleases God sometimes to punish his People by a tyrannous hand, and in such a case to resist what else is it, but tollere martyrium, to take away the occasion, the Glory and Crown of Martyrdom.  
Anno 1647. Dr. Jasper maine published his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
P. 5.  or the People's war examined, etc. and in it, he affirms, that suppose the King invade the People's Liberties, which could not possibly be preserved, but by Arms taken up against the Invader,— yet the King being this Invader (unless by such an Invasion he could cease to be their King, and they to be his Subjects) I cannot see, how such Rights could make their defence lawful.— and this he proves, 
P. 6, 7, etc.  by showing the Divine Institution of Kings, and what rights God allowed them,— particularly that of being supreme, independently Lord of his own actions; whether unjust or just, as not to be accountable to any but God; after which he proceeds to show, 
P. 12, etc.  wherein the supreme Power consists, 
P. 16, 17.  and that those particular rights do belong to the Kings of England,— wherefore the Crown is Hereditary, where the tenure is not conditional, nor hangs upon any contract, where the only obligation upon the Prince is the Oath, that he takes at his Coronation to rule according to the known Laws of the place; though every breach of such an Oath be an offence against God (to whom alone a Prince thus Independent, is accountable for his actions) yet 'twill never pass for more than perjury in the Prince; no warrant for Subjects to take up Arms against him.— were a King misled by evil Counsellors, 
☞  did actually trample upon the Laws of the Kingdom, and the liberty of his Subjects; yet unless some Original Compact can be produced, where 'tis agreed, that upon every such encroachment, it shall be lawful for them to stand upon their defence— that where the King ceases to govern according to Law, he shall for such Misgovernment cease to be King, to urge such unfortunate Precedents, as a deposed Richard, or a dethroned Edward (too disproportioned examples of popular fury, the one forced to part with his Crown by resignation, the other as never having had legal title to it) may show the injustice of former Parliaments grown strong, never justify the pitched Fields, that have been fought by this. If this supposition were true, the King being bound to make the Law his rule by no other obligation, 
Sect p. 20, 21, etc.  but his Oath at his Coronation (than which there cannot be a greater, I confess, and where 'tis violated, never without repentance escapes unpunished) yet 'tis a trespass, of which Subjects can only complain, but as long as they are Subjects can never innocently revenge.— but they will say, they have all this while fought for the defence of the Protestant Religion, etc. all which resolves itself into this unchristian bloody conclusion, 
P. 36.  that an Assembly of professed Protestant Divines have advised the two Parliaments of England and Scotland confessed Subjects, to take up Arms against the King their lawful Sovereign, have thereby set three Kingdoms in a flame, 
Id. def. of his Serm. against Cheynel. p. 4.  etc. This Doctrine (that it is not lawful to propagate Religion, how pure soever it be by the sword) is that Religion, to which I profess myself ready to fall a Sacrifice, is that defamed, true, Protestant Religion, for which the Holy Fathers of our Reformation died before me.  
Dr. Peter Heylyn Anno 1643. 
Print Oxf. p. 2, 3, etc.  published the Rebel's Catechism, wherein he shows, that Lucifer was the first Author of Rebellion— that the Rebellion even of the heart makes a Man guilty of Damnation in the sight of God, much more that of the tongue, or the hand;— that one branch of the Rebellion of the hand is the composing, and dispersing of false and scandalous Books, and Pamphlets tending to the dishonour of the King; the other the taking up Arms against such Persons, 
P. 6, 7. cons p. 9, 10, 11, etc.  to whose Authority they are subject.— and it is worth our observation, that not only the bearing Arms against the King is declared to be Rebellion by the Law of England, but that it was declared to be Rebellion by the chief Judges of this Kingdom, at the Arraignment of the Earl of Essex, for any Man to seek to make himself so strong, that the King should not be able to resist him, although he broke not out into open act,— even defensive Arms are absolutely unlawful in the Subject against his Sovereign, in regard that no defensive War can be undertaken, but it carrieth with it a resistance in it to those Higher Powers, to which every Soul is to be subject.— we find it thus resolved in Plutarch, 
P. 12.  that it was contrary both to positive Laws, and the Law of Nature, for any Subject to lift up his hand against the Person of his Sovereign; with much more to the same purpose.  
The same Author, near about the same time, 
See his Ecclesia Vindicata p 645, &c Pr●at Lon. 1681.  wrote a Treatise entitled, the stumbling-block of disobedience removed, to show, that Kings ought not to be controlled by their Subjects, either singly, or in a body, the whole of which learned Treatise, as well as his other Vindications of the Doctrines and Rights of our Church, will sufficiently repay the Reader's expense of pains and leisure.  
And in his Sermon on May 29. 1681. it is to be observed, that such as draw their Swords upon God's Anointed, use commonly to throw away the scabbards also, and find no way of doing better, but by doing worse; no middle way for them to walk in, but either to bear up like Princes, or to die like Traitors.   

SECT. VI  
Of the same belief was Sir John Spelman in his Case of our affairs in Law, etc. that the Sovereignty is in the King's Person inseparably, 
Pr. Oxf. 1643. p. 15, 17, 19  and the allegiance of the Subject by Law thereto inseparably annexed, fortified, and enforced by Religion, under the severe menace of damnation.— what straight then of humane Affairs can be so violent, as to make Christian Subjects contrary to sworn Faith; to Law, and to Religion, not only to disobey their Sovereign, but resist and Invade the Sovereign Rights, etc.  
Anno 1641. Sir Tho. Ashton, and many others, noblemans, and Gentlemen of Cheshire, tendered a Remonstrance to the Parliament against Presbyterian Government; and in it they affirm, that the donation of Sovereign Power is solely from God, and so will he have the revocation too; he doth not subject them to the question of inferiors, but puts a Guard upon their Sacred Persons, which to violate, though in our own defence, is a breach of his command, even when persecuted, as David was by Saul, which precepts are renewed in the Gospel.— we see ourselves bound by Oath to acknowledge, and support that Regal Government, our Statutes have established, our Laws approved, History represents most happy— to whom all Primitive times yielded full obedience, to whose Throne Christ himself yields Tribute, whose Persons God will have Sacred, whose actions unquestionable, whose Succession he himself determines, and whose Kingdoms he disposes.— Tacitus, though a Heathen, advises us, to bear with the riots, and covetousness of Kings, as with barrenness, and other infirmities of nature; for while there are Men, there will be vices, but they cannot continue long, and will be recompensed when better come.  
In the 19th year of this King came forth a little book, called an Appeal to thy Conscience, as thou wilt answer it at the great, and dreadful day of Jesus Christ; 
p 2, 3, etc.  the Author of which says, that Subjects may not take up Arms against their lawful Sovereign, because he is wicked and unjust; no, though he be an Idolater and Oppressor. 1. Because it were an high presumption in us to limit that command, which God doth not limit; now our obedience to Superiors, is always commanded without limitation. 2. We may not think evil of the King, much less may we take up Arms against him. 3. St. Paul saith, recompense to no man evil for evil, Rom. 12.19. If to no Man, then certainly not to thy King, 〈◊〉 That, which peculiarly belongs to the Lord, thou oughtest not without his Authority to meddle with; but vengeance is his. 5. Rom. 13. Every Soul (none excluded) must be subject; there is no Power but of God (if so, than the Power of a wicked Prince is from God) and the penalty of resisting, is everlasting damnation both of Soul and Body in Hell-fire for ever. 6. In Eccl. 8.1, 2. the Covenant made by the People to obey their King, is called the Oath of God, and who dares break this Oath of God? 7. God commands, Touch not mine Anointed, therefore thou mayest not smite him, therefore thou mayest not bear Arms against God's Anointed. 8. For Subjects to take up Arms against their own King, though an Idolater, and an Oppressor, is contrary to the practice of God's People in all Ages, the Jews, and the Prophets, Christ and his Apostles, and the Primitive Christians. 9 God's heavy judgements on those, who have taken up Arms against their Prince, though an Idolater and Oppressor, aught to be a warning to us, how we do the like; this is contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England in her Homilies.— then he answers the usual objections for resistance, resolves several doubts, and removes other little scruples; and in the close of all, passionately advises all Men to return to the Lord, and to do their duty; 
P. 51.  for 'tis strange (says he) that God's Church can be no way preserved, the Subjects liberty no ways maintained, but by sin; who ever heard, unless from a Papist, that the way to Heaven was through Hell? shall we do evil, that good may come? Rom. 3.8.  
It would be a very needless labour to cite all the passages to this purpose, that occur in the Books written between the year 1644. and the time of the King's Murder, and therefore I shall refer the Reader to the Regal Apology Printed 1648. the Kingdoms brief answer to the Declaration of the Commons. Pr. 1648. the Plea for the King and Kingdom 1648. with many other Treatises of the same kind; only I shall mention Bishop Rainhowe, who took the degree of Doctor of Divinity An. 1646. 
Vid. Bish. Rainbow's life, p. 41.  when his chief Question (on which he made his Thesis) was, Ecclesia Anglicana tenet omnia ad salutem necessaria; a point, which he durst defend in the worst of times, when that Church was so much oppressed for asserting her Loyalty to God, and the King, for her agreement with the Primitive Church in not rebelling against the lawful Magistrate, and in owning the Jus Divinum of Episcopal Hierarchy and Liturgy.  
To what is quoted out of Mr. Edw. Symmons' Vindication of King Charles in the first part of this History, let these Passages be added.— by virtue of the Canon (Romanus Episcopus) say the Jesuits, 
Sect 4. p. 46. v. p. 47.  the Pope hath power to depose Kings, be they Heretical or Catholic, of vicious or virtuous lives, if in his judgement he finds them unfit, and some others more capable of Government; and do not these Men believe the Authority of Parliament to be as irresistible, as that of the Pope, and their Votes to be as full of virtue, as his Canons, and altogether as authentic, even to the deposing of Kings, and disposing of their Kingdoms.— have they not loosened People from their Oath of Allegiance to the King, and then put them in Arms, persuading them, that 'tis no Rebellion to fight against him. 
Sect. 16. p. 160, 161. — the next thing they mention (wherein they triumph indeed, and glory) is their late extraordinary success in the Field; some perhaps may wonder, how these three can agree together, great sufferings, strange patience, and extraordinary good success,— prosperity and good success, which of old went current only among the Papists, for a note of the true Church, is now admitted also by these Men, to be a special mark of the goodness of their Cause; but in regard, our Religion hath hitherto taught, that sufferings and patience, were rather the marks of Christ's true Flock, than extraordinary success in the World, therefore, etc.— these two names of suffering and patience, shall from henceforth be rejected, and wholly disclaimed, 
P. 168. cons. loc.  as infallible marks of Loyalty and Malignity,— success is the weakest Argument, that can be alleged to prove the goodness of a Cause, and the wickedest Men have most used it.— this Book was written Anno 1645. though not published till the year 1648.    

CHAP. VII. The History of Passive Obedience under King Charles II. etc.  

SECT. I.  
WHen the execrable Parricide was committed on the Martyr Charles, and his Family driven into Exile, this Truth did not want its Confessors, though they smarted bitterly for owning it; of which number Mr. Sheringham published his accurate treatise of the King's Supremacy, wherein (as he says in his Introduction) he exposes, and confutes those Principles and Grounds, whereby the Rebels endeavoured to justify the War against the King; the first of which was, that it was lawful for the People to resist their Sovereign, and Supreme Governors, by force of Arms, in case they be Tyrants, and bend to subvert the Laws, and Religion established; or by illegal Proceed invade the Lives, Estates, or Liberties of their Subjects: This dangerous position, he fully and learnedly confutes in his Book, proving the Supremacy of our Kings, and that they are neither coordinate, nor subordinate to the People, both by the Statute and common Law of this Land, and clearly answers all the objections, from either reason or authority, concluding all with this remarkable saying, 
P. 118.  To speak my desires, I wish unfeignedly the Salvation of all the pretended Parliamentarians; 
☞  but to speak my thoughts, I conceive more hopes of the honest Heathen, than of any Man, that shall die a Rebel, or not make restitution, as far as he is able, of all that he hath gained by oppression and injustice.  
Mr. Allington in his Grand Conspiracy. 
Sermon 3. p. 106, 107. Vid. Serm. 2. p. 60, 81.  Caiaphas' pleaded the exigencies of the State for the Murder of our Saviour, and which of us is there, that hath not a Caiaphas in his bosom? Which of us is there, that doth not rather consider the expediency, than the justice of an action? which of us do not consider, whether what we do be not rather secure, than conscionable?— Men, who will sacrifice both Judgement, Loyalty, Conscience, and all Honesty, to avoid an inconvenience. 
P. 115, 116. — it is a Law much commended in this Land of ours, that no Man shall be tried but by his Peers; now a King must be above the judgement of his Subjects, because among them he can have no Peers.— such an heir (as Christ was in the Parable, 
Sermon 4. p. 179.  Luc. 20.14.) could not be robbed of his Birthright, nor deprived of his Inheritance, but it must be done with violence, and that violence could never had hands enough without an Association,— the Husbandmen without any mask of Religion, 
P. 205.  or cloak of Godliness, without any pretence of freeing themselves from Tyranny, Arbitrary Government, or any manner of Oppression; they declare clearly (what more subtle Rebels would not) that the reason they prosecute, bought, arraigned, and killed the heir, 
P. 208, and P. 210, 211.  it merely was for his Inheritance that the Inheritance may be ours; this Lord had power to call the Labourers, but the Labourers had none to call him to account.  
Anno 1651. Mr. Jane (Father to the present Regius Professor at Oxon, if I am rightly informed) Printed his Answer to Miltons' Iconoclastes, and in it fully, and on all occasions avers this truth. 
Exam. of the Pref. p. 5. v. p. 11  It is hateful in any to descant on the misfortunes of Princes, but in such as have relation to them by Service or Subjection, (as the Libeler Milton to the late King) is the compendium of all unworthiness, 
P. 28, v. p. 34.  and unnatural Insolence,— had His Majesty's faults been as palpable, as this Author's falsehood, it could not diminish his Subject's duty, nor excuse the Rebels imprety.— Rebels never wanted pretensions, 
P. 36, 37.  but liberty and justice, were the common masks of such Monsters; so this Man will have the World believe— Rebellion is dearer to this Author, than Religion, and he will rather commend superstitious actions of a blind Age, and the very dregs of Popery, than want an ingredient to the varnish of that horrid sin. 
P. 39 — Superstitious Churchmen had their hands in the old Rebellions, and in our days we find, they have Successors, that teach the People Doctrines of Devils, and seduce them from Obedience to those, that had the rule over them. 
P. 47. — Obedience and Sufferings are the servility and wretchedness, which Milton calls the Pulpit stuff of the Prelates; we may shortly expect, that as these Miscreants have altered State and Church, 
☜  so they will compose an Index Expurgatorius of the Bible; for it cannot be imagined, that they will object this heinous crime of Preaching Passive Obedience to the Prelates, and leave so many places in the Gospel, which command it; and themselves need not the Gospel to make Men obedient: they have the Sword, and this Ceremony of Religion is abolished, 
P. 48, 49. — if righteousness consists in blaspheming God, contempt of his Ordinances, and scorning the Doctrine, and practice of his Saints, these Men may lay some claim to it.— are they greater practisers of self-denial, who Preach War, and Blood, rather than obey, than those who Preach Passive Obedience, and Suffering rather than violence. 
P. 55. — Milton is very industrious to find out causes, why so many would not be Traitors? why could he not fall into the consideration of the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, that all Members of parliament take at their entrance? 
☜ — how did he forget the commands of Obedience from God? 
P. 59 — repentance is a great reproach among those Rebels, the Preaching of that Doctrine is worse to them, 
P. 64.  than Passive Obedience.— It is ridiculous to any judgement uninthraled, that such as Rebel against their King should pretend, 
P. 66.  they are not Rebels to God.— Christians never thought, that any sword drawn against their King, did not violate their Loyalty and Allegiance, much less that their professed Loyalty, and Allegiance led them to direct Arms against the King's Person.  
There are many such Passages in the Book, 
Medit. on death. p. 257, 258.  but I shall only quote one more towards the end of it. King's have their Power from God, and God gives the Sword, yea even to wicked Kings, and because the Power is given them for justice, it is called the Sword of Justice, though they use it oftentimes to injustice,— the Scripture forbids us to judge another Man's Servant, but this Man will have the Father punished by the Child, the Master by the Servant, the Prince by the People.— Kings are unaccountable to Men for their actions— for if Kings be accountable to Men, are not they, to whom he is accountable, by the Libelers argument not only stronger than the King, but stronger than Justice? 
P. 260. — divine law forbade all Men to take the Arms of justice, without, or against the King, who is referred to God's justice, and justice hath no Arms, but his power.— the Law was above the Emperor Theodosius, 
P. 262 v. loc. & p. 263.  in regard it was his rule, but could not make any Person or Society above him.— it were a profane Oath, as well as vain, that should be void at the will of the Father.— this last Age hath brought forth a generation, that do God service, when they scorn all his Laws, and Religion, etc.   

SECT. II.  
Bishop Sanderson in his censure of Ascham's Book Printed at London 1650. Upon perusal of Mr. Ascham 's Book you left with me, I find not myself in my understanding thereby, convinced of the necessity, or lawfulness of conforming unto, or complying with an unjust prevailing Power, further than I was before persuaded, it might be lawful or necessary so to do, viz. As paying Taxes, and submitting to some other things (in themselves not unlawful) by them imposed or required, such as I had a lawful Liberty to have done in the same manner, though they had not been so commanded, and seem to me in the conjuncture of present circumstances, prudentially necessary to preserve myself, or my Neighbour from the injuries of those, that would be willing to make use of my Non-submission, to mine or his ruin; so as it be done with these Cautions.  
1. Without violation either of duty to God, or any other just obligation, that lies upon me by Oath, Law, or otherwise.  
2. Only in the case of necessity otherwise not to be avoided.  
3. Without any explicit, or implicit acknowledgement of the Justice and Legality of their Power: I may submit to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (to the Force) but not acknowledge the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (the Authority) or by any voluntary Act give strength, assistance, or countenance thereunto.  
4. Without any prejudice unto the claim of the oppressed Party, that hath a right Title; or casting myself into an incapacity of lending him my due, and bounden Assistance. If in time to come, it may be useful to him towards the recovery of his Right.  
5. Where I may reasonably, and Bonâ Fide presume the Oppressed Power, (to whom my Obedience is justly due) if he perfectly knew the present condition I am in, together with the exigency and necessity of the present case, and all the circumstances thereof, would give his willing consent to such my conformity and compliance.  
So that, upon the whole matter, and in short, I conceive I may so far submit unto the Impositions, or comply with the Persons of a prevailing Usurped Power, unjustly commanding things not in themselves unlawful; or make use of their Power to protect me from others Injuries: As I may submit unto, comply with, or make use of an High way Thief, or Robber, when I am fallen into his hands, and lie at his mercy.  
As for Mr. Ascham's Discourse, though it be handsomely framed, yet all the strength of it to my seeming (if he would speak out) would be in plain English this.  
1. That Self preservation is the first and chiefest obligation in the World, to which all other Bonds and Relations (at least between Man and Man) must give place.  
2. That no Oath, at least not imposed Oath, in what Terms soever expressed, binds the Taker further than he intended to bind himself thereby; and it is presumed, that no Man intended to bind himself to the prejudice of his own safety.  
Two dangerous and desperate Principles, which evidently tend, first, to the taking away of all Christian Fortitude and Suffering in a Righteous Cause. 2. To the encouraging of Daring and Ambitious Spirits to attempt continual Innovations, with this confidence, that if they can by any ways (how unjust soever) possess themselves of the Supreme Power, they ought to be submitted unto. 3. To the obstructing unto the Oppressed Party all possible ways and means, without a Miracle, of ever recovering that just Right, of which he shall have been unjustly dispossessed: And (to omit further instancing) 4. To the bringing in of Atheism, with the contempt of God, and all Religion, whilst every Man, by making his own Preservation the Measure of all his Duties and Actions, maketh himself thereby his own Idol.  
The same excellent Casuist is of this mind in his Case of the engagement (the bond of Allegiance (whether sworn, 
Vid. loc.  or not sworn) is in the nature of it perpetual, and indispensible, etc.) and his Fifth Lecture of the Obligation of Conscience, 
Sect. 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 20, 21.  to which, for the sake of brevity, I refer the Reader.   

SECT. III.  
To this Eminent Bishop, 
Jenkins Redivivus Lon. 1681 p. 20, 21.  I shall join the Eminent Judge Jenkins, To depose the King, or take him by force, or Imprison him, until he hath yielded to certain demands, is adjudged Treason in the Lord Cobham 's Case,— the Law makes not the Servant greater than the Master, nor the Subject greater than the King, 
P. 81.  for that were to subvert order and measure.— it is High Treason by the Law of the Land to levy War against the King, to compass, or imagine his death, etc. follow the Monition, and Counsel of the Lord Cook (3. 
P. 141.  part Instit. p. 36.) peruse over all Books, Records, and Histories, and you shall find a Principle in Law, a Rule in reason, and a Trial in experience, that Treason doth ever produce fatal, and final destruction to the Offender, and never attains to the desired end (two incidents inseparable thereunto) and therefore let all Men abandon it, as the poisonous bait of the Devil, and follow the Precept in Holy Scripture, Serve God, Honour the King, and have no Company with the Seditious.  
Dr. Stewart in his Sermon Preached at Paris, called Hezekiah's Reformation; 
P. 38, 39  he can be no Martyr for the first Table of the Law, who is in the same deed a transgressor of the second; nor will God at all thank him, as a Reformer of his Church, who in the self same act is no less than a Traitor to his Deputy; so that as for Subjects to take up Arms against their Kings is by the Doctrine of St. Peter, 
☞  and St. Paul in all cases damnable; so especially to do this in point of our Religion, which so much commends and blesses Patience, and Sufferings, and Martyrdom; either upon pretence to plant it, where now it is not, or to reform it, where it hath been planted, is of all other kinds of contentions, or Wars most Turkishly Antichristian.— Rabshakeh himself was grown so much a Divine, as to aver openly, that he, 
P. 54.  who puts his hand to overturn that Religion he professes, yea that puts his hand to overturn it too at the same time, while he likes it, pretend what he will, he trusts not in God, he trusts perhaps in the Syrians, or in Egypt.  
To what is quoted in the first part of this History out of Bishop Brownrig's Sermons, may be added a remarkable Passage or two of his life, 
P. 183, 186, 187.  recorded by Bishop Gauden, the first that having Preached at Cambrige, that Christians had neither Christ's Precept, nor any good Christians practice to resist their Sovereign Princes, but that there was only left them the choice to obey actively or passively, to do or suffer, he was immediately for this Doctrine proscribed, and outed of his places in the University, and deprived of his liberty, and put in Prison; the second, that when O. P. with some show of respect to him, demanded his judgement in some public Affairs, then at a non plus; his Lordship with his wont gravity, and freedom replied: My Lord, the best counsel I can give you, is that of Our Saviour, render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God, the things that are Gods; with which free answer O. P. rested rather silenced than satisfied.  
There are many observations worth the noting made by Bishop Hacket on this Subject, in his Sermon on the day of the Coronation of King Charles I. on Ps. 118.24. but I refer the Reader to the Discourse itself, while I relate what is recorded of him in his life written by Dr. Plume; that in the time of the great Rebellion, 
P. 17.  no Man Preached more boldly against the licentiousness of those times, than he, challenging the boutefeu's to show, where ever the Scripture gave countenance to Uproars and Rebellions. Julian the Apostate reading the Bible with a malicious intention to quarrel at it, said, that Christianity was a Doctrine of too much patience, but he could never find any place in it to object, that it was a Doctrine of Rebellion. If the administration of a Kingdom be out of frame, it is better to leave the redress to God, than to a seditious Multitude; the way to continue purity of Religion, being not by Rebellion, but by Martyrdom; to resist lawful Powers by seditious Arms, and unlawful Authority was not the Primitive, and Apostolical Christianity, but Popish Doctrine, not taught the first three hundred years, but much about a thousand years after Our Saviour's Ascension into Heaven by the Pope of Rome, the very time, the Spirit of God says, Satan should be let lose, viz. by Gregory VII. who first taught the Germans to rebel against the Emperor Henry iv— this poison was given the English People to drink out of the Papal cup, though they pretended quite contrary; but Bishop Hacket ever asserted, this was not the way to pull down Antichrist, but Protestant Religion; and therefore he warned the Nonconforming Divines to have a care, how they cried up a War, and became famous in the Congregation only, as Erostratus, by setting the Temple on fire.   

