A VINDICATION OF THE Primitive Christians, In point of Obedience to their Prince, AGAINST The Calumnies of a Book entitled THE Life of julian, Written by ECEBOLIUS the Sophist.  
As also the Doctrine of Passive Obedience Cleared, in Defence of Dr. HICKS.  
Together with an APPENDIX: Being a more full and distinct Answer to Mr. Tho. Hunt's Preface and Postscript.  
Unto all which is added The Life of Julian enlarged.  
LONDON: Printed by J. C. and Freeman Collins, and are to be sold by Robert Kettlewell, at the Hand and Sceptre over against St. Dunstan's Church. 1683.   

TO THE Most Reverend Father in God, WILLIAM, By Divine Providence Lord Archbp of Canterbury, Primate of all England, and Metropolitan, And one of his Majesty's most Honourable Privy-Council, etc.  
May it please your Grace,  
ALthough (as Solomon says) Every thing is beautiful in his season; and there was a time when a Cup of cold Water was an acceptable Present to an Emperor: yet should I not have presumed to offer so mean a Present to so Great a Person, as a little Water in a homely Vessel, taken up in haste and disorder, (as men are wont to do when the Neighbourhood is on fire) had it not been that the Firebrands which I endeavour to extinguish, have not only been scattered up and down among combustible matter through the Nation, but that the Boutefeus' have been so desperately bold, as to throw some of their Fire-balls into the August Assembly of his Majesty's most Honourable Privy-Council. Such was the Barbarous Celeusma, the Answers to Dr. Stillingfleet, etc. and now a Traitorous Preface and Postscript dedicated by one Tho. Hunt to the Right Honourable John Earl of Radnor, etc. Lord Precedent of his Majesty's most Honourable Privy-Council.  
I am well assured, that that Judicious and Noble Lord hath either so contemned those seditious and treasonable Libels, as not to vouchsafe them the Reading; or if he hath read them, that they kindled a just indignation in his loyal breast, and condemned them to the fire, as designed to set the Nation in a flame. The Author tells us truly, that the reason of his Dedication was to create a Prejudice: and the thing is self-evident, that the greatest Adversaries which that Noble Lord hath (if at least he hath any: for I know he can have none, but among the factious and seditious Rabble that are acted by such Seducers) could not have offered a greater Affront to a Person of his known Wisdom and Integrity, than such a Dedication amounts unto; and therefore I doubt not but those fiery Darts which that Author hath shot against so firm a Fortress of Religion and Loyalty, will recoil on his own head.  
If men of such fiery tempers have presumed of favour from so Great Persons, I cannot but hope for your Grace's pardon, who have endeavoured, though in a hasty and rude manner, to extinguish those Wilde-fires which they have kindled: for God only knows how great a matter a little such fire, blown (as it is) with popular breath, may kindle, if not timely prevented.  
The Devil was wont to carry on his designs formerly as an Angel of Light; and then the deluded Instruments deserved some pity: But now that he appears in his proper Colours, a Noon-day-Devil, breathing our flames of fire and a horrible stench, none but such as are by his Sorceries and Witchcrafs become his covenanted Servants, would seek to bring others under the same sins and condemnation with themselves, as being already self-condemned, and having sinned away all hopes of mercy from God or man.  
All those Coals of Sedition and Rebellion which were raked up under the Ashes of this ruined Nation, and which we might in reason hope, had been quite extinguished by the enjoyment of Peace and Truth, Prosperity and Plenty, for twenty years together, have been secretly fomented, and are now publicly scattered, to cause a New Conflagration.  
I humbly beg your Grace's patience to mind the present Age, how ready they are to be led over the same Precipices, by the same Impostures, and by some of the same men by whom the former Age was ruined: only, they were led on by degrees, and colourable pretences; the Snare was not spread in their sight, as it is now in ours, who are persuaded with open eyes, and a dreadful prospect of Rebellion and Damnation before us, to cast ourselves headlong into them both.  
It was after a long Progress and unhappy success of the former War, that John Goodwin (and others) published his Evangelium Armatum, his new Gospel-liberty, affirming, That the lawfulness of Resistance is now discovered to God's Church, as the necessary means to ruin Antichrist: for the Kings of the Earth (saith he) will never be persuaded to effect this great and holy work, and therefore the People must. He in the 30, 31, 32 pages of his Anti-Cavalierism, among many other Passages, hath these words, which every Christian that reads them must abhor.  
Amongst many other Truths which were of necessity to be laid asleep, for the passing of this Beast (Antichrist) unto his great power and authority, and for the maintaining and safe guarding of him in the possession thereof, this is one of special consideration, That Christians may lawfully in a lawful way stand up to defend themselves, in case they be able, against any unlawful Assaults, by what Assailants, or by what pretended Authority soever made upon them: for had this Opinion been timeously enough, and substantially taught in the Church, it would certainly have caused an Abortion in Antichrists birth, and so have disappointed the Devil of his firstborn, had not the Spirits, and Judgements, and Consciences of men been as it were cowed and marvellously embased and kept under, and so prepared for Antichrists Lure, by Doctrines and Tenets excessively advancing the power of Superiors over Inferiors, and binding Iron yokes and heavy burdens on those that were in subjection; doubtless they would never have bowed down their backs so low, as to let such a Be ●●…rule over them; they would ne●… have resigned up their Judgements and Consciences into the hands of such a Spiritual Tyrant as he. So that you see there was a special necessity, for the letting of Antichrist into the world; yea and for the continuance of him in his Throne, that no such Opinion as this which we speak of, whether truth or untruth, should be taught and believed; I mean, which vindicateth and maintaineth the just Rights, and Liberties, and Privileges of those that live under authority and subjection to others. Whereas now on the contrary, that time of God's preordination and purpose for the downfall of Antichrist drawing near, there is a kind of necessity that those truths, which have slept for many years, should now be awakened; and particularly, That God should reveal and discover unto his faithful Ministers and other his servants, the just bounds and limits of Authority and Power, and consequently the just and full extent of the lawful Liberties of those that live in subjection.— Evident it is, that they are the Commonalty of Christians, I mean Christians of ordinary Rank and Quality, that shall be most active, and have the principal hand in executing the Judgements of God upon the Whore. Consider that place, Rev. 18.4, 5, 6. Now that this service shall be performed unto God by them, (Christians I mean of under Rank and Quality) contrary to the will, desires, or commands of those Kings and Princes under whom they live, it appears by that which immediately followeth, v. 9 And whereas the Text saith expressly that the ten Kings shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and eat her flesh, and burn her with fire; for God hath put it in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree and give their Kingdom unto the Beast until the Words of God shall be fulfilled: To prevent this Objection, because God in his good time will arm the Kings to fight jointly the Lords battle against the Beast; he thus interprets that place; I conceive (saith he) this is not meant of the persons of Kings, but of their States and Kingdoms, (i. e.) of the generality of the people under them, p. 32. As if the meaning of— The Kings shall hate the Beast, were, The People shall hate their Kings, and rebel against them, in order to the destruction of Antichrist.  
Nothing is more evident, than that this Doctrine which he would promote for the pulling down of Antichrist, was that by which Antichrist was advanced to that sublimity of Power which he now hath, and by which he is still supported in it; unless they will deny the Pope to be Antichrist: for this Resistance of lawful Authority is still practised and defended by that Church. And how can they blame that Church, who teach and practise the same things? If ever the Pope be pulled down by the Doctrine and Practice of Resistance of lawful Princes, it will be to set up Another in his room.  
Now that the Doctrine which was taught by this wretched man and John Milton, the only two persons that publicly defended the Parricide committed on that incomparable King, when he was cast out of his Throne, and an Usurper placed in it, is the same which is now revived by these two Authors whom I have under consideration; I submit to your Grace's judgement, and the Consciences of all impartial Readers. And to what a prodigious height of Impiety are they come, who in such times of Peace, under a most gracious and religious Prince, and after such experiences of the miserable effects of them, shall openly plead for the same Antiscriptural and Antichristian Doctrines and Practices, by which these men endeavour at one leap, (as the Devil did the herd of Swine) to plunge the Multitude over head and ears in Rebellion and Confusion! And yet to court the People, Mr. Hunt tells them in the close of his Preface, That Loyalty, Religion, and the Prosperity and Peace of his Country, have entirely conducted his thoughts and guided his hand in this Work, (whereas if he were not the same person, yet he useth the same Arguments as an anonymous Author did in a Tract concerning Mixed and Limited Monarchy): That he hath affirmed nothing but what is publicly known for truth: That Justice it self will acquit him from having done any thing amiss: That he hath encircled himself (in his own considerations) as in a brazen wall (when it is but a brazen face). And as for the fears of Rage and Injustice, they shall never affect him: but I fear the hand-writing of the Laws, and the sentence of Justice may one day shake his confidence.  
I join Issues with him in his Appeal concerning his Writings, and the Reply now made to them: and though he have provoked me to say something that may balance the Reputation of Religion and Loyalty, etc. which he assumes to himself, I shall only say, That I am one who have served in the Ministry of the Established Religion for forty years together; I have kept my Station, and defended my Post against all Assaults: I have seen those deplorable times, wherein it was counted a daring thing to assert the use of the Lords Prayer in the Public Assemblies, against the Blasphemies of J. O. I have withstood the attempts of Mr. Baxter, Humfries, Job, and others, for the disturbance of our public Peace. And though by age and other infirmities I might claim the privilege of a Miles Emeritus, yet have I engaged once more against these two Incendiaries; and having the same cause of Religion and Loyalty to defend, I cannot doubt of success against such Aggressors, of whom your Grace will find a far different Character from that which they give of themselves: for,  
These two Authors, like Simeon and Levi, are so confederate, that they strive who shall exceed the other in doing mischief. The one undermines the foundation of the Church in her Ministry: The other, that of the State in the Royal Authority. Again, The one plays with the Crown, as if it were a Tennis-ball: The other derides the Doctrine of the Cross, comparing it with that of the Great Turk's Bowstring. The one encourageth Resistance, and very modestly insinuates a Reward due to such as shall kill those (be they Princes or others) who oppose the Religion which they approve of: The other more confidently asserts the excluding (not of a single Monarch, but) even Monarchy itself, though it be in the glorious Family of the STVARTS, as he Ironically calls them. Yet so great is the Revolt of our People both from God and the King, that these two (like Jeroboam's Calves which he set up as well to alter the established Worship, as to translate the Kingdom from the Family of David) are worshipped by the Rabble from Dan to Beersheba.  
And now I beseech your Grace not to be offended with this Confident Address of an obscure Person, who after various toss, having through the great mercy of God escaped Shipwreck in that great Hurricane wherein many thousands more worthy persons perished, is still embarked in that ancient Vessel wherein he hopes to end his days in peace; nothing doubting, but that God, who stilled the raging of that Sea, and the madness of that People, will also lead us without any harm through those Fires which so many busybodies are now kindling against us; and that he will preserve us even in the flames; at which though we be affrighted, as Moses was at the burning Bush, yet we shall not be consumed by them: Especially while we have such a CAESAR, who all his life-time hath been a Favourite of Heaven; being born, preserved, restored, guided, and supported by a Chain of Miracles: And such a principal Member of that Church of Christ embarked with us, against which the gates of Hell shall never prevail; and having also such a pious and experienced Pilot as your Grace, who hath both his Eyes and his Heart to Heaven for his own direction, and both his hands to the Helm, for the conduct of the People committed to his Charge.  
There remains nothing to the perfecting our Establishment, but the casting out those Jonahs' which lie asleep in the bottom of the Ship; I mean our sins, which have caused the wrath of God to kindle those fires in the midst of us, which may justly make us as desolate as Sodom or Gomorrha. That with penitent Tears, fervent and unanimous Prayers, seasonable and serious reformation of our Lives, we would deprecate God's displeasure, and that yet he would make us of one heart and mind in considering and doing the things that belong to our peace, before they are hid from our eyes: That in these things I may do some acceptable service to the Church of Christ on Earth, and with it have my Reward in Heaven, is the hearty Prayers and great Ambition of  
Your Grace's most humble and most dutiful Servant, Tho. Long.   

L. Cook's third part of Institutes, 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, and honour the King; and have no company with the Seditious.   

Mr. Hunt's Preface to the Argument for Bishops.  
OUr Adversaries were treated too kindly, and deserve sharper reflections than are made upon them for their false and perverse Reasonings; and aught to lose that Reputation which they abuse to the hurt of the Government.— Nor is it for the honour of our Faculty, that never fails to supply the worst Cause with Advocates.   

ERRATA.  
PAge 17. line 4. r. Or. In the Preface, for Cyril, r. Gregory in four places. p. 46. l. 1. r. contradictious Zeal. p. 49. r. Justitia. p. 50. r. templa. p. 90. r. Constantium. p. 91. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 96. deal And Basil. p. 107. r. Annum. ibid. for Curtis r. Curtius. p. 124. after patience, add of. p. 129. r. confirmed. p. 152. r. though. p. 185. r. atrocia. p. 189. r. paries. p. 205. r. Sumus. p. 224. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 226. r. foretold. p. 233. r. Reges. ibid. r. Depravari. p. 242. l. 25. r. Or. ibid. r. suppose. p. 262. deal after the fifth line four lines which are doubled.   

