CERTAIN CONSIDERATIONS UPON THE DUTIES BOTH OF PRINCE and People.  
Written by a Gentleman of quality, a wellwisher both to the KING and PARLIAMENT.  
OXFORD, Printed by LEONARD LICHFIELD, Printer to the university. 1642.   

CERTAIN CONSIDERATIONS upon the duties both of Prince & People.  
AMONG many intemperances that minister disturbance to the Church and State, we have those, whose supine affectation of flattery has grown to that impudence, as that they have not only for learning's sake disputed, but in the name of the word of God, and at the time and place when we should expect no other than the lively Oracles of God, delivered, that the persons, and fortunes of all Subjects, are absolutely at the will and command of the Prince, to dispose according to his will and pleasure. To such licentiousness, we need give no other answer, then only to demand, that the maintainers of such Doctrine, would put us but a case, wherein (those opinions of theirs being admitted) a Prince can commit any Injustice, and that they would show us, wherein lies the justice which the Scripture commands Princes to execute, and which it affirms to be the establishment of their Thrones, 
Prov. 29. 4.  and the violation of it to be their adversity or subversion.  
We have on the other side those, who finding it written, that governors are for the good of the People, pursue it with Sophistry; That the people are the end of Princes and Governors beings: and that therefore as their government is for, or against the good of the People, so may they be continued or deposed by them. To that end also there are opinions set on foot; That all government first came from the people, and that all authority does in the last place reside in them; That in every kingdom the whole body of the people must of necessity contain, all power and authority whatsoever either is or may be erected in it; so as that all the people or the greater part of them (which amounts to all) may by their votes, reassume all power into their own hands: abrogate all Ordinances: annul the forms of present government: and new mould the State into such forms and institutions as best liketh them. These are falsities which yet lay hold upon reasons, and prevail over the judgements of many that are understanding men, and which have no evil affection toward government, and these are of that consequence, as that they subvert the stability of all kind of government whatsoever.  
But were we shy of Jesuitism, as well as of Popery, we would not with so little examination receive opinions, which we know had their first hatching in the school of the Jesuite. The matter would require a very large field, should we set forth all things that fitly conduce to the support of the truth, but my purpose is to be very short. Therefore declining to controvert what may be, and usually is alleged in the matter, I shall humbly offer to consideration such apprehensions of the truth as I have conceived less vulgar, & submitting them to the approbation or correction of better judgements, expect they shall return unto me, with confirmation, or rectification of my own private thoughts; if from so mean a talon, no mite of benefit be raised to the public,  
And first, we are to consider that the original of Kingdoms is of three sorts, to wit, natural, (which we may also call civil,) Violent, (or if you will, martial,) or mixed of these two. The first was of Parents over their children, children's children, and servants bought or borne unto them. In this, the person of the governor was before the being of the Subject, and his authority, before ever the Subject consented, or had power to obey or disobey. Such a King was Shem, called therefore Melchisedeck, or King of righteousness. And a Prince of this kind was Abraham, after that by God's command he had left his Country and his father Shem's house, and lived of himself, and Kings of this nature were they that were intimated in the names of Abimelech, Abiam, Abiram, Abram, Abishalom, &c. And this sovereignty was not inherent to the person of the Father only, but from him descended, by right of primogeniture, 
Gen. 4. 7.  to the eldest son, to whole rule, we see that God subjected the younger.  
The second sort of Kingdoms was wholly founded by the sword, over people that were subjugated by usurpers and invaders, such as followed the way of Nimrod: who being potent in his natural dominion, used his power to the oppression of his neighbours, and changed the state of government into tyranny; I say not the state of liberty, (as if till then men had lived in solute liberty) but changed the natural government into that which is tyrannical.  
The third sort had much what the same original with the second: where people surcharged at home and forced abroad; men in division; in distress; in fear; exiles; and fugitives, distrusting their present condition, served themselves on the Wit, Spirit, and courage of some notable man; to whose command they (with such limitation of his power as they could agree on,) subjected themselves; and then falling into action prospered even into a Kingdom: from hence sprung our modern Kingdoms, more novel and various in their frame, and many of them so qualified, as not properly to be called Kingdoms, but rather republics under regal styles, with Prince's elective, much circumscribed in authority, and obnoxious to deposing. Now in the first and second sort, apparently the people had never any thing to do with the institution and limitation of sovereign Power: and though in the third sort they had more to do therewith, yet not alike in all of that sort, nor had they the whole and sole power of instituting, scarce in any of that sort, so as we must rectify that misapprehension, that in all Kingdoms the first derivation of authority was from the people.  