SECT. iv  
Thus the truth was asserted in the days of distress, till God was in his infinite mercy pleased to restore the King, under whom the Confessors for Loyalty, who had during his Exile Preached this truth by their sufferings, asserted it as vigorously from the Pulpit and Press; and among them the most Reverend Primate Dr. Sancroft challenges an Eminent Station, who in his most Learned Sermon, Preached at the Consecration of Seven Bishops, comparing the State of our Native Country with that of the Island of Crete, adds, have we not outvyed the Cretans, lied for God's sake, 
P. 31.  and talked deceitfully for him? what pious frauds, and holy cheats? what slandering the footsteps of God's Anointed, when the Interest was to blacken him?— Pliny hath observed it, nullum animal maleficum in Cretâ, and Solinus adds, nec ulla serpens; but they should have excepted the Inhabitants.— and I wish there were no other Island, could show Vipers too many, that have eat out the Bowels of their common Mother, and slown in the face of their Political Father, without whose benigner influence their chill, and benumbed fortunes had not warmth enough to raise them to so bold an attempt.— fullness of bread was also one of their sins, and now I cannot wonder, if it be observed from the Records of History (as Grotius assures us, who knew them well) that the Cretans were (and I wish, there were no other such) a mutinous, and a seditious People, and had but too much need to be put in mind by Titus to be subject to Principalities and Powers, and to obey Magistrates.  
The Devil of Rebellion and Disobedience, 
Id. lex ignea p. 15.  which not long since possessed the Nation, rend and tore it, till it foamed again, and pined away in lingering Consumptions; that cast it ofttimes into the Fire, and ofttimes into the Water, (calamities of all sorts) to destroy it— this ill spirit, this restless fury (this unquiet and dreadful Alastor, the Eldest Son of Nemesis, and heir apparent to all the terrors and mischiefs of his Mother) walks about day and night, seeking rest, and finds none; and he says in his heart, I will return sometime or other to my house, from whence I came out: Oh! let us take heed of provoking that God, who alone chains up his fury, lest for our sins he permit him to return once more, with seven other Spirits more wicked than himself, and so our last Estate prove worse than the former.  
Dr. 
Pr. 1661. P. 34. v. p. 14, 19, 21.  Morley (Bishop of Winchester's) Sermon, at the Coronation of King Charles II. is full to this purpose,— as no Man can take upon himself the Honour, or Office of a Priest, so much less can any Man take to himself the Honour, or Office of a King; but he must have it from God himself, either by God's own immediate designation, as Moses and the Judges had (for the Judges were Kings) and as Saul and David had; or by God's ordinary way of Dispensation, which was by Succession of Children unto their Fathers; according unto which method, as Families grew into Nations, so Paternal Government grew into Regal; and consequently an Usurper, as he hath no claim to Divine Institution, so he hath no title to Divine Benediction or Protection; and besides, because what is gotten by the Sword must be maintained by the Sword, an Usurper must be a Tyrant, whether he will or no. Lastly, a Monarchy by Usurpation is res sine titulo, a possession without a title; which seldom lasts long, or ends well, for he that takes the Sword, shall perish by the Sword, says Our Saviour. Mat. 26.52.  
Again, as Monarchy by Usurpation is res sine titulo, so Monarchy by Election is titulus sine re, for Elective Kings are but conditional Kings, and conditional Kings are no Kings; besides, 
P. 35.  a King is to have the power of life and death, which none, that have it not themselves, can give unto him; and therefore how he, that is Elected by those, that have not the power of life and death, comes to have the power of life and death, and consequently how he comes to be a King is, I conceive, not easy to imagine; the best and surest way for Prince, 
P. 38.  State, and People, is to protect, cherish, and allow of that Religion, and that only, which allows of no rising up against, or resisting Sovereign Power, no not in its own defence, nor upon any other pretence whatsoever;— but though Princes are called Gods, yet they shall die like Men, 
P. 46.  says one, that was a Prince himself Ps. 82.7. and though they be accountable to no Tribunal here, yet they are to be judged hereafter by one, who is no respecter of Persons.— a Prince therefore is to take care to govern himself, not according to that licence, which his exemption from the penalty of humane Laws may prompt him to, but according to that strictness, which the severity of the Divine Justice doth require of him.  
The same Prelate in his Vindication of himself against Baxter, 
P. 29, etc.  among Baxter's Maxims of Treason, Sedition, and Rebellion reckons these. That unlimited Governors are Tyrants, and have no right to that unlimited Government: If God permits Princes to turn so wicked as to be uncapable of Governing, so as is consistent with the ends of Government, he permits them to depose themselves.  
If Providence disableth a Prince from protecting the just, etc.— it deposeth him, if any Army (of Neighbours, Inhabitants, 
P. 31.  or whoever) do (though injuriously) expel the Sovereign, and resolve to ruin the Commonwealth, rather than he shall be restored; and if the Commonwealth may prosper without his Restoration, it is the duty of such an injured Prince for the Common good to resign his Government; and if he will not, the People ought to judge him as made uncapable by Providence, and not to seek his restitution to the apparent ruin of the Commonwealth.  
If a People, that by Oath and Duty are obliged to a Sovereign, 
P. 33.  shall sinfully dispossess him, and contrary to their Covenants choose, and covenant with another, they may be obliged by their later Covenant, notwithstanding their former; and particular Subjects, that consented not in the breaking of their former Covenants; yet may be obliged by occasion of their later choice to the Person, whom they choose.— with many more such Rebellious Trese, all which the Bishop with great reason censures, and to the Book itself, I must refer the Reader, where he will find ample satisfaction in a Manly confutation of the abovecited, and other such popular errors.  
And among these venerable Fathers of the Church, I must beg leave to introduce a Layman, concerned in the same controversy, for when Baxter had published his Key for Catholics, and in it p. 321. treated of the King's murder, of which he says, Providence had so ordered it, that it could not be laid on the Protestants, with much more to that purpose. John Nanfan Esq in those worst of times, writes a censure of the Passage, 
P. 3.  and in it avers, that all War taken up by Subjects upon any pretence whatsoever, or by whatsoever caution or limitation, evermore, in the nature of it, intends the destroying of King and Kingdom. 
P. 4. — that all the bringing the People into a body by Covenant, is unlawful, because Government merely consists in having no contracts of the People acting of themselves,— that in such Covenants Men swear things contradictory, as to fight against the King, and to be true to him.— there is no such thing in nature, as a defensive War against the King by Subjects,— to subdue a King, and deprive him of his Power, 
P. 5.  is the same thing as killing, it stays but the acting— I should be very glad, 
P. 7.  that the World should be satisfied, that Supreme Power should be unquestionable; I would trust God and Man, and Humane casual events with my share out of it, because I see, pretended Reformations never countervail the mischief of Rebellions.— nothing in nature can go higher than its first cause; 
P. 9  a Power derived out of the King, cannot be understood to be against the King, for no Power can create a Power against itself. 
P. 10, 11. — all attempts to bring a King under the Power of his People, are the same as to destroy him; and this was resolved in the case of the Earl of 
‖ Cambd. Annal. p. 547, 548.  Essex;— and it never came into the conceit of any Person to except a Parliament for committing Treason.— the nature of Man is, to think any thing, that hath been done, 
P. 12.  may be done, and so never finds end of wickedness, but to make it infinite; any extraordinary or transcendent acting upon Government, though never so unlawful and violent; yet if it become powerful, it commonly creates something to others to derive from it: thus the Long Parliament declared long before that execrable murder was committed, that in case they should act to the highest precedent, they should not fail in duty or trust; 
☞  having their eye and aim upon the deposing of Kings, Edw. 2. and Ric. 2. and the last actors that completed the Tragedy, conclude power of Parliaments, from former destroying Kings, and setting up others.— the deposition of Edw. 2. was as horrid Treason, as was imaginable or possible to be in nature.— and does doing wickedly create a lawfulness? if so, all sins and villainies by the perpetrating them lose their natures to be evils, and become lawful.— wickedness can be no precedent, 
p. 16. — not such thing as Government can be, if the governed may judge and execute their Governor.— I wonder how Mr. Baxter can dispense with the Scriptures, against using force to Kings or destroying them; his distinction of Parliamentary right, will not serve the turn, since it is absolutely forbidden, as is proved from Exod. 22.28. Ezr. 6.10. Ps. 51.4. Eccl. 10.20. Prov. 24.21. 1 Sam. 26.9. Rom. 13. 1 Tim. 2. 1 Pet. 2.13, 
P. 19  17. which texts (having some of them a relation to very Tyrants) show directly, the nature of supreme Governors, to be born by the People, whatsoever their condition be,— to call them Gods is an exemption from all humane Tribunals, above the condition of Mankind, subject to God only, as Supreme Governors cannot in nature be other.— I think that God would take it ill, that we should mock him, 
p. 20. ☜ p. 22.  to set up a King to govern, and then to reserve a Power to destroy him.— God doth sometimes give evil Governors, and doth he not likewise give them power? God himself forespoke in Saul, and then concluded the People, in these words, 1 Sam. 8.18. then. i.e. when they were oppressed by their King, shall they cry out. i e. seek help of God (because there are no humane remedies, as Grotius expounds it) and call to God for help. i e. there was no means of resistance to be used on their part.— Kings were, when Parliaments were not; 
P. 23.  we cannot suppose here in England any time of Government without Kings; the Parl. therefore was a creature merely of the King's will and creating, the King is the sole judge of the safety, 
p. 27.  or danger of the Republic— Supremacy is the sole governing Power, 
p. 53.  and Government is a constant being, the other (that of Parl.) but at times, and by occasion.— that must needs be a strange Government, 
p. 54.  where the Sovereignty is divided; and lying in divers powers, when they differ, the People are distracted in their obedience.— therefore the 11. of Henr. 7. was made to avoid the mischief of a divided commanding Power, though it be a gross Law, and against truth many times, 
☜  because Usurpers did possess the Throne.— it is not possible to fancy governing power, with a power in the People, 
p. 57 ☜  or any Party out of the King to resist his power; for than he should govern no longer, than the governed Party were disposed to obey, and so no Government at all.— there can be no such thing, as a conquest of Subjects over their King; 
p. 64. p. 65.  it is Desertion or Treason, not Conquest.— there is no footstep, or mark from God of the People's title over Kings, or their making them, or giving them their Power.— Parliaments have declared for titles, 
p. 69.  but never can make any, nor deprive right; it is true, divers Usurpers have had Parliament Test for their Warrant, for those have most need of it, but still it was acted under power enforcing, and so it was nothing, 
p. 70.  but merely so long as the Power lasted.— Conquest is only a great Riot, and multiplying of Rapines and Man slaughters, it is all wickedness, which is only distinguished from common wickedness, as it transcends all other actings of Wickedness; and such is conquest by excess of Wickedness, to make itself above offending and punishment; and if so, than it cannot be in the submission of the People, who are first conquered, before they consent— none of these things make right; for if the outed Prince can recover, and regain power, these things vanish as unlawful;— one instance with us in England of sixty years' discontinuance, yet when it recovered power to act, all the Usurpation went for nothing, and the old came in as Right, not as Conquest.   

SECT. V  
Bishop Wren in his abandoning of the Scotch Covenant. 
P. 49, 50.  God disposed of the Kingdom of Abiah, but otherwise by Man it could never else have been done rightly, nor would it ever have held; no Man, not all the Men in the Kingdom (whatsoever is told you of the Power of the People, by those, that worship that many headed Monster) had Power or Authority, to alter that Covenant of God with David, more than they had to alter that Covenant of day and night in their Seasons, says God himself, if Men would believe him. Jer. 33.21. they were never to meddle with it, unless God himself gave order expressly in it.  
Bishop Laney. We were in a sad case not long since in this Kingdom by a Civil War. 
Sermon at Whitehall Mar. 18. 1665/6. p. 19, etc. — they Covenanted, first to extirpate the Government of the Church, in this they were too bold with the King's Sceptre; at the next turn they take hold of his Sword too, and engage themselves to a mutual defence against all opposition,— though a self defence may be allowed, as natural to all, it is against private, not public opposition, and then too, as Divines generally resolve, Cum moderamine inculpatae tutelae, never to the hurt of others; every Man may defend himself clypeo, but not every one gladio, the Sword is the Kings, and he that takes it from any hand but his, where God hath placed it, shall perish with the Sword.  
Bishop Pearson aggravating the sin of the Gunpowder Traitors, 
Serm. No. 5. 1673. p. 14, 20, 25.  says, Touch not mine Anointed, is the voice of God— nor must we do evil, that good may come thereof, such men's damnation is just.— I cannot choose but remember those words, which I read so frequently in the Scriptures, God save the King, God save the King; God save him from the open Rebellion of the Schismatical Party, the ruin of his Father; God save him from the secret Machinations of the Papal Faction, the danger of his Grandfather. God save the King, and let all the People say, Amen.   

SECT. VI  
Francis Lord Bishop of Ely, hath frequently asserted the same great truth.— The Church of Rome 's Fifth-Monarchy-Men (assertors, 
‖ Serm. bef. the King Jan. 30. 1680/1. p. 13 P. 17.  I mean, of the Papal Universal Monarchy) in the Murder of Conradine King of Naples, and Sicily; were beforehand with our fanatics, and taught the Art of killing a King ceremoniously,— the Life and Person of the King, his Office, his Crown, and Dignity ought to have been inviolable, and sacred in the Eyes of all his Subjects.— if he be the soul of the Nation, than it follows, 
P. 18.  that his Power is derived from above, and is held from none under Heaven,— and as none but God can judge both Soul and Body, so none but God is a competent judge of the King. 
P. 20. — David spoke by the Spirit of God to the Amalekite, wast thou not afraid to stretch forth thy hand against the Lord's Anointed? What! afraid of a conquered King, unable to defend himself, much less afford protection to any Subject? is not that enough to Unking him? yes, if we own him lest assistance, when he needs it most.— tho flying; nigh breathless, panting, and gazing round to beg his death of some friendly hand, he was formidable, he was sacred still, 
P. 23, 24.  for still he had a signal impress of the Deity upon him.— I will only put the case of Julian the Apostate Emperor; after so clear conviction, after so full instruction, as he had in the Christian Religion, having, as some Historians report, taken one of the lower Orders in the Clergy, before he came to the Throne; after all this he renounced his Baptism, he turned a very plague to the Church, he proved the most formidable Persecutor, that is, a tempter of his Christian Subjects to Apostasy: he offended with that malicious wickedness, that the Catholic Church, and all her guides justly supposed, he had committed the unpardonable sin against the Holy Ghost; they looked upon him as one, that had cut himself off from their body with the greatest Excommunication, even to Anathema Maranatha. i e. till the Lord come to judgement; now in this case was it lawful for Christians to cast him off, that had so openly, and maliciously cast off his Christianity? We have the judgement of the whole Church to the contrary; they thought themselves obliged by St. Paul 's Apostolical Canon, to make prayers and supplications even for him, that whatsoever he was, and howsoever he behaved himself towards them, they might still lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty; and they had the Grace, they prayed for, they did live peaceably under him, they never took upon them to Unking him, they drew out no Forces against him, but only their thundering Legion of prayers and tears.  
St. Paul exhorting to make prayers for all Men, 
Id. Serm. before L. Mayor. May 7. 1682. p. 10 P. 11, 12.  for Kings, etc. has left no room for any to evade it, as if he had foreseen, there would be a sort of Men (and they lived within our memories, Men) who instead of praying for their King, would learn to pray against him,— there is a sin unt o death, saith St. John, I do not say, that ye shall pray for it; but St. Paul in my text hath provided even against this supposition, though the charity, that hopeth all things were overcome, so that the spiritual welfare of a Nero, etc. were in a manner despaired of, yet such Provision is made, that as their Prince, he was to be prayed for still, that they might lead a peaceable and quiet life; thus it was in the case of that impious Wretch Licinius, 
P. 13, 14, 15.  etc.— and if our lives ought to be answerable to our prayers (since praying for peace, is but mocking of God without keeping the King's peace too,) then let not any pretend to be good Christians, and sound Members of Christ's Church, unless they be also good Subjects.— my aim is against the Power of Deposing Kings, that has been often claimed by the Bishops of Rome— and there is another Party of Men, who have introduced a distinction of taking Arms by the King's Authority against his Person.— whereas, wheresoever the King's Person is, 
P. 16, 17.  there is also his greatest Authority,— but they tell us, the Primitive Christians wanted not Authority and Right, but strength to resist the civil Powers; but did our Saviour want Power, when he controlled evil spirits, and cast out devils— did he want Power then, when he commanded Universal nature, when even the Winds and Seas obeyed him? etc.— he had more than twelve Legions of Angels at his call; why did he not strike Herod or Pilate, but that he confesses himself Subject to him?— the Men, 
P. 30, 31.  that first broke the Peace of the Church were the first, that gave the leading foul example of waging War against their lawful Prince, as did the Novatians of Paphlagonia, who fought with the Arian Emperor Constantius 's Forces sent against them, to compel them to receive the Arian confession.  
Such as will not trust in God, 
Id. Serm. Sept. 9 1683. p. 10 P. 17.  as a deliverer from any dangers they fear, but will take the Sword against their lawful Prince, upon any pretence whatsoever, their sentence is read in the words of our Blessed Saviour, they that take the Sword, shall perish with the Sword, the Jews shedding innocent blood brought upon them a deluge of blood; and their second desolation under Titus, says Josephus, came upon them in the same month, on the same day of the month, that the former fell upon; and when by the same division of Priests and Levites, the same Divine Service was reading in course, viz. that Psalm, 
P. 24.  which was written in admiration of God's vindictive justice, O God, to whom vengeance belongeth, etc.— there are complying Men, who resolve to thrive under all Governments— they are animals incombustible for Religion (as one defines them) and whatever interest prevails in the State, they laugh at the notion of being State-Martyrs,— honesty is true policy, unless Men mean to revive that old abominable Gnostick Principle of complying with any Usurpations or Impositions, for fear of suffering.  
St. Paul declares, their damnation is just and righteous, 
Id. Serm. Nou. 5. 1684. p. 5, 6.  who persevere in charging the Blessed Gospel with admitting so cursed a Principle, as if it were lawful to do any one known evil, though with an eye to the best, and noblest designs, and with an aim at no other consequences, but such as were most beneficial to the public;— for this was no Apostolical Canon, but a maxim from Hell.— such Men are apt to conceit, 
P. 10.  that they have made themselves necessary, as if God Almighty could not do his work without them.— I have heard, that the case of Jacob's wrestling with God, was Preached upon to our late Great Usurper, and this Doctrine raised, that God's jacob's, or glorious Wrestlers with God, 
☜  might for great ends do some things contrary to his declared Will, which things might yet be acceptable to his secret Will, and procure a blessing.— 'tis a Jesuits Salvo, 
P. 20. P. 27.  that a Man of wit never sins against his conscience.— we believe it a preposterous way of securing our Religion, by giving up the peculiar Doctrine of our Church, the Doctrine of Obedience unto Kings; and we judge it a strange means of barring out Popery, by letting in the Doctrine of translating, and disposing of Kingdoms.—  
For a King and People to be happy, 
Id. Coron. Ser. April 23. 1685. p. 15, 16.  the King must have a right to his Kingdom, for how can an Usurper expect to reign prosperly?— how mice rabble is a King and Kingdom, when every Man, that is but audacious enough, has a fair pretence, if he can but gather force, to overturn any settlement, that can be in such a case; such a Pirate Prince must be always exposed to Tempests.— King Stephen was none of our worst Princes, and one of the most valiant, but an Intruder he was, and he sped accordingly; his reign was the most turbulent of any, except that of King John, another Usurper, etc.— But be the title of a King, 
P. 18.  as good as a Warrant from Heaven can make it; be it so undoubted, as Hell itself can find no pretence to question it; be the King like an Angel of God— yet if his Subjects will be Sons of Belial, Sons of the Devil; so Rebels are called in Scripture, Men, that will bear no yoke, 'tis still in their power to be as miserable, as they please.— therefore, I commend your strict adherence to your former Protestations, 
P. 27.  and to your Oaths of Allegiance— take heed of destroying your Country to build your own House— destruction, and death is not all you are like to get by it; take heed of that which follows, there is another death to come after; 
☜  God has warned you of it, they that resist, shall receive to themselves damnation; as you would avoid this, take heed of that which leads to it.— thus that great Prelate, who, as it is justly said of him, 
‖ Thom. Brown. Ep. praefis. conc. Jun. 11. 1687.  in the whole course of his life, and in all the varieties of times, and fortune, still maintained his fidelity to his Prince in an illustrious manner.   