TO THE READER.  
AS often as I consider the numerous Pamphlets which the Scribblers of this Age have brought forth, it calls to my mind what I have read of a sort of Indian Rats, which are said to be pregnant whilst they are in the belly of their Dams. Every Libel propagates such a numberless Issue, that, as one observed of the increase of Faction, the first Separation might say to its Offspring, Arise, Separation, and go to thy Separation; for thy Separation's Separation hath a Separation.  
But of all the Libels that have been lately written, none are more fruitful (as it is mostly with Venomous Creatures) than those which have been written against the Established Government. There was a Swarm of such in the Late Unhappy Times; and some of the Authors, (as well as that sort of Writings) are yet alive, or revived, to create new Disturbances: And as Horace observes, 
Aetas parentum pejor avis  
Tulit progeniem vitiosiorem.  Every Pamphlet hath more of venom, than that from whence it had its birth.  
Prynne, Burton, and Bastwick, were the Great Grandsires of this monstrous Progeny: The Covenanters, Nye, Marshal, and the Smectymnuans, were their genuine Offspring. To these succeed (notwithstanding the peremptory Vote for Exclusion) John Goodwin, Owen, Harington, and Baxter; all right Commonwealthsmen; with Milton, and May, and many others, whose Writings have by men of like Principles been reviewed, reprinted, and recommended to the present Age.  
I shall only instance in the Treatise now under consideration, which hath contracted and improved the Antimonarchical principles which lay scattered in the Author's last mentioned, and in the Character of the Popish Successor, Plato Redivivus, and other seditious Pamphlets; but especially from Mr. Hunt's Postscript: for certainly our Author's teeth were set on edge by Mr. Hunt's sour Grapes; and he makes it his business to blow up the Coals which he had kinled. The great Notion on which all his Discourse is builded, is from Mr. Hunt, p. 46, & 47. (And facile est inventis addere). Let no man (says Mr. Hunt) betray his Country and Religion, by pretending the example of the patience and sufferings of the Primitive Christians for our Rule. The Reformed Religion hath acquired a Civil right, and the protection of Laws. If we ought not to lose our Lives, Liberties, and Estates, but where forfeited by Law; we ought much rather not to lose them for the profession of the best Religion, which by Law is made the Public National Religion, etc. This gave occasion to the greatest part of his Book, which is a loud and notorious Calumny against the Primitive Christians, viz. their patiented submission to their unjust and cruel Persecutors.  
From Mr. Hunt he took his instance of Mary Queen of Scots, of whom he speaks, p. 48. and says, Scarce a Child but hath heard what was done, said, and maintained by the Clergy of England in the case of Mary Queen of Scots, a Popish Successor, in the earliest time of our Reformation. Upon this our Author paraphraseth at large, from p. 12. to the 18th of his Preface.  
His deriding of the Succession in the right Line, is taken from Mr. Hunt, p. 47. If any be so vain as to say that a lawful course of Succession is established among us by Divine Right, he is a man fitted to believe Transubstantiation, and the Infallibility of the Pope. And our Author's Comments on this, fill many pages. Concerning Arbitrary Power, compare Mr. Hunt, p. 42. and 52. with the 78. of our Author's: and p. 241. Mr. Hunt minded him of the Doctrine of Sibthorpe and Manwaring, of which in p. 77.  
P. 47. Mr. Hunt's Comparison between Popery and Paganism, gave him a Text for another part of his book; and from a hint in p. 49. That we must not suspend all the legal security we have for our preservation upon the life of our present King; there are a hundred hints for that one, to prepare people for actual Resistance and Rebellion.  
Thus the Leprosy of Naaman cleaves to this covetous Gehazi, and spreads itself through the whole book, so as it becomes a continued Scab. And I pray God it may creep no farther.  
But for this one thing our Author is very culpable, that having got these and many other Materials for his Babel, he never mentions his Founder: Only, p. 88 he says, A worthy person hath lately observed, That one single Arm unresisted, may go a great way in murdering a Nation. But works of darkness hate the light, and therefore he thought fit to conceal both their names.  
The Author of the Life of Julian seemeth very fit to describe an Apostate, having himself apostatised from the Doctrine of the Church whereof he hath long professed himself to be a Member, as also from the judgement and practice of the Primitive Christians, against whom his book is a very notorious Libel; and by which (if it should be credited) he would wound the Reputation of those Primitive Christians more than Julian hath done. For he says himself, That (but for their name) Julian had better have fallen among so many Barbarians than among them, p. 66.  
These two things are what I design: first, to wipe off the dirty Aspersions cast by the Author on the Christians in Julian's time, which have more of an Invective against them, than any thing that St. Cyril wrote against Julian himself. And secondly, to prevent the infection of those false and dangerous Opinions in the case of Obedience to Magistrates, which this distempered Generation are too much disposed to receive, and (as is usual with infected persons) to propagate, and make them epidemical. I intent not a Vindication of the Papists, nor of Julian, though (as the Proverb says) The Devil is not so black as he's painted, (let Baal plead for himself) I only design a short Apology for the Primitive Christians, whom our Author represents as so many Apostates from their Predecessors in the days of Dioclesian, when by their patiented sufferings they more honoured the Gospel, than the Christian Emperors did by all the Privileges and Largesses wherewith they endowed the Church. And he might with equal truth have objected the same things against the Christians in the time of Constantius, as he doth against Jul●an: for he being an Arian, and violently persecuting many Orthodox Bishops, setting the Arians in their places, some of them did speak far otherwise of him than St. Cyril doth; yet none attempted to resist him, but prayed for him, and patiently submitted to his unjust Chastisements, as being their lawful Governor. Of which hereafter.   