In the next place, we are to consider; that kingdoms are not associations of men in their natural capacities: but communions of men quatenùs members politic, united in one common bond of obedience into one political body, where none can move to give his due aid for the weal of the body, but in the capacity of a politic member, and according to the peculiar office which every several member properly aught to execute; which office the members duly exercising, make a true and perfect civil Communion. Now though we consider a kingdom as a mere civil or temporal State only; Yet even there, the observance of this communion is a duty strictly required of every member, even by the law of nature, or moral law, and by the law of God itself. For man having lost his original righteousness or justice, and consequently the right of governing himself; and being thereby necessarily subjected to the government of some justice without himself: it was necessary, for his own good and safety, that he should not only be subject to that justice in the things that concerned the well governing himself toward others; but likewise in those things that concerned his safety and defence from the violence of others misgoverning themselves toward him, and that necessarily brings in Empire. So that (Unless we can imagine some kingdom to consist of people sprung of themselves, in perfection of righteousness, not depending, nor obliged to God, or nature, nor obnoxious to those conditions to which the fall of man has subjected all men,) we cannot devise how men should naturally be free from subjection to government; and less, how (being subject) private men in any State, should in their natural capacity, meddle with any thing concerning government; or so much as go about the making, changing, on anulling of ordinances; or so compel governors▪ to do them, without being criminally culpable; not only against the positive laws of the land, but even against conscience pressed with the bonds of natural, or moral, and also divine law. Therefore to explicate the sense which all intend, but some (not well distinguishing) confound: It is certainly true, that all the people of a kingdom must needs comprehend all power whatsoever is, or may be exercised in it: but when we say so, we by all the people, mean, the whole entire body of the members politic, from head to foot, every one of them abiding and working according to his proper and ordained office politic. But if beside their ordained office & power, any shall do or attempt any alteration in the State, (howsoever intended for common good) their act must needs be so far from being lawful, as being from the beginning repugnant and resisting the ordained power, it can never become a lawful act, though all the Subjects of a kingdom should after consent unto it.  
But in the third place, we are farther to consider: That if the kingdom be also a Church of God, than is the original, and authority of it, of far higher nature, and more remote from the reach and power of the people. It is true, God is King of all Kings, and highest sovereign in all kingdoms, as well Heathen as Christian: yet, as he cautioned in the behalf of his Church, that no stranger should be King there, but by any means one that was of the Brethren of the people: so in His Church He himself is a nearer and (as it were) a more cognate sovereign, then in other kingdoms; and his Vicegerents there, are of more immediate and more important subordination to him. For which cause he there reserves to himself the choice of the man, and leaves the people no more than the bare investing of him. Not but that God in all kingdoms, makes Kings whom he pleaseth; but he will have it known, that in his Church, the choice is not only his, and to be sought at his hand, but that he more strictly requires the observance of his right, in his Church; then he does otherwhere. Therefore he expressly commands there; 
Deut. 17. 15.  Thou shalt in any case set him over thee, whom thy Lord thy God shall choose.  
And as in his Church he to himself reserved the nomination; so when he had nominated, he did not leave it to the people, there to declare the right and manner of the Kingdom: but by the Prophet by whom he signified his choice, by the same was the manner of the Kingdom declared to the people, 
1. Sam. 10. 25.  written in a book and laid up before the Lord.  
Kings of God's Church, having from God a more immediate and more sacred ordination, have also a more especial endowment of his spirit, for which cause they have been ever instituted with anointing, & their persons therewith consecrate, for the exercise of their function. This we see in Saul, whose person (though he were a wicked Prince) David in this respect declared so sacred, as that he pronounced a curse upon the mountains of Gilboa, because in them his person was cast down and vilefied, without regard of the sacredness of his anointing. Their anointing therefore is not a mere outward solemnity, but is significant of the spirit of God in a more especial manner given unto them, and from thence proceeds that which the Scripture witnesseth, 
Prov. 16. 10.  A divine sentence in the lips of the King, yea, and a sacred integrity also, His mouth transgresseth not in judgement. And suitable to their Prerogative of graces, beyond the ordinary of other Princes, God vouchsafes them his ear, with more favour and familiarity then to the other, as we may see by his ready hearing, gracious answers, vouchsafed messages sent, and will declared touching them; not only to the good, as David, Solomon, Asa, Jehosaphat, Hezechiah, Josiah, &c. but even to Coniah, Saul, Jeroboam, Ahab, Jehu, and other wicked Princes. And we not only hear God himself saying, by me Kings reign; 
Prov. 8. 15. Psal. 81.  and I have said ye are God's: but his word couples also the fear that is to be rendered unto Kings, with the fear that is due unto himself, fear God and the King. Keep the King's commandment, in regard of the oath of the Lord. Nor is it ordinary obedience that is commanded, but the highest (under God) Submit unto the King, 
1. Pet. 2. 13.  as unto the supreme. And that not for the danger that may ensue, but (as the Apostle saith) Not for wrath only, 
Rom. 13. 5.  but also for conscience sake. Now if the King be supreme, then is there in no kingdom any superintending power or authority, that may lawfully call the King to account: for that power only is the supreme, over which there is not any other to take account. So high and sacred is the authority of them whom God has made, nursing fathers, and nursing mothers, to his Church.  
When Kings then, both in their Persons, and Functions, are of so sacred an ordination, and so hedged in, by God's especial protection, where is there place for the people to interpose and meddle with the affairs that do belong unto them? besides, when without the Kings consent there can be no concurrence of people, to join in any accord for the disposing of any affairs of the kingdom, but that the matter must first pass the project, solicitation, and prosecution of diverse private men, no way thereunto authorized: how can any act of the people to such an end be justifiable, when an unlawful beginning, (what number or quality soever the attempters be of) can never make a lawful act? Therefore omitting those places of Scripture, It is not fit to say to a King thou art wicked, Who may say to a King, what dost thou? Fear God and the King, 
Prov. 24. 21.  and meddle not with those that love innovation: And many others (which yet block up the way against private men's meddling with matters of government.) If it were to be granted that the people in any kingdom had power over all rights of the kingdom; yet unless that by the Ordinances of that kingdom, it be expressly declared and appointed, how, and by whom, that power shall be executed, (and by the way, where such Ordinances are, there is not a right kingdom, but a republic) and again, unless those ordinances be rightly pursued, there can be no combinement, to do any such act, but with the guilt of Sedition, and Treason, in the sight of God. For it will lie against every particular man, between God and his conscience to answer, who hath called thee to this? who hath separated thee? who hath made thee a judge or an Executor of these matters? And though it be pretended (and perhaps intended too) that the work so to be done shall make for the glory of God and good of his Church: yet that will but little help the matter; for, for men to do God a good office against his declared will, is to be God's good Masters, not his good servants. 