SECT. VII.  
And of this opinion was that great promoter of piety and learning, Bishop Fell, who having in his 
† On 2 Pet. 3.3. Anno 1675. p. 21, 22. Ox. 1675.  Sermon before the King, asserted, that nothing can be so unhappy, as Authority, when baffled, that the Coffee-house rebel is more mischievous, than he, that takes the Field, and that a Prince is sooner murdered with a Label than a Sword, and in his 
* Dec. 22. 1680. p. 3, 4. on Mat. 12, 25. Oxf. 1680.  Sermon before the Lords, expressed his astonishment, by what Enchantment (but that Rebellion is the sin of Witchcraft) Men should be persuaded to disturb their own, and the public Peace, forfeit all the advantages, they enjoy in a settled Government, which cannot be so bad, as not to be much better than the confusion, which sedition brings, and run upon that sudden destruction, which the Wiseman says, is the end of those, who are given to change, he continues to give the same advice in his Sermon before the Sons of the Clergy, wherein having told them, that a great part of them present were the Sons of the persecuted Clergy, 
‖ On Act. 3.16 p. 61, 63, 68, 69.  a sort of Men, that hazarded their lives unto the death, and their Estates to the greater cruelty, and grave of sequestration for the cause of God, and of their Prince. He adds,— 'tis their glory, that in the day of trial they did all they pretended to, they forsook Father, and Mother, Houses, Brethren, and Sisters, and those more endearing names of Wife and Children,— let it therefore be the strict concern of every one here present to maintain a faithful Loyalty to his Prince and Sovereign: It is the peculiar glory of the Church of England, 
☞  that She, above all others, Principles her Children in Obedience to Superiors, and most supports the ends and interests of Government, which had so visible an effect in the late unhappy revolutions, that the Royal Martyr, who fell a Sacrifice to the misguided zeal of his rebellious Subjects, 
☞  made it his observation, that none forfeited their duty to him, who had not first deserted their Obedience to the Church; nor can you any way more remarkably approve yourselves to be Orthodox in your Religion, and good Sons of the Church, than if you are Loyal in your Principles, and good Subjects to the King.  
On the 23. of June of the same year Dr. Thomas Bishop of Worcester died, having two days before sent for a Reverend Divine, to whom, after he had discoursed an hour about the new Oath of Allegiance, which he thought altogether inconsistent with the Doctrine of the Church, and his former Oaths, he said; if my own heart deceive me not, and God's grace fail me not, I think, I could die at a Stake, rather than take this Oath.  
The Earl of Clarendon in his Animadversions on Mr. Cressy 's answer to the Dean of St. Paul's, 
P. 72.  as a very competent witness, avers, that there were very few, who did so much as pretend to have a reverence for the Church of England, that were ever active in the late Rebellion;— and that it were to be wished, rather than hoped, that the Profession of Christian Religion in any Church had that impulsion in it, as it ought to have, that it preserved the Professors of it, from entering into Rebellion, and the practice of any other iniquity.— and speaking of Archbishop Cranmer, who signed King Edward the Sixth's Will, he adds, if that unhappy, 
P. 80.  and ill advised Queen (who had just reason to be offended highly with that Archbishop) could have found, that the Law would have condemned him for Treason, she rather desired to have had him hanged for a Traitor, than to have him burnt for his Religion— but the Law would not extend to serve her turn that way; if it would, no body would have blamed her for having prosecuted him with the utmost rigour, whereas many good Men than did, and since have for proceeding the other way with him.  
— The Popes, who have assumed Authority to depose Princes, 
P. 151, 152.  have caused more Christian blood to have been spilt, more horrible Massacres of Kings, and Princes, and People, than all the Heresies in the World, and all other politic differences have produced.— much the greatest part of this destruction, 
☜  and ruin proceeded from the perjury of Popes themselves, after they had promised, and sworn to observe such parts, and agreements voluntarily entered into by themselves, or from the dispensation, they granted to others to break their faith, and not to perform the contracts, they had entered into.  
The same noble Person, even when under the displeasure of his Prince, and in Banishment, thought himself still obliged to be unalterably Loyal, as he professes in his Epistle to the King; I thank God, from the time I found myself under the insupportable burden of your Majesty's displeasure, and under the infamous brand of Banishment, I have not thought myself one minute absolved, in the least degree, from the strictest duty to your Person.  
And whereas T. H. (in his Leviath. p. 114.) had affirmed, that the obligation of Subjects to their Sovereign is understood to last as long, and no longer, than the Power lasts to protect them; he rejoins, 
P. 90.  hereby he gives Subjects leave to withdraw their obedience from their Sovereign, when he hath most need of their assistance; so that assoon as any Town, City, or Province of any Prince's Dominions, is invaded by a Foreign Enemy, or possessed by a rebellious Subject, that the Prince cannot for the present suppress the Power of the one or the other, the People may lawfully resort to those, who are over them, and for their protection perform all the Offices and Duties of good Subjects to them; whereas the duty of Subjects is, and all good Subjects believe they own another kind of Duty and Obedience to their Sovereign, than to withdraw their subjection, because he is oppressed; and will prefer poverty, and death itself, before they will renounce obedience to their natural Prince, or do any thing, that may advance the service of his Enemies, 
P. 92. — surely this woeful desertion, and defection, which hath always been held criminal by all Law, that hath been current in any part of the World, hath received so much countenance, and justification by Mr. Hobbs' Book, 
☞  that CROMWELL found the submission to those Principles produced a submission to him; and the imaginary relation between protection, and allegiance, so positively proclaimed by him, prevailed for many years to extinguish all visible fidelity to the King, whilst he persuaded many to take the Engagement, as a thing lawful, and to become Subjects to the Usurper, 
P. 135, 136.  as to their legitimate Sovereign.— Kings themselves can never be punished for their casual, or wilful errors and mistakes, let the consequences of them be what they will; but if they, who maliciously lead, or advise, or obey them in unjust resolutions and commands, were to have the same indemnity, there must be a dissolution of all Kingdoms and Governments; but as Kings must be left to God, whose Vicegerents they are, to judge of their breach of trust, so they, who offend against the Law, must be left to the punishment, 
P. 163.  the Law hath provided for them.— if all Sovereigns be subject to the Laws of Nature, because such Laws are divine, and cannot by any Man, or Commonwealth be abrogated, they then are obliged to observe, and perform those Laws, which themselves have made, and promised to observe; for violation of faith is against the Law of Nature: 
☞  Nor doth this obligation set any Judge over the Sovereign, nor doth any Civil Law pretend, that there is any power to punish him; it is enough, that in justice he ought to do it, and that there is a Sovereign in Heaven above him, though not on earth.  
To this great Minister of State I should join Sir Robert Filmer, but that it is needless, the Enemies of the unaccountableness of Kings, having branded him with the mark of a State Heretic for his Orthodox Opinions, which among all good Men make his Memory reverend, and his works Eminent, to which I advise the Reader to make his recourse, particularly his short, but excellent Treatise of the Power of Kings, etc. See also Sir William Dugdale's Preface to his view of our late troubles, etc.  
The Late Bishop of Chichester, Dr. Lake, having Aug. 27. 1689. received the Sacrament on his Deathbed, did in the presence of Dr. Hicks Dean of Worcester, Dr. Green and some others, make this protestation, being (as himself worded it) engaged in the most sacred and solemn act of conversing with God, 
See the Paper, and the vindication of it.  not knowing to the contrary, but that he might appear with those very words in his mouth at the dreadful Tribunal.  
That I was Baptised into the Religion of the Church of England, and sucked it in with my Milk: I have constantly adhered to it through the whole course of my life, and now, if so be the will of God, shall die in it, and had resolved, through God's Grace assisting me, to have died so, though at a Stake. And whereas that Religion of the Church of England taught me the Doctrine of Nonresistance, and Passive Obedience, which I have accordingly inculcated upon others, and which I took to be the distinguishing Character of the Church of England, 
☜  I adhere no less firmly, and steadfastly to that, and in Consequence of it, have incurred a Suspension from the exercise of my Office, and expected a Deprivation. I find in so doing much inward satisfaction, and if the Oath had been tendered at the peril of my life, I could only have obeyed by suffering, etc.  
Manu propriâ Subscripsit Jo. Cicestrensis.  
To this great Man I should add his bosom Friend, Dr. Allestrey, who speaks fully, and consonant to sound Doctrine on this Head; but I must refer the Reader to his Sermon, Novemb. 5. 1665. on Luc. 9.55. Vol. 1. p. 127. and Vol. 2. p. 60. and p. 253, 276.  
Thus the acute Dr. Sherlock. Some Men pretend great Oppression, 
Serm. on Ps. 18.50. p. 2.  and Maladministration of Government, though their licentious noises, and clamours sufficiently confute it; for Men, who are most oppressed, dare say the least of it. The Liberties and Properties of the Subject, is an admirable pretence to deprive the Prince of his Liberties and Properties.— Others make Religion the pretence for their Rebellion: Religion, the greatest, and the dearest Interest of all; but, methinks, it is a dangerous way for Men to Rebel to save their Souls, when God hath threatened damnation against those who Rebel.— No Men fight for Religion, who have any. Religion is a quiet, peaceable, governable thing: it teaches Men to suffer patiently, but not to Rebel.— It is evident it is not Religion, such Men are zealous for, but a liberty in Religion; i. e. that every one may have his liberty to be of any Religion, or of none; which serves the Atheist's turn, as well as the Sectaries, but is not much for the honour, or interest of true Religion.— So that, whatever the pretences are, it is an ambitious, 
p. 3. v. p 6, 7.  discontented, revengeful spirit; an uneasy, restless, fickle, and unchangeable humour, which disturbs Politic Government, and undermines the Thrones of Princes.— In the time of the Fanatic Plot, 
p. 7, 8. p. 11.  but to Talk, or Writ, or Preach about Obedience to Government, or patiented Suffering for a good Cause, was to betray the Protestant Interest. — God may sometimes suffer Treason and Rebellion to be prosperous, 
p. 11.  but it can never prosper but when God pleases; and it is impossible Rebels should ever know that, and therefore it is impossible they should have any reasonable security of Success.— There is nothing more expressly contrary to the revealed Will of God, than Treasonable Plots, and Conspiracies against Sovereign Princes.— Christian Religion, indeed, is the greatest security of Government, both in its Precepts, and Examples— It requires us to obey our Superiors in all lawful things, and quietly to submit, and suffer, when we cannot Obey. And the blessed Jesus, who was the Author of our Religion, and our great Pattern, and Example, did himself practise these Laws, 
p. 14. v. loc. and p. 21, 22 &c  which he gave to us.— Under the most barbarous, and persecuting Emperors, no Christian ever suffered as a Rebel; they gave no other disturbance to the Government, than by confessing themselves Christians, and suffering for it. Their numbers indeed were very formidable, but nothing else.  
The same Doctor wrote his Case of Resistance, when the Doctrine of Nonresistance, and Passive Obedience were not Confuted, but laughed out of Countenance. 
Ep. Ded. p. 109.  When whoever hath been so hardy, as to assert the Doctrine of Non Resistance, hath been thought an enemy to his Country; one who tramples on all Laws, who betrays the Rights and Laberties of the Subject, and sets up for Tyranny, and Arbitrary Power. 
p. 3.  In this accurate Treatise he proves. 1. That God himself set up a Sovereign, and iresistible power in the Jewish Nation; and that during all that time, 
v. p. 13, 14.  it was unlawful for Subjects, upon any pretence whatsoever, to resist their Princes. 2. That our Saviour taught the same Doctrine, both by his Example and Precepts, as did also St. Peter, and St. Paul 
p. 133. — The sum of St. Paul's Doctrine is this, that all Men, whatever their rank and condition be,— must be subject to Sovereign Princes; i. e. must obey all their just and lawful commands, and patiently submit even to their unjust violence, for Sovereign Princes are made, and advanced by God,— and therefore he that resisteth, resisteth not Man, but God:— and how prosperous soever such Rebels may be in the World, they shall not escape the Divine Vengeance, and Justice, which will follow them into another World: They shall receive to themselves damnation. 
p. 221. — The last Judgement weighs down all other considerations; and certainly Rebellion may well be said to be as the sin of Witchcraft, when it so enchants Men, that they are resolved to be Rebels, though they be damned for it.  
So Dr. H. Bagshaw. 
Serm. on Isa. 1.26. p. 8.  Should Magistrates omit Works of Justice and Mercy, they are no more Gods, but Idols; nay, the worst sort of Idols, that being made to represent, do yet foully reproach Divine Power: but should People resist, libel, or abuse them, and so strive to deface the marks of their greatness, they strike at the Majesty of the Supreme. We may all learn Duty from considering that God is the founder of human Government.  
So also the learned Dr. Faulkner. 
V Christian Loyalty, l. 1. c. 5. p. 183, 184.  The truth is Maximus was a Rebel, and had wicked murdered Gratian the Emperor, and invaded the Territories of Valentinian; and for this cause S. Martin, though often requested, for a long time refused to come to his Table, and avoided all converse with him,— and did also foretell his ruin. And Marcellinus, Socrates, Theodoret, and Sozomen, in their Histories, often give him the stile of Maximus the Tyrant. And Symmachus, a Roman Senator was found guilty of Treason by Theodosius, for publishing a Panegyric upon Maximus.— S. Ambrose not only refused Maximus the salutation of a Kiss from him, but withdrew himself from those Bishops who Communicated with him, etc. 
Chap. 6. p. 233.  The same Author confuteing the claim of the Pope to this Kingdom, on the account of the surrendry made by King John to Pandulphus the Pope's Legate, adds, I shall choose to observe in general, that this Case is the same, as if any Seditious persons, or Usurpers, should by fraud, or force, reduce the King to straits, and difficulties; and should then by like methods gain a promise from him, that he should be under their Government, and shall order the Affairs of his Realm in compliance with them, and subjection to them. Now all such Acts are wholly void, and utterly unobligatory: Because, 1. No part of Royalty can be gained by Possession, upon an unjust Title, against the right Owner, upon a sure Title; this being a parallel Case to a Thief being possessed of an honest Man's Goods. 2. No Sovereign King (unless by voluntary relinquishing his whole Authority to the next Heir) can transfer his Royal Supremacy to any other person whomsoever, etc. 
p. 383. v. loc. — Another ground of Subject's security, though they may not take Arms against their Sovereign, is from God being the Judge, and Governor of the World— and shall not the Judgement, and Authority of God over Princes be thought valuable, and considerable, though he is more righteous, and more able to help the oppressed, than any Judge upon Earth? 
p. 393. V p. 395, 397, 456, 457, 463, 490, 491. — Unless all things be in utter confusion, and Anarchy, it is not possible, but that there must be acknowledged such an Authority, which none have power of resisting; but this can not where be so well placed for the Subjects Interest, as in their Sovereign Prince, and Supreme Governor.— Christians are Baptised into that Doctrine, which makes great provision for the security of Kings, and against all manner of resistance.— But though the directions of our Religion be plain; History will acquaint us, that there have been many contrary Practices, as matters of Fact. But these are no more to be urged against the Rules of Duty in this, than in other Actions of disobedience, and swerving from God's Commandments. 
p. 507. — It was truly observed by Barclay, that Valentinian the younger, who was an Arian, might as easily have been Resisted, and Deposed by the Catholic Christians, as any King or Emperor whatsoever, if they would have undertaken any such thing; for then the strength of the Eastern part of the Empire was then in the Hands of Theodosius, who was a zealous promoter of the True Faith: the Western Empire was overrun by Maximus an Enemy to the Arians,— The Army of Valentinian, then at Milan, were so disaffected to the Emperor, that they declared, they would go over to those, 
Ambr. Ep. 33. ad Marcellin.  to whom S. Ambrose should direct them, unless the Emperor would Communicate with them who embraced the True Faith. But in this case Theodosius protected, and assisted Valentinian, and S. Ambrose disclaimed all resistance against him, and espoused his Interest to the utmost against Maximus.  
Herbert Lord Bishop of Hereford, 
Pr. Lond. 1688.  in his Defence of the Reading the late Declaration, asserts the same Truth; for though he pleads for the Reading of the Decclaration; 
p. 5.  Because, when we are bid to Honour the King, we ought to observe that express command of God in every thing, that is not expressly contrary to the word of God, or at least, most evidently deduced from it, so that every common understanding must needs see it. 
p. 15.  Yet he subjoins— that it is impossible that a true Son of the Church of England should have any disloyal thoughts in his Heart, his Principles commanding him unto entire Obedience, either Active or Passive, without any Equivocation, or Mental Reservation whatsoever.   

SECT. VIII.  
Dr. Matthew Griffith. 
Serm. 25. Mar. 1660. called, fear God and the King, p. 11. u.p. 39 and p. 8, 9  If God command one thing, and the King should command another, than God's command is to be preferred: and yet let me tell you, that the King is not to be disobeyed; for a true Christian is obliged to a twofold obedience, Active and Passive. Where the King commands things Lawful, there yield Active Obedience, and know that it is your duty to do them: but if he should command such a thing as you may not lawfully do, than you must not resist, but suffer patiently for your not doing it, and that is your Passive Obedience: and in both these you may still keep a good Conscience; for though God be to be preferred, yet God will not have his Anointed to be disobeyed.  
Dr. Jane Dean of Gloucester. 
Ser. at the Consecr. of Doctor Crompton Bishop of Oxon, p. 30, 31, 32.  Such is the peculiar genius of Christianity, that where ever it is either Preached or Received, it can create no jealousy in the State. The ground upon which this Assertion stands, is this, that it disclaims all title to the Sword, but leaves him that takes it to perish with it, though it be drawn in defence of Christ himself.— In the Church then, as of old in Israel, there was no Smith to provide Swords and Spears, though against their persecuting Philistines.— To obey Authority was taught, and practised under a Nero, and their Submissions were as unparallelled, as their Provocations. And we may truly suppose, under the Roman Emperors, that had the Doctrine of Obedience been as truly received by their Heathen Subjects, as it was Preached by S. Paul, and practised by the believing Romans, they had effectually provided for the public Tranquillity without any further need of Forts, and Armies to secure it.  
Dr. Outram. The Glory of the King, 
Ser. Jan. 30. 1664. p. 141, 149.  the Privileges of the Parliament, the Liberty of the Subject, the Purity of Religion, these are written upon the Face of the design.— The Principle is, doing evil that good may come of it, and breaking Laws that we may the better observe them.— These Men went to Rome to whet the Axe, and borrowed an Arrow out of the Roman Quiver secretly, to shoot the Lord's Anointed.— Were the Prince a Nero, 
p. 160.  Paul would charge us, we should not resist, and would charge resistance with damnation.  
Sir Orlando Bridgman, at the Trial of the Regicides, says, 
Try. p. 10, 12. v. p. 15, 52, 182, 283.  I must deliver to you for plain and true Law, that no Authority, no single Person, no Community of Persons, not the People Collectively, or Representatively, have any coercive Power over the King of England. And this he proves at large in the same place.— The Crown of England is, and always was an Imperial Crown.— Now I do not intent any Absolute Government by this. It is one thing to have an Absolute Monarchy, another thing to have that Government absolutely without Laws, as to any coercive Power over the Person of the King.— God is my witness, what I speak, 
V p. 13, 14. p. 280. V p. 281, 282.  I speak from mine own Conscience, that is, that whatsoever the case was, by the Laws of these Nations, the Fundamental Laws, there could not be any coercive Power over the King. And this he there proves from the obligation of the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, etc. Mark the Doctrine of the Church of England, and I do not know with what spirit of Equivocation any Man can take that Oath of Supremacy.— Her Articles were the judgement not only of the Church, but of the Parliament at the same time.— And the Queen, and the Church were willing that these should be put into Latin, that all the World might see the Confession of the Church of England.  
So also Sir Heneage Finch, 
P. 51.  than the King's Solicitor General. The King is not accountable to any coercive Power. See also the accurate Treatise, 
See also Nalson's Counter. p. 35, etc. 3●9. Com. Interest of Kings, p. 139, etc. p. 3.  called the Harmony of Divinity, and Law, which proves that it is a damnable sin to resist Sovereign Princes, and answers all the little objections of the Republicans to the contrary.  
I shall here only mention Mr. Foulu's History of the Plots, and Conspiracies of the pretended Saints; and briefly transcribe a passage or two out of Dr. Sprat (Bishop of Rochester) his True account of the horrid Conspiracy — At that time under the colour of the only true Protestant the worst of all Unchristian Principles were put in Practice; all the old Republican, and Antimonarchical Doctrines, whose effects had formerly proved so dismal, were again as confidently owned and asserted, as ever they had been during the hottest rage of the late unhappy Troubles. 
p. 21. See p. 41. — The Lord R— was seduced by the wicked Teachers of that most Unchristian Doctrine, which has been the cause of so many Rebellions, That it is lawful to resist, and rise against Sovereign Princes for preserving Religion. 
p. 43, 44. — Other Principles were, that the only obligation the Subject hath to the King, is a mutual Covenant: that this Covenant was manifestly broken on the King's part, 
☞  that therefore the People were free from all Oaths, and other ties of Fealty and Allegiance, and had the natural Liberty restored to them of asserting their own Rights, and as justly at least against a Domestic, as against Foreign Invaders. 
p. 131. v. p. 132.  The whole design of A. S' Papers was to maintain, That Tyrants may be justly Deposed by the People; and that the People are the only Judges who are Tyrants.— That the general Revolt of a Nation from its own Magistrates can never be called a Rebellion, which Positions the Historian calls with great Truth and Justice, Villainous Opinions, 
p. 133.  and such, as, if allowed, it will be impossible for the best Kings, or the most happy Kingdoms in the World to be free from perpetual Treasons, 
p. 164.  and Rebellious Plotting.— But his Majesty hath just reason to acknowledge that the main body of the Nobility and Gentry stood by him: so has the whole sound, and honest part of the Commonalty: so the great Fountains of Knowledge and Civility, the two Universities: so the wisest and most learned in the Laws: so the whole Clergy, and all the genuine Sons of the Church of England: 
☞  a Church whose glory it is to have been never tainted with the least blemish of disloyalty.  
Dr. Pocock. 
In ch. 8. Hos. 4. p. 388, 389.  Some Interpreters by Setting up Kings, but not by me, would understand Saul; but that cannot with reason be imagined. Others looking on the sin of the Israelites to be their defection from the House of David, on which God had entailed the Right and Title of the Kingdom, and their changing of the Kinghom, and Priesthood of their own heads, will have the words to concern their setting up of Jeroboam, and his Successors in opposition to the House of David, as appears by their carriage. 1 Kings 12.16. when not liking Rehoboam's answer to them, they cried, what portion have we in David? etc. no command, or instructions were (for aught we find) given them by Abijah, or any other from God; neither did they, in what they did, consult with God by that Prophet, or any other means to know his pleasure therein; but what they did, was of their own heads, out of a rebellious humour of casting off their lawful Sovereigns of the House of David, in which God had settled the right of the Kingdom; so that, though they so fulfilled the Will and Counsel of God, yet they did it, not in obedience to them, but with contrary intentions, and plain disobedience; and so were no more justifiable in it, than the Jews in murdering Christ, than Judas in betraying Innocent Blood, that it was determined by God.— and the setting up of his Successors, was a continuance of defection from the House of David, and a Rebellion against God.— others by, setting up Kings without me, etc. would mean, their seeking to Foreign Kings and Princes for help, as to the Assyrians, and King Jareb ch. 5.13. to Egypt ch. 7.11. so forsaking God, and their dependence on him, and setting up them as Patrons, and Protectors to themselves.  
Dr. Fitz Williams. 
Serm. of the duties of fearing God, and the King. p. 4, v. p. 5, 6.  Subjects withdrawing their obedience from their lawful Prince is a denying God's Authority;— Treason against him is a kind of Sacrilege; a revolt from him, an Apostasy from God; a resisting him, an opposing God; rebelling against him, fight with God; the setting up the title of a Counterfeit Prince against the true one, an introducing a plurality of Godheads; the obeying of an Usurper, Idolatry; the slandering his Anointed, and his Footsteps, a Blaspheming God; the blaming his conduct, 
P. 15.  a quarrelling with Providence. breaking through all Oaths,— Oaths, in which they deposited with them the richest pawn, it was possible for them to stake down, and gave them the strongest security, that others could require of their fidelity and obedience, their Salvation; Oaths, in which they called God's Omniscience to witness these engagements and his justice, and power to revenge the breach of them.— can it be thought, that he, 
P. 23.  who will not hold him guiltless, that takes his name in vain, should connive at the violation of all obligations of duty, and fidelity contracted in that name,— if Men shall be in danger of Hell-fire for calling their Brother Fool, shall they be in none for railing against their Superiors invested with Authority from above, and acting by a Commission from Heaven? St. Peter, and St. Judas have taught us, that God reserves such, who speak evil of dignities, unto the day of Judgement to be punished in the blackness of darkness for ever.  
Mr. Wagstaffe. 
Serm. Sep. 9 1683. p. 11, 12.  It is the glory of our Reformation, that as it proceeded by the most peaceable and orderly steps, so it held the most peaceable and orderly Doctrines; the first Reformers pleaded, as the Primitive Christians did, that they always paid subjection to the powers set over them— that they always complied with the will of their Rulers, where they lawfully might, and where they might not, they submitted with patience, and always chose rather to suffer, than to be seditions, turbulent, and unquiet; this was the first Reformation, and this the true Protestant Doctrine; but alas! since that time there hath risen up another Protestant Religion, 
P. 33, 34. See also his Serm. July 26. 1685 p. 18, 19 21, 22, etc.  and another Reformation, etc. it is the peculiar glory of the Church of England, that it never hath, either by Doctrine or Practice, in the least encouraged, or countenanced any thing tending to Treason, Sedition, or Rebellion.— it is impossible, that any Man, so l●●g as he continues in the Communion of the Church of England, should be a Matineer or a Traitor.  
Of this Opinion also are, the Authors of the Remarks 
† P. 32, 33, 34, 35.  on Popery represented, etc. as to the deposing Doctrine; 
* P●●● Prosecution ●o persecution p 21. See his mod. Pharisee. p. 4, 23. Id misch. of Anarchy p. 13. v. p 33, 55, 56, 57, &c Exposit. 5. Comm. in private devot. Ox. 1089. In lib. 4. antiquit: p. 294. con. loc.  and of the Catholic balance. Dr. Bisby. Formy part I wish as well to my Religion as any Man, and pray as hearty for the continuance of it— but to put by my lawful Prince, because I suspect he will call me to account for my Religion, and thereby make me worthy of suffering for Christ, nay blessed; this my Duty, my Conscience, my Oaths, my Religion will not suffer me to do,— a King supposes a Power Sovereign accountable to none but to God, who is the King of Kings, and the last Judge of Men.  
Dr. Ed. Bernard. I will obey, I will reverence all my Superiors, Spiritual, and Temporal, and in all things not plainly repugnant to God's Word; and whenever they command any thing contrary thereto, if I may not according to Law, Righteousness, and Honour appeal to a superior Power on Earth, I will patiently submit to their censures and penalties.  
The Oxford Notes on Josephus treat largely of this Subject and say, that the Pharisees were the Men, who under the doubtful, and linsey woolsey Government of the Maccabees brought in these Maxims, that the King could do nothing without the High Priest and the Sanhedrim (because in weighty matters he used to consult them of his own choice) that his luxury and other vices ought to be maturely corrected; and that an Aristocracy was a better Government, than that of a single Person; that they themselves might be concerned in the Government; although in that very Age it was a celebrated Axiom among the Jews, that the Majesty of their Kings was so sublime, that it ought not to be stooped to the Senate— the King gives judgement, but no Man judges him; that God only calls the King to account, but no mortal Person; with many other citations out of the Rabbinical Writers to the same purpose. Such Doctrines therefore contrary to the Rights of Kings, Josephus would never have vented, if he had been less addicted to the Opinions of Hillel and Shammai, and had remembered the Golden Times of David and Solomon; or the flourishing State of Judea in other Reigns; for the Posterity of David down to the Assyrian Captivity, exercised a full Power (a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as truly such, as any that Asia ever saw) in all Affairs, Sacred and Civil, etc. beware therefore, O you Princes, of the Doctrine of the Scribes, and Pharisees, Hypocrites, of the Rabbis, Jesuits, and Presbyterians.  
Dr. South with great smartness censuring the solemn League and Covenant, observes these two things. 1. That those, 
Serm. at St. Mary's Oxf Jan. 30. 1660. and before the King Jan. 30. 1661.  who promise Obedience to the King, only so far as he preserves the true Religion and Liberties of the Kingdom, (withal reckoning themselves Judges of what Religion is true, what false, and when these Liberties are invaded, and when not) do by this put it within their own Power to judge, when Religion, Faith, and Liberties are Invaded, as they think convenient; and from such judgement to absolve themselves from their Allegiance. 2. That those very Persons, who thus covenanted, had already from Pulpit and Press declared, the Religion established in the Church of England, and then maintained by the King to be Popish and Idolatrous, and withal, that the King had actually Invaded their Liberties.— was there any thing in the Book of God to warrant this Rebellion?— Why yes, Daniet dreamt a Dream, and there is also something in the Revelation concerning a Beast, and a little horn, and a fifth Viol; and therefore the King ought undoubtedly to die: 
☜ — others plead providential dispensations; God's work it seems must be regarded before his Word;— as if when we have a Man's Handwriting, we should endeavour to take his meaning by the measure of his foot,— we have lived under that model of Religion, in which nothing hath been counted impious, but Loyalty, nothing absurd but restitution.— the Church of England is the only Church in Christendom we read of, whose avowed Practices and Principles, disown all resistance of the Civil Power, and with the saddest experience, and truest Policy, and reason will evince itself to be the only one, that is durably consistent with the English Monarchy; let Men look back into its Primitive Doctrine, and its History, and they will find, neither the Calvin's, nor the Knox's, the Junius Brutus', the Synods, nor the Holy Commonwealths on the one side; nor yet the Bellarmin's, nor the Mariana's on the other.   