AN ANSWER TO THE PREFACE OF OUR Author's Life of JULIAN.  
OUr Author seems better read in the Koran than the Scriptures; that hath found out a Comparison for his Majesty's Subjects from a Vision of Mahomet, when he might have found more suitable representations of them from the holy Scriptures, as in David's Subjects, who were careful not only of his safety, but all his house, 2 Sam. 19.14. Christ himself and his Apostles have delivered for the good of all succeeding Ages, such Precepts and Examples of Christian obedience and subjection, as the most loyal Addressers (even the men of Rippon themselves) come short of. It was their bounden duty at such a time to make their Profession to adhere to his Majesty, his Heirs and Successors; it was no more than what the Law of God and the Nation hath obliged them to; so that they are neither Guelphs, nor Gibelines, nor Papists, nor fanatics, but such as are ready to render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar, and unto God the things which are Gods: nor could they sufficiently express their thankfulness to his Majesty, (when too many began to exercise an arbitrary way of vexing their fellow-subjects, and supersede the established Laws) for his gracious Declaration to govern according to the established Laws, and (which is that which gives offence to too many) to cause others to do so too.  
They know best how to reconcile Contradictions, that could swallow Covenants and Engagements after the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, and all their Obligations to God and his Church, and knew how to make a glorious King by bringing him to the Block, and to establish Religion by dividing it, which our Saviour says is the ready way to destroy it: for a Kingdom or house divided cannot stand. If the men of Rippon had a● apprehension of the mischiefs that in all probability would follow upon a Bill of Exclusion, I cannot see but their Fears were more reasonable than the groundless Jealousy of such as trouble themselves with what may never be; or if it should, is but a just judgement of God to punish those by some Rehoboam, who were so malcontent with the pious and peaceable Governments of a David and Solomon. And I have often thought, that one reason why God set a Julian over the Christians of that Age, was, because in the times of Constantine and Constantius they degenerated into Heresies and Schisms, (such as the Arians and Donatists) and began to by't and devour one another. The Shepherds have generally observed, that when Sheep push and chase each other, it betokeneth an approaching Storm.  
As to what you mind us of, p. 4, 5. That a Popish Successor will be an heavy judgement of of God, and aught to be deprecated by all good men: As far as Prayers and Tears and other lawful endeavours may be employed, all good men will readily join with you: but if it shall please God for our wantonness and ungovernableness to lay that heavy Yoke upon us, it is in vain to resist, lest we be found to fight against God. I shall at present only send you to a Heathen to learn better behaviour; Quomodo sterilitatem aut nimios imbres, & caetera naturae mala; it à luxum vel avaritiam dominantium tolerate, vitia erunt donec homines▪ sed neque haec continua, & meliorum interventu pensantur, i. e. As we endure scarcity or immoderate rain, and other natural evils; so ought we to bear with the luxury or avarice of our Rulers, for there will be faults as long as there are men: but neither are these still continued; the interchange of what is good, will make compensation for that which is evil: as Tacitus says.  
Our Saviour would have us to live without distracting fear of those events which are not in our power to prevent, especially when our groundless fears may be the chief cause of drawing those evils on ourselves. Few Rebellions were ever hatched, but by the warmth of a pretended zeal for Religion and Reformation; and Fears and Jealousies (how groundless soever) have animated it, and given it growth and strength. The panic fear of a change of Government, (he means Arbitrary Government) was the principal cause of the late War, saith Mr. Hunt in his Postscript, p. 52. The noise of Popery to be brought in by the King and Archbishop Land, who were the Heads of the Grotian Papists, (as Mr. Baxter says) was another: yet I hope neither Mr. Hunt nor our Author will warrant that Rebellion under their hands, upon such false and ungodly pretences, when they shall consider to what real evils these feigned Bugbears and Fancies did precipitate us.  
It is true, a Popish Successor will be an affliction to sincere Protestants, in respect of temporal accommodations, and spiritual advantages also; yet that evil may be improved to our eternal advantages, our Saviour having promised, that great shall be their reward in heaven, that are reviled, persecuted, and slandered, for his sake, Matth. 5.11, 12. And St. Peter tells us, If we suffer for well-doing, and take it patiently, this is acceptable with God, 1 Pet. 2.20. And if it be the Will of God if shall be so, we must learn of David, though in another case, Psal. 39.8. I was dumb and opened not my mouth, for it was thy doing.  
P. 5. You seem not satisfied with Hypocrates Receipt of Citò, longè, tardè, which preserved many Confessors in the days of Queen Mary, and is prescribed by a greater than Hypocrates, in this very case; If they persecute you in one City, flee to another, Matth. 10.23. You are for Fires and Fumes of Pitch and Tar, etc. for Imprisonment and close Confinement even of innocent persons. The Papists indeed apply such Caustics in cases of Heresy, Apostasy, and Tyranny; but I never read that the Primitive Christians used them against their Princes, not against Dioclesian a Tyrant, Constantius an Arian, or Julian an Apostate. Nay even the Doctors of Rome forbidden such Medicines, even in the case of Tyranny, without which the other two may not much hurt a sound Christian, till the Disease be universalis manifesta, & cum obstinatione, (i. e.) till after they find all other means ineffectual, and he is resolved to make a total overthrow of his People. Concerning which we are yet in the dark as to our own Case; and you give us some light to comfort us, when you say, p. 65. of Julian's Persecution, That it was but a flea-biting, a short and weak assault of the Devil; and that he was rather a Tempter than a Persecutor: which makes their behaviour towards him (if it were so barbarous as you represent it) the less excusable. Until a Plague be epidemical and wasting, it is not charitable nor just to confine suspected persons; much less them that are sound, and to deal with them as persons destined to destruction, to bury them alive; and to make their own Relations instruments of these severities, who may justly fear the like are intended for themselves.  
Though some intent only to lop off a degenerate Branch, yet having got the Axe in their hand, others may make use of it to strike a blow at the Root; and (to answer your Parenthesis) plain English is as well understood on this side Trent as the other; so that there is more fear lest we should lose a Protestant King (as we have once already) than a Popish Successor: for though such an one may be deprecated as a Judgement, and may prove as a Plague to the Nation, yet may we not presently cut Throats to prevent what may never come, or if it should, make use of a Remedy worse than the Disease: for, Rebellion is as the sin of Witchcraft, 1 Sam. 15.23.  
That Remedy which you suppose may be effectual to prevent this mischief, will prove to be of that nature; which is a Compound of belying the Primitive Christians, and betraying Modern ones into a sin of Rebellion, which may do more hurt (as Experience hath shown us) than all the Arts and Witchcrafts of Julian: In writing of whose Life, you have not, I confess, impoverished the Subject (p. 6.), for you have only weeded it, as Mr. Baxter hath done the Ecclesiastical History, in his Profane one of the Bishops and Councils▪  
P. 7. You say, you wrote this discourse only to render that of Julian 's Succession intelligible. It is a strange course you take to make his Succession intelligible, which you yourself confess was from God by a legal descent, and most agreeable to the Laws of the Roman Empire, and yet seek to overthrow it: you had done more to your purpose, if you had shown what party of Christians they were, and on what grounds of Religion or Law they went, what Sedition or Armies the Christians had raised to oppose his Succession; of all which you give us not the least notice; you only suppose, that if Constantius had known Julian's Religion before he was Emperor, he would have gotten a Bill of Exclusion; or if not, the Christians would have resisted him.  
And from their behaviour towards him after he was Emperor, (which is scandalously represented, as is also the carriage of former Christians) you would reconcile the Christian Religion and Rebellion. This you have done intelligibly enough: but that the Christians did or would have resisted his Succession, I find no show of Argument or History; only you give us some Rhetorical expressions out of St. Cyril's Invectives, from which you infer more than the Premises will bear. And you do not report, as it becomes an Historian, but only suggest, add, and invent what may ensnare your Readers. I ingenuously confess, I do not believe all that St. Cyril speaks in praise of Constantius, nor against Julian. Panegyrics, and Stelliteuticks, have not the authority of true Histories, with discerning men.  
P. 7. You say your business is to show how wide a difference there was betwixt the Case of Christians in Julian 's time, and that of the first Christians; and make it as great as Laws for men and against men could possibly make it: yet you confess that what you have written is contrary to what is commonly reported of them, and to the carriage of former Christians. It is then some such New Light as Jo. Goodwin's Doctrine of Resistance, that is your Guide: but you take no notice of the unalterable Laws of God, which bind all men in all Ages to be subject to the Higher Powers without distinction, not only for fear of Wrath, but for Conscience sake. There are few men that intent a Rebellion, but will pretend to have the Laws on their side; and if they may be Judges in their own Case, will as certainly condemn the Legislator, as dispute his Laws.  
It were well if you would keep close to your Principle, That the Laws of your Country are the Measures of your civil Obedience. I am sure you want none to require your active Obedience to the just Laws of your Prince; nor your passive Obedience, if at any time you suffer wrongfully: And this is not enjoined by Mahomet, but by Christ himself; it is the Doctrine of the Cross, and not of the Bowstring. The violation of the Law on the Prince's side, doth not discharge the Obligation of the Subjects; they are under a higher Law than that of the Land. The chief Magistrate's obliging himself to certain Rules for administration of his Government, is not the just Measure or chiefest Tie of the Subjects Obedience. The eternal Laws of God and our Saviour, that require Obedience and Submission even to wicked Princes, and that for Conscience sake, and threatening Resistance with Damnation, is a safer Rule for the saving of our Souls, though not for the preservation of our Lives and Estates.  
When St. Peter drew a Sword to defend his Master, in a way of resisting, and revenging him against the Officers of a lawful Magistrate, he was commanded to put up his Sword, and threatened, that they that use the Sword should perish by the Sword, Matth. 26.52. And when some other Disciples would have his consent to call for fire from heaven to consume the Samaritans, he tells them, they knew not what Spirit they were of. The contrary Doctrines are not from the blessed Jesus, but the accursed Jesuits, and to be abhorred of all good Christians: and yet it is that which you chief tract, and seek to bring into practice. St. Aug. speaking of St. Peter's using the Sword, and of Moses slaying the Egyptian, says, lib. 22. chap. 7. Contra Faustum Manicheum; Vterque Justitiae regulam excessit; & high fraterno, ille Dominico amore peccavit.  
P. 8. You say, It is impossible in so short a Treatise as yours is to say the tenth part of what is to be said, to show how intolerable that Doctrine (of Passive Obedience) is, and how contrary to the Gospel, and the Law of the Land. If you had not said the tenth part of what you have, to show how intolerable the Doctrine of Passive Obedience is, and that it is contrary to the Gospel and the Law of the Land; you had said too much, as will appear hereafter. Christianity indeed doth not enslave us, or divest us of the Rights and Privileges that we have; but it teacheth us to exchange them for better. Terrestria non eripit, 
Sedulius.  qui regna dat Caelestia. And it assures us, that he that loseth his life for Christ's sake, shall save it, Matth. 16.25.  
P. 8. To prove your Assertion from the Gospel, you commend your Reader to Dr. Hammond's Paraphrase on 1 Cor. 7.21, 22, 23. which speaks little to your purpose; it concerns only such Christians as were in bondage to heathen Masters.— That if they could by any fair and regular means attain their freedom, they might make use of them, and prefer Liberty before Servitude; which they might have done if they had never been Christians: And that they who have obtained Liberty, and were formerly Servants to Heathen, should not sell themselves again, and revert to that condition of slavery, but prefer Liberty rather. But what is this to that Exposition which he gives us of Rom. 13. in these words?— Then for the Judicial Laws, that great supreme one ought to be taken into special care of all Christians, that of Obedience to the Supreme Powers rightly established and constituted, although they be not Jews but Romans. Nothing in Christianity ought to be pretended or made use of to give any man immunity from Obedience, which from all Subjects, of what quality soever, Apostles, Teachers, etc. is due to those to whom Allegiance belongs (contrary to the Gnostics Doctrine and Practice, Judas 8.) but on the contrary, every person under government, of what Rank soever, is to yield subjection to his Supreme Governor legally placed in that Kingdom, as to him that hath commission from God, as every Supreme Magistrate must be resolved to have, though he be a Heathen. Vers. 2. From which Divine Commission it is directly consequent, that he that makes any violent resistance or opposition to the Supreme. Magistrate, opposeth that violence to God's Commission, and shall accordingly receive that punishment which belongs to so sacrilegious a Contumacy; the wrath and judgement of God belongs to it. With more to that purpose.  
As to St. Paul's dealing with the Centurion, Acts 22.25. the Apostle neither spoke nor acted any thing that tended to resistance; he only asked the Centurion, Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned? In like manner, Acts 16.39. Paul and Silas only made the Officers sensible of their wrongful imprisonment. It is strange that any man that pretends to Sense or Religion, should wrest these places to the countenancing of Resistance, when the Doctrine which Christ and his Apostles taught and practised, and which we have received from this great Apostle of the Gentiles, is so opposite to it. Maledicta Glossa quae corrumpit Textum. What consequence is this? St. Paul and Silas got their liberty by pleading their Privileges; Therefore it is lawful to resist. It is against the yielding of Passive Obedience to the Supreme Magistrate, that you urge it.  
P. 9 As for the Laws of the Land, that Doctrine (you say) overthrows Magna Charta, Chap. 29. That Chapter says thus: No Freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or disseized of his Freehold and Liberties, etc. but by lawful judgement of his Peers, or by the Law of the Land. But if any or all these should happen to some particular man, will that justify a Rebellion? When a Roman Emperor gave a Senator a Sword, saying, If I rule well, use it for me; if otherwise, against me; was it intended think you by him that gave, or him that received it, that an Act of Violence, or a High Court of Justice should be employed against that Emperor upon every Transgression? (the Apostles rule of Submission non obstante). It is a sad return of Gratitude, when Christian Princes have granted the greatest Privileges and Immunities to their Subjects, that they should on all occasions be requited with Affronts and Severities.  
P. 9 and 10. You propose the Case of a Pursuivant slain in the execution of a Warrant out of the High-Commission-Court; and then add, Any man may see that my Discourse doth not descend to such petty matters as false Arrests. True: it is evident enough you fly at a more noble Game, the resisting of Princes and their lawful Successors. I pray speak out: When King CHARLES of blessed memory came to the House of Commons to demand Justice against the five Members, against whom he had Articles of Treason prepared, was it lawful for the Parliament to make resistance, and to raise that War that cost so many thousand lives, and millions of money, on pretence of a breach of their Privileges, rather than to deliver them up to a legal Trial? I doubt the man that killed the Pursuivant did not well know whether his Authority were lawful or not; if he did, he might more safely have submitted, than drawn the blood of an unadvised man. But however, Currat Lex, let the Law have its course; and if by accident it be interrupted, or overflow its just bounds, we may not for that cause damn up the Fountain.  
P. 11. You say you have honestly pursued the end of our Saviour's coming into the world, Luke 9.56. Not to destroy men's lives, but to save them. But doubtless, whereas the Meekness, Obedience, and Patience, which the Gospel teacheth, hath destroyed one man's life, (and that our Saviour assures us is not lost, but exchanged for a better) the Doctrine of Resistance and Rebellion hath destroyed thousands. And you may see plainly by the Context, our Saviour commends Passive Obedience, and not Resistance, as the means to preserve men's lives. You rather pursue another end, which our Saviour mentions, not as a proper effect of his Gospel, but of the malice of men against it, Matth. 10.24. I came not to send peace, but a sword.  
You say, p. 11. That the Laws of the Land have taken particular care of those who are put on an inevitable necessity of defending themselves, etc. How far a man that is assaulted, and put on an inevitable necessity of defending himself against the injuries of private men, is one thing; and what he may do against his Prince, (of whom you seem to discourse) is another: In this case we may apply that in Rev. 13.10. He that killeth with the sword, shall be killed with the sword. This is the patience and faith of the Saints.  
P. 11. This Doctrine (of Passive Obedience) you say, quite altars the Oath of Allegiance, which requires you to be obedient to all the King's Majesty's Laws, Precepts, and Process proceeding from the same. I do not find those words in that Oath, as set forth by King James; but I find what you overlook (viz.) I will bear Faith and true Allegiance to his Majesty, his Heirs and Successors, and him and them will defend to the utmost of my power, against all Conspiracies and Attempts whatsoever. And thus I find more particularly in a Declaration (which I believe our Author hath subscribed) thus amplified: I do declare, that it is not lawful upon any pretence whatsoever to take Arms against the King: And that I do abhor that traitorous Position of taking Arms by his Authority against his Person, or against those that are commissionated by him.  
P. 11. After a large Preface little to your purpose, telling us, That the Church of England reserves her Faith entire for the Canonical books of Scripture (which I hope you also do,) and that she divides her Reverence between the Fathers and the first Reformers of this Church, who partly were Martyrs that died for the Protestant Religion, and partly Confessors that afterward settled it. (And now to the business.) How much the Fathers would have been for a Bill of Exclusion (you say) we have seen already. No, not one word of it from the beginning, nor I believe any mention of it from one Argument tending to it to the end of the Book, from any of the Fathers, as will shortly appear. But what say our Martyrs, Confessors, and Reformers? First he tells us what some men would have persuaded King Edward to do, if they could have had their wills confirmed by Act of Parliament: They shown what they would have done if they could, saith our Author: They never spoke such bad English as our Author doth in his Taunton-Dean Proverb, Chud eat more Cheese an chad it; which being interpreted, is, We would rebel if we had power. The Duke of Northumberland indeed did cause the Lady Jane Gray's Title to be proclaimed, but here the Bishops must be the men that were chief engaged in that design of Exclusion: whereas I read not that any of them were ever consulted with, nor ever declared any thing to that purpose; but in their joint and most solemn Writings enjoin the clean contrary, as shall now appear.  
P. 12. The Bishops in Queen Elizabeth 's time, to whom, under God and that Queen, we own the settlement of our Church, concurred to the making of that Statute which makes it High-Treason in her Reign, and forfeiture of Goods and Chattels ever after, in any wise to hold or affirm, That an Act of Parliament is not of sufficient force and validity to limit and bind the Crown of this Realm, and the descent, limitation, inheritance, and government thereof, 13 Eliz. chap. 1. But our Author never considered the grounds and reasons of that Act; Ex malis moribus bonae Leges; it was the iniquity of those times, and the traitorous practices of the Queen of Scots, which gave occasion to that Statute: for there were many Pamphlets written by Saunders and the Author of Doleman, which denied the Title of Queen Elizabeth, and proclaimed her an Usurper; and the Queen of Scots made actual claim to the Crown of England; she assumed the Arms of England and other Regalia; and by her Confederates endeavoured to raise a Rebellion, and conspired against the life of the Queen; for which causes she was condemned, as may appear by her Sentence which was passed upon her, viz. That divers things were compassed and imagined within this Kingdom of England with the privity of the said Queen, who pretended a Title to the Crown of this Kingdom, and which tended to the hurt, death, and destruction of the Royal Person of our Sovereign Queen. Cambdens Eliz. p. 464. (Leiden 1625.) Such practices gave occasion to that Statute, to prevent the Mischiefs that might befall Queen Elizabeth and the Nation, And that Statute consists of many heads: As first, Whoever should compass, imagine, devise, or intent the death or destruction, or any bodily harm tending to death, destruction, or wounding of the Royal person of the Queen, or deprive or depose her of or from the Style, Honour, or Kingly name of the Imperial Crown of this Realm, etc. or levy War against her Majesty within this Kingdom or without, or move any Strangers to invade this Kingdom or Ireland, etc. or shall maliciously publish and declare, by any printing, writing, word, or say, that our Sovereign Lady during her life is not, or ought not to be Queen of this Realm, etc. or that any other person or persons ought of right to be King or Queen of the same; or that our said Queen is a Heretic or Schismatic, Tyrant, Infidel, or an Usurper of the said Crown, etc. these shall he guilty of High-Treason. Also if any after thirty days from the Session of this Parliament, and in the life of our said Queen, shall claim, pretend, declare, or publish themselves or any other besides our said Queen to have Right or Title to have and enjoy the Crown of England, or shall usurp the same. or the Royal Style, Title, or Dignity of the Crown, or shall affirm that our said Queen hath not right to hold and enjoy the same; such shall be utterly disabled during their natural lives only, to have or enjoy the Crown or Realm of England in Succession, Inheritance, or otherwise. Then follows the Case of Succession: That if any person shall hold or affirm, that the Common Laws of this Realm, not altered by Parliament, ought not to direct the Right of this Crown, or that our said Queen by the Authority of Parliament is not able to make Laws and Statutes of sufficient force, etc. as above.  
Yet was not the Queen of Scots condemned upon the Statute of the 13 of Eliz. but on that made in the 27 of her Reign; wherein it was provided, That twenty four persons at least, part being of the Privy Council, and the rest Peers of the Realm, should by the Queen's Commission examine such as should make any open Rebellion or Invasion of this Realm, or attempt to hurt the Queen's person, by or for any pretended Title to the Crown. In which Commission I find no Bishop save the Archbishop, who at first refused to act: nor when the whole Parliament petitioned for the Execution, do we find that the Bishops (who were denied to vote in case of Blood) did join or were consulted with. And Cambden observes, that the same day when the Sentence was pronounced against the Queen of Scots, it was declared by the Delegates and Judges of the Kingdom, That that Sentence should derogate nothing from the Right or Honour of James King of Scots; but that he should be in the same Estate, Order, and Right, as if that Sentence had never been given, p. 465. So that the whole matter being considered, here was no Exclusion of a Popish Successor, but rather a tacit confirmation of one that was a Protestant; and consequently, it must be a great slander on those worthy Bishops by him named, that they were zealous for such Acts of Exclusion: for the business of the Queen of Scots did concern matters of Treason, such as you say might exclude her out of the world; as also the Reasons of Sir Simon d'Ewes tended to the taking away of her life; and therefore come not home to the Case of Succession: nor does Sir Simon tell us whose Reasons they were; and I suspect them to be the Opinions of some private person, who having spoken all-along in the plural number, he discovereth himself at the end in these words; God I trust in time shall open her Majesty's eyes to see their cruel purposes, etc.  
P. 18. You say (what another hath said before you) That a Bill of Exclusion is a perfect Courtship to these Reasons. True, if the Heir apparent or presumptive were under the same circumstance with that Queen: but 'tis perfect Cruelty to endeavour the like Exclusion of a Popish Successor, as such only, not only from his Right, but out of his Life. And now no man else needs turn his fury or reproaches upon those Bishops; you have done that sufficiently.  
As for your Protestation, p. 19 that if but one Reason can be given to prove a Bill of Exclusion to be unlawful, which will be owned to be a Reason a week after, and the owners not be ashamed, you do solemnly promise to join in renouncing those Old Reformers, and readily follow their New Guides and Lights. The Apostle gives you a Reason which is of eternal verity, viz. We may not do evil that good may come of it: And he assures you, that the condemnation of such as affirm the contrary is just, Rom. 3.8. And to any but an Ignoramus, that of Dan. 4.25. may serve as another Reason; The most High ruleth in the Kingdom of men, and giveth it to whom he will. To which add, If it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it, lest ye be found to fight against God, Acts 4.39. And for your renouncing the Old Reformers, you have done that with the utmost spite and reproach that all the Wit of a Julian or the Malice of a College of Jesuits could invent, as if they had been the Judges and Executioners of the Queen of Scots under the Notion of a Popish Successor. Wherefore I would advise our Author to consider what occasion he hath given to the Enemies of that Church (whereof I suppose him a Member, if not a Priest) to reproach her: for from this Story of his, no doubt it was, that the scurrilous and Bedlam-Author of the Pamphlet called Crape-Gownorum hath thus commented: It is plain that the Church of England- men did hold King-killing, or Queen-killing Doctrine, (which is the same thing); so that if Knox, Buchanan, or Calvin first taught the Speculative part, the other (meaning those Bishops named by our Author) first put it in practice, and set the fatal precedent that others followed, (that is), in the murder of King Charles the first; for at that he aims, when he threatneth us to let 641 sleep in Oblivion, lest we awake 587. intimating, that what was done in the process of that War, (viz. that barbarous Murder perpetrated on the Royal Person of Charles the First) may be justified on the Principles of our Reformers. Whatever may be told in Gath, and published in the streets of Askalon, to make those Philistims rejoice; I cannot permit this diabolical Slander to pass without a brand on the Author of it here at home; and to vindicate those Worthies, and silence our Adversaries the Jesuits, and to prevent the ill consequents of this Forgery, which may stir up the fanatics of this Nation to act over our former Tragedies.  
I shall first relate the matter of fact, and the grounds of that Severity which was used against that Queen; and show you the most deliberate Judgement of those Reverend Bishops in the Case of Resisting lawful Authority.  