Rom. 13. 1. 2.  He does expressly command, that Every soul be subject to the higher powers; and declares plainly, that the powers that are, are ordained of God, and that they that resist the power, resist the ordinance of God, and receive to themselves damnation: and our Saviour himself forbids us, that we do not evil, that good may come thereon. 
1. Sam. 15. 22.  The Scripture tells us the reason, for God hath no need of a wicked man, & he is best glorified when his voice is obeyed. We have also the examples of Scripture to the same purpose. It did not only turn to sin to Saul, that he, to satisfy the people in their devotion, spared the best of the Amalekites spoil to offer in sacrifice unto the Lord, when God had commanded that all should be destroyed: but it became a final sin even unto his rejection. And Uzza was struck with sudden death, 
2. Sam. 6. 6. 1. Chr. 13. 10,  for nothing but putting his hand to the ark of God's Covenant; (which no man but the sons of Aaron might do) yet Uzza did not do it, but with a good and a pious mind to save the ark of God's Covenant from falling. Therefore it is not enough for men to be assured that the work which they do, in their consciences tends to a good and a religious effect: but they must every man have a sufficient warrant for his conscience, and for his calling to the work; that is, either the express word of God, or else such manifest inference and deduction from it, as by the concurrent judgement of the Church universally in all ages, is agreed for truth, not such judgement as some particular ministers take upon them to make, for the spirit of the Prophets, 
1. Cor. 14. 32, 33.  are subject to the Prophets; that is the spirits of the particular, to the spirit of the universal: For God is not the author of confusion, which else would necessarily follow. Men therefore must look to the ground & first beginning of their actions; for if the root be evil, so will also the branches be, though it promises never so good fruit, and be countenanced by all the people of a kingdom.  
If further we look into Scripture, The story of Moses is not without some doctrine to this point. Moses having an ardent zeal to the relief of his brethren the people of God, and finding himself above others enabled to be the instrument of their deliverance, both by his extraordinary abilities, & also through the great power he had with Pharaoh's daughter, persuades himself, and (as appears by St Stephen's relation) would have the people understand, 
Acts. 7. 25. Exod. 2. 12.  that he was even then called to be their deliverer. Hereupon he makes his address to the people, and by the slaughter of one of their oppressors, takes say of their affection toward an attempt of liberty, as if there needed no more in the case, but that the people should resolve, and join with him to break from the subjection of the King they lived under, who was an enemy to God's Church. In this now, (though we make no question but that Moses had a zeal acceptable to God) yet may we see by that which followeth, that he had not yet a particular calling thereunto, neither was the way wherein he thought to have executed his zeal agreeable to the will of God; therefore the people themselves (whom Moses only sought unto) they reject him: his attempt is frustrate, and himself is driven to repent it with forty years' exile in the wilderness. 
Acts. 7. 30.  After that long space of expiating the error of his self-led zeal, God calls him then indeed to the work to which he came of himself before; 
Exod. 3. 10.  Come now (saith God) and I will send thee: and God sends him then indeed; but sends him not to the people (that we may know he sent him not before) but (though he could have made the people able to make their own way by the sword, and could by his command have made it lawful so to have done) yet (to teach us the observance of ●ustice and duty, in our proceedings) he sends him to the King, of him to demand the dismission of his people, that so the people's obedience to his messengers, and to the word delivered in his name, might be without any reluctance of conscience in regard of their allegiance to the King. When Moses did this way set upon the work, all went the right way, and the unspeakable obstinacy of King Pharaoh, being aggravated by the fairness of proceedings toward him, did to his condemnation before men and angels, and to the magnifying of God's justice redound the more unto his praise and glory.  