SECT. IX.  
And here it is necessary to mention the several Addresses, that own the same Doctrine; and I shall begin with that of the two Universities; that of Oxford runs thus, being according to an Act of Convocation dated Febr. 21. 1685.  
May it please your Majesty, etc.  
We your Majesty's most dutiful, etc.— as we can never swerve from the Principles of our Institution in this place, and our Religion by Law established in the Church of England, which indispensibly binds us to bear all Faith, and true Obedience to our Sovereign without any restrictions, or limitations— so we presume to assure your Majesty, that no consideration whatsoever shall be able to shake that steadfast Loyalty and Allegiance, which in the days of your Blessed Father, that Glorious Martyr, and in the late times of discrimination, stood here firm, and unalterable to your Royal Brother and yourself, under the sharpest trials; and that we shall constantly (by God's assistance) with our utmost zeal and sidelity, improve all those advantages, wherewith God and your Majesty have entrusted us in this ancient nursery of Learning, to promote the quiet, happiness, and security of your Majesty's Reign over us.  
Thus also the University of Cambridge in their Address tendered by the Vicechancellor, 
Gaznum. 2019.  etc. Mar. 23. 1684.— We do with all humble submission present to your Sacred Majesty our unfeigned Loyalty, the most valuable Tribute that we can give, or your Majesty receive from us: this is a Debt which we shall be always paying, and always owing; it being a Duty naturally flowing from the very Principles of our Holy Religion, by which we have been enabled in the worst of times to breed as true, and steady Subjects as the World can show, as well in the Doctrine, as Practise of Loyalty, from which we can never departed.  
Many other Addresses, 
Gaz num. 2008. 2012. 2013. 2016. 2018, etc.  of the same kind, were made by the University of Dublin: by the Bishop and Clergy of the City of London: the Bishop and Clergy of Chester: the Bishops of Bath and Wells, and of Hereford: and in truth of all the Dioceses, I think, in England, Scotland, and Ireland: besides such as were tendered by Lords Lieutenants, Grand Juries, and particular Societies. For which Sense of the Nation, in those days, I must refer the Reader to the Prints, while I only subjoin the memorable Close of the Address tendered by the Bishop, Vicar-General, and the Clergy of the Cathedral, and City of Bristol.  
The Church of England is peculiarly endeared to us, for that (above all that is called Religion in the World) it twists Piety with Loyalty; and, without Reserve, Recognizeth your Sacred Majesty as the Sovereign, and Supreme Power within your Majesty's Realms and Dominions, against whom there is no rising up, and only less than God himself. According to the Dictates of that most excellent Religion, we abhor all those Antimonarchical Persons and Principles, which would either exclude Princes from their just Rights, or disturb the peaceable enjoyment of them. And we earnestly beseech the King of Kings, that your Majesty's Throne may not only be Established, but raised still higher upon the ruins of those that shall endeavour to Subvert, or Supplant it.   

SECT. X.  
Dr. Stillingfleet, 
Origin. Brit. c. 5. p. 319.  enquiring into the Reasons why the Saxons were called into Britain by Vortigern, quotes Gildas, who affirms, That after the Britain's found themselves deserted by the Romans, they set up Kings of their own, and soon after put them down again, and made Choice of worse in their room. Adding, it is plain, that he supposes, that the Britain's, in that Confusion they were in, took upon them, without regard to their Duty, to place, and displace them.— But withal he observes, that then the Britain's were left to their full liberty by the Roman Empire, that there was no Line remaining to succeed in the Government, nor so much as to determine their Choice, which made them so easily to make, and unmake their Kings; who lost their Purple, and their Lives together. This must needs breed infinite confusions among them, and every one who came to be King, lived in perpetual fear of being served as others had been before him. And the natural Consequence of this jealousy of their own Subjects, was looking out for assistance from abroad, which, I doubt not, was one great reason of Vortigern 's sending for the Saxons, hoping to secure himself by their means against his own People: although it proved at last the ruin both of himself, and his People.  
And whereas Cressy, in his answer to my Lord of Clarendon's Vindicaon of the Dean of S. Paul's, had objected, That days of Thanksgiving were kept for the discovery, and prevention of such personal Treasons (as the Gunpowder Treason) but none for the Deliverance of the whole Kingdoms from almost an Universal Rebellion; as if their were no necessity of requiring from any a retraction of the Principles of Rebellion, or a promise that they shall not be renewed. 
Answ. to the Letter Apologet. c. 5. p. 334.  The Dean smartly rejoins By this we might think Mr. Cressy a stranger in his own Country, and that he had never heard of the 30. of January, or the 29. of May, which are solemnly observed in our Church, and the Offices joined with that of the 5. of November, and are purposely intended for that very thing, 
☜  which he denies to be taken notice of by us in such a manner.— what doth Mr. Cressy think the Renunciation of the Covenant was intended for, if not to prevent the mischief of the former Rebellion? — After his, he gives an Historical account of the Controversy in England about the Power of Princes, and the Usurpations of the Pope over them, 
p. 348.  and having cited Pope Gregory the Seventh's Letter, wherein he avers, That Kings had their beginnings from Men, who gained their Authority over their equals by blind Ambition, and intolerable Presumption, by Rapines and Murders, by Perfidiousness, and all manner of Wickedness: 
☞  He subjoins, Is not this a very pretty account of the Original of Civil Power by the Head of the Church? The Oath of Allegiance sworn to the Pope, 
p. 366.  leaves no room for Allegiance to Princes, any more than a person who hath already sworn Allegiance to one Prince, hath liberty to swear the same thing to another, 
p. 370.  which it is impossible he should keep to both. — And discoursing of King Stephen, he says, that his Title being very bad, he saw it necessary for him to strengthen it by the Pope's Authority,— and that during his Usurpation all the Rights of the Crown were lost. 
p. 373. p. 452. — Again he says, If depriving Sovereign Princes of their Crown and Dignity, endeavouring by open Rebellions, and secret Conspiracies to take away their Lives, be not Treasons, there are none such in the World. 
p. 463.  If the Primitive Christians had been guilty of so many horrible Treasons, 
☞  and Conspiracies, if they had attempted to deprive Emperors of their Crowns, and absolved Subjects from their Allegiance to them, if they had joined with their open, and declared Enemies, and employed Persons time after time to assassinate them, what would the World have said of their sufferings? Would Men of any common sense have said, they were Martyrs for Religion? but that they died justly, and deservedly for their Treasons.— the late Regicides pleaded the cause of God and Religion.  
The Scripture attributes the great revolutions of Government to a particular Providence of God; 
Id. Ser. on 1 Cor. 12.24, 25. p. 17.  God is the Judge, or the Supreme Arbitrator of the Affairs of the World, he putteth down one, and setteth up another; which holds with respect to Nations, as well as particular Persons; which doth not found any right of Dominion (as some fancied, till the Argument from Providence was returned with great force upon themselves) but it shows, that when God pleases to make use of Persons or Nations, as the scourges in his hand, to punish People with, he gives them success above their hopes or expectations, but that success gives them no right.  
Suppose a Prosperous Usurper in this Kingdom, 
Id. ans. to the first royal paper. p. 23. and vindicat of that ans. p. 64.  had gained a considerable Interest in it, and challenged a Title to the whole; and therefore required of all the King's Subjects within his power, to own him to be rightful King; upon this many of them are forced to withdraw, because they will not own his Title; is this an Act of Rebellion, and not rather of true Loyalty,— 
‖ Id. Vindi. p. 37. and ans. to the 1st. part. p. 19  the Doctrines of deposing Princes, and absolving Subjects from their Allegiance, are errors in matters of practice of the highest importance; 
* Id. ans. to 2d. royal paper p. 40, 55. — if fancy only keeps us firm to the Church of England, might it not as well have been said, that the Protestants of the Church of England, adhered to the Crown in the times of Rebellion out of fancy, and not out of judgement? and that if their fancy changed, they might as well have joined with the Rebels.— as we have cause to be thankful to God, when Kings are Nursing Fathers to our Church; so we shall never cease to pray for their continuing so, and that in all things we may behave ourselves towards them, as becomes Good Christians, and Loyal Subjects; and whereas the Defender of the Royal Papers. p. 80. argued against this, that Subjects were no longer according to this Doctrine to be Loyal, than their King is a Nursing Father to their Church, the Doctor wipes off the Aspersion by telling him, 
† Vindic. of the ans. p. 101. ☜ P. 86.  that he had put an ill construction on his words far from the intention of the Author, who thinks it a part of a good Christian, to be always a Loyal Subject.— I desire this Gentleman to resolve me, whether in the late times of Usurpation this had been good Doctrine; that those, who enjoy or pretend to Supreme Power, are to be judges in their own case? if so, than it had been impossible for Men to have justified their Loyalty to the Royal Family, than very unjustly put out of possession, 
P. 88, 89. — it is some comfort, that our Church is confessed to teach the Orthodox Doctrine of Loyalty, and her practice to be conformable thereto in the worst of times; (and so the Doctor hopes, it will always be)— But it hath been said by some body, 
☜  that we have nothing peculiar to our Church, but our Doctrine of Nonresistance; this might have given occasion to inquire, whether the Church, which pretends to be infallible, doth teach it so Orthodoxly or not? or whether those, who do think themselves obliged to believe what she teaches, are thereby obliged to the strictest Principles of Loyalty? 
☜ — this our Church doth not only teach them as her own Doctrine, but, which is far more effectual, as the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles, and of the Primitive Church; which, I think, aught to have more force on the Consciences of Men, 
P. 99  than the pretence to Infallibility in any Church in the World. 
☜ — Is it any argument that the constitution of our Government is not firm, or that Loyal Subjects cannot be certain of their duty, because Men of ill Principles have run away with false notions of a Fundamental contract and coordinate power?— and whereas it might be objected, that propositions as dangerous, as those of the Jesuits, were held by some among ourselves (witness those condemned at Oxford July. 26. 1683.) We cannot deny, says he, but that there have been Men of ill Minds, and disloyal Principles, Factious and Disobedient, Enemies to the Government, both in Church and State; but have these Men ever had that countenance from the Doctrines of the guides of our Church, which the deposing Doctrine hath had in the Church of Rome? To make the Case parallel, he must suppose our Houses of Convocation to have several times declared these damnable Doctrines, and given encouragement to Rebels to proceed against their Kings, and the University of Oxford to have condemned them.— how come the Principles of the Regicides among us to be paralleled with this Doctrine, when the Principles of our Church are so directly contrary to them? and our Houses of Convocation, would as readily condemn any such damnable Doctrines, as the University of Oxford? and all the World knows, how repugnant such Principles are to those of the Church of England. And none can be Rebels to their Prince, but they must be false to our Church.  
The same Author in his accurate Preface to the Jesuits Loyalty; says, 
P. 1, 2.  that though the Jesuits walk in darkness, and do mischief, his intention was to set such marks and characters upon them, that when others see them, they might take the wind of them, and avoid the infection.— and that he published the Jesuits Treatises, because some poisons lose their force, when they are exposed to the open air; and thereupon addressing himself to the Jesuits, he endeavours to prove two things. 
P. 3.  1. That if you do not renounce the Pope's power of deposing Princes, and absolving Subjects from their Allegiance, you can give no real security to the Government. 2. That if you do renounce it, you have no reason to stick at the Oath of Allegiance,— to prove the first, he says, it is allowed by all Friends to our King and his Government, 
☞  that the Commonwealth Principles are destructive to it, and that none, who do own them, can give sufficient security for their Allegiance. I shall therefore prove, that all the mischievous consequences of the Republican Principles do follow upon the owning the Pope's Power of deposing Princes. 
P. 4. — Now the mischief of the Commonwealth Principles lay in these things. 1. Setting up a Court of Judicature over Sovereign Princes. 
☞  2. Breaking the Oaths and Bonds of Allegiance Men had entered into. 3. Justifying Rebellion on the account of Religion. As to the first of setting up a Spiritual High-Court of Justice at Rome, it is no satisfaction in this case to distinguish of a direct and indirect power; for however the Power comes, the effect and consequence of it is the same.— The question is, whether the Pope hath any such Sovereignty over Princes, as to be able by virtue thereof to depose them; and the Commonwealth's Men do herein agree with you; for they do not say, that the People have a direct Power over their Princes (which were a contradiction in itself, for Subjects to command their Sovereigns) but only, that in case of breach of Trust, the People have an indirect power to call their Princes to an account, and to deprive them of their Authority; but are the Commonwealth Principles the less mischievous to Government, because they only assert an indirect Power in the People?— the main thing to be debated is, 
P. 5.  whether Sovereign Princes have a Supreme, and Independent Authority Inherent in their Persons or no; or whether they are so accountable to others, that upon maladministration they may be deprived of their Government?— the Republicans, and Assertors of the Pope's deposing Power are agreed in the Affirmative of the later Question, and only differ, whether the Power be in the Pope, or the People to call Princes to an account— and even in this they do not differ so much, as Men may at first imagine; for however the Primitive Christians thought it no flattery to Princes, 
☜  to derive their Power immediately from God, and to make them accountable to him alone, as being superior to all below him (as might be easily proved by multitudes of testimonies) yet after the Pope's deposing Power came into request, the Commonwealth Principles did so too, and the Power of Princes was said to be of another Original, and therefore they were accountable to the People.  
Thus Gregory VII. not only took upon him to depose the Emperor, and absolve his Subjects from their Allegiance; but he makes the first constitution of Monarchical Government to be a mere Usurpation upon the Rights and Liberties of the People.— and did ever any Remonstrance, Declaration of the Army, 
P. 6.  or agreement of the People give a worse account of the beginning of Monarchy, than this Infallible Head of the Church doth? What follows from hence, but the justifying all Rebellion against Princes, which upon these Principles, would be nothing else, but the People's recovering their just Rights against intolerable Usurpations?— the very worst of our fanatics never talked so reproachfully of Civil Government, 
☜  as your Canonised Saint doth; their Principles and Practices, we of the Church of England profess to detest and abhor.— I pray Gentlemen tell me, what divine assistance this good Pope had, when he gave this admirable account of the Original of Civil Government? and whether it be not very possible upon his Principles, for Men to be Saints and Rebels at the same time.  
I have had the curiosity to inquire into the Principles of Civil Government, 
P. 7.  among the fierce contenders for the Pope's deposing Power, and I have found those Hypotheses avowed and maintained, which justify all the Practices of our late Regicides.— Parson's Book of the Succession (to the making of which Cardinal Allen, Sir Francis Inglefield, and other Principal Persons of our Nation concurred) being shred into so many Speeches to justify their Proceed against our Late Sovereign of Glorious Memory, the Book being designed to exclude King James— and thus we see, 
P. 8.  the Pope's deposing Power was maintained here in England by such, who saw, how necessary it was for their purpose to defend the Power of Commonwealths over their Princes, 
☜  either to exclude them from Succession to the Crown, or to deprive them of the possession of it.  
The same we shall find in France in the time of the solemn League and Covenant there, in the Reigns of Henry III. and iv for those, who were engaged so deep in Rebellion against their Lawful Princes, found it necessary for them to insist on the Pope's Power to depose, and the People's to deprive their Sovereigns.— thus Boucher affirms, the fundamental and radical Power to be so in the People, that they may call Princes to account for Treason against the People.— and that in such cases they are not to stand upon the niceties, and forms of Law; but that the necessities of State do supersede all those things. If this Man had been of Council for the late Regicides, he could not more effectually have Pleaded their Cause,— our Countryman William Reynolds also Vindicating the Murder of Henry III. says, that Obedience to Princes is so far conditional, that if they do not their duty, their Subjects are free from their obligation to obey them; the contrary opinion being against the Law of Nations, and the Common reason of Mankind: and this is affirmed by many others of their Writers.  
Thus we find, 
P. 1●.  the most mischievous Commonwealth Principles have been very well entertained at Rome, as long as they are subservient to the Pope's deposing Power; and if we inquire further into the reason of these pretences, we shall find them alike on both sides; the Commonwealth's Men, when they are asked, how the People having once parted with their Power, come to resume it; they presently run to an implicit contract between the Prince and the People, by virtue whereof the People have a Fundamental Power left in themselves, which they are not to exercise, but upon Prince's violation of the Trust committed to them; 
☞  the very same ground is made the Foundation of the Pope's deposing Power. viz. an implicit contract, that all Princes made, when they were Christians, to submit their Sceptres to the Pope's Authority; which is so implicit, 
P. 13.  that very few Princes in the World ever heard of it.— it is declared in the Case of King John, that the resignation of the Crown to the Pope is a void Act. And so consequently will the Imposing any such condition be, as inconsistent with the Rights of Sovereignty,— if they plead an implicit contract, who made such conditional settlements of Civil Power upon Princes? 
☞  who keeps the ancient Deeds and Records of them? for all the first Ages of the Christian Church, this conditional Power and Obedience was never heard of— not when Emperors were open, and declared Infidels, or Heretics; what reason can be supposed more now, than was in the times of Constantius, and Valens, that were Arian Heretics? Yet the most Learned, Zealous, and Orthodox Bishops of that time, never once thought of their losing their Authority by it; as I could easily prove, if the design of this Preface would permit me.  
If Christ and his Apostles were the best Teachers of Christianity, 
P. 15  this is certainly no part of it, for the Religion they taught, never meddled with Crowns and Sceptres, but left to Caesar the things that were Caesar's, and never gave the least intimation to Princes of any forfeiture of their Authority, if they did not reader to God the things that are God's.— it requires all Men, of what rank or order soever, to be subject to the Higher Powers, 
P. 16.  because they are the Ordinance of God, and to pray for them that are in Authority, etc. Thus far the Christian Religion goes in these matters, and thus the Primitive Christians believed and practised, when their Religion was pure, and free from the Corruptions and Usurpations, which the Interests and Passions of Men introduced in the following Ages; and how then come Princes in these later times to be Christians upon worse and harder terms, than in the best Ages of it?— in my mind there is very little difference between Dominion, being founded in grace, and being forfeited for want of it; and so we are come about to the Fanatic Principles of Government again; which this deposing Power in the Pope doth naturally lead Men to; but this is not all the mischief of this Doctrine. For,  
2. It breaks all Bonds and Oaths of Obedience, how sacred and solemn soever they have been. 
P. 17. — there being an obligation to Obedience on the Subjects part, which doth naturally arise from the relation between them and their Prince, when Subjects are absolved from their Oaths of Allegiance, they are thereby declared free from that natural duty, they were obliged to before,— this is nulling the obligation to a natural duty, and taking away the force of Oaths and Promises.— this is turning Evil into Good, and Good into Evil, that can make Civil Obedience to Princes to be a Crime, 
☞  and Perjury to be none; this is a greater Power, than the Schoolmen will allow to God himself, where there is intrinsic goodness in the nature of the thing, and inseparable evil from the contrary to it. 
P. 18. — for though it be granted, that God may after the matter or circumstances of things, our Question is only, about dispensing with the force, and obligation of a Law of Nature, such as keeping our Oaths undoubtedly is.— this he illustrates very Learnedly, and at large, in some following Paragraphs, ask, how comes the Pope to have power to give away another Man's natural right? a Man swears Allegiance to his Prince, by virtue of which Oath, the Prince challenges his Allegiance, as a sworn duty:— the Pope dispenseth with this Oath, i.e. gives away the Princes right, whether he will or no.— but how came the Pope by that right of the Prince, which he gives away? 
P. 19, 20, 21.  may he not as well give away all the just rights of Men to their Estates, as those of Princes to their Crowns?— Cajetan lays down a good rule about dispensing with Oaths, that in them we ought to see, that no prejudice be done to the Person, to whom, and for whose sake they are made.— he afterwards citys the several distinctions, which the Roman Casuists use to vindicate this Power of dispensing with Oaths, particularly Laymen, that a promising Oath made to a Man cannot ordinarily be relaxed, 
p. 24.  without the consent of the Person to whom it is made, except it be for the public good of the Church, 
☜  as though evil might be done for the good of the Church,— but woe be to them, that make good evil, and evil good, when it serves their turn; for this is plainly setting up a particular Interest under the name of the good of the Church, and violating the Laws of Righteousness to advance it; if Men break through Oaths, and the most solemn Engagements and Promises, 
☜  and regard no bonds of justice and honesty to compass their ends, let them call them by what specious names they please, 
p. 25.  the good Old Cause, or the good of the Church (it matters not which) there can be no greater sign of Hypocrisy, and real Wickedness than this, for the main part of true Religion doth not lie in ca●ting Phrases, or mystical Notions, neither in specious shows of devotion, nor so zeal for the true Church; but in Faith, as it implies the performance of our promises, as well as belief of the Christian Doctrine; and in Obedience, or a careful observance of the Laws of Christ, among which, Obedience to the King as Supreme, is one, which they can never pretend to be an inviolable duty, who make it in the Power of another Person to absolve them from the most solemn Oaths of Allegiance; and consequently suppose, that to keep their Oaths in such a case would be a sin, and to violate them may become a duty, which is in effect to overturn the natural differences of good and evil, to set up a controlling Sovereign Power above that of their Prince, and to lay a perpetual Foundation for Faction and Rebellion, which nothing can keep Men from, If Conscience and their Solemn Oaths cannot. Therefore, 3. The third mischief common to this deposing Power of the Pope, and Commonwealth Principles, Is the justifying of Rebellion on the account of Religion; which is done to purpose in Boucher and Reynolds, whom he citys at large, and then proceeds to his second Proposition, that whosoever does renounce the deposing Power, hath no reason to refuse the Oath of Allegiance; and then adds, 
P. 29. — it is very true, this hath been the effect of this Blessed Doctrine in the Christian World; Seditions, Wars, Bloodshed, Rebellions, what not?  
But I ought to transcribe all that excellent Preface, were I strictly to do the Author, or the Cause justice, while I refer the Reader to it at his leisure.   