First, As to the matter of fact, it is beyond denial, that the Queen of Scots married the Lord Darly a Subject to the Crown of England, who being slain, (whether by her consent, or not, I will not determine, but) she was questioned by her Subjects for incontinent living, the death of her Husband, and for Tyranny; and was forced to resign her Crown to her Son, then about thirteen months old; so that she was no longer a Crowned head. After which, she raiseth an Army, and is defeated by Murray; and being imprisoned, makes an escape into England, where a Council was called to consult how to dispose of her. It was resolved, that to let her pass into France, might prove dangerous; and worse to send her back to Scotland: And to prevent farther mischief, she should not be dismissed from England till she had made satisfaction for the death of her Husband a Subject and Peer of England, and for usurping the Arms of England, and pretending a Title to the Crown. During her restraint here, she contrives many Plots against the Peace of the Nation; both with France by the Duke of Guise, and D'Alva Governor of the Netherlands; and at home, by the Dukes of Northumberland (to whom she promised marriage) and Westmoreland, who raised a Rebellion in the North for her Rescue: both which suffered, the first was beheaded, the last died in Exile. By her instigation a Bull was sent from Rome, discharging the Subjects of England from their Obedience to the Queen. Then follows the Conspiracy of Tho. and Edw. Stanley, Sons to the Earl of Derby. Several Invasions were also made in Ireland, to disturb that Kingdom, by the joint Counsels of the King of Spain and Pope Gregory the 13th, and a swarm of Jesuits are sent into England, and contrive with Throgmorton, Paget, and others, for another Insurrection; which was prevented. The Nobles and Gentry seeing no hopes of Peace through such daily practices, entered into an Association to prosecute all those even to death that should attempt any thing against the Queen; and prevailed for a closer restraint of her: which notwithstanding, one Babington conveyed Letters between Her and France, and engaged divers to murder the Queen; which was discovered to Secretary Walsingham, as also the manner how the Queen of Scots conveyed Letters to the Spanish Ambassador, and other Confederates: whereupon fourteen of them were executed; and in the Parliament convened about that time, Throgmorton, the two Pagets, Englefield, Babington, Salisbury, etc. were proscribed. So that the Nation being continually alarmed with the news of Invasions, Insurrections, and Conspiracies, during the life of that unfortunate Queen, who can blame the Parliament for soliciting the execution of a Just Sentence?  
Of all men living, our Author ought not to object it, much less to charge the Bishops with that (if they had been guilty) for which they are ready now to pronounce them Papists, as not consenting to the Exclusion of a Popish Successor.  
But secondly, what the Judgement of those Reformers was concerning the Doctrine of Resisting lawful Princes on any pretence, I shall now demonstrate.  
P. 103, 104. of his Book, our Author is pleased to recommend the Homilies of our Church to every bodies reading, as one of the best Books that he knows in the world, next to the Bible, (as Mr. Hunt had done before him). I shall therefore entreat him to judge of the Opinion of our Reformers and Confessors in point of Obedience, out of the public Doctrines set forth by them in that excellent Book. In the first Homily against Disobedience and wilful Rebellion, they say, p 277. If Servants ought to obey their Masters not only being gentle, but such as be froward, much more ought Subjects to be obedient not only to their good and courteous, but also to their sharp and rigorous Princes, 1 Pet. 2.18. And p. 278. It cometh not of Chance or Fortune, nor of the Ambition of Mortal men climbing up of their own accord to Dominion, that there be Kings, Queens, Princes, and other Governors over men being their Subjects; but all Kings, Queens, and other Governors, are specially appointed by the Ordinance of God. P. 279. A Rebel is worse than the worst Prince, and Rebellion worse than the worst Government of the worst Prince that hitherto hath been.— Whatsoever the Prince be, or his Government, it is evident that for the most part those Princes whom some Subjects do think to be very godly, and under whose Government they rejoice to live, some other Subjects do take the same to be evil and ungodly, and do wish for a Change. If therefore all Subjects that mislike of their Prince should revel, no Realm should ever be without Rebellion. P. 280. But what if a Prince be evil indeed, and undiscreet, and it is evident to all men's eyes that he is so? I ask again, What if it be long of the wickedness of his Subjects that he is so, shall the Subjects by their wickedness both provoke God for their deserved punishment to give them an evil and indiscreet Prince, and also rebel against him, and withal against God, who for the punishment of their sins did give them such a Prince? Will you hear the Scripture in this point? God maketh a wicked man to reign, for the sins of the people. Again, God giveth a Prince in his anger, meaning an evil one, and taketh away a Prince in his displeasure, meaning when he taketh away a good Prince for the sins of the people: as in our memory he took away our good Josias King Edward, for our wickedness. Again, God maketh a wise and good King to reign over that people whom he loveth, and who love him. And again, If the people obey God, both they and their King shall prosper.— And for Subjects to deserve through their sins to have an evil Prince, and then to rebel against him, were double and triple evil, by provoking God more to plague them, let us either deserve to have a good Prince, or let us patiently suffer and obey such as we deserve: and whether the Prince be good or evil, let us according to the Scriptures pray for him for his continuance and increase in goodness if he be good, and for his amendment if he be evil.  
The Bishops that were their Predecessors, and our first Reformers in the days of King Henry the Eighth and King Edward the Sixth, were of the same judgement, as appears in a Book called The Institution of a Christian man, whereof Cranmer, Ridly, and other Martyrs were the Compilers. On the Fifth Commandment they say, Subjects be bound not to withdraw their Fealty, Truth, Love, and Obedience towards their Prince, FOR ANY CAUSE WHATSOEVER; ne for any Cause may they conspire against his Person, ne do any thing towards the hindrance or hurt thereof, nor of his Estate. And by this Commandment they be bound to obey all the Laws, Proclamations, Precepts, and Commandments made by their Princes, except they be contrary to the Commandments of God: With much more to that purpose. And on the Sixth Commandment, No Subjects may draw their Swords against their Princes, FOR ANY CAUSE WHATSOEVER IT BE.— And though Princes, which be the Supreme Heads of their Realms, do otherwise than they ought; yet God hath assigned no Judges over them in this world. The contrary to this is a Popish Doctrine, who think it cause enough to depose a King, because he is a Protestant: and it is a Lesson which some sorts of Protestants have learned from them, to depose any that is a Papist. A Doctrine which all the Reformed Churches have hitherto condemned: and yet this is the Sophistry which our Author hath detected, to his own shame, and the honour of those Worthies whom he hath reproached: and if our Author's Politics should be embraced Kings would be of all men most miserable: for if they be Protestants, the Papists may depose them; and if they be Papists, Protestants may resist them; which is tantamount.  
P. 19 Is a discourse against the Oath of Allegiance, which he forms in an Objection and Answer. The Objection is this: You are pre-engaged, and cannot consent to a Bill of Exclusion; if you do, you are forsworn, having long since sworn Allegiance to the King, his lawful Heirs and Successors. His Answer: Now though the Lawyers tell us an hundred times, no man can have an Heir as long as he liveth, yet this will not overcome that deceitful prejudice which is occasioned by our common speech. Reply. Yet our Author presently adds, That a man and his Heirs may live at once in the some house, and eat and drink together every day. I pretend not to the knowledge of Law-terms; yet I am confident those Lawyers which penned that Oath did not put it in in vain; nor would they make it Treason to conspire the death of the Heir of the Crown of England, if there could be no such person in being. One clause of that Oath is this: I will bear Faith and true Allegiance to his Majesty, his Heirs and Successors, and him and them will defend to the utmost of my power, against all Conspiracies and Attempts whatsoever which shall be made against his or their persons, their Crown or Dignity, by reason or colour of any such Sentence or Declaration, or otherwise: and will do my best endeavour to disclose and make known to his Majesty, his Heirs and Successors, all Treasons and treacherous Conspiracies which I shall know or hear of to be against him or any of them. And I do farther swear, That I do from my heart abhor, detest, and abjure, as impious and heretical, this damnable Doctrine and Position, that Princes which be excommunicated or deprived by the Pope, may be deposed or murdered by their Subjects or any other whatsoever.— And all these things I plainly and sincerely acknowledge and swear, according to these express words by me spoken, and according to the plain and common sense and understanding of the same words, without any Equivocation, or mental Evasion, or secret Reservation whatsoever, etc. Now let any man judge whether you have not taught the Jesuits themselves how to equivocate, and to make void that solemn Oath, by affirming that there can be no such person as an Heir to the Crown while the King is living.  
Your own distinction of an Heir Apparent and Presumptive, seems a sufficient Confutation of your senseless Assertion. Besides, though it may be true of a Testamentary Heir, that he is not actually so till the death of the Testator; yet a Legal Heir, upon whom an Estate is entailed, as the Royal Crown of England is upon the next in Blood, is truly an Heir, and aught to inherit. And in this Opinion I am confirmed by the Apostle, Gal. 4.1. who says, That though the Heir as long as he is a child, (i.e. as long as his Father liveth) differeth nothing from a servant, yet he is Lord of all: and if he be a Son, or next in Blood to a Prince whose Kingdom is hereditary, then is he his Heir, v. 7. as St. Paul argues.  
You seem to grant, that this is the Law-sence of the words Heirs and Successors in an Act of Parliament, as in the Duty of Excise granted to the King, his Heirs, and Successors; But an Oath of Allegiance (you say) ought to be conceived in plain words, and in the common sense of those words. Which I should think to be that which the Lawyers that penned that Oath, and the Lawgivers that enjoined it, did intent; and unless you will justify Papists in their Equivocations, and absolve them from the obligation of that Oath, it cannot be taken in any other but the Law-sence. Well, (say you) if it be so, (and so it must be) let them be sure to keep it in that sense in which they have or should take it at sixteen years of age in the Court-Leet; viz. I will be true Liegeman, and true faith and troth bear to our Sovereign Lord the King that now is, and to his Highness' Heirs and lawful Successors. Kings and Queens of this Realm of England. To which you add this pitiful and worse than Jesuitical Evasion: It is plain to every body, that no one certain or known person in the world hath any interest at present in the Oath of Allegiance besides his Majesty that now is. For which you give this as a Reason, which is none at all: For who shall be King or Queen of England hereafter, none but God himself knows. And if God, by whom King's reign, had not wonderfully restored his Majesty, we should have had none at this time. But God by a Miracle hath restored the right Heir against all oppesition.  
Pag. 21. He brings in another Objection against the Bill of Exclusion, fetched from the Common-Prayer (to which I perceive he is no great Friend): viz. No Church of-England-man can be for it with a good Conscience, being to the prejudice of his R. H. because we there pray that God would prosper him with all happiness here and hereafter. Now by the way, no such words (as here and hereafter) are expressed, though we grant they are implied under the word All. But we especially (though not only) intent it to that happiness which flows from the Spirit and grace of God, and may bring him and all the Royal Family to God's everlasting Kingdom; and as a means thereunto, that he would endue them with his holy Spirit, and enrich them with his heavenly Grace. You say, No man in the Communion of the Church of England prays that Prayer more hearty than you do. But if you do indeed think him to be a Julian, and yourself such as those Christians that said their Prayers backward, that prayed him to death, and would not so much as desire his conversion, this would certainly be a Curse in the mouth or heart of any Protestant. And I hope there are no such in the Communion of our Church, though you intimate that they were all such in the Primitive Church, and that we should be such also: for p. 96. you say, You find not one single wish among the Ancients for Julian's conversion, but all for his downright destruction. It is a good Rule that, Pro quibus orandum, pro iis laborandum. We should by a meek and Christian behaviour, enforce our Devotions: for 'tis the Prayer of the Righteous man that availeth much. If we could thoroughly inspect the Arguments that prevailed for the reputed defection of that Prince, I believe the unchristian behaviour of those who oppose his Succession, was most cogent. And who knows but our amendment, moderation, and meekness, might yet reclaim him? But to pray coldly without faith, for what you say (p. 22.) there is no hope, and to act contrary to your Prayers, is to beg a denial. And I hope many others pray more hearty than you do: For when we pray God to endue him with his Holy Spirit, etc. we pray that he may return to the Protestant Religion, and not that he may be exposed to an invincible Temptation, and a kind of necessity to extirpate it, as you maliciously accuse us. Nor are we to distrust the power of divine Grace either to restrain or sanctify those whom we pray for; and so to limit the Holy One of Israel, as if he had not the hearts of Kings in his hand, or had no rule over the Governors of the world. Cambden, p. 5. of his Remains, reports, that when Brithwald the Monk was troubled about the Succession, the Blood Royal being almost extinguished, he heard a voice saying, The Kingdom of England is God's Kingdom, and God will provide for it. And why should not we acquiesce in the same Divine Providence?  
P. 79. You argue against a Popish Successor à possibili, because he may be a Persecutor. Some have accounted both our present Sovereign and his Father of blessed memory such: they sent the One out of the world with an Exit Tyrannus, though the meekest and most gracious Prince in the world; and what the effects of a Bill of Exclusion, as some men would manage it, may be, is dreadful to consider. But as you suppose the Popish Successessour may be; so I suppose he may not be a Persecutor. And for the proof of this, I appeal to your Friend Plato Redivivus, who in p. 207. gives an instance in the Prince of Hanover, who was perverted to the Roman Church, went to Rome to abjure Heresy; and returning home, lived and governed as he did before, without the least animosity of his Subjects for his change, or any endeavour to introduce any to his Government or People; and dying the last Spring, left the peaceable and undisturbed Rule of his Subjects to the next Successor his Brother the Bishop of Osnaburg, who is a Protestant. Now (as Solomon says) there is no new thing under the Sun, but what hath been may be; and if we do our duties, we may be the more confident of the success of our Prayers, That God will endue the Royal Family with his Holy Spirit, & c You do very naughtily therefore to represent the case as impossible and desperate, as if God himself could not or would not order this great affair for the good of his People. I am almost persuaded, that the sins of the Nation to which this clamour against Succession hath given occasion, by planting in the hearts of too many, malice, bitter enmity, revile, and even abhorrence of one another, is a greater evil than we are yet like to suffer from a Popish Successor. And did we think he might prove to be such a one as he is (too boldly) represented, we do very ill to exasperate and embitter his Spirit, by such Libels, Slanders, and such unlawful Contrivances as in all probability made Julian worse than he would have been. I therefore hearty wish that you had spared that Grinning Compliment (to use your term, which you borrowed from Dr. Howel in his life of Julian) That if it stand with his H.'s good liking, he would enjoy that Religion to the greatest advantage, and take his fill of it at the Fountainhead. I shall rather pray he may never go thither: There are too many Crowned heads at the devotion of his Holiness already. Such Complementers I am sure do not pray hearty that God would prosper him with all happiness here and hereafter. What? to persuade him to cast himself down over some precipice, as Curtis did, p. 19 of the Character of a Popish Successor? or like that mentioned by our Author to be presented to Cromwell, p. 87. that to kill himself is no Murder? If it be out of the abundance of the heart that the mouth speaketh, none but men of murderous intentions will so speak.  
P. 23. You are throughly satisfied (you say) that the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy are Protestant Oaths (as a great Assertor▪ of our Religion and Laws (now with God) thought fit to term them). Sir W.J. I confess, was a good Lawyer, but how he could call them Protestant Oaths I know not. 
* See L. Cooks Reports N. 7. fol. 6. and fol. 7. in calvin's Case. And his Institutes Sect. 94. and 259.  The Oath of Allegiance was long before the name of Protestants came up; King James only enlarged it, and appointed it to be taken of all in Court-Leets at Sixteen Years of age, as you have observed. Nor is there any new thing at all in that Oath, more than what all Protestant Princes do generally require of their Subjects. And as for that of Supremacy, it is one of the ancient Regalia of the Kings of England, which our Parliaments still defended against the encroachments of the Pope; so that the thing was in being long before King Henry the Eighth brought it into a form: and he was yet a Popish Prince when he did it. And I have read, that Queen Mary herself would hardly part with the acknowledgement of her Supremacy. It is not peculiar then to Protestants; or if it were, I am afraid that some who term themselves the true Protestants would be found no great Friends to it: For there are many other Sects, as well as the Anabaptists, who are now called sound Protestants, refuse it: And the late Sanctions were intended equally against them all. I agree with you, that we are all bound by them to endeavour in our place to keep out Popery; but not by Rebellion, and the bringing in of Confusion.  
As to what you say of twisting a Popish Interest with these Oaths, as Julian endeavoured to entangle the Christians. There are matters more pertinent, and more fully related by St. Gregory Nazianzene than by you— There was (saith he) an Anniversarie-day wherein the Emperor bestowed Donatives of Gold on his Soldiers, when at the same time he had provided Fire, Frankincense, and several persons to persuade the Soldiers to kindle the Incense, as an ancient Rite, and more becoming the Imperial Dignity. By such arts and persuasions, many of the inconsiderate Soldiers were circumvented, and kindled the Frankincense: but, at their return and feasting together, they drank to each other, and with Eyes lifted up, and using the Sign of the Cross, they made mention of Christ. Whereupon one of their Company said, What strange thing is this! Do ye call on Christ after you have denied him? At which they being astonished, said, How have we denied him? what is your meaning? He answered, By throwing Frankincense into the Fire, which is a denial of Christ. Whereat leaping up speedily from their Feast, they ran forth as so many distracted men into the Marketplace, proclaiming, We are Christians, we are Christians in our hearts. Let all men hear us, and God above all, to whom we live, and to whom we will die. We have not broken our Covenant with thee, O Christ our Saviour, nor abjured our blessed Profession. If our Hands have offended, our Minds are not guilty, It was not the Gold, but the Emperor's fraud that circumvented us: We have put off impiety, having been purged in blood. Then hasting to the Emperor, and with great resolution casting their Gold at his Feet, said, We have not received a Donary, O Emperor, but a Condemnation: You called us not to receive marks of Honour, but a brand of Ignominy: Let your Soldiers receive such Largesses; slay and sacrifice us to Christ, to whose Empire only we submit ourselves. Revenge one fire with another, and reduce us to dust for the dust that we have cast into the fire: Cut off those hands which we have unhappily stretched out, and those Feet that carried us to it. Give your Gold to such as may not repent the receiving it: Christ alone sufficeth us, whom we value above all things. Having said thus, and informing others of the fraud, and exhorted them to recover themselves out of this snare, and satisfy Christ even with their Blood: The Emperor, though highly provoked, would not make a public slaughter of them, who as much as in them lay were desirous of it; he commanded them to be banished. Methinks here is much of the resolution of the Thebaean Legion, who voluntarily offered themselves to death, rather than have the guilt of kindling Incense, though without any evil intention, at the command of the Emperor. From whence I gather, that these Heroic Christians thought themselves under the same obligation in Julian's time, as the Thebaeans did in that of Maximian. Which is your 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, such an error in your foundation, as we shall see to enfeeble the whole Fabric. And here you may be instructed what you ought to say and do, when a Prince (as you phrase it) shall put a border of Popery about his Picture, which you would fain honour; namely, as these noble Confessors did; We reverence your Person and Authority; we will fight your Battles, and follow your Commands; but if you will draw us to Idolatry, (though by the Laws we might resist) we will rather die at your Feet than do either. This is the Faith and Patience of those exemplary Soldiers: and this may serve also to free you from those afflicting thoughts which had almost made you to forget a passage of great consequence which riseth up against all that you have said, delivered by St. Augustine on Psal. 124. to this effect: That the Christian Soldiers served under this Heathen Emperor; and where their Religion was not concerned, made conscience of obeying him; but where it came to the Cause of Christ, there they made as much conscience of disobeying him. True, they would not obey him, but neither would they rise up against him, though (as you take for granted) they had the Law on their side. They would lose their Lives rather than offend God, or rebel against their Emperor: which is the very thing that St. Augustin persuades, having shown that Servants must obey their froward Masters: Quod de domino ac servo dixi, hoc de Regibus intelligite; commending julian's Soldiers, who for the sake of their Master in Heaven, did serve their Earthly master.  
P. 26. You would have the Reader take notice, that the whole Contest between Julian and those Christians was purely on the score of Religion, and not from any lawless and ungovernable humour. And certainly such lawless and ungovernable humours as you mention, did no way become the Christian Religion: for that instructs us to practise meekness and forbearance; not to avenge ourselves, but to give place to wrath; not to speak evil of Dignities, or curse the Rulers of the people. Whereas you present them under such a black Character, as would make some believe that they were the Apostates and Persecutors, and not Julian. They are almost your own words, p. 66. For how do they treat the Emperor, reproaching him, ruffling him, vexing every Vein in his Royal Heart, saying all their Prayers backward, and calling down vengeance upon his head— dancing and leaping for joy at his death, and insulting over his Memory; and but for the name of Christians, he had better fallen among Barbarians: and when he often put them in mind of their Christianity— they call him by the bloodiest names of the Devil, for telling them they must not avenge themselves, nor render evil for evil, but pray for and wish well to those that injure and persecute them: and tell him he must not think to drive all men up to the top and Pinnacle of Virtue; for there are several Commands in the Gospel which are no more than Counsels of perfection, which bring Honour and Reward to them that keep them; but to those that do not keep them, no manner of danger at all. Pudet haec Opprobria, etc. I am sorry to hear that distinction applied to the practice of those Virtues which do more especially discriminate Christians, and show them to be of a more excellent spirit than other men: For we need such graces as these in our daily conversation; and what do we more than others, if we only be kind and loving to them that are so to us? Yet this distinction of Counsels and Precepts will be but a sorry excuse for such as neglect those Duties enjoined Matth. 5.44. etc. If these and suchlike are Counsels, and we may do as the Julian Christians are said to do, the design of the Gospel is quite another thing than what all the learned and serious professors of it in all Ages have believed and practised: Non tali auxilio aut defensoribus istis Christus egit. I have heard of some that have turned the Gospel into Burlesque; but it is more strange, that one whom I suppose a Minister of the Gospel should make the grand design of it Ridicule.  
P. 26. As for the Soldiers fight under Julian against the Persians or any common enemy, and obeying the word of Command, when they received his Pay; it is such a low part of Honesty, that our Author would have done it himself, for his Pay. But he that would have fought for Julian, will scarce sit down quiet under a Popish Prince, which he thinks to be ten times worse than a Julian; and probably would rejoice as much at such a slippery trick as was showed to Julian in Persia, as (he says) those Christians did that lived under him. For why are these things propounded and applauded, but to commend them as examples to the present Generation? But I hope we shall not have many such Reformadoes.  
You say, p. 26. Every body knows how the Church was rend in sunder by Arianism; And there might be too much stiffness and rigidness on the other hand about words, for aught I know: but miserably rend it was; which gave great advantage to Julian against the Christian Religion. I know not what our Author means in excusing the Arians, and charging the Orthodox with too much stiffness. What more dangerous Error could there be, than to oppose the Deity of Christ, and deny the Lord that bought them? In such a Case, and when almost the whole world was turned Arian, the Orthodox could not be too stout and resolute: and if there were so good an Effect of a bad Cause, as the Union of Christians, under Julian; I wish our fears of what you call a greater evil might have the like effect on us, whose Divisions have not so great a cause as abjuring the Deity of our Saviour was. And he that shall extenuate that cause of dissension, as if inconsiderable, and but a mistake about words, as our Author (after Mr. Baxter) hath done, and yet aggravate the grounds of Division among ourselves, as if the Scrupulosity which the Dissenters so pertinaciously defend, were (as Mr. Hunt says) from God, hath quite outrun the Men of Rippon for Contradictions Zeal like another satire, he can blow hot and cold; he is extremely hot in Punctilios, and as cold in Fundamentals; he serves some other Interest than that of Peace, Truth, or Piety.  
P. 27. Now what did the Christians do? Did the Orthodox go and side with Julian, to revenge the injuries which they received from the Arians in Constantius 's time? or make use of julian's favour which he shown in restoring them, to crush their brethren which dissented from them? No, there was no seeking to him by either side: Only the Donastists of afric complemented him, and received some small favour from him. The design of Julian's recalling the Orthodox Bishops was, as Ecclesiastical Historians affirm, either to cast an Odium on Constantius, who had banished them; or to dash them and the Arians and Donatists against each other, thereby to 
* Eo modo nomen Christi de terris perire putavit, si Sacrilegas dissentiones liberas esse permisit. St. Aug. Epist. 166.  ruin both; or at least that they might not find any opportunity of disturbing him, being wholly employed in the destruction of one another. ' Two or three things I shall briefly demonstrate, on occasion of this Paragraph.  