It is not inconsiderable that God by a star declared our Saviour in his birth to be the born King of the Jews; and in that stile brought the wise men to worship him. And likewise, that when our Saviour (to fulfil the prophecies concerning him) did solemnly present himself to Jerusalem: he suffered his Disciples publicly to congratulate his coming by the name of King, and told those that were offended at it, that their gratulation was so necessary, as that if they should omit it, the stones in their default would have performed it also. That he himself before Pilate, maintained that he was a King, and at his death had his cross (notwithstanding the Jews opposed) adorned with the Title, King of the Jews: but when the people would have made him King, he refused their officiousness and would by no means accept of that dignity from them: he would rather be without his right, then receive it either in a wrong way, or from a wrong hand: no, he would not at any of their instances so much as acknowledge himself to be authorized for a judge or divider amongst them. So little did he acknowledge any power in them to confer crowns, or to have superintendence over them. But it is true, that when God had determined to make a division of the kingdom of his people, the first King of the ten Tribes was of the people's making, and was made in the way of reformation: 
1. King. 12. 4.  but that you may know it was only permitted by God, that so he might give that stiff-necked people of the fruit of their own hands, and make them an example unto others; he designed Jeroboam King, which neither anointing, nor blessing, nor other ceremony than a rent: the Prophet rent the new coat into twelve pieces, and when he had done, he gave him none of them, but (as if he would show he should be a King in fact, not in right, in some way in which God would own nothing but the permission only) he bade him (as one would say) be his own carver, and take ten pieces to himself. What the progress of the story was we all know; when the people had made a King of their own, than they and their King must have a Religion of their own fitted to their new framed kingdom, and to effect that, the old Priests of God must be sent away, as absolute impediments to the settling of their new government: and when that was done; then were they absolute indeed, and had as much authority over their God, as they before had taken liberty against their King: so it followed, that when the People had made an usurpers' King, their King and they made a calf their God; and the sum of the people's reforming their King's misgovernance, and relieving their own grievances, was; they made themselves a King that made them all castaways: he himself the reproach of sovereignty, and an infamous stigmatic to all posterity, and his sins for ever adhering to the People, till they had caused their utter extirpation, and till of freeborn Subjects under a King of their own, they became perpetual slaves to the Subjects of another kingdom. So unpleasing to God, and so pernicious to the people themselves, are the fruits of those reformations which only or principally are managed by the popular inclination, in which, though for the most part a desire of doing justice, or preserving true religion be pretended; yet private discontent in some, and ambition in others, is commonly the chief and radical incitement of the work.  
The means that belongs to private men to use, for reforming of Kingdoms, 
1. Tim. 2. 1.  is that which the Apostle shows, Let prayers, (saith he) and supplications be made for Kings and all that are in Authority, that we may lead a Godly life. The people must not with impatience and puffed up minds invade God's peculiar right, of calling Kings to account, but every man betaking himself to the reformation of himself, and to prayers unto God, must seek of him (that has the hearts of Kings in his hand) to dispose the King's heart to the desired reformation. 
Prov. 21. 1.  Many think this way long and tedious, and like better that the people should Offer themselves willingly, and help God in some readier way. But truly if such private reformation and prayer be the right means of public good, and be too long neglected, that is the people's own fault; and they may not by their fault, gain a power which before they had not. Yet true it is, that in great misgovernances, God often uses the people's hand, to do his work of justice, but that we may know the way is not right; as not agreeable to his revealed will; we shall find that the work of justice that he so beginneth by them, he endeth not till he hath finished it on them, and his hand is never more heavy, then against that rod, that in the way of injustice, hath done his justice service. But will you hear God himself taking cognisance of the misgovernance of Princes, and determining of it?  
In the 81. psalm, God declares himself to stand in the congregation of Princes, and to be judge among Gods (so calleth he Kings there.) Then he expostul●teth the matter with wicked Princes, How long will ye give wrong judgement and accept the persons of the wicked? Then he complaineth, They will not be instructed, but walk on in darkness, the foundations of the earth are out of square. The misgovernance is great and the consequence of it desperate, but does God in that case give the people power to reform? No clean contrary: God without any revocation still affirms, I have said ye are God's, and ye are all children of the most high, 
Vers. 6.  persons sacred, not to be approached by the profane hands of the people: but to awe, and restrain Princes, he tells them, that though he has made them Gods, yet they shall die like men, when they must make account to him of their misgoverning: so that God reserves the judgement of them to himself, and no whit authorises the people to have any thing to do with their misdoeings.  
This is not to flatter Princes, to say God has appointed men no means to relieve themselves against their misgovernment, but only prayers, to be made either to them, or for them: and that men have not otherwise to meddle with the right of liberty and duties of Princes, then only by way of supplication. Nor is this a security for Princes, for though in a lawful and ordinate way there be no other means, yet no examples are more familiar, than those in which the sin, the injustice, and violence of wicked Princes, are in this world punished, by the sin, injustice, & violence of wicked people, sometimes their own, sometime others subject, God's extraordinary and supreme justice is tied to none of those regulations, with which he has circumscribed his ordinary justice committed to the administration of man, but (as we said before) we may still observe God's indignation, not more fatally incensed against any, then against those whose wickedness has put them forward to be the instruments of his extraordinary justice upon others.  
But to pursue the examination of the right that people may have in questioning and reforming the rule of Kings. Let us farther examine what we find in Scripture. David sinning by numbering the people, was enforced to his choice of one of three plagues, Famine, Sword, or Pestilence; & Deus malum avertat, this is but a doleful instance for the people. The King sins, and God lays all the punishment upon the people: Nay he gives not them so much as the choice of the punishment which they must suffer for the King, but the sinning King must choose, which of the three plagues, the innocent people must undergo: this is strange, did not the great judge of heaven and earth do right? yes undoubtedly, and the matter was; the wickedness of the people had grievously provoked God, 
2. Sam. 24. 1.  so as the King must be let go, and suffered to fall into sin, that way may be made for the people's punishment. This seems no less strange on the other side; that because the people sin, therefore the Prince should be let fall: that for the transgressions of the land, the Prince (as we have it in another place) should be punished with division and diminution, and many should be the Princes of the land: Nay, that for the sin of the people, the Prince should be cast away, 
1. Sam. 12. 25  as in that place, If ye do wickedly ye shall perish, you and your King. All this were strange indeed, should we consider Prince, and people, as persons strangers in interest to one another: but therefore these places show the strict union, and indivisible mutuality of interest, that they have in the doings and sufferings each of other, beyond any thing that can be created by the mere constitution or agreement of men.  