SECT. II.  
Dr. Tennison in his Epistle Dedicatory to his Examination of Hobbs' Creed, says, 
Hobbs' Creed examined. Lond. 1670.  that Hobbs hath framed a model of Government, pernicious in its consequence to all Nations, and Injurious to the right of his present Majesty; for he taught the People soon after the Martyrdom of his Royal Father, that his Title was extinguished, when his adherents were subdued; and that the Parliament had the right, 
☜  because it had possession; he hath subjected the Canon of Scripture to the Civil Powers, and taught them the way of turning the Alcoran into Gospel; and for these, and the like Tenets he calls him an insolent and pernicious Writer. 
P. 2. — and when Mr. Hobbs had asserted, that Nature had made all Men equal, so that no Man can thereupon claim to himself any benefit, 
P. 129, 130, 131.  to which another may not pretend, as well as he, that from equality of condition competition arises fomented by equality of hope, and from thence a War of every Man against every Man, etc. he rejoins, that it is a very absurd, and unsecure course to lay the groundwork of all Civil Polity, and Reformed Religion upon such a supposed state of Nature, as hath no firmer support, than the contrivance of your own fancy: let Philosophers discourse, and make different Hypotheses of the motion of the Stars,— but when the temporal, and eternal safety of Mankind is concerned (as in the Doctrines of Civil, and Moral, and Christian Philosophy) then are Hypothesis framed by imagination— as exceedingly dangerous, as they are absurd; wherefore such Persons, who trouble the World with fancied Schemes and Models of Polity, in Oceana's and Leviathans, 
☞  aught to have in their minds an usual saying of the most excellent Lord Bacon concerning a Philosophy advanced upon the History of Nature, that such a work is the World, as God made it, and not as Men have made it; for that it hath nothing of imagination:— for the faithful accounts of time give us another account of the Origin of Nations; 
P. 13●. — our Parents being before the Institution of Commonwealths absolute Sovereign's in their own Families. 
P. 141, 142. — after which he confesses, that prejudice, and self interest doth (usually) blind the understanding, and cause it to put evil for good, and humour, and education, and profit for reason,— and adds, 
P. 147.  if Men be lawless in a State of Nature, and for the mere sake of temporal security, do enter into Covenants, and are obliged to justice, and modesty, and gratitude, and other such like sociable Virtues, only because they conduce to our Peace, and to the keeping of us from the deplorable condition of a War of every Man against every Man; then when any Subject shall have fair hopes of advancing himself by treading down Authority, and trampling upon the Laws in a prosperous Rebellion, what is It according to your Principles, which can oblige him to refuse the opportunity? If it be said, that one Covenant is this, that we must keep the rest; It will be again inquired, what Law engageth Men to keep that past, seeing there is no Law of more ancient descent, except it be that of Self-preservation? for the sake of which we suppose the Covenants to be broken; so that without the obligation laid upon us by Fidelity (the Law of God Almighty in our nature) antecedent to all humane Covenants, 
P. 148  such Pacts will become but so many lose materials, without the main binder, in the fence of the Commonwealth, which will therefore be trodden down, or broken through by every herd of unruly Men: Men are apt to violate what they esteem most just, and sacred for the sake of Reigning, and they will be much more encouraged to break all Oaths of Duty and Allegiance, 
☞  when they once believe, that their ascent into the Throne, and possession of the Supreme Power, like the coming of the reputed Heir unto the Crown, 
* Lord 〈◊〉 Hen. 7. p. 13.  as in the case of Henry VII. doth immediately clear a Man of all former Attaindors.— this Doctrine is of the same strain with that pernicious Book, Entitled Nature's Dowry, Printed the year after the Leviathan, that Rebeilion is not iniquity, 
P. 149.  if upon probable grounds it becomes prosperous; that he, who usurps not like a Politician, is therefore a Villain, because he is a Fool; that all Usurpers in the World, stepping up into the Throne by means likely to further their ascent, pursue the Fundamental Law of Nature, and are rightful and undoubted Sovereigns,— that the Earl of Essex in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, when he miscarried was a Rebel and a Traitor; because he was a weak and unfortunate Politician; but that Oliver, who was sure of being Protector, by the inclination of the Soldiery, and possession of the Militia, was a Lawful Prince; after this he with justice taxes Mr. White, as the 
† p. 93.  first part of this History gives an account, and then shows, that Bishop Bramhal fled from England, rather than submit to the Usurpation, and that the other Bishops that stayed at home, 
P. 153, 154.  promoted the Cause of their Sovereign, which, if all zealous Loyalists had withdrawn themselves, would by degrees have died away; and because they refused the Oaths imposed at the Peril of their Lives, and of their Fortunes, 
☜  they therefore are not to be judged treacherous in undermining the Usurped Government, or disloyal to the King in enjoying protection under Oliver, whom they neither armed nor owned in Power. 
P. 156. — It is not for you to pretend to Loyalty, who place right in force, and teach the People to assist the Usurper with active compliance against a dispossessed Prince; and not merely to live at all adventure in his Territories, without owning the Protection by unlawful Oaths, or by running into Arms against their Dethroned Sovereign. 
P. 157. — thus you give encouragement to Usurpers, and also when Civil discords are set on foot (as it happens too frequently in all States) you hereby move such People, as are yet on the side of their Lawful Prince, whose Affairs they see declining, to adjoin themselves to the more prosperous Party, and to help to overturn those Thrones of Sovereignty, at which a while before they prostrated themselves; for in your way of reasoning they have a right to preserve, or delight themselves by any course of means, and can be best protected by the prevailing side, which because it hath more degrees of growing Power, has it seems, therefore more of right, 
P. 158. — thus it is in the choice of every Subject (whom you make the Judge of the means to preserve himself) to apply himself to the stronger side; or for a Company combined in Arms and Counsel, when an Heir, and a Traitor are engaged in Battle with equal success (as was the practice of the Lord Stanley, etc. at Bosworth-field) to give the day to the side, they presume will most favour them.— but there is no tie so strong, as that of Religion, etc. 
* Vid. 1. part of the Hist. p. 93. — and whereas Hobbs affirmed, that Covenants are but words and breath, and have no force to oblige or constrain any Man, but what it has from the Public Sword; he answers, that thus the Prince is always in a State of danger, 
P. 160.  (Society being like a State of Nature, managed all by force) because he cannot be a day secure of remaining uppermost; seeing that the People are taught by you to believe, that the right of Authority is a deceit, and that every one would have as good a Title, if he had as long a Sword, for the many headed Beast will throw the Rider, when he burdens and galls them.— Woe to all the Princes upon Earth, if this Doctrine be true, and becomes Popular; if the Multitude believe this, the Prince not Armed with the scales of the Leviathan, i. e. with irresistible Power, can never be safe. 
P. 161. — wherefore such as own these pernicious Doctrines, destructive to all Societies of Men, 
☜  may be said to have Wolves Heads, as the Laws of old were wont to speak concerning excommunicated Persons, and are like those ravenous Beasts, so far from deserving our love and care, 
P. 192.  that they ought to be destroyed at the common charge,— if the commands of Christ, and his Apostles are not also Laws— what means the common Doctrine in the Scripture of suffering for the sake of Christianity? We are enjoined to take up the Cross, and to follow Christ, etc. Such commands and exhortations, to die rather than to obey Unchristian injunctions are delivered in vain, yea, they deserve the name of Impious, if they be not a Royal Law without the stamp of Civil Authority.— it is therefore your opinion, that it is our duty for the sake of outward safety to obey that, which is the Law of our Country, though we live among the Heathens, rather than to follow dangerous, though Evangelical Counsel.  
This Doctor, together with the Lords Bishops of Ely, and Bath and Wells, and Dr. Hooper were by the King appointed to attend the late Duke of Monmouth before his Execution, and the great thing, that they with reason pressed him to, was a particular repentance, an acknowledgement that his Invasion was a Rebellion, particularly urging him (as the Printed account says) more than once, 
P. 1, 2.  if he were of the Church of England to acknowledge the Doctrine of Non Resistance to be true; 
☞  and therefore I believe, that Pulton the Jesuit (as 
† Pulton considered, p. 67.  himself says) charged him unjustly, that when he assisted Sir Thomas Armstrong before his Execution, that he did not oblige him to an humble acknowledgement of his Crimes, and particularly of the injury done to his King and Country, for the 
* Account of the cons. with 〈◊〉 p. ●3.  Doctor (even in the height of Popery) thought his Loyalty more valuable, than Mr. Meredith's, because he, as a Son of the Church of England professed, he would not rebel against the King, notwithstanding he might be of another Religion, whereas Mr. M. being of the same Religion, could not well separate Loyalty from Interest.— and 
‖ 〈…〉 cons. p. 89.  avers, that he is by Church Principle against resisting the Higher Powers, and approves not of the excluding, and deposing Doctrine taught in Mr. P's. great Lateran Council, before there were Jesuits, and also after they arose, by Bellarmine and Doleman, and a long train of others; in which some Popes, some Synodical Men have pompously marched.  
To pass by General Complaints, 
Id. exam. of 〈◊〉. 10 note 〈◊〉. holiness of life. p. 243.  we may furnish ourselves with abundance of instances, in the Lives of particular Men of that Communion, who have been Infamous for Impiety.— I shall content myself with a few reflections upon two or three of this sort of M●n, with whom the more the World is acquainted, the less veneration it will have for them.— Pope Gregory the Great— fawned upon the Emperor Mauritius whilst he lived and prospered, and owned him as his Patron, and the Maker of his Fortunes, even before he had made his own. But assoon as the Emperor and his Family, were barbarously Murdered by the most Bloody Vassal and Usurper Phocas, Gregory insulted over this dead Lion, and flattered this living Monster, and his Immoral Wife Leontia: He used such words at his ●surped exaltation, as he did at that, which he called the Conversion of England; singing profanely, Glory to God in the Highest— Let the Heavens rejoice, and the Earth be glad.  
There are many things in the Roman Church itself, 
P. 248.  which by helping forward an ill life, do, in part deface this mark of her Sanctity: Such as— the Doctrines about— Papal Supremacy. Which last is very prejudicial to the quiet of the World, especially in the Deposing Point, concerning which, I take leave to use the words of another, with Relation to Bellarmine. He was 
* Postscript to transl. of 〈…〉 of the Leag. p. 15, 16, 17.  himself a Preacher for the League in Paris, during the Rebellion there of King Henry IU. Some of his Principles are these following. In the Kingdoms of Men, the Power of the King is from the People, because the People make the King.— We hear Bellarmine in another place positively affirming it, as Matter of Faith, if any Christian Prince shall departed from the Catholic Religion, and shall withdraw others from it; he immediately forfeits all Power and Dignity, even before the Pope has pronounced sentence on him: And his Subjects, in case they have Power to do it, may and aught to cast out such an Heretic, from his Sovereignty over Christians.  
If therefore, the Faith of Bellarmine be Faction, whatsoever his Church is in itself, it is certain, as he has made it, it can never he found out, either as The Church, or as A found Church, so far as we are to look for it by the Note of Holiness.   

SECT. XII.  
Dr. Patrick hath also fully declared his Opinion in this point, for, besides what hath been cited out of his works, in the first part of this History, he says 
Paraph●. on on Ps. 15. p. 75. , that he, who shall dwell in God's Tabernacle, is a Man, who hath such a respect to Religion, that whatsoever he promiseth by Oath, he will perform, though be loses never so much by keeping his faith.— and 
* in Ps. 51. p. 361.  that David confessed to God, against thee only have I sinned, not because I stand in fear of punishment from Men, who have no Power over me; but because I am so obnoxious to thee, whose judgements I ought to dread the more, the less I am liable to give an account of my actions unto others: O how it afflicts me, that I presumed, because I had none to control me here on Earth, to offend thy Majesty, thy Allseeing Majesty! at whose Tribunal, 
☜  the highest must be judged.— Politicians, when they do unwarrantable actions, 
Id. Jewish Hypocrisy. p. 371, 372. Lond. 1660.  think to excuse themselves with the Reason of State, and pretence of Common good— and therefore will break their Faith, and their Oaths, and at the rate of their honesty purchase the common welfare,— as if God had need of men's sin, or we could tell what is his Interest, better than himself. I am something angry at this vile abuse of his Holy Name,— that though God hath told us, what is his mind and pleasure, yet they will instruct him, and teach him what is more for his benefit, and show him a way, that he thought not on, for the advancement of his Glory.  
The same Author in his Epitome of Man's duty annexed to his Treatise of the Jewish Hypocrisy, is of the same mind; as we love ourselves, 
P. 41.  let us endeavour to live in all good conscience before God; let us not do the least evil for to avoid the suffering of the greatest evil, and let us not neglect any good for the purchasing of the best good the World affords.— it cannot be long before thou feelest that hidden Whip, the cords of which thou art continually twisting for to lash thyself.— all impatience comes by pride, 
P. 67, 68  and our murmur are bred by too goodly thoughts of our own selves; but if we thought with ourselves, what we are, etc. we should become very humble, i. e. meek, and patiented, and contented under all that befalls us: one act of humility begets another, and he, that thinks meanly of himself, will not be angry that he is afflicted.— Be peaceable and obedient to Governors, who are Gods in the World, and to whom God hath bidden us, that we should submit ourselves, submit yourselves to every Ordinance of Man for the Lord's sake, etc. 1 Pet. 2.13. It is an high act of Pride and Insolency, to control the Authority that is over us, and to set up our own wills above God's Vicegerents; for it is a great contempt of the Majesty of God, whose Image they more remarkably bear, and with whose Effigies they are more visibly stamped than other Men; we must always therefore do what they command us, or else suffer, what they inflict upon us; 
☜  and if we choose the latter, we must suffer as meekly and peaceably, as if it was an immediate hand of Heaven upon us; for if Solomon says of every Man, that proud and haughty scorner is his name, who decleth in proud wrath, Prov. 21.24. Then much more is he to be branded in the forehead for a Man superlatively proud, who cannot endure to be touched in Body or Estate, but it casts him into the highest Inflammations of anger even against the Highest Powers.  
Dr. Tillotson. There is a Spirit in the World, which is not only contrary to Christianity, 
Ser. on Nou. 5. 1678. p. 17, 18.  but to the common Principles of natural Religion, and even to humanity itself; which by falsehood and persidiousness, by secret Plots and Conspiracies, or by open Sedition and Rebellion,— by Deposing and Killing Kings— in a word, by dissolving all the bonds of humane Society, and subverting the Peace, and order of the World, i. e. by all wicked ways imaginable doth incite Men to promote, and advance their Religion. 
P. 19 — When Religion once comes to supplant Moral Righteousness, and to teach Men the absurdest things in the World, to lie for the truth, 
P. 20.  and to kill Men for God's sake, and to be a bond of Conspiracy,— better it were, there were not revealed Religion, 
☜  and that humane nature were left to the conduct of its own Principles and Inclinations, which are much more mild and merciful, than to be acted by a Religion, that inspires Men with so wild a fury— and is continually supplanting Government, and undermining the Welfare of Mankind. In short, such a Religion, as teaches Men to propagate, and advance itself, by means so evidently contrary to the very nature and end of all Religion.— how much better Teachers of Religion were the Old Heathen Philosophers? 
P. 21, 22.  in all whose Books and Writings, there is not one Principle to be found of Treachery and Rebellion.— Panaetius, Antipater, and Diogenes the Stoic; Tully, and Plutarch, 
P. 28.  and Seneca were much honester, and more Christian Casuists than the Jesuits are, etc.— I am not sure, that the Pope is Antichrist,— but I challenge Antichrist himself, whoever he be, and whenever he comes, to do worse and wickeder things than these. 
Serm. on 1 Cor. 3.15. p. 11, 15.   
I hope no body expects, that I should take the pains to show, that this was not the Doctrine of our Saviour, and of his Apostles, nor of the Primitive Christians (viz. the Doctrine of deposing Kings)— our Church hath this peculiar advantage above several Professions, 
P. 3●, 34.  that we know in the World, that it acknowledgeth a due and just subordination to the Civil Authority, and hath always been untainted in its Loyalty.  
Dr. Meggor. 
Serw. before the L. 〈◊〉 on Ps 11.3. 〈◊〉 30 p. 14.  Although there were Laws to guide, and direct the Kings of Judea and Egypt, yet, if they forgot themselves so much, as to violate and break through them, there were none by which they might resist and punish them; their Ministers and Instruments were ever accountable, but as to themselves it was a Maxim every where, that they could do no wrong, 
P. 16. — he, who resists Kings, is in danger of receiving to himself damnation in the other World for such unjustifyable, and forbidden practices.— there never yet was any Rebellion, where Religion or Liberty were not one, or both pretended, yet— he, who examineth the most judicious and impartial W●●ters of Story, will be hugely put to it to produce an instance of any one, where Personal disgusts, and selfish designs were not the first Promoters and Fomentors of it;— they, 
P. 28, 29. v. p 43, 44, etc.  that can dispense with their Oaths, and comply with Usurpers, be instruments of the illegal Innovations, and Zealous for the Statutes of Omri, may receive some wages for their unrighteousness, and ravish to themselves fortunes, as unexpected as ignominious; but for those, that dare not debauch their Consciences, nor be partakers of other men's sins; that will retain their integrity, and rather than do, would suffer evil, 
P. 〈…〉.  what can there do? These are they, that are so pitied in the Text;— down then, 
☞  down to the place of darkness from whence it came, with that Antichristian Principle, that it is lawful for the People, upon the ill managers and abuse of their Power, by Arms, and force to depose and punish their Princes.— this once admitted, layeth the Axe to the Root of all Civil Society, etc.  
Dr. 
〈…〉. p. 37.  Nath. Hardy. D. R. The Enemies of the King accuse him for being a Traitor to his People, which was so far from being true, that it was impossible, since he never received any trust from them.— after which, addressing himself to the Lord Mayor, and his Brethren; he adds, you have taken care, that Rebellion may be destroyed in that, which was its Principal Engine, the illegal League and Covenant— and in its rotten Principles, those Doctrines, which give Power to the two Houses of Parliament, in some cases to take up Arms without, and against the King's command, and distinguish between the Personal and Politic capacity of the King, as to the point of resistance, etc.  
Dr. 
Serm. before Lord M●yer F●●. 11. 16 S●. p. 22, 24.  Goodman. King's are God's Vicegerents, and he maintains and upholds them in their Offices under himself,— a King hath the Stamp and Character of Divine Authority upon him;— it is the Divine Providence, that is the People's caution and security against the weaknesses, passions, and extravagances of Princes; so that they shall not need to resort to Arms, or any seditious and unlawful means in their own defence; we use to appeal to an Higher Court, when we are oppressed in an inferior Judicatory, and this is our proper refuge, when our Rights and Properties are invaded, to look up to God the Supreme Potentate of the World, that he will restrain the exorbitances of his Ministers: 
P. 25, 26.  God is the King of Kings.— the safety of Religion, Liberty, and Property are mighty Concerns, but certainly they are not too great a Stake to trust in the hands of God,— unless the means we use, be as certainly and manifestly lawful, as the cause we pretend to shall be just and honourable, we shall but provoke Providence instead of subverting it, 
P. 34. — let the People be quiet, not listen to noise and rumours; but be sure to Banish all disloyal thoughts of resorting to irregular means for the asserting their pretensions? Is not God in the World? etc.   

SECT. XIII.  
Dr. Burnet in his modest and free conference— 
† Printed Ann. 1669. p. 6, 7.  Show me one place in either Testament, that warrants Subjects fight for Religion? you know, I can bring many against it; yea, though the old dispensation was a more carnal and fiery one, than the new one is; yet, when the Kings of Israel, and Judah, made Apostasy from the Living God into Heathenish Idolatry; some of the Kings of Judah polluting the Temple of Jerusalem, as did Ahaz, and Manasseh, so that God could not be Worshipped there without Idolatry; yet where do we find the People resisting them, or falling to popular Reformations? neither do the Prophets that were sent by God, ever provoke them to any such courses; and you know, the whole strain of the New Testament runs upon suffering;— it seems, you are yet a Stranger to the very design of Religion, which is to tame and mortify nature, and is not a natural thing, but supernatural; therefore the Rules of defending, and advancing it must not be borrowed from nature, but grace.— are not Christ's injunctions our Rule? Since than he forbade his Disciples to draw a Sword for him, with so severe a threatening, that whosoever will draw the Sword, shall perish by the Sword, this must bind us, and what he says to Pilate on this head, my Kingdom is not of this World, etc. is so plain language, 
P. 24.  that I wonder it doth not convince all.— Pope Gregory VII. Armed the Subjects of Germany against Henry iv the Emperor upon the account of Religion, because the Emperor laid claim to the Investiture of Bishops, they being then Secular Princes; and this prospering so well in the hands of Hildebrand, other Popes made no bones upon any displeasure they conceived either against King or Emperor, to take his Kingdom from him, and free his Subjects from their Obedience to him.— the Authors, who plead for this are only Courtiers, Canonists, and Jesuits; now are you not ashamed in a matter of such Importance to symbolise with the worst gang of the Roman Church (for the soberer of them condemn it) yet fill Heaven and Earth with your clamours, 
Burn. Vind. of the Authority, etc. of the Ch. of Scotland ad Lector.  if in some innocenter things the Church of England seem to symbolise with them? one great rule, by which the peace and order of all humane Societies is maintained and advanced, is Obedience to the Laws, and submission to the Authority of those, whom God hath set over us, to govern and defend us; to whose commands if absolute Obedience be not paid, ever till they contradict the Laws of God, there can be neither peace, nor order among Men;— now it cannot be denied to be one of the sins of the Age we live in, that small regard is had to that Authority, God hath committed to his Vicegerents on Earth, the Evidence whereof is palpable, since the bending or slackening of the Execution of Laws, is made the measure of most men's Obedience, and not the Conscience of that duty, we own the commands of our Rulers; for what is more servile and unbecoming a Man, not to say a Christian, than to yield obedience, when overawed by force; and to leap from it, when alured by gentler methods?— hence it appears; how few there are, who judge themselves bound to pay that reverence to the Persons, and that Obedience to the commands of those, God hath vested with his Authority, which the Laws of Nature and Religion do exact; and the root of all this disobedience, and contempt can be no other, but unruly and ungoverned Pride, which disdains to submit to others, and exalts itself above those, who are called Gods; 
☜  the humble are tractable and obedient, but the self-willed are stubborn and rebellious; yet the height of many men's pride rests not in a bare disobedience, but designs the subverting of Thrones, and the shaking of Kingdoms, unless governed by their own measures.  
Among all the Heresies, which this Age hath spawned; there is not one more contrary to the whole design of Religion, and more destructive of Mankind, than is that Bloody Opinion of defending Religion by Arms, and of forcible resistance upon the colour of preserving Religion; 
☞  the Wisdom of that policy is earthly, sensual, devilish, savouring of a carnal, unmortified, and impatient mind, that cannot bear the Cross, nor trust to the Providence of God; and yet with how much Zeal is this Doctrine maintained and propagated, as if on it hung both the Law and the Prophets? neither is the zeal used for its defence, only meant for the Vindicating of what is past, but on purpose advanced for reacting the same Tragedies,— indeed the consideration of these evils, should call on all to reflect on the evident signatures of the Divine displeasure, under which we lie, from which it appears, that God hath no pleasure in us; nor will be glorified among us, that so we may discern the signs of the times— we must consider, wherein ye have provoked God to chastise us in this fashion, by letting lose among us a Spirit of uncharitableness, giddiness, cruelty, and sedition.  
The Question is in general, 
1st. Confer. P. 100L.  if Subjects under a Lawful Sovereign, when appressed in their 〈◊〉 Religion, may by A●●s defend themselves, and resist the Magistrates? To which 〈…〉 he Nonconformist answers, consider, if there can be any thing more evident from the Law of Nature, than that Men ought to defend themselves, when unjustly assaulted,— he is a self Murderer, who does not defend himself from unjust force; besides, what is the end of all Societies, but mutual protection? did not the People at first cl●●se Princes for their protection, & c?— it was then the end of Societies; that Justice and Peace might be maintained, so, when this is inverted, the Subjects are again to r●●me their own conditional suborder, and excoerce the Magistrate, who forgetful of the ends of his Authority, doth so corrupt it.— to this Basilius, the Orthodox A●●ertor of the King's Authority, gives the Answer, which you find in the 〈◊〉 part of this History. p. 73. distinguishing between the Laws of Nature, and the per●●ions of nature.  
It is like the sacredness of the Megistrate's Power, 
P. 12.  was a part of the Traditional Religion conveyed from Noah to his Posterity, as was the practice of expiatory Sacrifices; 
P. 17, 18. — certainly, the defence of Religion by Arms is never to be admitted, for the nature of Christian Religion is such, that it excludes all carnal weapons from its defence; and when I consider, how expressly Christ forbids his Disciples to resist evil, Mat. 25.39. how severely that resistance is condemned by St. Paul, and that condemnation is declared the punishment of it; 
☞  I am forced to cry out, Oh! what times are we fallen in, in which Men dare against the Laws of the Gospel defend that practice, upon which God hath passed his condemnation; if whosoever break the least of these commandments, and teach Men so to do, shall be called the least in the Kingdom of God, what shall their portion be, who teach Men to break one of the greatest of these commandments? such as are the Laws of Peace and Subjection; and what may we not look for from such Teachers, who dare tax that Glorious Doctrine of patiented suffering as brutish and irrational; and though it be expressly said, 1 Pet. 2.21. that Christ by suffering for us, left us his example, how to follow his steps, which was followed by a Glorious Cloud of Witnesses, yet in these last days, what a brood hath sprung up of Men, who are lovers of their own selves, 
P. 35.  traitors, heady, highminded, etc. I must confess myself amazed,— when I find St. Peter saying expressly, 1 Pet. 2.21. that Christ suffered, leaving us an example, that we might follow his steps; and applying this to the very case of suffering wrongfully, and that notwithstanding that you would study to pervert the Scripture so grossly.  
I confess, 
P. 58.  there is no piece of story, I read with such pleasure, as the accounts are given of the Martyrs; for methinks they leave a fervour on my mind, which I meet with in no study, that of the Scriptures being only excepted; say not then, they were not able to have stood to their own defence, when it appears, how great their numbers were; 
It was then no Legend, P. 61.  or shall I here tell you the known story of the Thebaean Legion, which consisted of 6666, who being by Maximinus Herculeus. an. 287, etc.— Consider, how Maximinus came, in the ●●g end of that great Persecution begun by Dioclesian and Herculeus, continued by Galesius, and consummated by Maximinus himself, in which for all the numbers of the Martyrs, and the cruelty of the Persecution, there was not so much as a tumult; which makes it evident, 
☜  that Christians of that time understood not the Doctrine of resistance; the whole course of our Saviour's Life, 
Id. Serm on Rom. 13.5. p. 25, 26.  was a perpetual tract of doing good, and bearing ill.— and when he was accused to Pilate, of being an Enemy to Caesar, and pretending to set up another Kingdom, he did in the plainest style was possible, condemn all practisings against Government upon pretence of Religion, by saying, my Kingdom is not of this World, if my Kingdom were of this World, then would my Servants fight, etc. the Blessed Apostles followed their Master's steps in this, 
P. 27.  as in all other things, and therefore having learned of our Saviour that Lesson of bearing the Cross, and suffering patiently— St. Peter doth at full length once, and again call on all Christians to prepare for sufferings, and to bear them patiently, etc. 
P. 29. — profane, as well as Ecclesiastical Writers assure us, 
☜  the numbers of the Christians became very soon so vast, that nothing but the Conscience of the duty they owed the Supreme Powers, obliged them to be Subject.  