1. That the Donatists and Arians were united among themselves against the Orthodox.  
2. That they courted Julian's favour to strengthen their Faction against the Orthodox. And  
3. They did commit greater outrages where they had power, than Julian himself.   
As to the first, Donatus himself wrote a book de Spiritu Sancto, agreeable to the Doctrine of Arius, as St. Hierome hath observed: the Macedonians also, who, as St. Ambrose observes, blotted out of their books that of St. John, God is a Spirit, joined with them. See St. Ambrose de Spiritu Sancto, lib. 3. cap. 11.  
Secondly, They courted Julian's favour, and got a Toleration, by their flattering Petitions, applauding him as a man with whom alone Justice did reside. And in truth, all that hath been said in favour of a Popish Successor, comes short of what they said in favour of Julian. And whereas the Orthodox looked on this Indulgence of the Emperor as a design that would prove fatal to Christianity; for as St. Augustine says, Quae pejor mors animae, quam libertas erroris? There is no death so evil as the licensing of error, which is the destruction of the Soul: Yet the Donatists on the contrary are loud in their Acclamations to Julian as a most gracious Prince; and when he was dead, would, if it had been possible, have prayed him alive again. And to ingratiate themselves yet more, they pull down the Cross which Constantius had set up in public places to the honour of Christ, and set up julian's Image in its place. And by how much he was more severe against the Catholics, so much the more they applauded him: nor would he have done so much Mischief as he did, had not they solicited him by their frequent and fawning Petitions. Such Orthodox Bishops as were famous for Learning, were all silenced: Athanasius indeed returned to Alexandria, but was presently banished again by their means, who informed the Emperor that Athanasius had baptised many Noble Persons, to the great disgrace of Julian's Empire and Religion. See Baronius' Annals, Anno Christi 362. p. 115. Tom. 4. Mogunt. So that Athanasius, St. Basil, and St. Gregory, Fugerius Antiochenus, and both the Apollinares, were banished and persecuted by means of the Arians. St. Augustine calls Julian, Desertor Christi & inimicus, an Apostate from Christ, and enemy to his Church: but vester Julianus, so great a friend to the Donatists, that he was wholly theirs.  
Julian's affection to George an Arian Bishop, whose Writings he earnestly desired, intending probably to make use of them against the Orthodox, is recorded by himself in his Epistles, and was made known by setting up him in the place of Athanasius, as he generally did Arians in the room of the Orthodox. And Baronius, p. 117. speaking of the Catholics, says, In quos conversus est furor Gentilium, Arianorum, pariter & Judaeorum: they agreed with the most opposite parties against the Catholics; Jew's, Gentiles, and Arians. Perhaps you may give some credit to what is said by Mr. Baxter's History of Councils enlarged. The Arians possessed Constantine with hard thoughts of Athanasius: And it could not be expected that Julian should countenance the best, when Constantius had done so much against them, and got most of the Churches headed with Arian Bishops. So that Julian maintained divers of the Leaders of the Factions as his Favourites and Pensioners, to balance the Orthodox, that they might be in a continual hurry, and find no establishment, but suffer as evil doers, and the causers of Division, when they only asserted the Evangelical Doctrine, as well against the Arians as Pagans.  
Rogatianus and Pontius, two Donatists, in a Petition of theirs to Julian, style him the only Assertor of public liberty, from whom alone Justice and Clemency could be hoped for. Than which flatteries. St. Augustine says, Nil injustius, nil pernitiosius? Their words were, Quod apud eum sola justitiam haberet locum, Epist. 166. that he would do nothing but what was just. The Catholics wondered (as well they might) that the Donatists should be so , as not to perceive that Julian was striking at the very root of Christianity; of which they often minded them, and gave them this plain Demonstration: That by the same Edict by which they were indulged, the Worship of Idols was enjoined; and the Devil and they were let lose together, to compass the Earth, and make Proselytes to their Party. Tunc reddidit (Julianus) Basilicas Donatistis, quando Templae Daemoniis, Aug. Epist. 166. Optatus, l. 2. p. 54. Eo modo putans Christianum nomen de terris posse perire, si unitati Ecclesiae de quâ lapsus fuerat, invideret, etc. haec erat ejus praedicanda justitia. Yet when Julian was dead, and Jovian a Catholic Emperor succeeded, the Donatists bewailed his death, and often wished that their good Protector were alive again: Julianum ab inferis excitaretis. St. Aug. ubi supra.  
As to the third particular, it would fill a Volume to acquaint you that Outrages were committed by the Donatists upon the Orthodox during Julian's Reign: I shall only name one or two, that may parallel those which were committed by the Pagans. The first shall be from Optatus, p. 55. Felix and Januarius, two Donatist Bishops came to the Castle of Lemelle, where the Catholics had a Church; which being shut against them, they commanded the Rabble that followed them to pull it down: who presently got upon the roof and uncovered it; and perceiving the Deacons defending the Altar, they threw down the Tile-stones, and slew two of the Deacons in the place. In Thypasia a City of Mauritania, Albanius Formensis and Felix Idicrensis, with their bloody Companions, assaulted an Assembly of the Catholics while they were at their Devotions; and driving them out of the Church, slew and wounded a great part of them, without respect of Sex or Age: The Bread of the Consecrated Eucharist they threw to their Dogs; which having eaten it, by the Judgement of God grew mad, and fell on their Masters, renting some of them in pieces: They sold the Consecrated Chalices to Women for vile uses, or to the Heathen for the service of their Gods; pulling down the Altars; and burned the books of the Holy Scriptures. Felix one of their Leaders deflowered a Virgin that had a little before owned him for her Spiritual Father. None of the Heathen committed greater Outrages than some of their Bishops. And by their instigation, Julian shut up their Church-doors. Honorius the Emperor posted them for it, and caused an Edict to be set up in public places as a Memorial, Quo omnibus innotescat, & Catholicae confidentiae constantia, & Donatistarum desperatio & fucata perfidia; of the constancy of the Catholics, and the baseness of the Donatists in making use of Julian's power to oppress them. These practices gave occasion to Ammianus Marcellinus to say, No Beasts were more cruel to Christians, than they were to one another. And they who shall close with Usurpers and Persecutors to favour and support their Faction against a true Church, deserve to be stigmatised as those Donatists were, In perpetuam rei memoriam.  
P. 27. of the Alexandrian Synod, Zozomen (lib. 5. cap. 11.) gives us a better account. You are ready to catch at every thing that may make for a Toleration of Schism and Heresy, and therefore mention their Agreement not to use those terms which might puzzle ordinary understandings, and not on every occasion in Popular Orations, but in disputes against the Heretics that denied the Consubstantiality of the Son and Holy Ghost. But you omit their confirmation of the Nicene Council, which Zozomen there names, (viz.) That Athanasius and Eusebius having assembled the Bishops of divers Cities, did confirm the Decrees of that Council, and confessed that the Son and the Holy Ghost were consubstantial with the Father; and these they named the Trinity; and that they desired only that the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might not be used at that time, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, unseasonably to disturb the Church, and continue strife and disputes: but when the errors of Sabellius came in their way, they ought to refute them. However, it were well if the Dissenters would make the same use which you say the Christians did, (especially having once been enslaved by one as bad as Julian already) i.e. to be united with the Orthodox: this might be a means not only to secure us from our fears of a Popish Successor, but also what may prove as destructive, those dangerous Heresies which when our Succession was interrupted did overrun the Land, and brought all things Sacred and Civil into Confusion.  
You conclude your Preface thus: I have been as careful in the Citations as ever I was in telling Money; and can only say as they usually do in that case, I hope it is all right: and if it should chance in any one particular to prove otherwise, am ready to make it good. I have not yet time to account over your Money; I fear it will fall short of the value you pretend it to be▪ for at first view, I perceive the metal is base and counterfeit, and intended to put a Cheat on the common sort of christians, who are not well acquainted with such Brimigems. Besides, a great part of it is unreasonably clipped; and though you profess yourself ready (as to particular Quotations) I fear you will never be able to make just satisfaction as to the Summa Totalis, i. e. you can never make good your design, That it is lawful for Christians to resist their Princes on pretence of Religion. But to ease you of your afflicting thoughts, at present I shall take my leave of you, desiring you well to meditate on the following story.— Rodolphus Duke of Suevia swore Allegiance to Henry the Fourth: Pope Hildebrand absolves him of his Oath, being persuaded by some of the Pope's Clergy to a Revolt. After which, he never prospered; and by God's just judgement, his right hand, with which he swore, gangrened, and was cut off. Whereupon, he told some of those Bishops that had dissuaded him from his Allegiance, This is the hand that was lifted up when I swore Fidelity to my Emperor, which is now justly cut off for my Perjury and Rebellion; for which you are to answer who persuaded me to those perfidious practices. Should I that have taken the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance, and made such a Declaration as is , by any Writing renounce the same, and teach others so to do; I should think the loss of that hand which was instrumental in it, a very gentle and easy punishment.   