This case of David's further teaches; that if when the sins of the people be grown high, it be any way necessary that the King be let fall into sin before the People be punished: then are Kings immediately between God and the people, and stand there like Moses in the gap, to withhold the hand of God from the people, until that they also by falling someway be removed. Again if the King's transgression in government has the original from the sins of the people; then are the People the prime offenders, and first agents in the King's transgression, and He himself is as it were accessary, and in a manner passive in it. We see that God himself here judged so, and laid the real punishment upon the people, whom he accounted the original sinners: as for the King (to whom the sin is verbally ascribed) we see God reckons, as if he were only passive in committing it, and therefore inflicts no punishment on him, but what he voluntarily took upon him, an humbling of himself, and a compassionate fellowfeeling of punishment, such as a good common father has always by the sense of his people's suffering.  
It now follows plainly: that the people that have their hands in sin, are no competent justiciars for hearing, judging, and reforming of any misdemeanours; especially of those in which they themselves (having the principal hand) are the principals; and less, where the person questioned, is but an accessary, drawn in by them: and lest of all, where he is a person sacred, and one so much superior, as by God's ordinance to stand immediately betwixt God and them, sure, he that would not suffer one with a beam in his eye, to pull a moat out of the eye of his brother; does not permit him to do it toward one so much superior as his Prince: nor suffer guilty Subjects to arraign their sovereign; guilty servants, their Lord; nor guilty sons their common father.  
To conclude, we may consider the unlawfulness of popular animadversion into the manners and government of Princes, (especially of Princes that are lawful Christian Monarchs) even in this alone, that there are no received, nor known bounds of limitation, how far people may walk in the way of questioning and reforming the errors of Princes, but that if any thing at all be lawful for them to do therein, then may they without restraint proceed so far as to depose Princes, and deprive them of their lives, if (according to the doctrine of the Jesuite) they find it for the good and reformation of the Church and Commonwealth, which how well it is warranted by the word of God, we may see plainly enough in the case between Saul and David.  
Saul was King, but, misgoverning himself and the Kingdom, became as bad as excommunicate and deposed: 
1. Sam. 15. 23. & 16. 13.  for he was rejected of God, and David was by God's express command anointed to be King, all which notwithstanding; neither David nor the people ever sought to depose him; to renounce obedience unto him; to combine against him; question his government, or so much as meddle with ordering any of the affairs that belonged to the King. Nay, Saul after this persecuted David unjustly, and in the midst of his unjust and hostile persecution, was delivered into David's hand, and it was of necessity that David should take the advantage and kill him, for he could not otherwise have any assurance of his own life: David did then but even cut of the skirt of Saul's garment, to the end it might witness his faithful loyalty, because it made it manifest he could as easily have cut the thread of his life; and even for this, his heart so smote him, as that he cries out, The Lord forbid that I should do this thing to my Master the Lord's anointed, to stretch forth my hand against him. 
1. Sam. 24. 5.  That was not all neither, but there were more circumstances in the case, Saul was not yet reformed, and going on still, was another time delivered into David's hands, and the people both times understood it, the special delivery of his enemy into his hands by God, and would have embraced the opportunity and have made him away: David restrains them still with the same bridle; The Lord forbid &c. and tells them, 
1. Sam. 26. 9  Who can lay his hands on the Lord's anointed and be guiltless? No, David (though already anointed) would tarry God's time, the Lord should smite Saul, or his day should come, or he should descend into battle and perish, but David's hand should not be against him. No whatsoever Saul was, or whatsoever he had done; neither his falling from God, nor Gods declaring him rejected, nor David's anointing by God's command, nor Saul's unjust persecution of David the Lord's anointed in future, could dissolve the duty of his Subjects, nor make it lawful for them to lay their hands on him, no not when he was in wicked hostility against them. But Saul in David's account, was still the Lord's anointed, still a sacred person, still David's Master, notwithstanding the circumstances which might seem to have discharged the ties of duty which David and the people did formerly owe unto him.  
Neither is the anointing of Kings a thing sacred as to their own Subjects only: but the regard thereof is required at the hands of strangers also, because of the profanation and sacrilege that in the violation of their persons is committed even against God. Wherefore, we see that though the Amalekite were a stranger, and made a fair pretence, that he had done Saul a good office, when at his own request he dispatched him of the pain of his wounds, and of the pangs of his approaching death: yet David (taking his fact according to his own confession) makes a slight account of the causes which he pretended, as a frivolous extenuation of an heinous fact, and condemns him, though a stranger, as an heinous Delinquent against the Majesty of God. How wert thou not afraid (saith he) to stretch forth thy hand to destroy the Lord's anointed? neither his being a stranger, nor any of the other circumstances were so available, but that his blood fell deservedly upon his own head. The act is in itself perfectly wicked, and in the degree heinous; altogether against the word of God: and therefore all actions of Subjects, that in the progress of them tend, or by the way threaten to arrive at that upshot, are all unlawful, foul, and wicked; and not only the actors themselves wicked, but their assistants, favourers, those that wish them well, or (as St John speaks) That bid them God speed, are partakers of their evil deeds.  