‖ Id. mist ●y of Iniq. 8vo. p. 73, 75.  The Bishops of Rome not content with their Usurpations over their Brethren, and Fellow Churchmen, their next attempt was upon Princes— they pretended to a Power of deposing Princes, disposing of their Dominions to others, and dispensing with the Oaths of Fidelity their Subjects had sworn to them,— but I cannot leave this particular without my sad regrets, 
☜  that too deep a tincture of this Spirit of Anti Christianisme is among many, who pretend much aversion to it; since the Doctrine of resisting Magistrates upon colours of Religion is so stiffly maintained, and adhered to by many, who pretend to be highly Reform, though this be one of the Characters of the Scarlet-coloured Whore. 
☜  Their contempt of the fifth commandment follows upon the Doctrine of the Pope's Power of deposing Princes, and freeing their Subjects from their obligation to them, by which they are taught to rebel, and resist the Ordinance of God.— we hold, 
P. 152.  that the Civil Powers are of Christ, whose Gospel binds the duty of Obedience to them more closely on us; and therefore, if they do wrong, we leave them to Christ's Tribunal, who set them up, but pretend to no power from his Gospel, to coerce or resist them,— while we have a Zeal against Popery, as a bloody, rebellious, and cruel Religion, 
Serm. at the Rolls. Nou. 5. p. 25, 27, etc.  we must do nothing to show, that we are acted by the Spirit of Popery;— we must never forget the Station, in which God hath put us, ●s we are Subjects under a Lawful Prince, to whom we are tied both by Divine and Humane Laws; and even the Lion's Mouth itself opening to devour us, 
☜  can never excuse us from our obligation to submit and suffer, if God had so ordered it by his Providence, that we were born under a Prince, that would deliver us up to the Lion.— the late Rebellion, as it was managed with a Popish, i. e. a bloody Spirit, so many of the Arguments that were used to defend it, were taken from Popish Authors. 
P. 28.  When we go out of the way of patience and submission, of obedience, and of bearing the Cross; when we give scope to passion, and rage, to jealousy, and mistrust, and upon this fermentation in our minds we break out into Wars and Rebellion, we forget, that the God, whom we serve, is Almighty, and can save us either from a devouring Fire, or a Lion's Mouth;— we forget, that the Saviour, whom we follow, was made perfect by sufferings, and that we become then truly his Disciples, when we bear his Cross, even though we should be crushed under it; we forget, that our Religion ought to inspire us, with a contempt of Life and the World; and with meekness and lowliness of mind, etc. 
P. 29. — we are not to share with the Papists in their cruelty, not imitate them in their Rebellion.   

SECT. XV.  
Dr. Adam Littleton in his Catechism, 
Printed Lon. 1662. ●p. ded.  or the Grounds of Religion. An ungrounded Christian will be easily persuaded to give himself up to any wild Opinion, or lose practice, to turn Heretic or Rebel, 
P. 334.  and prove a fit instrument for the managery of Satan's designs.— the fifth commandment is the hinge of the two Tables,— and concerns the Magistrate, who is God's Vicegerent on Earth, and the keeper of both the Tables; wherefore some assign it a place in the first Table, 
P. 336, 337. See his Ser. on Nou. 5 1675. p. 221, 223, 224, 226. and Ser. on Jan. 30. 1677. p. 236, 237, etc.  God having a special care of civil order, and Peace in the Societies of Men, honour thy Father and Mother, whether thy natural Parents, or the Civil Magistrate.— disobedience dissolves, and unloosens or ●er and peace, which are the bands of Society; whereas oppression does but strain, and gird the ties of Government too close; no Tyranny of the most wicked Prince can be so mischievous, and destractive to the Public, as the Rebellion of Subjects, let them pretend never so much Religion for it; the great interest of society is to obey, since the resisting of a Lawful Governor will in the end destroy Government itself, and bring all things into consusion; 
☞ — then he introduces God thus speaking, thou inferior, whoever thou art, that art under another's Power, 
P. 343, 344. — thou shalt be subject to him, and yield a ready and cheerful obedience to him, as to the Lord, in all things that are just and lawful; and hear with his humours, and his harshness, 
☞  remembering, that the he be a Man of like passions with thyself, yet he is in God's stead; and if he at any time swerve from his rule in commanding, yet do not thou decline thy duty in obeying; but when be biddeth thee do any thing coutrary to my will, carry thyself with submission, and resolve to suffer for a good conscience, rather than to resist, where thou canst not with a good conscience obey,— thou shalt not withdraw, or grudge thy obedience, 
P. 347.  much less shalt thou take upon thee to call him to account;— thou Subject, shalt honour and obey the King, and his Ministers,— thou shalt not raise sedition to bring an odium upon the Magistrate's Person, his Authority, or his Council; nor show any discontent to the disturbance of the public Peace, nor take up Arms against thy Lawful Sovereign, nor maintain or assist Rebellion; nor meddle with those that are given to change; thou shalt not offer any violence to the King's Sacred Person; but if at any time unrighteous commands are imposed upon thee, have recourse to thy Prayers, and make thy appeals to Heaven, to God the King of Kings, to whom alone they are accountable, and who will in his dut time remove the oppression, and call the Oppressor's to an account. 
P. 352, 353. — when the hedge of Government is broken down, neither Religion, nor Law shall bond us;— this hath been England 's Case in the wicked times of Anarchy and Confusion,— when we complied with Illegal Powers,— when our Oaths of Allegiance were eluded with the solemn cozenage of a League, and sinful Combination, when we were bewildered with the Witchcrafts of Rebellion, and knew not the things, which belonged to our Peace, but pretended to reform abuses by destroying the Offices,— when we raised War against our dread Sovereign, and offered violence to the Lord's Anointed.— what need have we therefore to pray fervently with the Church; Lord, have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this Law.  
The same Author in his Sermon, 
Pt. Lond. 1669. p. 24, 25.  called The Church's Peace asserted upon a Civil account, Preached July 4th. An. 1669. says the same thing. The best Party of the Dissenters have such Principles of Policy and Government, as are utterly inconsistent and incompatible with Monarchy— whereas there is no one thing, that the English Church doth in her Doctrine more positively affirm, 
☞  or in her Offices more ●ealously express, than Obedience to Governors, and her duty to her Sovereign;— thanked be God, we live not now under Heathen Emperors, and Pagan Governors; though if we did, it were our duty to pray for them, and to thank God for them too, and to obey them in all lawful commands, 
An Original of all Plots. Lond. 1680. 810. cap. 1. p. 2.  and where we cannot safely obey, cheerfully to suffer for a good Conscience.  
Dr. William Saywel. Still it hath fallen out, that Men of more zeal than discretion, of greater reading than judgement, have struck in with the Politicians, and wrote that, which would most please the Men in Authority, and was likely to get them most favour, and reputation amongst those, who could satisfy their ambition, and by these means have rather served themselves than God, though with the confusion and disorder of the Church.— Athelsm, breach of common faith and honesty, 
P. 3.  violations of all Oaths and Contracts, Murders, Treasons, Conspiracies, Rebellions, long and bloody Wars, Massacres, Fires, Undermine, Poisons, 
P. 4, 5.  and Subversions of Governments are the sad consequences of such dissensions in Religion— that these Parts of Christendom for some Ages past have been an Aceldama or Field of Blood, and many horrid and barbarous Murders have been acted upon pretence of Religion, is evident from all Modern Histories; and though the Romish Party have been the great cause of all these inhuman Butcheries, yet they have not been the only Actors in them; there are another sort of Men, who have had their Hands stained with blood, and upon what Motives and Principles, and to what degrees they have proceeded, I refer the Reader to Archbishop Bancroft's dangerous Positions, and to the History of Presbytery to satisfic himself. 
Ch. 2 p. 7. 8.  But though several Murders and Rebellions have been carried on by those, that call themselves Christians, yet neither the Christian Religion, nor the Church itself did ever teach any such Doctrine, or encourage any such Practice,— nay there are such Evidences against it, that no rational Man, that does rightly consider the matter, can ever doubt, but that she in her judgement and belief, wholly condemns all such wicked and ungodly designs.— And for further satisfaction, I will inquire into the flate of the matter, 
P. 9 — that all Power and Dominion is Originally from God, is not to be doubted, but by Atheists, and that Governor's act in his Name, and by his Authority, is as unquestionable among Christians; now this Power is derived to them, either from the Law of Nature, which is common to all Mankind, or else from positive Revelation and Assignment; the first and highest fountain of Supreme Power, is founded in that natural Dominion, that God hath given Parents over their Children, insomuch that if either Adam, or Noah, who were the common Fathers of us all, were now alive, 
P. 10.  they ought to be the Universal Monarches of the World; but when the Father dies, and Brothers are scattered up and down the World, and live independently one of another, there can be no natural pretence for one to have Dominion over the other; yet the necessity of forming themselves into Societies for mutual defence and traffic, will oblige them to enter into Covenants— and though while they are free, they may choose different forms, as they shall see best for themselves, yet having once chosen and accepted of a Supreme Power, they are not at liberty to cast it off again when they please, but all the Rights, Prerogatives, and Jurisdictions, which belong to Sovereign Authority, are presently by God invested on it, who does ratify all lawful pacts and agreements, and requires us strictly and inviolably to observe them,— though it may fall out, 
P. 11.  that the Person sometime may be chosen by the People, or Nobility, or Senate;— yet the Power, and Office itself was not made, is not given, nor can it be limited or bounded by them, so as to destroy the Office itself, or make it become no Supreme Power; one Prerogative whereof is to be irresistible, 
P. 1●.  and not to be called to account by any but God.— a Prince must use his Subjects as Freemen, and not Slaves; but if Princes do not their duty, we must not revenge ourselves; for we ought not to be Judges in our own case, for God hath told us, that Vengeance is his, and he will repay; 
P. 13.  therefore we must go for vengeance to those, whom God hath appointed to execute vengeance in his stead; if then our inferior Governors do us wrong, we must go to the Superior, who are made Revengers, to execute wrath upon them that do evil. But if the Supreme Powers themselves oppress us, they cannot be judged by their Inferiors; and there will be no other remedy, but to leave them to the judgement of God, who hath reserved their punishment to himself; but tells us, he that resisteth the Power, resisteth the Ordinance of God, and they that resist, shall receive to themselves damnation; and 'tis better to suffer unjustly in this World, than to suffer justly in the World to come; for since the last judgement in this World must be somewhere, 'tis fit, that Children should be committed to the judgement of their Parents, and Inferiors to the Supreme, than any other way; 
P. 14, 15. — tho Princes are the Instruments, yet it is God's purposes or commands, that they put in execution, whether they be for good or evil; he inclines them to favour and mercy— when he is pleased to try us with prosperity and kindness,— again, when our sins call for judgement and indignation, than he sends forth evil Governors, or else permits wicked Men to act according to their own cruel and ambitious minds, and the instigation of the Devil; but yet in the midst of judgement he does remember mercy— they shall not do any harm, further than God in his Wisdom shall give them leave, and that is no more than is needful for our good;— so that we are to look upon evil Governors and Superiors, that oppress us, no other than plagues, or violent Storms, or Earthquakes sent from God, from whence we may run and hid ourselves, if it be possible, and use all reasonable means to save our lives by flight, or the like, but they are no more to be resisted by violence, than any of those natural Evils; we must by humiliation and prayer implore God's mercy to us, in turning their hearts, or some other way sending us deliverance, as we do to avert a Plague, or an Earthquake; 
P. 16.  but God hath given us no natural strength to secure ourselves, and thereupon will defend us himself, and have us wholly therein depend upon his own care; this belief it was, that filled the World with Martyrs, etc. this made our Saviour confess to Pilate, that he had Power given him from above to crucify him, etc. it was upon this account, that St. Paul said, let every Soul be subject, etc. and in this sense those Texts, and the Authority of Governors were vouched by the Ancient Fathers and Councils; and there is not one Writer for a Thousand years of any credit in the Church, that did ever doubt of, 
P. 17.  or question this Doctrine; but many of them have declared themselves fully for it, that Sovereign Princes had their Authority immediately from God, and were accountable to none but him, if they did use it amiss, and therefore could not be deposed by any Authority upon Earth, whether of Pope or People, neither ought they to be resisted by open violence, or have their Power wrested out of their hands by any of their rebellious Subjects; those also, that act in a War without the Commission of the Supreme Power, or of the King, where he is Supreme, have not the Sword given them by God, but take it themselves; and therefore shall perish with the same: And this he confirms, as from Scripture, so from the Doctrine of the Church, and the sense of the Holy Fathers about it; 
P. 40, 41.  and concludes, It were easy to carry the same Doctrine through all Ages of the Church, and to produce testimonies— especially from the Articles and Canons of the Church of England, and the Writings of our Learned Bishops, and other Eminent Defenders of our Church; but these shall suffice for the present, and they are enough to convince any sober Man, that the Ancient Christians did never dream, that either the Pope, or the People did give Kings their Authority, or had any Power to depose them, and authorise their Subjects to take up Arms against them, with or without their Authority; much less to set up others in their stead, or reserve their Power in their own hands, but did believe, that their Authority and Power is wholly from God, and therefore must be obeyed according to his Ordinance; and that they never can be deposed either by the People or People, or any other Authority upon Earth.  
Dr. Dove. 
Sermon on Nou. 5. 1680. p 4, 5.  They, that dare imagine evil against the King in their Bedchamber, will not stick to countenance Rebellion against him in the Camp; for the malice of Treason, like fire concealed, will either find or force its passage;— this is the usual Prologue to all traitorous designs, 
P. 21.  to calumniate the Government, and speak evil of dignities, to repreach the one, and make it odious, by traducing the other, and rendering them contemptible.— we may learn by experience, that God for the better Government of the World, thinks it fit to make Rebels and Traitors, the most memorable examples of vengeance and judgement; search the Scriptures, and turn over the Annals of all Ages, you shall scarce meet in story with a seditious Innovator, or a Rebel, who hath not ruined himself. 
Id. Ser. bef. Lord Mayor Sept. 29. 1682. p. 15. — If a Man can help Men to an evasion from the duty of Obedience, he shall have followers enough; this is a certain sign, that though Men know their duty, yet they do not love to hear it;— for certainly obedience to Magistrates is one of those things that accompany Saivation; and if they that resist, shall receive to themselves damnation, then surely we may safely affirm, and that without any breach of charity, or stretching beyond our line, that they who oppose them in lawful things, or refuse to obey them in the same, without a timely repentance, and reformation are in danger of it. 
P. 17. — though David was next heir to the Crown, and already anointed to it, though Saul thirsted for his blood, and persecuted him by force and fraud, though he had the hearts of the People, and Saul was given up into his hands, so that he could as easily have slain him, as have cut his skirt; yet this was that, which kept him from so great iniquity, that he was the Lord's Anointed. 
P. 18. — the Authority is still from God, though it be placed in the bands of a sinful Man, and it loseth not its essence by the accession of personal miscarriages, etc.— disobedience hath all that is base in it, 
P. 24.  and Rebellion contains a whole conjugation of wickedness; of which there seems to be an indelible sense in all men's minds, since even they, who love the thing, do usually hate the name of Rebels, and such as are conscious of the guilt, would gladly avoid the reproach of it; a plain indication of guilt, as guilt is a manifest argument of sin and wickedness, 
P. 25. — 'tis a sin next to blasphemy to speak evil of dignities, a degree of profaneness to disobey them, 
☜  and intolerable iniquity to rebel against them; it is as bad in its own nature, as murder, or theft, being as expressly forbidden as these, and in its consequence, 'tis far more mischievous, etc. this sin debauches the conscience, 
P. 26.  and hardens Men in impiety, so that it is rare, very rare to find a repenting Rebel.— it is directly opposite to the Spirit and Power of Christianity,— it makes the very profession of Religion odious and despicable,— it is contrary to the example of Christ, the Blessed Apostles, and Primitive Christians;— there have been many pretences made for disobedience and resistance; 
P. 27. v. p. 28.  one hath libelled the Primitive Christians, ascribing their meekness, and submission to necessity, (so Bellarmine) another, that the Apostles in prescribing Obedience only flattered the Emperors (so Salmeron) a third hath taught, that the Doctrine of resistance was a mystery bid from the first Ages, and reserved for these last days of greater light (so Jo. Goodwin)— thus the Gospel itself is belied to countenance that, which it every where condemns.— we have a Church, 
P. 30.  whose Doctrine, Discipline, and Government is Apostolical and Primitive, defective in nothing so much as the Obedience of her Members, unless it be the exercise of her Discipline.— this Church was always famous for her untainted fidelity and loyalty to the Crown; oh! that our lives were as good as our Religion, etc.   