THE CHAPTERS ANSWERED.  

An Answer to our Author's CHAP. I. A short Account of Julian 's Life.  
I Shall not interrupt my Discourse, which is designed as a Vindication of the Loyalty of the Primitive Christians, against the false, impudent, and impious Calumnies of this Author, with a History of Julian 's Life, which I intent in a more full and impartial Relation by itself. It shall therefore suffice to observe here with our Author, p. 9 That Julian charged the people that they should injure none of the Christians, nor reproach them, nor draw them to sacrifice against their wills. So that the violences offered to the Christians, were more from the insolency of the Heathen, than any Law made by Julian, as our Author observes. And indeed the Heathen, even in Julian's time, never acted such Cruelties upon the Christians, as the Arians and Donatists did; which made Ammianus Marcellinus a Heathen, to say, that no Beasts were so cruel to one another as the Christians were. And, in a word, if we should 〈◊〉 all that our Author says of Julian's per●●●●ting the Christians in this Chapter, and all that he says of the Christians persecuting Julian in all the rest, to be true, we might be tempted to think that the Christians were the greatest Persecutors.   

An Answer to our Author's CHAP. II.  
THis Chapter you say contains the sense of the Primitive Christians about his Succession; of which you speak, p. 19 under these two heads: 

1. how the Succession stood, and  
2. what Right and Title Julian had to succeed to the Empire.   This first, I confess, you have (but against your will) clearly stated; and it will be enough to discredit all that you suggest concerning the second; which is, That the Christians would have been willing to set aside his Title, and to have excluded him purely for his Religion; which upon your Reasons I suppose the generality of Christians would never have attempted, though some few might have been willing enough.  
As to the first, the reason you mention from Eusebius is, That the Throne of the Empire descended to Constantine from his Father, and by the Law of Nature (which is a divine Law) was reserved for his Sons and their Posterity, and was to descend for ever, as another Paternal Inheritance doth. And that this is the Law of Nature, you confirm from Eumenius a Heathen then, (and others) who says, It was not the casual consent of men, or any sudden effect of their favour, which made (Julian) a Prince; he gained it by being born into the world: which seems to me the first and greatest Gift of the Gods. Now if by the Law of Nature, as well as of the Empire, Julian was to succeed; I cannot see how the Christians could by their Principles resist him in the administration of it, without resisting the Ordinance of God. For this, I have quoted Dr. Hammond's Paraphrase on Rom. 13.1, 2. etc. and that Saying of Tacitus, That we ought to endure wicked Princes as we do Inundations or Scarcity, which are of Gods sending.  
These, you say, p. 20. are full and pregnant proofs; and I think, ad hominem cogent: for if, as you observe from Eusebius, the Empire was to descend as other Paternal Inheritances, than it must be more unlawful to resist or exclude a Prince from enjoying his Inheritance, than any private person. And then surely no sound Christian could have joined in an Address to Constantius to exclude a person appointed as it were by the Voice of God, as you say of Constantine that he was declared absolute Emperor by the 〈◊〉 and long before that, by God himself the great King of all, p. 21. And St. Augustine says the same, viz. God that gave the Empire to Constantine, gave it to Julian. Only by the way, I do not think that your 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 neither, will, in the sense of the Greek Fathers, bear your interpretation of the Law of Nature: for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is often used by Greek Authors for Custom. And I believe that Father whom you mention, intended no more than a Right of Succession for two or three Generations; which carried the name of a Law, as it doth also in our Common Law, where Consuetudo Lex est. And it is well known, that when the Heirs of the Emperors have been living, the Roman Soldiers have created their Emperors out of Obscure Families: but these are no Patterns for us Christians to follow, nor for us in this Nation above others. For William the Conqueror claimed the Crown not so much by his Sword, as by Right of Succession, (if you will believe the Author of that Fanatical book called The Rights of the Kingdom) to King Edward, whose Kinsman he was, and his Heir by Will, as appears by the Laws of St. Edward and William, p. 197. So that in this respect the Descent of the Crown of England is much more firm and established than that of the Empire, having been continued through more Generations, and confirmed by many Laws, which whoever shall infringe, takes off the Government from its Hinges, and leaves all to Confusion. For when a private Estate is entailed on a man and his Heirs, it is necessary that to bar the Heir, and alienate the Estate, the original Entail must be cut off, and then he that is in possession may dispose of the Inheritance to one or more. And perhaps this was the intent of the Bill for Exclusion, to make it an Act for the Dissolution of Monarchy, and reduce us to a Commonwealth again. And it were better we should suffer some Inconveniencies (if the Will of God be so) which yet are uncertain, than against the Will of God to do things unjust, and draw more certain troubles on our own heads. For in the Contest between the Houses of York and Lancaster, when the first always pleaded the Right of Descent, the other alleged the Acts of Parliaments; there were infinite troubles, which cost the lives of above 200000 men, whereof eight were Kings and Princes, forty Dukes, Marquesses and Earls, besides Barons and Gentlemen; and after all, the Kingdom fixed on this Maxim, Jus Sanguinis nullo Jure dirimi possit, i. e. The Right of Blood cannot be abrogated by any Law. And the Author of the Rights of the Kingdom says, that in the days of Henry the Third and Richard the First, when was a motion of some great men that a Bastard might inherit, the Parliament at Merton cried out, Nolumus leges Angliae mutare, p. 264. Therefore I wonder that the same Author, p. 98. making a Supposition. That if any one man of all the Commons in Parliament should usurp the Crown with all its deuce: (He mentions not the whole House, for that hath been done already) What should I? what may I do? (saith he) and answers, Nothing, but mind my Calling, and attend the Judgement of the highest Court that I know, that may command my Body and Judgement much. It is a Maxim in our Law, That the King never dies: The King and his Heirs are looked on in the eye of the Law as an Individual; and to prevent Tumults and Disputes, they are joined in most of those Acts that concern the Dignity of the Crown and public Peace; and the Son hath sometime been Crowned in his Father's life-time. Yet we plead not Providence in the long continuance of the Succession, nor the Law of the Land, upon which for other matters you lay the stress of your whole Discourse; but upon the Law of God, Deut. 17.8. where it was ordained as a Statute of Judgement, (i. e. say Fagius and Munster, a firm and immutable Law, and as the Vulgar, Sanctum Lege perpetua) That IF A MAN DYE WITHOUT CHILDREN, THE INHERITANCE MU BE GIVEN TO HIS BRETHREN. And Ainsworth from Solomon Jarchi, says, The Brother of him that was dead, or his Brother's seed, shall inherit. All this hath been observed by the Law of Nations where Kingdoms are hereditary, That as it is unjust, so it hath been always unhappy to alter the Succession; and even in private estates, the disinheriting the right Heir hath been very much condemned and unfortunate.  
And yet, (p. 22. you say) the Fathers had the Conscience to set aside such a Title. They could not do it with a good Conscience, the thing being in itself evil: for as the Law of God forbids to countenance a poor man in his Cause, so doth it also to defraud the rich, or follow a multitude to do evil, neither to speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgement. None of us would judge it reasonable to be deprived of his right contrary to Law; and why then should we think it lawful to deprive another of that right to which we own the preservation of our own? Athenagoras more clearly shows what was the consent of the Fathers in this case: We pray for your Empire, and that the Son, as it is just, may succeed in his Father's Throne. And yet they both were Pagans. But what would the Consent of Fathers, and the sense of the primitive Christians signify against the Decree and Laws of Heaven? who cannot more plainly declare his will to us, than by the voice of Nature, by his written Word, by pointing out, as by his finger, in his Providence, in making Heirs to Kingdoms as well as other Estates by a long and legal descent: and, as St. Augustine said, God that gave the Empire to good Constantine, gave it also to Julian. So Tertullian: Ind est Imperator, unde & Homo antequam Imperator.— And Irenoeus: By whose command they were born Men, by his they are ordained Kings.  
And yet all this Crack of the Fathers and Primitive Christians, and (p. 31.) the whole Christian world, produceth nothing but a flash of Rhetoric from an Invective in Gregory Nazianzen against Julian; from which if we appeal to the same Author in a more temperate and Christian Zeal, when he delivered himself dogmatically to the people committed to his charge, we shall find him teaching and exhorting a different Doctrine and Practice from what is here delivered by him: of which I shall speak at large hereafter; and only note by the way, That the Oration was made long after Julian's death: which savoured not very much of humanity; and if it were upon occasion of some disappointment, as is reported, it had as little of Christianity. And this will appear a truth, that he did exceed as well in the praise of Constantius the first Arian Emperiour, as in the dispraise of Julian, and the misrepresentation of the Christians in his time. All which circumstances considered, and no other proof produced, our Author deserves to do public Penance for abusing the Fathers and Primitive Christians, and, as he says, the whole Christian world. And yet what can Gregory blame in Constantius, but that which he calls his Ignorance or Mistake? not being ware of his Apostasy. And it was too unchristian to blame the Emperor not only for making him a King, but keeping him alive. This (you say, p. 24.) is enough to show that Constantius would never have made Julian Caesar if he had known him to have been such. And, in my judgement, here is as much said to prove that Constantius ought to have slain him when his Brother Gallus was slain; Although this was a thing which he repent of in his Deathbed, and would undoubtedly be more unworthy of a Christian Emperor to exclude him out of the life, than to leave him to a Succession that descended by inheritance to him. And if it be such a Bill of Exclusion that you contend for, I am sure none of the Fathers nor any good Christian would ever consent to it.  
P. 24. Is an Exclamation against the Emperor, having first said that Constantius did far excel all other Kings in Wisdom and Understanding, p. 25. and that he was led by the Hand of God into every Counsel and Enterprise (what, in turning Arian, and persecuting Athanasius and other Orthodox Bishops, and putting Arians in their seats?) your wisdom was admired above your power, and again your power more than your wisdom: but your Piety was valued above them both. Then he comes to blame the Emperor as the only ignorant and inconsiderate person— and which of the Devils stole in along with you at that Consult? And yet again, p. 26. he says of this first Arian Emperor, That he would have parted not only with his Empire, and all that he had in this world, even his Life itself, for the security and safety of the Christian Religion, etc. And our Author says, that at his death he shown with much earnestness the concernment he had for the true Religion, p. 28, 29.  
But for aught I yet see, Julian's Apostasy was not yet known, but he was generally accounted both a pious and a stout man; and therefore his repenting of making Julian Caesar was not on the account of Religion, but for some other respect, Julian having been declared Augustus by his Soldiers, who often disposed of the Empire, and being then on his march to dispute the Title with Constantius; (for hitherto Julian kept to the Christian Assemblies, and was not known to be a Pagan, as you show from Ammianus Marcellinus, p. 28.) After that Julian was declared Emperor, he still feigned himself a Christian; and though in private he performed his Heathenish Rites, trusting some few with the secret, yet he publicly went to Church on Twelfthday; and after he had been devout at the Service, he came away again. This was done at Vienna, not quite Ten Months before the Emperor's death.  
This is all that our Author produceth for the sense of the Fathers and primitive Christians for the Exclusion of Julian; his Title was divine, his Religion at most only suspected, not know. Yet says our Author, p. 30. If this Doctrine (concerning the alteration of Succession) shall displease any, which is contrary to what these Fathers (which will not amount to one single person) assert with so much vehemency: He thinks it reasonable that first they confute this Doctrine (of Exclusion) which they dislike. And secondly, That they would never fetch their Mountebank-Receipts of Prayers and Tears▪ and suchlike encouragements to arbitrary Government, out of the Writings of these very Fathers. This our Author knew could easily be done, and therefore he thought to prejudice his Readers against it, by calling them Mountebank-Receipts, and Antimonarchical Authors, and encouragements to arbitrary Government. Than which I scarce know any thing more profane, but the downright Blasphemy of the Doctrine of Christ, and the practice of the best Christians, who counted not their lives dear unto them, that the Doctrine of the Gospel might not be evil spoken of, as if Christianity were an utter Enemy to Caesar, or as another Mahomet to establish his Kingdom by the Sword. What an easy matter doth our Author think it, to impose any falsehood on the Vulgar, when he tells them of Fathers and primitive Christians with so much vehemency asserting the lawfulness of excluding Julian; and instead of all other proofs, produceth only a Rhetorical Expression of a person in some passion; from which it might be proved as lawful to Murder Julian, as to Exclude him from the Succession? Hercules tuam fidem! But to answer our Author's demand.  
I shall endeavour to confute his Doctrine, (viz.) That the Fathers and Primitive Christians of the whole World were for the Exclusion of Julian from the Empire. Iraeneus, Tertullian, and St. Augustin, you have seen to be of a contrary Judgement.  

1. The true Christians could not be for it, upon your Position, That he had a right to it by the Law of Nature, and the Hand of God gave it him: which you seem to assert.  
2. It is certain the Arian Fathers were not, as hath been already shown; they congratulated Julian's advent to the Kingdom: Much less could the Orthodox be for it upon Gregory's surmise that Constantius would have excluded him out of the Life as well as the Empire.  
3. From their behaviour towards Constantius a vehement Arian, the Orthodox Fathers show they were not for Exclusion. Constans his Brother was joined with him in the Empire, and he defended Athanasius and the Orthodox Bishops against Constantius; yet these Christians never sided with Constans against Constantius: they never resisted or sought to depose or exclude him, although his Heresy was extremely dangerous, and propagated by Force and Persecution of more eminent Divines than any that suffered under Julian. And as our Author says that Popery is ten times worse than Paganism; so I have heard as wise and good men as himself say, that Socinianism is as bad as Popery; and the Arians, who denied the Deity of the Son and the Holy Ghost, were much like our Socinians. Mr. Baxter hath so much Charity as to think that some that died in the Communion of the Church of Rome are Saints in Heaven; though he will scarce grant it to such as die in the Communion of the Church of England, and therefore much less to those that die in the belief of the Socinians, who renounce the Doctrine of the Blessed Trinity, and the use and efficacy of the Holy Sacraments.  
4. Constantius himself would never have consented to the Murder of Julian, upon due consideration; the Murder of others being repent of upon his Deathbed: and here is but one Argument for both his Exclusion and his Murder.   
Now although our Author hath sufficiently refuted himself in what hath been said, yet because the Calumny against the Christians of that Age, though asserted only with noise and confidence, (and, as the saying is, Fortiter Calumniare aliquid adhaerebit) may beget a false opinion both of those Primitive Christians, and the Doctrine of Christianity itself, and also infect the present Generation, in which too many are glad to hear what power they may exercise on such Governors as are not of their own Judgement; I shall in due time inquire strictly into this Author's Opinion concerning Resistance, and show, that his whole Fabric will be crushed by the authority and reason of those very Authors upon whose bare names he seeks to raise it. But for this I must desire the Readers patience.   

An Answer to our Author's CHAP. III. Their Behaviour towards him in Words.  
THe Reader may understand that our Author hath done with Julian as a Successor, and now shows how the Christians treated him when he was in full possession of the Empire, and that by Divine Appointment (as he grants). And therefore I hope it will be considered, that the following Reflections do show, from the practice of the Christians of that Age, how the Christians of this may behave themselves towards their lawful Governors. And he gins, p. 32. with a great variety of Instances, as he calls them, of the hatred and contempt of those Christians towards Julian. And I shall also desire that the Reader will consider not only the matters of fact, but the lawfulness of such Words and Actions as were spoken and done against Julian. A facto ad jus non valet argumentum. And then by what number of Christians, and of what condition they were that spoke and acted such things as were spoken and acted: For we have known in our Age such things spoken and done, by no small company of men, against a Prince of known Integrity, as will make all sober Christians to be ashamed and confounded at the report of them. And if such behaviour of our present Christians shall be a hundred years hence read in our Annals, it will be a grand Calumny against such as were more Loyal and Pious, for any Reader to conclude that such was the general practice of the Christians in that Age; or that because one discontented Bishop turned Apostate, and fought against his Prince, that all the Bishops and Christians then alive were Rebels.  
P. 33. Of their behaviour you inform us under these three Heads. 