But error in this point, has made such impressions in the minds of many, as that they will never be persuaded, but that they may disobey and resist Authority, if ever they find it faulty, or the commands thereof not agreeing with their consciences. They will grant, that they may not disobey Authority in the lawful commands thereof, neither do evil that good may come thereon: but then, they themselves will be the judges what commands are lawful, and what not; what things good, and what evil; & so they make obedience arbitrary, and government (by pretending conscience) at the discretion of the Subject: yea, though the things whereat they take check, be of their own nature indifferent, or doubtful, (and therefore not matters of faith) yet will not they submit themselves, nor their opinions unto any, no not to the judgement of the Church they live in, no not to the judgement of the Church Catholic, nor to the authority of it, even in the purest times thereof. But they from the authority of their own opinions, or from the authority of such Teachers, as they themselves have chosen to themselves to be their guides, they will both censure, condemn, disobey, and revile the Ordinances of their Church, and the governors thereof, so secure in opposing imaginary, or at least unproved superstition, as they will not see how incompatible, self-will, presumption, disobedience, arrogance and railing are with true Religion, nor that the false Teachers, and their Disciples (which our Saviour and his Apostles foretold should be in the last and perilous times, and which St Peter calleth cursed children) are not only described by this, that they have a form of godliness, but deny the power thereof. 
2. Tim. 3. 5.  That they are in sheep's clothing, but are inwardly Wolves. That the fruit they bear is not answerable to the tree they seem to be. 
Matth. 7. 16.  That their way of working is after the way of private insinuation, 
2. Tim. 3. 6. 4. 3.  creeping into houses, and leading silly Women captive. Having itching ears, and after their own liking heaping to themselves teachers. 
Iude. 19  That they be they that separate themselves, and the like. 
2. Tim. 3. 3.  But they are especially described to be traitorous, Heady, high-minded, 
2. Pet. 2. 10.  to be such as despise government, as are presumptuous, self willed, and not afraid to speak evil of dignities. And again that they despise dominion, 
Iude. 8. & 11.  and speak evil of Dignities. And that they Perish in the gainsaying of Corah. now we know that the sin of Corah was, that he (being a Levite, and countenanced by an hundred and fifty Princes of the assembly, famous in the Congregation, 
Numb. 16.  and at least fourteen thousand seven hundred of the people) upon his own private opinion (to which also his followers adhered) that both he, and all the Congregation were holy, and might offer incense before the Lord as well as Aaron, Charged Moses and Aaron that they took too much upon them, and that they exalted themselves above the Congregation of the Lord, and therefore they holding themselves in a parity of authority with them, would not appear on their Summons, nor be obedient unto them. Yet (as if these passages of Scripture nothing concerned our times) we are nothing shy of those things whereof they do admonish us.  
There be some, that justify, that private men may resist authority, when it would do that which is hurtful to the Church of God, yea, that it is then their duty to resist it, that such resistance is no disobedience, no rebellion, no sin at all. These swallow that which may not be granted, viz: that they are competent judges of the church's hurt, and besides they make the rule that our Saviour gave us for discovering teachers of false Doctrine to be nothing worth. 
Mat. 7. 16.  Our Saviour tells us, we shall know them by their fruits, as granting fruit to be a thing apparent, known of all and unchangeable: but these men make the fruit to alter according to the diversity of the tree that bears it, though otherwise it have the same shape, taste, and virtue. For example: disobedience, resistance of authority, sedition, and rebellion, are by the law of God, and by the law of nature, agreed both by Christians and Heathens to be evil fruits. But these men (and Jesuits) tell us that resisting authority, and raising force against it, thereby to work the good and safety of the Church of God, though done by Subjects, is no resistance, no rebellion, no sin. The fruit has lost his own nature, which in itself was nought, and takes a new nature of goodness, because it was brought forth by the good tree of piety toward the Church of God. So our saviour's precept is made of no effect, and we must learn of the Jesuite, to unknown a known thing, and know it for some other thing, then ever we knew before, and that by a new way too; viz: by that which is not to be known of itself. We must know the fruit by the tree.  
We deny not, but that authority may command things, that by no means at all aught to be done, and that then we must not do them: but those things are such as are manifestly contrary to the express word of God, and principles of Religion. And even in them we are only simply to refuse the doing of the evil commanded, without any actual resistance otherwise, and so doing, our not obeying, is not to be counted disobedience; because it being necessary obedience to the express word of God, the primitive sovereign of all authority: it can never be disobedience as to the derivative. But where authority commands nothing against the express word of God, and principles of Religion (as in things disputable it doth not) there, except the governors that are the derivative be obeyed, God, the primitive is disobeyed. For he strictly commands obedience to his vicegerents, even in every ordinance of man.  
But we are also to take heed we play not the hypocrites with God. When thinking to do a good office to the Church or State, we resist authority, that presses us with that, which (as we suppose) threatens depravation of true Religion, or due liberty. For what know we but that by wrongful suffering (whereto all are called) God calls us to a trial of our faith, 
1. Pet. 2. 21.  patience, and obedience in that way, which if we do not show by keeping close to his command, not turning on the left hand to do any evil though commanded, nor on the right hand to resist authority with violence, although it hath commanded evil, we then refuse God's trial, and with an unseasonable zeal for Religion, and for our worldly rights, we contrary to God's command resist his lawful vicegerents, & the excuse we have for it, is little better than like the Pharisees, to say Corban, God shall have profit by it in the good that we shall do his Church thereby, and make the precept of God of no effect; and antevert the glory that god seemed to seek in our trial: And having so justified our resistance, we must then call it pious, and an act of duty, and such as God requires, and so make God the author of our sin, and lodge it where we can never repent us of it.  