SECT. XVI.  
Dr. Henry Maurice. The Ancient Christians knew how to die, better than to dispute, 
Ser. on Jan. 30. 1681. p. 2, 12, 30, etc. cons. 1st. pt. hist. p. 112.  but none understood yet how to rebel for their Religion,— how then are we departed from this ancient and reasonable practice?— no Faction did ever insult a Prince, they did not mean to destroy;— but now to return to the blaspheming of the Church of Rome; if community of name be not so much to be regarded, as agreement in Doctrine, our accusers will be found to have a greater part in these Sectaries, than we; for both agree in the Fundamentals of Rebellion, and the lawfulness and merit of Resisting the Higher Powers.  
There are Men in the World, that honour such as Martyrs, 
P. 180.  that were executed for murdering their King— I hope, they were neither Bishops, nor Episcopal Men, that were so fond of Canonising those Murderers for Martyrs; 
P. 318. — when chrysostom saw the Civil Power against him, he would not contend, but endeavoured to steal away to prevent contention; and what his favourers did, when they began a Mutiny, they did it against his will, and against all his entreaties, and obsecrations to the contrary; did not the Primitive Christians meet to serve God, 
p. 326.  and suffered Martyrdom for it; but did they ever enter into Covenants, and Practices against the State?— in all the lamentable distractions of the Church (by the Arians) we find no Orthodox Bishop animate the People against the Government, 
p. 327.  what Persecution soever they suffered; but on the contrary restraining all tendences to Rebellion, and withdrawing themselves, when the popular favour towards them grew inordinate, 
p. 32●. p. 337.  and uncontrollable.— Whoever animated the People to resist Julian?— what a number of worthy learned Ministers of the Church of England, were turned out to make vacancies for the Non-Conformists (in the days of Rebellion) who were to instruct the People in new Mysteries of Religion, which their old Pastors had not the conscience, or ability to teach them, i.e. of the lawfulness of Rebellion;— we read of St. Ambrose's zeal against the Arians, of his popularity, of his charity, etc. but not a word of his Sedition, 
p 34●.  or his forcible resistance of the Emperor.— while the good Bishop in his Embasly to Maximus carried himself, as the Father, or Guardian of his Prince, 
☞  though he had been provoked in the most tender part by his Prince's endeavours, for the introducing of Arianism; others perhaps, if they had been in his condition, would have looked upon this Tyrant's (Maximus) declaring for the truth, as such an opportunity, that Providence had offered for the Preservation of the Faith; and since the Empress was of a false Religion, and the Emperor was governed by her, why should they not set up this Maximus, as the Protector of the true Faith? But Ambrose, and the Bishops were of another mind; they knew what it was to die for their Religion, 
p. 346.  but did not understand, what it was to brigue, or to resist;— and, I pray, how did the Bishops comply with the Usurper Maximus? were any of them instrumental to his advancement? did they Preach up his cause, and the lawfulness of his revolt? did they ever press the People to bring in their Plate and contributions? or after his successes, and the Murder of Gratian, did any of the Bishops justify the Usurper's Proceed, and Preach, and Print in defence of that barbarous Regicide? did they flatter him, as the preserver of Religion, the David, the Champion of Israel? with much more to the same purpose.  
Dr. Williams Printed his Sermon Preached July 26. 1685. 
Selfful. 26. 1685. on Rom. 3●7, 8. p. 11.  being on the day of public thanksgiving, for the late victory over the Rebels, to vindicate the City Clergy, and particularly himself, who was censured, as if the Sermon was not to the purpose of the day, and occasion, as he says in his Epistle Dedicatory to the Bishop of London; Grant this, that evil becomes lawful by a good end, and when we think ourselves secure, we make all compacts broken, Oaths dissolved, all difference betwixt Superiors and Inferiors confounded; it exposes the Church and State to every pretender, and any one that hath a mind, 
P. 20, 21.  will never want a reason for Insurrection, and Rebellion.— as no Religion hath more discountenanced such Principles and Proceed, than the Christian; so no Nations, nor Persons have more discountenanced the thing, than those who have professed it; it is too notorious to be dissembled, for that there have been Rebellions against, and depositions of Princes; dissolutions of Governments; taking, and breaking of Oaths, and other things apparently evil, of that and the like kind done to serve a Cause, a Party, or a Church, is no Mystery now a days.— Christian Religion teaches the wholesome Doctrine of being subject to the Higher Powers, and that they, that resist, 
p. 22.  shall receive to themselves damnation.— from the confessions of Faith, in all the protestant and Reformed Churches nothing can be drawn, 
p. 23.  that will justify Opposition, or Rebellion against Civil Authority, but they expressly declare against it;— when Queen Mary was a known Member of the Roman Church, yet the Protestants first joined with her against the Lady Jane Grey, who was invested with the title of Queen, and was a Protestant.— And this particularly is the avowed Doctrine of the Church of England in all its Articles, and Homilies at large, three of which are against Rebellion.  
Do they find in the Sermons of the Ministers of the Church of England, 
Id. Apol. for the Pulpits, p. 3, 4.  the Doctrines of the People's Power over Princes, of the lawfulness of resisting their Sovereigns, or rather, where have the Rights of Princes, and the Subjection and Obedience of the People in all lawful Cases, and the Nonresistance in any Case, 
☜  been so much asserted?— That Loyalty which concerns all, of all Persuasions, is taught in the Pulpits of the Church of England, which obliges them to be as loyal, when the Prince is of a different Religion, as when he is of the same with them.  
The same Author also in his Difference between the Church of England, and the Church of Rome, having cited our Articles, Homilies, etc. to prove the chief Power of the King, and that he ought not to be resisted; and shown how contrary to this Doctrine the Decrees of the Church of Rome are, he subjoins, 
pag. ●1. — The Church of England teacheth, the King in all his Realms hath Supreme Power in all Causes, whether Ecclesiastical or Civil;— For God alloweth neither the Dignity of any Person, 
☜  nor the Multitude of any People, nor the Weight of any Cause as sufficient, for the which Subjects may rebel.  
So Dr. Grove, in his Examination of Bell. 15th. Note, viz. Temporal Felicity. 
pag. 393. — Since the Power of Deposing Princes hath been openly assumed, and frequently practised, and never yet condemned by any, either Pope or Council; since the Doctrine of Equivoeation, and many other absurd and Impious Opinions are taught by their Casuists, and made use of by their Confessors, in directing the Consciences of their Penitents; and since these, and many more very dangerous Errors, do not only escape without a Censure, but are approved of, and encouraged by their Governors, I cannot see how they and their Church can possibly be excused from the Gild of them.  
Mr. Thomas Stainoe, B. D. and Archdeacon of Brecknock, preached Sept. 6. Ann. 1686. 
Seem. on Rom. 13.5. Epist. Ded.  before the Lord Mayor, and says, that he published it, That it might be instrumental to convince the People of their Duty to their King; because it was for that very reason, that he preached it. That there is no Man so much a ravening Wolf inwardly, 
pag. 3.  but he will put on Sheep's Clothing; and though his Resolutions are bend upon Rebellion, yet his Discretion and Prudence will prompt him to pretend Religion.  
The least that can be inferred from the words will be a Subjection to lawful Authority, and by consequence also, to our own Prince: For the truth of all which, I shall urge no more at present, than the tacit Confession of his most avowed and professed Enemies, who after all their contrivance of Wit, Anger, and Malice, could at length pitch upon no better expedient to prevent his Right of Accession, than a Bill of Exclusion: Now such a Bill either presupposes an antecedent Right, or it does not; if it does not, than it must be confessed, that they did most elaborately trifle, whilst they took a great deal of pains to bring that about that was already done to their hands. If it does, than we have what we look for, and that is, that the Injustice of their Actions does make good the Justice of his Title, and affords us a tacit Confession, that there was no other way to overthrow that Title, but by overturning the very Foundations of the Government itself. 
pag. 7. — We are therefore obliged in Conscience to be in subjection to the Superior Powers, because God himself commands us so to be.— God hath given the lawful Magistrate a Title to that Authority, 
pag. 12.  to which we are obliged in point of Conscience to be subject, and therefore we are obliged in Conscience to be subject to our own Prince, because he is the Minister of God.— There are a sort of Men in the World, who, though they do always complain, that we do not quote Scripture enough, when we discourse upon any other subject; yet, when we discourse about Subjection to Government, do always complain, that we quote too much; 
☜  and therefore they are by no means willing, that the Case of Subjection should be measured by that Rule.— though Government is the Ordinance of God, if the Scripture had never acquainted us with any such thing.  
I would have it considered, 
pag. 14.  that neither the Laws of Nature, Reason, nor Justice, will ever allow us to endeavour to strip the lawful Governors of any Places (either where we live, or where we are born Subjects) of their Authority, any more than they will allow us to take away any other Man's lawful Right, or just Possessions. For for that very reason, that Supremacy is a Right that belongs to them, Subjection is a Duty that belongs to us.— These Laws of Nature, Reason, and Religion, are the Laws of God.— If therefore the Law of God does command our Subjection to the Higher Powers, though the Scripture had never told us any such thing, 
pag. 15. — then let the Government have been form when it will, 
☞  and by whom it will; yet, in such a Case, because the Governors have a just and undoubted Title to, and Possession of their Supremacy, we cannot withdraw our Subjection from them, unless we break the Law of God.— The only Objection that I can foresee against this, is this, When the Actions of the Higher Powers, without any regard to the Laws of Justice, or the Government, do manifestly tend to the Subversion of Justice and Right, and instead thereof, do load our Necks with Injuries and Oppressions, 
pag. 16.  than we may fairly and honestly renounce our Subjection. Before I speak directly to the Objection, I must premise, 1. That that Design is justly suspicious, which measures our Duty by our temporal Interest. And 2. That it is as well an act of Subjection, peaceably and quietly to submit to the Penalty, as it is actually to obey the Command.— Now, if our Adversaries do not allow the Obligation to this disjunctive Subjection, it is apparent, that (when they tell us, we are not to be subject in the Case objected) their meaning is, we may defend our Disobedience by Resistance; and then the Objection put into plain English amounts to thus much, That whenever the Prince does not govern us according to the Laws of Justice, and those of the Land, 
pag. 17.  there it is lawful for us to resist and rebel against him.— This Doctrine is seditious and treasonable, and likewise absurd and false; for if a Subject does resist his Prince, though it be in such a Case, in which it is supposed, that his Prince does him an Injury, he does by so doing stand guilty of these following Acts of Injustice:  
1. He takes upon him to be Judge in his own Case: Now because he that does so, may be rationally supposed to be biased in his Judgement, by Self-Love, by Malice, Revenge, Covetousness, and the like train of Lusts and Passions; and over and above in the present Case, by Pride and Ambition: Therefore all those wise Men, who have made it their business to instruct us in the Laws of Justice and Equity, have with one consent condemned the practice of it.— Nay, the Rebel is both Judge and Executioner too in his own Case.  
2. 
pag. 18.  He that resists his Prince upon supposition, that his Government is unjust, is therefore so himself, not only in that he undertakes to be a Judge in his own Cause, but in that also he does by so doing, usurp to himself that Jurisdiction, which of right does belong to another. For there is no doubt, but that the Title to the Sword is of right lodged in the Prince's Power; and there can be as little doubt, that the Subject can acquire no Right from the Injustice of the Prince to force it thence. For by the same Law that the Injustice of a Prince does entitle his Subjects to wrest the Power of the Sword out of his hand against himself; 
pag. 19  I say by the same Law, the Injustice of any private Man would give the injured Person a Title to the Estate and Life of the injurious. And so new Titles would continually start up with new Injuries, and in a little time the Right to the whole World would (though perhaps the possession might not) belong to injured Persons, as such.  
3. 
pag. 20.  He that resists his Prince, upon supposition, that his Government is unjust, is so himself, not only in that he usurps to himself that Jurisdiction, which of right belongs to the Prince alone, but in that he invades the Rights of his Fellow-Subjects; for though it should prove true, that the Prince by his Injury to the Rebel does forfeit his Title to his Government over him; yet there is another Enquiry behind, Whether or no, by such his Injury, he forfeits his Title over the rest of his Subjects; if he does, than he may forfeit his Title as well where he has not done an Injury, as where he has;— if he does not, than the resistance of the Rebel is unjust.  
‛ There are several Conclusions that offer themselves from the Doctrine already delivered, 
pag. 23.  the first is this:  
1. Ought we to be subject for Conscience sake, and is therefore our Obligation to Subjection bound upon us by the hand of God himself? Then we may very fairly infer, that both the Doctrine and Practice of Resistance comes from the Devil. For most undoubtedly any Practice or Doctrine does so, that stands in Diametrical Opposition to any Duty that is laid upon us by God.— When People resist their Prince, and at the same time pretend to fear God, such their Pretensions are not only false, but blasphemous too.  
2. If we are bound in Conscience to be subject to the Higher Powers, 
pag. 27  and if such Obligation comes only from God, than we do infer, that no lawful Authority can be founded in mere outward Force: The reason is, because our Duty of Subjection to lawful Authority arises from an Obligation of Conscience. Now, though a long Sword may have terror enough in it (in many Cases at least) to awe our outward Actions, yet it can never have Power enough to oblige our Consciences. And though it may, upon the account of our Interest, engage us to a Compliance, yet it will never be able, upon the account of our Consciences, to engage us to an Obedience. For if mere Power can instate a Man in a just Title to the Supremacy, than it will follow, that whoever has Power enough to invade the Throne, has Right enough to possess it; and his Usurpation will therefore become lawful, because his Strength hath made it possible; and so at length the Robbers Sword and Pistol will come to be the only Standard of Justice, all other Power must be cancelled, and we must come at last to make the Power of doing wrong to be the only measure of Equity and Right. All these things are at least true, 
pag. 28.  when there is any Person in being, to whom the Title or Succession of the Supremacy does belong, which (blessed be God) is our Case at present. And therefore that great Argument, which was brought to vindicate the Usurpation of the successful Rebels in the late Wars, namely, that the People were not bound to adhere to their Prince, when the Prince was disabled to defend the People, supposes no other Obligation upon Subjects than mere Interest; and so evacuates and makes null all Obligations of Conscience. We shall therefore, before we part from this Inference, fix it as a certain Rule, by which every conscientious Subject may and aught to guide his Practice: That so long as there is any Person of the Royal Race, 
☜  to whom by the Course of Succession, according to the Tenor of the Law of the Land, the Crown does belong; so long we have a lawful Supremacy, and so long we shall be bound in Conscience to be in Subjection.  
3. Are we bound to be subject to the Higher Powers for Conscience sake, and does the Obligation of Conscience come only from God? Then I do infer, that to bind the People to be in Subjection to their Prince, there is no necessity of any Bargain or Contract between them, and the reason is, because that Obligation that binds the Subject to Obedience in this Case, is founded immediately and directly upon the Law of God.  
Lastly, Are we obliged to be subject to the Higher Powers out of Conscience; 
pag. 31.  and is this Obligation ●id upon our Conscience by God? Then I do infer, That no worldly Inconventence that we can possibly suffer by such our Subjection, can be a sufficient warrant for our Resistance. And the Reason is plain and easy, because our secular Interest, be it what it will, can never be a sufficient Counterpoise to our Duty; and he that will break God's Commands, because it is for his secular Advantage, can at best but make that foolish Bargain in the Gospel, that is, to gain the whole world, and in exchange for his Purchase, to lose his own Soul.  
Mr. Wake is also of the same mind; 
Answ. to the B. of Ox●●'s Reasons. l. 34, etc.  for when the Bishop of Oxon charges the Church of England, as if she set up the Charge of Idolatry, as a Standard against Monarchy; he replies, That it is a Calumny upon the whole Body of the Reformed; and that he might dare venture to say, that there is not the least reason to be apprehensive of Violence; he knows very well, how free the Christians of the Three first Centuries were in laying the very same Charge against the Gentile World; and yet we do not find, that ever they shown themselves the less obedient to their Emperors upon the account of it. And though I am verily persuaded, that the Romanists are guilty of Idolatry, yet I thank God, I am not conscious to myself of one Disloyal Thought to my King.— And what I can thus truly profess in my own behalf, I doubt not, but I may do for all others the true and genuine Members of the Church, 
☞  and who by being such, must, I am sure, by Principle be obedient Subjects. As for this Author, he has made a broad Sign, that he intends to leave us, by insinuating, that the Charge of Idolatry ought to be followed by Blows.— We, who do protest against certain Practices, as idolatrous, do also protest against violating Loyalty upon the account of Religion.— Did we indeed profess that of Idolatry, which some others do of Heresy, that it is a sufficient ground for the Excommunicating of a King, and the absolving his Subjects of their Allegiance; had we ever been caught, not in Oatesian Conspiracies, but in real Plots against our Sovereign upon this account, there might then have been just cause for such an insinuation. But whilst our Principles are so loyal, that we have even been laughed at for our asserting them— it was a very unreasonable apprehension to think, that the Charge of Idolatry should in the bottom have been the design against the Monarchy, which we have so often declared, and in the Person of our present King, have shown, we think ourselves obliged to support, whatever his Religion be, who is to sit upon the Throne.— The truth is, when I consider, how heinous a Suggestion this is, and what little Foundation there is, either from our Principles or our Practices to support it, I am under some temptation to reply to this Author, Nemo hoc potest credere, nisi qui possit audere; and this, I hope, may serve for my excuse, if I have at this time appeared in defence of a Charge, in which, every true Member of the Church of England is so highly concerned.— Let the same Mind be in us, 
pag. 15, 16.  which was also in those Primitive Christians before mentioned.— Let us still be careful to maintain the Character of the best Subjects, as we have long asserted the most Loyal Principles; that as the Prosperity of our King makes up a considerable part of our daily Prayers, so by a sincere discharge of all humble Obedience towards him, he may effectually see, that excepting only our Duty towards God, we are much more forward, and ready to do his Majesty effectual Service, than any Man can be, whose Loyalty is not supported by Religion.— We set before our People the Examples of the Primitive Christians;— with what an humble Obedience they submitted themselves to their idolatrous Emperors, and underwent the most cruel Persecutions for their Religion sake, even when they had Power sufficient to have asserted their Faith, and to have destroyed both the Idolaters and their Idols together, and by these Maxims we exhort them to walk.  
God be thanked, 
Id. 2d. Def. against the Bish. of Condemn, est. Part. p. 75, 76.  the Pulpits Zeal hath ever been employed to keep up in the Subjects that Duty, which by God's Command they own to their Prince; and nothing is at this day, next to our Zeal for our Religion, more our desire and endeavour, than to make Men Loyal to their Sovereign. Our Pulpits still speak the same Principles of Subjection, 
☞  they ever did. We are neither ashamed of the Doctrine of Passive Obedience, nor afraid of its Practice, though some of your accquaintance have endavoured to laugh both that and us out of countenance. Our steadiness to our Religion shall never make us fail in our Duty to our King. In one word, We will both by our Preaching and Actions make it our business to fulfil that great Evangelical Precept, of rendering unto Cesar, the things that are Cesar 's; and unto God, the things that are God ' s.  
Dr. Fowler. There is nothing more certain, than that for any of us to be false, 
Design of Christianity p. 243, 251, 252.  and perfidious, to be ungovernable, rebellious, or seditious, upon the account of Religion itself, is most unsufferable, and inexcusable: For if it be lawful to behave ourselves after this manner, upon any account whatever, Religion would be the most useless thing in the World; and if this were lawful upon the account of Religion only, 
☜  I will not stick to say, that it will not be more useless and unprofitable, than mischievous and hurtful. Nor would the Christion Religion itself be worthy our profession, if it would give us leave upon any design, to allow ourselves in the forementioned Immoralities, or in any one whatsoever.— Thus to do, is no other, than to be irreligious to promote Religion, to be unchristian to do service to Christianity; and therefore to go the directest way to destroy it by the means we use for its preservation.— Thus to do, is to oppose the Interests of our Religion to that of our Souls, 
Id. Discour. of Christian Liberty. p. 175. ●ee his Discourse of Offences. p. 9, 10, 11.  and to cast these away in the defence of that.— It is come to that sad pass, that preaching Obedience to Authority is as unacceptable Doctrine as can be to even many great Pretenders to Christianity, although it be done never so prudently and agreeably to the express Doctrine of our Saviour and his Apostles. And the Notion of Obedience for Conscience sake, seems almost lost among not a few, which is one of the great Sins, for which we have too great reason to fear, there is a heavy Scourge near us.  
Mr. Evans. A moderate Man, when the Honour of God, or the King, when Religion, 
Sermon of Moderate. 1682. p. 12.  and the Welfare of his Country lie at stake, then thinks it a most worthy and weighty occasion of employing his Zeal and Activity in their Service, of defending them with Courage and Resolution, with his Life and Fortunes.— He never breaks the second Table to preserve the first, nor make use of any ways to secure Religion, that are contrary to, or destructive of its Principles.— What Men esteem great Falsehoods, 
pag. 23.  and call Toryism and Popery, are really as true as Gospel. 
pag. 34. — I will conclude all with this Remark; We may, and shall, if we do not timely take up, bring in Popery by a heady and extravagant Zeal against it, 
☜  and ruin and enslave ourselves by our fierce and passionate Contentions for Liberty, Property, and Safety. 
p. 48. — Give me the Man that is honest, and constant to his Principles, and to what he professes, whatsoever Party or Persuasion he is of; he is much more valuable to me, than he that plights his Faith to the Church, and gives all the Security that can be taken for his Conformity to it, and then after he hath wound himself into its Communion and Preferments, plays booty, and acts like a Nonconformist: These are the treacherous Friends, that like Vipers, prey upon the Bowels of their Mother, and betray her, as Judas did our Lord with a Kiss.  
Dr. Comber, in his Religion and Loyalty, 
Sec. Edit. 1683. p. 8, 3. v. pag. 12▪ 13, etc.  If the Church of England did make worldly Interest the sole measure of her Actions,— they would never consider what was honest, but only what was expedient, and never stick at ill means to accomplish that, which they account good Ends.— We of this Church are perhaps the only Christians since the Primitive Ages, who never dispensed with our Loyalty to serve our worldly Ends. And if this do not commend our Policy, I am sure it declares our Honesty and Integrity, and must needs recommend us to all good Men, as those, who prefer our Duty and our Conscience before all earthly Advantages. 
p. 39 — No Religion in the World teaches and practices more Loyalty, than that, which is truly called Protestant; and we doubt not, but that if ever his R. H. should attain the Crown, he will not blame our Church for that, which was the Opinion of those, who endeavoured to subvert it, after they had renounced all Communion with it; 
pag. 52. — especially when it is further considered, how constantly the true Protestants of the Church of England have loved, and how faithfully they have served the Royal Family in all Fortunes, how closely they have adhered to the Interests thereof upon all Occasions; so that whoever were true Sons of this Church, our Kings have always reckoned them their certain and undoubted Friends: And when a Rebellion was designed against the blessed Father of his Royal Highness, the Contrivers of it found it necessary, first to seduce Men from the Church of England, before they could engage them in so wicked an Action. 
p 〈…〉 — And since the happy Restoration, they have incurred the Hatred of the  fanatics, for their perpetual standing for the King's Prerogative, and their zealous promoting his, and his Royal Highness' Interest.— The Pamphlets written in defence of the Bill of Exclusion, 
p. 57 ●●.  frequently transcribe whole Passages out of Doleman's Book:— Take some of their accursed Principles.  
The Commonwealth hath Power to choose their own fashion of Government, as also to change it upon reasonable Causes.  
The Commonwealth hath Power, not only to put back the next Inheritors upon lawful occasions, but also to dispossess them that have been lawfully put in possession, if they fulfil not the Laws and Conditions by which and for which their Dignity was given them.  
The Republic may cure or cut off their Heads, if they infest the rest. Princes are subject to Law and Order, and the Commonwealth, which gave them their Authority for the good of all, may also restrain, or take the same away again, if they abuse it to the common evil.  
The whole Body to superior to the Prince; neither so giveth the Commonwealth her Authority and Power up to any Prince, that she depriveth herself utterly of the same, when need shall require, to use it for her defence for which she gave it.  
The Prince's Power is not absolute, but delegate from the Commonwealth, and is given with such Conditions and Oaths on both Parties, as if the same be not kept by either Party, the other is not bound.  
With many other such Popish Positions, 
So also the Apost. Pr●●. p. 4, 5.  and it is very observable, that this wicked Libel of Doleman was in part reprinted, Anno 1648. under the feigned Title of Several Speeches delivered at a Conference concerning the Power of Parliaments, to proceed against their King's form of Government. 
pag. 61. — But the Protestant Church of England is not only better in all other accounts, but doth hold, teach, and practise Loyalty above all others in the World; the Divines thereof generally holding Monarchy to be of divine Right, and Allegiance to be an Obligation on the Conscience, and indispensible, because the King's Power is from God, 
pag 62.  to whom only Kings are accountable.— They pray for him three or four times by Name in all their solemn Offices; their Sermons are frequent and pressing upon this Theme, and their Books are numerous (against Papists and their factious Scholars) for the Right of Kings; yea, and their Actions being always Loyal, do justify, they sincerely believe as they teach.  
Dr. 
Sec. Edit. ad Lectorem.  Pelling's Apostate Protestant. Those Republicans who were the Movers of the Bill of Exclusion, very well knew, that by the same ePower which they pretended to have to dispose of the Heir, they might pretend afterwards to have to divest and destroy the Possessor of the Crown.— And I will presume to declare on my own and my brethren's behalf too (without begging their pardon) that we still act, 
☞  and by the Grace of God, resolve steadfastly to act upon the same loyal Principles, wherewith we have hitherto endeavoured to season the Kingdom.— The People cannot but be tickled at the heart, 
p. 6, 7.  when they are told, that they have a Sovereign Power in them, which they did not dream of, that they can make and unmake Kings, that Crowns and Sceptres lie at their Worship's Feet, must make Court to them for Succession, and that they can if they will, bar them out, and come like the Tribunes of the People of Rome, with an  Veto.— I am grieved at the heart (and 'tis enough to raise the indignation of every honest Man) to find, that so many among us do so inconsiderately (not to say maliciously) run altogether upon this Jesuits Principles, etc. 
V p. 9, 10, 11. p. 14. — Doleman confidently insists on this, that the Crown is not a bare Inheritance, but an Inheritance accompanying an Office of trust, and that if a Man's defects render him uncapable of the trust, he hath also forfeited the Inheritance, and from this Principle he concludes, that even a true King may be deposed, when he answers not the trust, which the People had reposed in him.— This Jesuitical Doctrine did not long ago cost one of our Kings his Throne, and his life too; I pray God, it be not so chargeable to another, but 'tis ominous, when pretending Protestant's will be nibbling at such Jesuitical Principles; Observe, that the Power of Deposing a King, 
P. 19  naturally follows from the Doctrine of the People's Power to choose one,— if any of our Clergy hold our Kings to be Divine, they hold no more, than what all Christians have ever held, 
P. 21. V p. 24, 25. P. 33, 34. v. loc. & p. 36.  no more than what the Church of England hath declared, no more than what the Laws of our Country do own, and will bear them out in.— Doleman is positive, that Princes may lawfully be deposed; and he observes too (is a remarkable instance, as he calls it) that God hath wonderfully concurred (for the most part) with such judicial Acts of the Commonwealth against their evil Princes, not only in prospering the same, but by giving also some notable Successor in the place of the deposed; had Father Parsons been alive in our days, perhaps he would have instanced in that blessed Bird Oliver Cromwell among the rest.  
I happened to read a new Assemblies Catechism, called a Political Catechism, 
p. 38. v. p. 40, 41, etc.  and I found it as full of the Jesuits Venom, as if it had been spit out of Doleman's own Mouth; these are some of the Principles in it word for word. 1. That the Government being a regulated Monarchy, the King is not above the Law, but is accountable to the Law, and not to God only. 2. That whatsoever is done by the King without, and beyond the limits of the Regulation is not Regal Authority. 3. That to resist the notorious transgressions of that regulation is no resisting the Regal Authority;— that the immediate Original of the King's Power is from the People, and many other such Principles, upon which the late Rebellion was raised and maintained  
After this he proceeds to show, that the little arts made use of to evade the obligations to Passive Obedience, have been also borrowed from the Jesuits, and to vindicate Dr. Hicks' Sermon on that Subject; as also to show the Parallel between the Jesuit, and the Puritan, particularly in their disobedience to Government, violation of Oaths, etc. And then subjoins, that when once Men are Jesuited, 
P. 50.  they will never stick at any manner of wickedness, Lying, Libelling, Sedition, defaming of Government, Perjury, etc.— you see, how basely partial these Folks are in their ordinary censures; 
P. 51.  let a Man be a true Friend to the King, and to the Established Government, and presently (forsooth) he is a Papist; let him resuse to do evil, that good may come (though that was St. Paul's way) and he is called a Papist; let him be for subjection to a Lawful Prince, 
☜  and (when time serves) for Passive Obedience, and he is a Papist with a witness, but let these Men profess the Faith and Doctrines of the Jesuits, let them lie and equivocate like the Jesuits, let them violate Oaths, 
v. p 52, 53, 57, 58.  or construe them in their own sense like the Jesuits; let them dispense with one another in doing any wickedness, that is serviceable to their cause (as the Jesuits do) yet who but they the true Protestants?— we dare not be dishonest, unless we will be Hypocrites, nor be Rebels, 
P. 54.  unless we will be damned.  
Some in Solomon's time were given to change out of 〈◊〉 strange kind of levity, and inconsistency of mind; 
Id. Serm. on Prov 24.21. 1632. p. 25.  and therefore some Expositors render the place thus, cum inconstantibus, with Men that are fickle, and unsteady in their Loyalty; would we not think it strange, that Men, who have showed their fidelity all along; Men, who have acted, taught, suffered, and ventured their Lives for the sake of Majesty, should such, I say, start aside, and suffer themselves to be wheadled into Faction at last? Truly we might wonder at it the less, when we consider, that it was the case of several Men in the Reign of David, and especially two very eminent Persons, Abiathar the Priest, and Joab that brave Commander; the former had been David's secret, and sure Friend, and the later had not turned after Absalon; both of them had been faithful hitherto; but when Adonijah usurped the Kingdom, both of them were concerned in that Plot; the Priest turned an Apostate, and the General a Renegado; upon what provocations, I do not know, nor can I gather any reason thereof, unless it be that I now have mentioned, a strange inconstancy of Spirit in Men, who in David's Old Age thought it their best cunning to take up the Persian custom, and worship the Rising Sun.  
Thus the Letter to a dissenter on occasion of the Declaration of Indulgence; We are not to be laughed out of our Passive Obedience, and the Doctrine of Nonresistance, though even those, who perhaps own the best part of their security to that Principle, are apt to make a jest of it.   