1. Of their Words.  
2. Their Actions.  
3. Their Devotions.    
Of their Words. You say they were quit with him for calling them Galilaeans, in calling him Idolianus. This, I confess, savours of the Wit of that Age: So the Arians called Athanasius Sathanasius; so the Pharisees called our Saviour Beelzebub. But did they return railing for railing? I am sure they taught us to return Blessing and Prayers even to our Persecutors. What if the Antiochians libelled him, and played with his Beard, and twitted him with some natural Blemishes and Imperfections, whereof he himself gives the world an account in his Misopogon? Is that sufficient authority for us to libel our Governors? Is it becoming a Christian to deride the bodily Infirmities, as the Shape of the Body, the Gate, the Beard, and, as you say, p. 33. every thing that belonged to him? Julian himself shown more wisdom and humanity in scorning these impotent Reproaches, than they did Christianity in seeking by such boyish language to vex every Vein in his Royal Heart, p. 66. It is a sign that he had more of moderation than they; for had they had his Power, (by your description of them) they wanted no Will utterly to ruin him. But I think it more agreeable to Truth, though some few overzealous persons might Lampoon his sorry Beard as fit to make Ropes of, etc. that yet the generality were better principled, and neither used their Tongues nor their Swords against that Heathen Emperor. As for those that did so reproach him, Julian tells them truly they had renounced the Laws, and him that had the keeping of them, (i. e. They dealt with him, as you say, like Barbarians). And if the Christians were first in the Transgression, it was not like Julian would be long behind them, or be less barbarous than they. And yet though he could have revenged himself with the Sword, he did it only with the Pen: And when he was put into a fit of anger, he only told them as a punishment that he would see them no more. Nondum ira quam ex compellationibus & probris conceperat emolitâ loquebatur, asperiùs se eos asserens postea non visurum, Am. Marcell. l. 23. I think in this particular one would take them to be the Apostates, and not Julian (as you say, p. 66.)  
P. 36. You give a particular instance of a single man in Berea, whose Son warping to the false Religion, his Father turned him out of doors and disinherited him; who related this whole matter to the Emperor, then coming to Berea. The Emperor being arrived, invited among other Magistrates and Chief men, this young man and his Father, and set these two next himself; and tells the Father, that in his mind it was not just to force a man's Judgement otherwise inclined, to reduce it to the other side: Therefore don't you (says Julian) force your Son against his mind to follow your Opinion; for neither do I force you to follow mine, though I could easily compel you. The Father sharpening his Discourse, with a Divine Faith, answered, O King, do you speak of this Villain, who is hated by God, and hath preferred a Lie, before the true Religion? But says Julian, putting on a vizard of Meekness again, Friend, leave railing; and turning to the young man, said, I will take care of you myself, since I have not prevailed with your Father to do it. This Berean deserves the Title of Noble for his Zeal; but it reacheth not to a demonstration of what you produce it for, p. 35. that the Christians took the freedom to reproach him and his Religion to his face: for though he despised his Religion, yet for aught that appears, he owned his Authority, and reverenced his Person, bespeaking him by the Title of O King. And here is no example for railing words, neither from that Noble Berean against Julian, nor from Julian against him.  
P. 38. you give another instance of Maris Bishop of Chalcedon, who being blind, was led to the Emperor as he was Sacrificing to Fortune, for which he called him Impious Apostate, and Atheist; and Julian reproached him again with his blindness, saying, his Galilaean God would not cure him. Maris replied, I thank God for striking me with blindness, that I may not see thy face. This was bold and well; for he reflected not on his Person, but his Paganism. The say of Juventinus and Maximus you think fit to omit; but I shall shortly mind you of them. It is strange that our Author could find no instances more pertinent to his purpose than these two, wherein (as he says, p. 45.) they shown themselves to be men of like passions with other men: though neither of them shown themselves to be men of a capricious humour, but declaring their just indignation against his Apostasy, yet spared his Person and his Office; as knowing that they ought not to speak evil of the Ruler of the People, though they were such as had been Usurpers, and caused them to be smitten contrary to the Law, as St. Paul informs us; much less when they only smite us with their tongues, as Julian did in the case alleged. And if it were done in passion, as you intimate, you know how our Saviour condemned that in his own Disciples that would call for fire from Heaven on the Samaritans.  
Now against the speaking evil of Dignities, which Judas, vers. 8. sharply reproves in the Gnostics of his time, I shall produce the practices of other eminent Christians, even in julian's Reign. Athanasius was a great Pillar of the Church at that time, and a great example of passive Obedience under the severe Persecutions both of Constantius and Julian; yet he gave his Oath that he never spoke evil of him, as you shall hear anon. St. Ambrose spoke of the same times, The Christian Ledentibus non irascitur, Spoliantibus non resistit, caedentibus non repugnat, etc. Lactantins' lived somewhat sooner, but shows the practice of Christians in his time, which was under Dioclesian and Maximian, the two greatest Tyrants: Cum tam nefanda perpetimur, NE VERBO quidem reluctamur, sed Deo remittimus ultionem, Instit. l. 5. c. 21. and the same patience he says was practised every where; That though they endured unspeakable miseries, yet none of the Christians did resist, so much as in a word.  
P. 38. It would be endless (you say; that is, it would not be to your end and intent) to reckon up the Say of Juventinus and Maximus; which you name again, p. 39 but wisely pass by. For they being accused for speaking against Julian, by some such Witnesses as yourself, do without any maledictions thus plead for themselves: We, O Emperor, who were brought up in the true Religion, and have lived in obedience to those excellent Laws made by Constantine and his Sons, cannot but greatly lament to see all things defiled with impiety— our Meats and Drink are polluted. (The Emperor had caused some of the Water, or the Sacrifices offered to his Gods, to be mixed or sprinkled with their Meat; which did not hinder the most Christians from using them, according to what the Apostle allowed, 1 Cor. 10.): But do they rail or rebel? No: they are Lachrymists; Those things (say they) cause us to shed many tears at home, and they constrain us to make our sorrowful complaint before thee. We are offended at nothing else in your Government. This you wisely omitted; using only their names, to make up a number. Ad populum has Phaleras.   

An Answer to our Author's CHAP. iv Of their Actions.  
FRom their Words you come to speak of Blows; yet none that I perceive fell upon Julian's person: for you give us but two Instances of this; and neither of them reached his person, and but one an Officer that was inferior to him that struck him: and that was Valentinian, a Colonel of the Houshold-guards, who as he was going before the Emperor to the Temple of Fortune, was sprinkled with Holy Water by one of the Chaplains (as our Author calls him): which coming nigh to Valentinian's Clothes, he struck the Sacrist, saying, It would rather defile than cleanse him. I am at a loss how to reconcile this History with another more generally reported by Gregory Nazianzen, as well as others, That Valentinian voluntarily stripped himself of his Military Girdle (that is, laid down his Commission) upon an Edict of Julians, That no Christian should bear Office in his Army; for which noble act St. Augustine (De civet. Dei, lib. 18. cap. 52.) calls him a Confessor. But if it be true that he was Colonel of the Guards when he made this Assault, and that Julian ipso facto sent him away to a Garrison lying by a Desert to spend his days there, than the other History must be false; and I think it more safe to believe that History which Gregory Nazianzen delivers, attested by many others, than that which comes on the single report of Theodoret. But if the Colonel of the Guards had struck a Sprinkler of Holy Water, what was this to the striking of Julian?  
The next Instance is from a passage of Gregory Nazianzen, of which this is a brief account. Who is there to be found that more despised the Emperor, or had a greater hand in destroying him, than my Father? Of his contempt, amongst many others, both those Archers and THEIR COMMANDER are a proof, whom HE BROUGHT against our Church, as either to take possession of it, or to destroy it: for having assaulted many others; he came hither likewise with the same intent, and imperiously demanded the Temple. He so far failed of accomplishing any thing of what he desired, that if he had not presently got out of my Father's way (being ware of it, either of himself, or by some body's advice) he might have gone away kicked; the Bishop boiling with Anger against him, and with Zeal for the Temple. A very hot fit of Anger and Zeal together, it must needs be, that did animate so ancient a Bishop (being ninety years old) to lift up his heel against a young Emperor of thirty two, in the head of an Army, who having assaulted many other Churches, came resolved to seize this also. Who can think Julian would be diverted with the notice of the old Bishops lying in wait for him; or that he who had read what David said concerning Saul, (after that he also had apostatised from God, as I suppose that old Bishop had done) viz. Who can lift up his hand against the Lords Anointed & be guiltless, 1 Sam. 26.9. should think of lifting up his heels against Julian in the head of his Army? Either therefore this must be such an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as is not to be paralleled in all Longinus, or such an heroic intention as never entered into the heart of any Zealot among the Jews. But to come more close to the matter; you say, p. 43. You have often tried to make this beating intended for the Captain of the Archers, and have been ready to make Solaecisms in the Greek, to avoid the greater Soloecism of an Emperor of the world awed and terrified with the fear of a kicking. But it will not do. No; the Proverb hinders it, None so blind as he that will not see. It might have been done easily enough, if you had not committed a Soloecism yourself, in translating the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he Brought, but had kept the righter sense of that word, which Billius, the learned Interpreter of Gregory Nazianzen translates immiserat, he sent; or, which your Elias Cretensis useth, concitabat, he stirred up, or compelled to go against that Church; which if the Emperor had been in person, he need not to have done. And therefore I suppose Gregory Nazianzen meant it of the Captain of the Archers, that demanded the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, not pro imperio, by virtue of a Mandamus or Commission from the Emperor: for sure the Emperor himself needed no such Commission. Nor is it probable that the Emperor himself would in his March against Persia troth up and down from one Church to another: for you say, he had assaulted many others to make a seizure of them. Nor is it a Soloecism to say the Emperor seized those Churches which another did seize by his command. Our Author I suppose was led into this error by taking the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifieth induco, to lead or introduce: whereas the Interpreters that render it immitto, or concito, being better Grecians than himself, understand it to be from the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of which every Lexicon will give him such a sense, as that, without a wresting of it, it must refer to the Captain of the Archers. But we are come to the end of this Tragi-comedy: The Emperor kept himself in a whole skin; the Bishop's Anger vented itself some other way, and all was hushed and calmed. But certainly our Author, who hath first begun this Quarrel between the Emperor and the Bishop, is much to be blamed, whether he did it ignorantly (which is the best construction that his Friends can make) or else maliciously, which appears by forsaking the Translations of Billius and Cretensis, and preferring another that might favour his design. And I challenge him to be as big as his word, and make satisfaction for this base Coinage. And that you may not be guilty of such a wilful mistake for the future, I shall give you this Token to be worn as a Frontlet on your brow, That from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is derived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an Instigator.  
P. 44. Here you have a description of one of the Lachrymists of old, etc. How far this Bishop was a Lachrymist, we shall see hereafter. It were fit for the Wit of a Julian, than the Piety of a Christian, to deride the Prayers and Tears of those ancient Christians. Whatever Garlands and Trophies Nazianzen or Basil erected for that old Bishop, are now pulled down by the hands of a young P— who represents him as a Hector, and a Striker, expressly contrary to our Saviour's Example, and St. Paul's Injunction.  
You add, p. 44. And now I know no more than the Pope of Rome, what to make of all this; what they meant by it, or on what Principles they proceeded. I question not the Principles of those in whom you have instanced; it sufficeth me that you say it was done in a fit of boiling anger. But when, speaking of the Principles of such as offer violence to their lawful Emperors, you say you know nò more than the Pope of Rome: I say, it is pity that you should know or divulge half so much: For what you have suggested concerning these pretended Violences offered by Primitive Christians to their lawful Emperors, hath a very malign influence on the present Age; and for this and other such Reasons, (as I said) I would rather lose my right hand than be the Author of them. But if you know their Principles as well as the Pope of Rome, you know he holds it lawful to depose or kill any Prince whom he shall judge and Excommunicate as a Heretic or Tyrant; and he can teach you to distinguish between resisting Julian, and resisting the Devil that was in him: That the King is Vniversis minor, and that the people who gave him his power may resume it, etc.  
You say, p. 45. none of those Bishops had ever been in Scotland, nor had learned to fawn upon an Apostate, and a mortal Enemy to Religion. Parcius ista: For though some may think you are reflecting only on a Popish Successor; yet others, considering you speak of Julian, who was now a lawful Emperor, may stretch this line too far. Scotland indeed hath been glutted with the blood of their Kings; whereof about Thirty have sussered violent Deaths. I acquit those Bishops from confederacy with Scotland; they never contributed to the destruction of any: I wish I could do so by the Presbyterians. Yet I perceive you know how to yoke the Pope's Bull and the Scotish Heifer together, and with them to make large Furrows on the backs of Kings. There was, I remember, for above Forty years since, a great Correspondence between Rome and Scotland, who then communicated their Principles to each other; and though none of the old Bishops were acquainted with them, yet some late Presbyters have espoused them, and can on all occasions (for the disturbance of our English Nation) talk as Whiggishly as ever Knox or Buchanan did. But they are so disingenuous as to conceal the names of their good Teachers, from whom they learned to distinguish not only between Julian and the Devil in him, but between Charles Stuart and the King, that they might destroy him in a double capacity; first, as a King, and then as a Man. And if, as you say, the Laws of our Land do not allow any one to imagine violence to their lawful Emperor: And if, as Bracton says, fama apud graves & bonos viros, is a proof of Treason, I fear an Indictment may lie against the Author of Julian's Life; for that— Not having the fear of God before his Eyes, but being moved, etc. It is therefore a most profane and Reproachful inference, with which you conclude Chap. 6. That in that Age the best Prayers and Tears were those that contributed most to Julian 's destruction.   

An Answer to our Author's CHAP. V Of their Devotions: And first of their Psalms.  
THis was indeed the Devotion of our late Times, to begin with a Psalm, not regarding the Scriptures, or as much as the Commandments, Creed, or Lords Prayer; and then to preach in their Prayers, and pray in their Preaching; or, if you will, in our Author's Language, to say their Prayers backward. In their Devotions, you say, p. 45. It might be expected we should see the flights of their selfdenying and suffering Religion; and one may expect they should lay aside their annimositie against Julian, though he were their Ememie, and for that reason pray the harder for him.— This certainly was their duty, wherein they might have shown themselves Christians indeed: But this, our Author thinks, was fit only for the Christians in Dioclesian's time, and those that lived in the most Primitive times. I am as sure that they used the right method of Devotion in praying for their Heathen Persecutors, as our Author can be of what he seems to glory in, that these in Julian's time prayed the wrong way, p. 46. They cannot sing a Psalm (says he) but they make his Confusion the burden of it. Such Psalms as these, are none of the Songs of Zion, which should make for Peace; nor had he the Wisdom of Solomon that composed them, or they the Spirit of Christ that sung them. Our Saviour (as we read) sung a Hymn a little before his Passion; but it was not for confusion of those that came to apprehend and crucified him; he prayed for them: Father, forgive them, etc. Now though the Brethren of Scotland have been silent of late, yet among the Sisters there are many such sweet Singers still, who in their Rhapsodies dart up Arrows, Firebrands, and Death against Heaven itself; which have deservedly recoiled on their own heads, and spoiled their singing. And if such be their running Verses, and the Burden of their Songs, sing Quicunque vult for me; I will be none of that black Choir: St. Stephen's example is fit for a Christian, who prayed for his Persecutors while they were stoning of him, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge, Acts 7. v. 60. And all sober Christians will rather take St. James his advice than the Author of Julian, who tells us, if we use our Tongues to bless God even the Father, and to curse men which are made after the similitude of God, (and Princes have a double Image of God; as they are Men, and as they are Princes) if we are double-tongued, and out of the same mouth proceeds blessing and cursing: my brethren (says he) these things ought not so to be, James 3.9, 10. And now let us consider his Proofs. And first, as to the instance of those who removed the Bones of Babilas; it was ill done to set David's Psalms to the tune of Sheba's Trumpet, We have no portion in David, neither have we any inheritance in the Son of Jesse: Every man to his Tents, O Israel. Doubtless, they should rather have prayed for his Conversion than his Confusion. How unsuitable was this to the Funeral-Solemnitie of a Martyr, when they should have rather blessed God for the example of the Faith and Patience of Babilas, than have provoked the Emperor to have made it their own Funeral-dirge! Our Saviour advised his Disciples to flee from persecution, not to draw it on their own heads.  
The second instance, is of Publia and her Maidens, who sung to the same tune, and contrary to what St. James prescribes; having praised God her Creator, by and by, in a fit of Rage, whereof (you say, p. 50.) there seemed to be some quantity, she turned her Devotion into Curses plainly levelled at the head of Julian: And it is a wonder, that having to do with such an Emperor, that they had not like Swans ended their Lives with their Songs. But did any company of Christians at that time meet solemnly together, and make use of such a Directory for their public Devotions? No; they were but the passionate acts of a few private persons, contrary to the general practice of the Fathers and serious Christians, as shall most undeniably appear anon. But this calls to my mind a more rude and barbarous behaviour of some (who accounted themselves the best Christians) towards the Royal Martyr, who honouring one of their Congregations with his presence, when they came to sing a Psalm, by whose instigation it was I know not, the 52 Psalms was named, and begun to be read: 
Why dost thou Tyrant boast abroad  
Thy wicked works to praise?  Whereat the good King lifting up himself, says, I pray you to sing the 56 Psalms, 
Have mercy, Lord, on me, I pray,  
For man would me devour.  And the Congregation cheerfully sung with his Majesty. This was one great fault (saith he) of the Common-prayer, that it taught them to pray so often for me; to which prayers they had not loyalty enough to say Amen. It is a most profane Custom, though it hath of late years been too much in use, to turn our Prayers into Satyrs, and our Psalms into Pasquil's and Libels; and to vomit forth our Spleen, when we should pour out our Hearts before God.  
I shall conclude this Chapter with Athanasius his answer to Constantius, when he had been accused for stirring up Constans against his Brother Constantius to restore him by Arms. I am not so mad, O Emperor, that you should suspect me to have had any such thought. I call God to witness against my Soul, and I swear, the Lord can bear me witness, and his Anointed your Brother, I never mentioned you for any evil before your Brother; neither ever stirred him up against you, as these (Arians) slander me: but whenever I had access to him, he himself mentioned your gracious inclination; And God knows what mention I made of your godly disposition.— I am not so mad, neither have I forgotten the voice of God, which saith, Curse not the King in thine heart, nor the mighty in the secret of thy chamber; for the birds of the air shall reveal it, etc. If the things spoken in secret touching you Princes cannot be hid, is it likely that I in the presence of a Prince, and many standing by, would say any thing of you otherwise than what was good?— I beseech your Highness call to mind my behaviour when you admitted me to your presence at Vimimachum, at Caesaria, and Antioch; whether I did so much as offer an evil word of Eusebius my bitter Enemy, or of any my persecutors: And if I refrained my tongue when I was to plead against them in my own defence, what madness had it been to traduce an Emperor before an Emperor, and to stir up one Brother against another? Athanasii Apol. ad Imperatorem Constantius. Yet was this Bishop turned out of his Church without kicking the Emperor, or any Officer of his, as may be there read: he departed peaceably; and though the Citizens were ready to take Arms on Ambrose his behalf, he pacified them and departed.   