There may undoubtedly be such pressures laid upon Subjects▪ as that humanity cannot but commiserate, and perhaps in some part excuse their impatience and resisting of them. But the pittifulnes of the case cannot make the resistance lawful, though we remit much to the doers, we must yet condemn the fact; and though their sufferings wash away much of the soil that would make both the deed and the doers more odious, yet must they be content to confess the deed to be evil. But to justify it, were to commit the accursed sin of calling good evil, and evil good; yea, the sacrilegious sin of making God weak and wicked, who for the necessary support of his Church, should stand in need, and require not only the help of sinful men, but even of their sins also. Private men, in things not plainly forbidden, cannot say they resist not authority, but sin: not the lawful power, but the licentiousness of them which abuse it: for they have no authority to distinguish. And if they offer to pull the mote out of the governor's eye, they will put a beam into their own. For though we be every one tied to resist sin in ourselves that we commit it not; yet are we not every one tied to resist it in others, that they commit it not; and we must leave every thing to be rectified by those only, to whom it properly belongs; and where there is no ordidinate means of reforming, there God has reserved that particular case unto himself, and we must not justle him out of his tribunal.  
We might in this place remember also what infinite doubts, and questions (perpetually ensnaring and wounding the consciences of private men, and with continual disturbance and divisions threatening the ruin of the State) do follow the admitting of this one opinion: that when other remedies fail, Subjects in case of necessity may levy arms, and defend their laws, Liberties, and Religion, against the oppressors of them. For what shall be sufficient necessity? and who shall be judge of it? what way, and how far may Subjects so proceed? who shall command? &c. But it is impossible to set forth all the branchings and consequents of errors, or the confusions that follows upon them. We might also remember, what dangerous strains and snares these opinions are to those that have taken express oaths of obedience and allegiance; but we hope, that this shall be hint enough to stir men up to take heed, how they entertain such opinions: and if already they have been led away with them, they make a more advised examination of the matter, and like good Christians be content (whatsoever censure fall upon their actions past, or whatsoever diminution upon their present esteem) they will yet submit, that God's truth may not be corrupted, nor his holiness blasphemed, 
Psal. 51.  but that, as the Psalmist saies, he may be justified in his sayings and be clear when he is judged, yea that God may be found true and every man a liar.  
We do not all this while contend that Princes are without law, we have in the entrance of our discourse shown the contrary: and we doubt not but that the rights & manners of Kingdoms, are religiously to be observed as well of the Prince as of the People: that the establishment of a Kingdom depends upon the observance of the rights thereof, as well by the one, as by the other: and that the Rights, and manner of every Kingdom is as sacred as the Kingdom itself. When God laid a curse upon those that removed the bounds between private man and private man, he left not the bounds of public right (in which all private right is included) open to secure violation: but what was wicked in the one case he accounted heinous in the other, as carrying with it, not only the transitory fortunes, but even the lives and souls of the People. And for this cause, when God finds in Princes the sin of those that remove the bounds, 
Hosea. 5. 10.  he threatens that he will pour out his wrath on them like water. It will not be unworthy our labour a little to inquire into the reason.  
Tyranny (as we have touched) began first in the Eastern parts, and thence dispersed itself through the world. And being from the beginning grievous, and incomportable, in time it discovered itself to be but weak. Withal it was supposed, that the grievousness of it consisted in the monarchal form, for remedy of which they instituted, in some places aristocratical, in some places Popular government, But in the use of them, they all also were discerned to be but other faces of the same tyranny: and men found plainly, that the absolute government of either People, or Nobles, was as well obnoxious unto tyranny, as the sole government of the Prince: and that in which of the three soever the government absolutely resided, the government was both tyrannical and infirm: and that in every of them the comportableness and stability depended only on the well regulating of the sovereign power, by a reasonable interposition of some power committed into the hands of the two other potent limbs. So it became an experimented principle among Statists; that the composite form (wherein every of the three potent limbs, for the surer support of the instituted State, had such apportioned influence and power as was proper for the frame of government) was the only firm and durable form; and that of the three powers, regal, aristocratical, or Popular, any of them prevailing so far, as to be wholly free from being qualified or tempered by some operation of the other two, corrupted the legitimate form into a tyrannical, and made a prognostic of the States declining into ruin. This principle of State is not impeached by any instance of long continuance of the old Assyrian, or present Turkish Empire, because the Assyrian had a peculiar advantage of continuance, by the simplicity and unactiveness of the age it was in. And the Turks to work their security and continuance, have wholly put out the light of knowledge from among their people, and have subdued them to a false Religion, that has in itself no other end, nor office, then only to keep men in subjection; so that they having deprived themselves of the principal of all conditions of humanity, and made themselves (in a manner) an Empire of beasts, the success of their affairs determines nothing of the event of theirs, that aim to live as men; much less of theirs, who are to live the lives of supernatural men, that is to say of Christians.  
Absolute power then, when it hath neither bound, nor limitation, (like the natural heat too much enforced, which soon devours the radical moisture that maintains it) tends not to prosperity, but to the destruction of itself. For all things being created in number, weight, and measure, the destruction of their proportions must needs be the decay of their being. 