SECT. XVII.  
Dr. 
C. 26. §. 1, 2, 6, 8.  Pierce Dean of Salisbury in his body of Orthodox Divinity, avers, that the Church of God consists of a Civil, as well as an Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, that Magistrates are constituted by a Divine right, as well as Priests; that he, who resists the Magistrate so constituted by God, wounds his Conscience deeply in this World, and shall be damned in the next; after which he smartly censures both the fanatics, and the Jesuits; the scandals of Christianity, as he calls them, condemning the Doctrines of both sorts of them, and showing the unreasonableness of that proposition, that Inferior Magistrates may control a Prince, if he does not do his duty, since by the Laws of the Land (as well as the Laws of God) a King can do no harm, i.e. that the King is unaccountable, inferior only to God, and obnoxious only to his Tribunal, so that no Mortal, much less his Subjects can have any Authority over him. 
Id. exceeding sinfulness of Schism. §. 5, 6, 7, 11. v. Ser. on 1 Pet. 2.13. §. 4, 5, 7, 8. — Obedience to Magistrates being of Divine Right, strongly founded upon the Will, and the Word of God, and even a part of the Obedience to God himself (whilst it is paid to that Authority, which God hath commanded us to pay an Obedience to) cannot possibly be due to the Men, as Men; or to the good, as they are good; but to the Magistrates, as they are such; 'tis due to the Governors, as they are Governors, and as the Ordinance of God, let their Practices and Opinions be what they will.— When God and his Deputies do stand in competition for our Obedience, God must have our whole active, and his Deputies our Passive Obedience only.— Saving the dignity, and priority of the first and great commandment, as the ground and foundation of all the rest, our Obedience to our Governors, and Humane Laws in force among us, is as really an Essential and Fundamental of Christianity, 
☞  and of as absolute necessity to our Salvation, as the belief of one God, or any other that can be named; it being as rigidly commanded by God in Scripture, under the very same promises of reward, if we obey, and under the very same threats of endless punishments, if we rebel.  
Dr. 
Serm. on Tit. 3.1. p. 4, 5. etc.  D. Whitby Chantor of the same Church in the time of the D. of Monmouth, Rebelbelli●n laid down this position, That Christians must be subject to their Civil Magistrates, and in no cases are allowed, or authorized forcibly to resist, or bear Arms against them; and this he proves at large from the expressions of the Holy Scriptures, from the deportment of David to King Saul,— that Jeroboam's revolt is by God himself called Rebellion. 1 King. 12.19. 
p. 8, 9 — for as a Father doth not forfeit his Authority over his Children, nor are they freed from that Obedience, which they own him, because he deals severely with them, so neither can the King, i. e. the Father of his Country lose his Authority over his Subjects, because he governs them severely, or lays afflicting burdens on them;— the Scriptures of the New Testament expressly call for our subjection; Let every Soul be subject, saith St. Paul; so let him yield subjection to them, as never to resist on any provocation, temptation, or specious pretence whatsoever.— whence it is clear, 
☜ p 10. Serm. 〈…〉 13.1. p. 24, 26, 27, 2●, 29, 30, 31.  that by the Christian Doctrine it is unlawful to resist the Higher Powers upon pretence of Maladministration, Tyranny, Injustice, or to rebel for the defence of our Religion against the worst of persecuting Princes; for if Resistance in the forementioned cases was a damning sin, when can it be excusable:— after this he answers the common objections from the Coronation Oath, and Self-Preservation, etc.  
Mr. Long's Sermon, called the causes of Rebellion, Preached Jan. 13. 1683. 
on J●●. 4.1. P. 14, 15.  was Printed by the joint desires of the Bishop of Exon, and the Justices of the County of Devon, and the Dedication gives an account of an order of theirs, that concurs with the Doctrine of the Sermon;— nor can any complaint of Tyranny, or Oppression justify a War among us,— did we suffer under some miscarriages in Government, some passions, and excesses in our Governors, neither Scripture, nor reason will warrant any resistance. Obj. But the Primitive Christians had no Laws to confirm their Religion, 
P. 16.  and therefore it was not so lawful for them to defend their Religion by Arms, as it is for us. Answ. It is strange, that our Laws should be made a pretence for Resistance, which declare, that it is not lawful to resist upon any pretence whatsoever.— then the Subjects are made Judges of the Actions, and Conduct of their Governors. 
P. 22, 23. — I take those, and only those, who do agree with the Jesuits in Preaching, 
☜  and propagating Seditious and Traitorous Principles and Practices, such as the lawfulness of Resistance, and taking up Arms in defence of Religion against the Supreme Magistrate; that the Original of the Magistrate's Power is in the People, who may call them to an account, and Depose, and Murder them as they see cause,— those, who have Murdered one King already, and use the same Methods to destroy another,— in a word, 
V p. 23, 26.  all such as will not declare, that it is unlawful to take up Arms against the King, on any pretence whatsoever, or that they will not endeavour any alteration of the established Government,— for such false Prophets, as our Saviour bids us to beware of. This also is the Doctrine of his Sermon, on July 26. 1685. and his Vindication of the Primitive Christians, etc.  
Dr. Fuller Chancellor of Lincoln;— those Men have but little sense of the honour of Christian Religion, that abuse its Name, 
Ser. bef. the King June 25. 1682. p. 56, etc.  and pervert its obligations to justify Sedition and Rebellion; who with great pretences, and zeal for Christianity forsake her in her more principal commands of meekness, patience, and submission; and defend the Doctrine of Resistance and Disobedience from those Holy Scriptures, that have forbidden them under the penalty of Damnation;— that those Men do little deserve the Character of Reformed, who have forsaken our Reformation in its Principal and Fundamental Doctrine of the King's Supremacy, and renounced the Protestant Church of England, in all her Principles of Christian Loyalty;— and indeed all the Enemies of the Church of England, how distant soever in other points, are perfectly united in the Doctrine of disobedience; all agreeing in one conclusion, against the express commands of Holy Scripture, that it is lawful to resist the Higher Powers, etc.  
Dr. Sclater. What a joy will it be to thy Spirit, and a lightning to thy Heart, 
Royal pay, & paymaster on Rom. 2.10. p. 6, 7, 1●  when thou canst say thou didst not cowardly yield, though thou hast been disarmed, sequestered, decimated, and unrewarded for it.— 'twas of God's mercy to be kept faithful to the righteous cause of God, and the King, when there were so many temptations to witdraw us from our Loyalty;— Fidelity and Loyalty is in a more especial manner required in a Subject towards his Sovereign;— 'tis Treason in a Subject to fight against his Sovereign.— but how long must this Fidelity last? a day or two, or so? Oh, no I this Commandment is like that heavy saying in Matrimony, till death us do part.  
Dr. Hickman. 
Serm. before L●rd Mayor Ju●. 27. 1680 p. 17, 18.  The honour of God, and the defence of his Worship are glorious Undertake, yet even here the excess of zeal is a crime, and the great importance of the end cannot justify any unlawfulness in the means; the will of God, as it is expressed in his Word, is the standard of good and evil; and he will not suffer his eternal Laws to be violated, though in his own defence; if it should please him to give his, and our Enemies such advantage over us, as may endanger the exercise of our Religion, we have our Prayers, and other lawful endeavours for our redress; but we must not defend our Church by an unlawful return of evil for evil, nor, like our Adversaries, commit any Act of Impiety or Injustice, though under the most specious pretence of fight the Battles of the Lord: The goodness of the Cause here is so far from justifying the Act, that it only aggravates the offence,— when a Law is violated, or any injustice done for the sake of our Religion, both the scandal, and the Crime become conspicuous, they are then laid at the door of our Church, and bring a public and perpetual blot upon our cause; 
P. 19, v. p. 20, 33. — what can our Religion profit us, or what honour can it bring to the Almighty, when our Sacrifice comes polluted with blood, and violence of its own, how can it atone for our transgressions? therefore it is necessary to obey, not only for wrath, 
☞  but also for Conscience sake. St. Peter, who was the first that drew his Sword In his Master's quarrel, was the first that denied his name, and forsook his cause; and doubtless, whosoever fights for his Religion against his Prince, can never pass the muster without a Romish dispensation.  
Mr. 
Ser. at Bath. Aug. 7. ●631. p. 4, 5, etc.  Jos. Pleydall Archdeacon of Chichester. Plebeians and Hobbists proceed upon one and the same Principle, making the People the Fountain of all Power;— whereas Subjects own a natural and inviolable Allegiance,— but if a Prince prove a Tyrant, does he not by Maladministration forfeit the trust reposed in him?— in whose Opinion? in the Opinion of Mariana, or Knox, Hobbs, or Bradshaw; i. e. in the judgement of Papists, 
P. 8.  Sectaries, Atheists, or Rebels;— 'tis impossible there should be a Rebellion, while the Principles of the Church of England are revered and owned;— that Kings may be Deposed and Murdered, 
P. 11.  we may reckon under the Apostles strange and monstrous Doctrines, or rather under his Doctrines of Devils.  
Mr. 
Assize Ser. p. 21, 22. v. p. 5, 78, 16.  Kimberley. No pretences of Conscience or Religion, can Authorise our Resistance of the lawful Powers, which God hath set over us; they never knew, what it was in the times of the Primitive Christianity to oppose, expel or destroy any Pagan, Persecuting Arian or Apostate Emperor.  
Mr. 
Assize Ser. p. 21.  Jemmat. None but God can absolve Subjects from that Allegiance and Obedience, which they own to their natural Lords; neither the Male administration of Government, nor their own fears, jealousies, nor the decay of Trade; no nor the hazard of Religion itself can justify the Acts of Rebellion;— they, to whom God hath given his own Power, are accountable to none but himself, etc.  
Mr. 
Serm. on 2 Chr. 13.5. p. 6. v. p. 8, 15, 18.  Camfield. The King is in the highest place, and highest power, and consequently all in his Dominions: Every Soul of them are obliged to be subject to him, none may presume to judge or resist him violently; there can be nothing justifyable on the Subjects part, but obedience and Submission, the rest must be referred to God alone the only Ruler of Princes, etc.  
Mr. 
Ser. at York. Aug 3. 1685. p. 16, 24. 〈◊〉 loc.  Stainforth. We have great reason to pity, and pray for Kings for the eminency of their Station, and uncontroulableness of their Power.— if Princess are bad Men, and oppress their Subjects against reason and against Law, we have no reason left us, but Prayers to God, in whose hands are the hearts of Kings.— Whatsoever Injuries they heap upon us, whatsoever Violences and Persecutions we suffer under them, we must not suffer our Passions to rise and swell againut them;— much less must we take up Arms, and by force resist their Persons or Authority: 
P. 34. — Those who take up Arms against their Sovereign's Authority fight against Heaven.  
Mr. Graile, Rector of Blickling in Norfolk, published four Sermons: 
Lond. 1685. P. 44, 45.  For Loyalty to our Prince is a thing commanded by God himself, together with Piety and Devotion towards himself, yea, and commanded in the very next place to it; so that the one is a part, an inseparable part, a very considerable part of the other: And it follows from hence by an apparent Consequence, that men's Disloyalty is a clear indication of their irreligion; if they fear not the King, they fear not God. 
☜  If any Man seem to be religious, and bridles not his Tongue from speaking evil of Dignities, or Higher Powers, 
Jam. 1.26. 2 Pet 2.10. Rom. 13.2. P. 53, 54, 55.  that Man's Religion is vain; and 'tis much more so, if he holds not his hands from resisting these Powers: Our Law will have no Error, no Injustice, no Folly, no Imperfection whatsoever to be found in the King.— All the States of the Realm joined together, all the Nobles and Commons, and the whole Body of the People have not a Power and Authority equal to his:— For otherwise he would not be the King of a Kingdom, but of single Men separately taken. 
P. 56. — The King is no substitute of the People, but the Minister of God, and his Power is the Ordinance of God.— It is a contradiction to be Sovereign, and to have a Superior.— The Lords, 
P. 57  both Spiritual and Temporal together, with all the Commons assembled in Parliament, do by a solemn Oath acknowledge the King to be Supreme, and themselves to be his Subjects: And they have in public Statutes particularly declared,— That both, or either Houses of Parliament cannot, nor lawfully may raise or levy any War, offensive or defensive, 
☜  against his Majesty, his Heirs and lawful Successors:— Neither is the King accountable to them, or to any other besides God: These are the Essentials of Sovereignty.— There is but one Case, wherein a good and loyal Subject will refuse to obey his Prince, and that is, 
p. 60, 61, v. p. 66, 96, 97, 119, 120, 154.  when such Obedience will by no means consist with his Obedience to God:— But there is no Case whatsoever, wherein he dares either to resist or reproach the Person or Authority of the King, or to offer any Indignity to him:— To fight against him, is to fight against God, whom the King represents,— upon any pretence whatsoever, it cannot be done without open Perfidiousness and Rebellion:— Such are Monsters of Men, and are as natural brute Beasts, made to be taken and destroyed: So S. Peter describes them, 2 Pet. 2.10, 12.  
Mr. David Jenner, in his Prerogative of Primogenitures 
* Lond, 1635 P. 48. , asserts the same Cause: Although the Law of God is indeed above all Kings, and if they wilfully transgress the same, they are all accountable unto God, and unto God only for the same, yet in this Kingdom of England, no Statute Law is or can be above the King, because it was the King that first gave life and being to the Law of the Land; the King by his Royal Assent made the Law to be what it is, viz. a Law: But the Law of the Land did not make the King to be what he is, viz. a King; for the King was King before the Law.— That the Doctrine and Practice of Deposing lawful Kings, 
P. 122.  and Excluding the right Heir from succeeding in the Throne for his being an Heretic, Idolater, 
☜  tyrannical and wicked; is grounded upon nothing but Popery and Fanaticism.  
Mr. Hancock, in his Answer to the Viscount Stafford's Memoires: 
Lond. 1682. p. 31.  I could make it evident, that the same Maxims of Political Divinity, the same Arguments, and many times the same Phrases and Expressions are to be found in the Heads of both Factions: I know 'tis disputed, whether the Ringleaders of Sedition among us poisoned the Jesuits, or the Jesuits them; but I do not envy the Bishops of Rome the Honour of having first poisoned them both with Antimonarchical Doctrines. If Milton (the great Oracle of one of the Factions) had owned himself to be a Papist, there had been no reason to wonder at the Impiety of his Doctrines, which he either did, or might have learned from the Popes, and greatest Divines of the Roman Church. It was truly alleged by Salmasius, that the Doctrine of the sacred and inviolable Authority of Princes was preserved pure and uncorrupt in the Church, till the Bishops of Rome attempted to set up a Kingdom in this World paramount to all Kings and Emperors; but he with his usual Confidence, acquits the Popes, and charges his Antimonarchical Principles on Luther, Zuinglius, Calvin, Bucer, Martyr, Parcus, and all the Reformed Divines.— Bellarmine, 
P. 50.  Parsons, Creswel, Suarez, etc. are the Men that furnished the leading Faction among us with Principles and Precedents, with Arguments and Texts of Scripture; 
☞ — out of whom they either did or might have derived the Grounds of the War against the King, of erecting an High Court of Justice, and of bringing him to the Block.  
John Goodwin, 
P. 53.  in one of his Pamphlets hath this remarkable Expression, As for offering Violence to the Person of a King, or attempting to take away his Life, we leave the Proof of the lawfulness of it to those profound Disputers the Jesuits. 
P. 166, etc. — I have fairly represented those Doctrines and Principles, which strike at the very root of our established Religion and Government, with the Arts and Instruments which have been used by the prevailing Faction of the Roman Church for the Subversion of them: 
☞  And I know no stronger Argument against the truth and goodness of any Religion, than that it supplants moral Righteousness, and serves to be a Bond of Conspiracy; allows of Sedition and Treachery, Injustice and Cruelty; for how can that Religion be from God, which maketh Men unlike to God, as had or worse than if they were left to the Principles and Inclinations of their own Natures?— Of the Church of England I will only say, It hath established the Right of Kings upon such sure and unalterable Foundations, that it is the Interest, as well as the Duty of the Civil Power, to support and defend it.  
Mr. 
Animadv. on Ob. Ch. Govern. Preface.  Smalridge. Certainly that Doctrine which invades the just Rights of Princes, can hope but for few Proselytes among those, who have constantly defended them in their Writings, asserted them in their Decrees, and upon all occasions vindicated them with their Swords. For we do not lie open to the imputation of a conditioned and distinguishing Loyalty, who have showed our readiness to imitate the glorious Examples of our Fathers, and were prepared (had not God's good Providence prevented our Service) to have transcribed that Copy lately at Sedgmore, which they set us formerly at Edg-hill. And in truth our steady Fidelity to the Prince is so unquestionable, that our Enemies have been pleased to ridicule what they could not deny, and have made Passive Obedience bear a part in our Character, when the Muse hath been inclined to satire.  
Thus also the Person of Quality, who wrote the Reasons, Why a Protestant should not turn Papist. 
P. 30, 31. — I am then quite out of conceit with your Religion, since I cannot embrace it without endangering my Loyalty (by reason of the Deposing Doctrine) in case I live up to the pitch of its real Principles. But 'tis all one to me, so long as I remain a Protestant, what Religion my Prince is of (though I could wish, he were of the same I profess) because his Authority over me, and my indispensible Obligation to submit to him, do not depend upon his Opinion or Religion, but upon his Birthright; yet have we not reason to doubt, if the zealous sort of Roman Catholics would not think it lawful to take Arms against their Prince turned a Heretic, since the French League against Henry the 4th. was upon this very account styled Holy; and had I not been particularly acquainted with the Principles of the Church of Rome, I had never conceived how it came to pass, that such great Numbers of learned and well-meaning Men too, could be guilty of such a horrible wickedness as that was, and forget themselves so far, as to pretend Holiness in an open Rebellion against their lawful Prince.— I am then more satisfied with the Loyalty of a Protestant, especially of the Church of England, who acknowledgeth the Prince to be a Supreme Governor over all his Subjects, and Sovereign Judge in all Cases, than with that of a Roman Catholic, who seems to set limits to his Power by such restrictions, as neither Reason nor Scripture can warrant.  
Mr. Pomfret. 
Serm. called Subjection for Conscience sake, p. 16.  Must the freeborn Subject break in upon the Birthrights and Liberties of the Crown, and reduce it to Submission and Slavery, that the humersom Christian may enjoy, what he is pleased to call his Christian Liberty? Christ gave not his Blood for this end; nor did he make a purchase of a disobedient and gainsaying People:— Be confident, no man can be God's Servant, unless he be also a good Subject. 
P. 22. — Some men's Opinions and other men's Interests, is the Conscience they so much talk of; and than it is no wonder at all, they cannot for their hearts obey, when they themselves are setting up for Superiority. 
Id. Pass. Ob. stated and asserted. pag. 3. P. 15. — Passive Obedience is a patiented and mild Suffering the hard and unjust Usages of Kings, being both the Christian's Duty and Profession: But this meek and Christian Principle was of late called to an account, and with Arguments of Raillery and Contempt endeavoured to be hooted out of the World.— Under the old Law, when the King should usurp upon their Lands, and Wives and Children, 1 Sam. 8.11.18. all their Remedy was, Ye shall cry out unto the Lord in that day, etc.— They that resist, shall receive to themselves damnation. 
p. 17, 18, 19, 21.  It is in vain to say more, being so plain to any Man to understand, that seriously thinks of a day of Judgement, when all the daubing of Liberty and Property, and Religion, shall be wiped off, and no pretence nor distinction, satisfy against the evidence of Truth, and so plain Expressions.  
Mr. Nicolas Claget. Disloyal Principles dispose Men to be unquiet Subjects, 
Serm. on 1 Thes. 4.11. p. 27. p. 22, 23, 38, 39, 40.  such as these, That all Power is from the People, and is put into the King's hands upon trust, that it is lawful for Subjects to enter into Covenants and Associations for the defence of themselves and their Religion, against the Command of the Prince, etc. which are the Doctrines of Jesuits and fanatics; 
See also Wilson's Disourse of Monarchy, p. 15. 22, 70, 72.81, 82. 106. 198. 207. 209. 248. 258, 259. Mr. John Cook, Serm. before the L. Mayor, May 13. 1683. pag. 8, 9 it. 24, 25. Dr. Jo. Price Seem. Sept. 9 1683. pag. 2. 12. 15. 18. Mr. Will. Bolton, Coreh Redivivus, pag. 9 14. 29. Mr. Higham on Prov. 24.21. pag. 45, etc. 86. 108. 123. 137. 157. 160. 175. etc. Mr. Whitfield's Sermon before the L. Mayor, Jul. 30. 1632. on Judas 8. Mr. Gifferd's Assize Sermon, p. 12. Mr. Hyrick's Sermon, July 26. 1685. p. 6, 10, 23, 26. Mr. Brown's Sermon at the Visitation, Apr. 12. 1681. p. 27, 34. Dr. Smith, Prebendary of Norwich, Assize Serm. Sept. 13. 1668. p. 8, 9 etc. Id. Assize Serm. Feb. 27. 1672. p. 28. B. Rively's Sermon at Norwich, July 19 1679. on Rom. 13.4. p. 6, 7. Dr. Thompson, Dean of Bristol, Serm. June 21. 1685. on Tit. 3.1. p. 3, 5, 6, 14. 16, 17, 18, etc. Mr. Bura's Serm. May 29. 1684. p. 25, 27, etc. Mr. Ethorowe's Scriptural Catechism, p. 59 Mr. Alsop's Serm. on Exod. 20.12. p. 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, etc. 24, 25, 30. Dr. Fr. Gregory's Serm. Nou. 5. 1679 p. 6, 9, 25. Mr. Will. Godman's Sermon May 24. 1660. p. 21, 22, etc. Mr. Luce's Serm. on 1 Pet. 2.16. p. 14, 17, 18. Mr. Fisher's Serm. Jan. 30. 1672. p. 11, 13. Mr. Sayer's Assize Serm. Feb. 25. 1672. p. 38, 40. Dr. Barnes' Serm. before the Univers. of Cambr. p. 10, 19, 20 Mr. Crisp's Visir. Serm. 1686. And very many other such Discourses; and I have reason to suppose, that if the Sermons of all the Divines of the Ch. of England, on this subject, were in Print, the very Catalogue would swell to a very great bulk.  Doctrines of so pernicious a consequence to the public Peace, that it is enough to make us reject them as false, without examining them further.— Such impious Doctrines and Principles as are destructive of the State, and do leave Governments and Governors insecure.— 
* P. 44.  And is Religion and God's Cause a Pretext for Treason and Rebellion? This is next to Blasphemy, and is an impious Reflection on the Wisdom and Power of God; as if to bring about his own Designs, he stood in need of our Devilish Devices.  
I shall close this Chapter with the Testimony of Dr. Carswell, Vicar of Bray, 
Serm. at she Assize, Mar. 3. 1683/4. p. 25.  in his State Reformer enquired into.— Designing Men still cunningly hid the disloyal Treachery in their Hearts, their ambitious Designs, their Disgusts and Disgraces at Court, their Discontents for missng Places of Trust, Command, Profit, or Honour, under the Vizard or fair-faced Pretences of Religion or Justice; 
P. 3●.  they are only concerned as Patriots of their Religion and Country, etc.— If our Judges are unjust, or the King had deputed none to hear, 
p. 44.  or none that would do Justice, it were not then lawful to oppose or revile: Be wise now therefore, O ye Kings, etc. Tho the People may not da●e to revile, 
p. 41.  or presume to call you to an account, yet the King of Kings, whose Deputies you are, will exact an account of your Stewardship.— God made not the People Judge of Moses' Actions, but him of theirs.  
The End of the Second Part.     

Some grosser ERRATA of the First Part.  
IN the Catal. of Authors, read B. Montague. p. 7. for primitive, r. more early. p. 18. for subscribed, v. assented to. for An. 1684. r. the same Year. p. 32. r. Ficlerus. p. 35. r. All Kum. p. 43. after or better him add the Paragraph in p. 46. And according to this Doctrine unto Malignants. p. 54. r. Goodwin. p. 74. for L. r. lastly. p. 88 r. irreligious.   

ERRATA of the Second Part.  
PAg. 1. for aught to, read would willingly. p. 5. l. 12. r. do deserve. p. 9 r. an. 1542/3. p. 11. marg. r. Barnes. p. 14. l. 18. r. as they. p. 20. r. a Friend. p. 32. l. 24. r. as he. p. 36. must. p. 53. how much. p. 57 l. 1. the state, deal after the words, to following. p. 59 l. 26. they could. p. 70. l. 31. p. rend, etc. p. 79. l. 27. r. then. p. 82. l. 36. for which r. and. p. 84. r. or Merode. p. 88● as if he. p. 91. r. sorer. p. 94. Abbadon. p. 95. l. 2. r. whom. p. 96. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 101. r. then only B. p. 104. marg. Bowsin. p. 105. l. 28. r. was the first. p. 109. deal the Cicero of the Fr. Church. deal Buckler of Faith. p. 112. l. 37. r. that Book is. p. 127. r. 1661. p. 138. r. Theses. p. 144. after B. Fell should be placed D. Allestry, who is placed p. 147. and instead of Dr. Allestry should be placed p. 147. B. Thomas. p. 149. r. wickedly.— The rest the Reader is desired to correct.   

ADVERTISEMENT.  
The Power communicated by God to the Prince, 
☞  and the Obedience required of the Subject: Briefly laid down and confirmed out of the Holy Scriptures, the Testimony of the Primitive Church, the Dictates of right Reason, and the Opinion of the wisest among Heathen Writers. By the most Reverend Father in God James late Lord Archbishop of Armagh, and Primate of all Ireland. Faithfully published out of the Original Copy (written with his own hand) by the Reverend Father in God, Robert Saunderson, L. Bishop of Lincoln; with his Lordship's Preface thereunto. Sold by the Booksellers in London.