Eccles. 36. 25.  Where there is no enclosure (saith the wise man) there the possession goes to decay. For though one, by decaying his fence, gives himself liberty to prey upon his neighbours, (which seems some advantage) yet he thereby lays himself open to be a prey also unto them; and when after he would close it again, he will find it hard to shut unruly beasts out from the haunt they have once gotten. Now for preservation of the bounds and fences of a Kingdom, it is necessary, not only to have just and equitable laws, but it must have also an institution of good and sound orders, for the making and executing of those laws: which orders must be sacredly observed. for as evil words corrupt good manners; so evil manners frustrate the effect of all good laws; and good manners (especially those that belong to government) are not preserved without strict adherence to the instituted orders of the Kingdom. Neither will those orders long continue valid and of use, unless the protection and care of them be committed into the hands of some conservatory power, more especially interessed in the continuance of them. Who though not absolutely, nor with any single power of immediate coercion, yet by their powerful intercession in the counsels, and convocate Assemblies of the State, may be effectually operative to the preservation of the public right, for which cause the use of these Assemblies are by no means long to be neglected.  
When then the continuance and prosperity of every State, stands upon no surer ground, than the observance of the Rights and Orders of the kingdom: upon no better stand the lives and fortunes of the Subject, of the Prince, and royal race; yea, and of the inheritance, and Church of God himself. And it is then no marvel that God should threaten to pour out his wrath like water on Princes that are like to those that remove the bounds. 
Hosea. 5. 10.  It is no marvel that to the Kings of Judah, (to whom God (no question) with a promise of perpetuity, gave the most absolute dominion that has been communicable to the Princes of his Church) he should command, Execute ye judgement and righteousness, 
Ier. 22. 3. 7.  etc: for than shall King sitting on the throne of David, enter in by these gates, etc: but otherwise, I will prepare destroyers against thee. It is the important consequence that makes God not give the charge without threatening. Though God declares Princes to be Gods among men, yet between him and them, God (as David confesses) has made the observance of the rule of justice and religion, to be the condition of their reigning. 
2. Sam. 23. 3.  Bear rule (saith God to David) over men, being just, and ruling in the fear of God. Indeed when Princes derive their authority from Christ, and justly challenge the prerogative of his vicegerents, it well behooves them to look that the derivatives fail not of the condition of their primitive. 
Psal. 45. 7.  The sceptre of Christ's kingdom is declared to be a right sceptre, and therefore his seat to endure for ever. If his vicegerents would have their seats durable, they also must have care their sceptres be right sceptres: they must see that the aunciently-established forms and Orders of their kingdoms be not violated or neglected, but from time to time renewed and kept: they must not, to be absolute, break the Rights, and Orders of the kingdom, and think to be good and just Princes in their Arbitrary Rule: it were a reproachful incongruity, and nothing suitable to the vicegerents of Christ, to be good and fair governors of that which they have made a tyrannical government. The governors and government must have one face and way, their rule cannot otherwise escape infamy; not their providence cut off occasion from after times of invading the Rights, and consequently the continuance of their kingdoms.  
The laws then, the Rights, and Orders of kingdoms, are most sacred, and binding, even to Kings themselves: but that is to be understood, in Safety, in Honour, in Conscience between God and them: not in any way, wherein, in their default, the people can become authorized. For if we look to what is written, we find that when Subjects do amiss, they ought to fear, 
Rom. 13. 4.  for the Ruler is God's minister to take vengeance, and beareth not the sword in vain. But we read of no authority committed to the people, in case the Prince fails of his Duty; nor of any sword that is to be born by them: if therefore they take the sword, or any course that leads unto it, they take the sword of injustice to the wounding of their own souls. But while we name the people in these things, we do not make all Subjects, living under the obedience of sovereigns, naturally to have this protence, that they may do themselves right, in case their Prince do not. 
1. Sam. 8. 5.  For as we see them of their own natural inclination to desire a King, so we know they naturally submit unto his government. And Prince, and people, of themselves stand naturally well-affected one to the other. But as there are those that are sinisterly officious to the one, so are there toward the other also. And as those often counsel the Prince, as if they would have him pull out the stones from out the foundation of his Throne, to build higher the roof and enlarge the battlements thereof: so these often persuade the people, that they have the authority of Princes, though they have neither Throne, sceptre, nor any thing belonging to the sovereign right: these find pretences, and broach opinions in the people's behalf; and than the people naturally jealous, and impatient of the violation of their supposed Right or Liberty, are facile to entertain suggestions, and through want of judgement easily carried away with them; but wanting also moderation, they so violently adhere unto them, as that with their intemperate prosecution, they often by their own instruments bring upon themselves the evils that they most do fear from others.  
So the people of Rome having expelled their Kings and settled a republic with such hatred to the memory of them, as that they would not endure the name of King: growing afterward ill satisfied with the proceedings of their Senate, they would not only have Tribunes, (Guardians of their Liberty, and Rights,) which was indeed no more than necessary, but they would have their Tribunes endued with Consular authority; then with that of the Dictator; of the Pontifex Max: and whatsoever other power the commonwealth afforded. In the end, they made them so unresistible, to vindicate their Liberty against the Nobles, and the Senate, as that in the upshot, when they were become secure against their adverse party, they had no means of interposition against the absoluteness of their own Guardians. Insomuch as that Caesar, obtaining to be head of their Faction, could not be hindered, but that even under the forms which they ordained to preserve their Liberty, he introduced a Tyranny more absolute, and worse conditioned, than was that of their Kings, which they expelled.  
Hitherto tends the Doctrines of those, who while they pretend to instruct for the common good, Liberty, and Right; do as it were appeal unto the people, and support their doctrines with the people's approbation and applause, and do so, in show, make the people, and indeed themselves, the sovereign judges of all things.  
FINIS.