An Answer to our Author's CHAP. VI Their Prayers and Tears.  
WHereof, he says, Gregory giveth a large account. So large indeed, that our Author only picked and chose what might make most for his purpose, omitting what was most material: for in that second Oration against Julian, p. 127. he says, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 How great provision of Armour and inventions of Engines; how many myriads of men and armed Soldiers could effect those things which we by our Prayers only, and God by his Will hath done? Nor is it probable that the Christians at that time did want force to restrain the violence of the Emperor, seeing our Author confesseth, that he who though it a small business to conquer the Persians, thought it a great work to reduce the Christians. And doubtless that Pagan wanted not malice to root them out, but he disinherited his Power: for even of that Army which he led into Persia, the far greatest part, if not all, were Christians; which appears not only by their choosing Jovian to be their Emperor 
* Greg. p. 117.  immediately after his death) who had renounced all his Honour, & suffered exile for Christianity; but by their unanimous 
* See Russ. l. 2. c. 1. Socr. l. 3. c. 22. Theod. l. 4. c. 1.  Acclamation, when Jovian told them he was unwilling to undertake the Government of a Pagan Army, We are all Christians! we are all Christians!  
This consideration, drew from the Learned Montague upon the relation of St. Gregory (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) this Note; It was not because they could not, but because they would not resist: for they had strength sufficient to have suppressed the Tyrant, as St. Augustine and Gregory declare: The Christian interest was so largely propagated, and had taken such deep roots, that it could not be destroyed, unless the Empire had perished with it. Tertullian says, the Christians were pars pene major cujusque Civitatis, & vestra Omnia implevimus; And if they had but deserted the Empire, it would have been as a Wilderness: Yet it appeared to be true, That Christianus nullius est hostis nedum Imperatoris. And St. Cyprian ad Demetr. Nemo nostrum quando apprehenditur reluctatur, nee se adversus injustam violentiam vestram, (quamvis nimius & copiosus sit populus noster) ulciscitur.) But those Christians had learned patience in the School of Christ, as well by example as precept; and not to overturn and bring all to confusion, with a Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo. So the Learned Montague. So that when Gregory says, they had no other defence, but all was cut off from them, he may be well understood, concerning the use of any other means, all violence and resistance being forbidden them; for, id possumus quod Jure possumus: they were forbid to use the Sword for revenging themselves upon the Emperor. And St Gregory in his 1. Orat. says, that the enemy of Christianity was defeated by God's mercy, and the Christians tears, which were many, and shed by many, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, having no other remedy against that Persecutor.  
Besides, as they wanted not Soldiers, so neither valiant and experienced Captains that had the entire affections of the Soldiers, and which were approved Christians. Jovianus, Valentinian, and Valens (which three after the death of Julian were successively chosen Emperors) could each of them have engaged Legions to follow them: and how well the Soldiers were affected to them, you have seen already by their choice of Jovian presently on the death of Julian. So that it might be as truly objected that they wanted Soldiers and Commanders, as that they wanted Arms, Castles and Fortresses. They had not indeed suprized any of the Imperial Forts, or held them out in actual Rebellion against Julian, (as you know who did in the last Age:) but many of them were Garisoned with Christian Soldiers, who doubtless would have declared for the Christian Religion, against the Atheism and Persecution of Julian, had not these renowned Confessors been restrained by the Command of Christ to fear God and honour the King,  
Besides, I have two other Considerations of great weight with me, that it was not for want of Strength, or doubt of Success, that the Christians did not oppose Julian.  
As first, it was usual with the Roman Soldiers upon any disgust with their Emperors, to kill their Emperors, and set others in their Thrones. Six of the twelve Caesars were slain, pass some Historians account; but never was there such a thing done by the Christian Soldiers: For after such time as the Roman Strength was put into the hands of Christians, they never deposed any one of their Emperors, though there wanted no Strength on their parts, nor Provocations on their enemy's part, many of them being Persecuting Arians. And though Julian by his rashness, against the advice of salustius, a man of great experience, and generally beloved of his whole Army, was resolved on the Persian War, and had foolishly exposed them to great hazards and danger, by his following the directions of a Renegado Persian, who led them into a barren, and almost inaccessible Country, and burning his Ships that might have served for a retreat; yet was there no Associating or banding against him in his life-time; but as soon as he was dead, they all professed themselves Christians, and chose a Christian Emperor.  
Secondly, The power which the Clergy had with the People, who could hardly restrain then from tumults and fight in their defence, is another Argument with me: for even at that time Athanasius convened in the great City of Alexandria, a great number, not only of the Bishops of the Greek Church, which were near at hand, but from Italy, Egypt, Arabia, and Libya; which argues that the affairs of Christianity were in no low or despisable condition. And if it be true that Gregory's Father alone thought of braving the Emperor, what might the united Interest of these Bishops and the Soldiery in their Sees have done? But they thought it better to flee as Athanasius did, or betake themselves to their Spiritual Armoury of prayers and tears, than to lift up a hand against Julian. And I cannot but think that St. Gregory was of the same Judgement, when he wrote without any passion to the Citizens of Alexandria, being affrighted with the noise of Persecution, in his 17th Oration, to this effect: (N. B.) this is one of our Laws, and of those laudable ones most excellently ordained by the Spirit of God, who knew best how to temper his Law with a mixture of what was possible to us, and honest in itself, That as Servants should be obedient to their Masters, and Wives to their Husbands, and the Church to our Lord, and Disciples to their Pastors and Teachers: So should we also be subject to all higher powers, not only for fear of punishment, but also for. Conscience sake. St. Gregory also in a Funeral-Oration, n. 20. for St. Basil, records an Answer of his to Modestus Governor of his Country under Valens an Arian Emperor— Where the Cause of God is in danger, we neglect other things, and look only to him: Fire, Sword, and Beasts, are matters of rejoicing to us, rather than terror: Reproach, threaten, and do to us what thou pleasest, employ thy Authority, let the Emperor also hear of this; Thou shalt not overcome nor persuade us to consent to Impiety. So that both Gregory and Basil the Divine, and Basil the Great, which were no Mountebanks, but Great Doctors of the Church, were for the prescription of prayers and tears, although you would force them to the contrary.  
I have reserved another Testimony of Athanasius for this place, being an account of the Public Prayers made by himself for Constantius the Emperor, though he had remeved him from his Pastoral charge. In his Apology to Constantius. Witness hereof (saith he) is first the Lord, who heard us, and granted unto you the entire Empire, which was left unto you by your Ancestors; then those who at that time were present: for the words I used were these only; Let us pray for the welfare of the most religious Emperor Constantius; and the whole People with one voice cried presently, O Christ, be favourable to Constantius; and so continued praying a long time. And then he concludes, Let truth take place with you, and leave not the whole Church under a suspicion, as though such things (as tended to the death of Constans) should be thought on or written by Christians, and especially by Bishops. Athanasius was also accused for celebrating Public Prayers in the Church of Alexandria; which he confesseth he did, being urged thereto by the importunity of the People; that they might pray for the welfare of the Emperor in that Church which he himself had builded, being ready otherwise to go out of the City, and to assemble themselves in the Deserts. But thus he expostulates with the Emperor: And you, O King, most beloved of God, where would you have had the People stretch out their hands and pray for you? there where the Pagans did pass by, or in the place which bore your name, and which from the first foundation thereof all men did call a Church? And then he prays thus for the Emperor— O Lord Christ, who art indeed King of kings, the only begotten Son of God, the Word and Wisdom of the Father; because the People have implored thy goodness, and by thee called upon thy Father, who is God over all, for the welfare of thy most religious servant Constantius, I am now accused. And then speaking to the Emperor, You do not forbid, but are willing that all men should pray, knowing that this is the Prayer of all, that you may live in safety, and continually reign in peace.— And as for you, O Emperor, beloved of God, many years I pray you may live, and accomplish the Dedication of this Church: for those Prayers that are made therein for your welfare, do no way hinder the solemnity of the Dedication. And whereas Athanasius was accused also for not obeying the Emperor's Command to departed from Alexandria, he says, I do not oppose the Command of your Majesty; God forbidden; I am not such a man as would oppose the very Treasurer of the City, much less so great an Emperor.— I was not so mad as to oppose such a Command of yours: I neither did oppose it, nor will enter into Alexandria, until you of your humanity be pleased I shall so do. If old Gregory was of another mind, it was but one Doctor's Opinion. And I think our Author in the same case is a Dissenter from all Christian Divines, as well as from the Church of England; and from Mr. Baxter too, who says, that hurtful prayers and desires are seldom from God: and he speaks it in the very case of Julian, p. 17. of his Direct. part 4.  
I shall here add the example of that Legion which was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or the Thundering Legion, consisting of 6666 Christians, under marcus Aurelius; of whom Zephiline speaks thus: The Emperor's Army being in great distress for want of water, and being compassed about by their Adversaries, the Praefect of the Praetorians told Marcus, That there was nothing which those Christians could not obtain by their Prayers: Marcus therefore desired the Praefect that he would entreat them to pray unto their God; which they had no sooner done, but the Lord by thunder and lightning discomfited their enemies, and with seasonable showers refreshed the whole Army, which otherwise might have perished.  
St. Ambrose was another of those Lachrymists which our Author derides; he lived under Valentinian the younger, another Arian Emperor; and yet, as Ruffinus says of him, (Hist. Eccless. l. 2. c. 26.) he did not defend himself by his hand or weapon, but with fastings and continual watch, and remaining under God's Altar, by his Prayers prevailed with God to be a Defender both of him and his Church. I will give you St Ambrose his own words to his Church at Milan:— I will never forsake you willingly; being constrained, I know not how to make opposition. Dolere potero, potero flere, potero gemere adversus arma Milites Gothos; Lachrymae meae arma sunt; talia enim munimenta sunt Sacerdotis; aliter NEC DEBEO NEC POSSUM RESISTERE. I can sorrow, I can weep, I can sigh against Arms, Soldiers, and Goths; Tears are my weapons; for such is the Munition of a Priest; in any other manner I AUGHT NOT, I CANNOT RESIST. And his People were much of the same mind, as he describes it, Epist. 33. or as in some Editions, the 13. Ad Marcellinam, What could have been better spoken by Christian men, than that which the Holy Ghost spoke in you this day? Rogamus, Auguste, non pugnamus, We entreat, O Emperor, we fight not; we are not afraid, yet we entreat. This (saith St. Ambrose) doth become Christians, that both the tranquillity of peace be desired by them, and their constancy in faith and truth should not be deserted, no not with the peril of death. And in his Tract de Renovatione fidelium: Laude magis scribendum est, non tam male facere non posse, quam nolle; whereof St. Peter told us the sense long before, 1 Pet. 2.19. This is thankworthie to God, if a man endure grief, suffering wrongfully: And that man doth certainly suffer wrongfully, that hath the Laws of God and man on his side. But there is no Law of God for resistance of a lawful Magistrate. The Apostle did not calculate his Doctrine for the three first Centuries under Heathen, and that it should expire under Christian Magistrates: the Spirit of God foresaw that Kings should be nursing Fathers to his Church, and made good Laws for the security thereof; but he never meant that Princes should be resisted, though in some things they should act contrary to those Laws.  
So that when our Author demands by what Law we must die? p. 81. and answers, Not by the Law of God, for being of that Religion which he approves: I answer, Yes, 

1. By the Law of God, rather than make resistance; that we may bear testimony to that Law by suffering of death for our Religion, rather than to violate it by our Rebellion.  
2. By the Laws of our Country too: for though by the favour of Christian Princes many good Laws are made for obedient Subjects, which the Prince may not violate without his great sin against God; yet hath the Supreme Authority of the Land provided especially for the security of the Prince, who is a Common good.   We see how in Nature light things do sometimes descend, and things that are heavy will ascend, against their natural propension, for the preservation of the Universe; and if private men do submit themselves to some Violences and Injustice for the preservation of the public Peace, it is but their duty: and if the Prince do invade our Rights, that is no ground for us to invade his, in whom the happiness of the whole Nation doth consist.  
St. Bernard was another Lachrymist, Epist. 221. speaking to Lewis then King of France; Whatever it pleaseth you to do concerning your Kingdom, Crown, and Soul, we that are the Children of the Church, cannot conceal the injuries done to our Mother; we will stand and fight even to death for our Mother, if need be; but Armis quibus licet; non scutis & gladiis, sed precibus fletibusque ad Deum: with such Arms as are allowed us; not with Sword and Buckler, but with Prayers and Tears to God.  
I could multiply many Testimonies in this kind; nor can any other than such as our Author produceth of some private passionate and mistaken Christians, be pretended to the contrary, until such time as the Pope erected the Standard of Antichrist against Christian Kings, which was after the time of Gregory the Great; or, until Presbytery, as a Reformado, fought under the same Banner.  
Now to say as you do, in the close of this Chapter, p. 55. That in that Age the best Prayers and Tears were those which did best execution upon an Apostate Emperor, and contributed most to his destruction; and again, p. 96. I do not find among the Ancients one single wish for Julian 's Conversion, but all for his downright Destruction, is a very unchristian insinuation, especially for one who pretends to say the Prayer for the Royal Family as hearty as any man (in the Preface.)  
P. 93. Our Author, by way of Postscript, tells us, he hath many more exceptions against the Artillery of Prayers and Tears, than he can stay to insist on. The first is a great exception indeed, which makes St. Gregory to overthrow all that our Author had quoted from him; for St. Gregory, p. 57 of the first Invective (Eaton-edition) says thus: Julian was hindered by the goodness of God, and the Tears of Christians, which were shed in great plenty by many who had this only remedy against the Persecutor. Now it is well observed by our Author, here are no Prayers mentioned; none at all for his confusion, no such Prayers as are no better than Treason by our Law, p. 95. Secondly, Gregory doth not tell us here that they had no Arms, or Walls, or that these Lachrymists cried, CHUD EAT CHEESE AN CHAD IT; but that they had this only Remedy against the Persecutor, (i. e.) as our Author says, They had no other way to help themselves: And though here be no Prayers mentioned, yet in other places St. Gregory mentions Prayers, and was as great a Lachrymist at Prayer as any.  
P. 96. Our Author parallels these Prayers with some, which he says were made Treason in Queen Mary 's days, of which the Act says, (Anno 1. and 2. of Philip and Mary, lib. 9) That some prayed that God would turn her heart from Idolatry to the true Faith, or else to shorten her days, or take her quickly out of the way. Though they had used such Prayers in secret, they should methinks for their own sakes have for born them in their Conventicles, where the Act says they were used, and where (as you would have it) such murdering Prayers are too frequent in our Age. And I doubt whether God might not have rejected such Prayers with a Quis requisivit? I believe verily it was never in our Saviour's mind, when he bids us to pray for them that persecute us; nor of his Apostle, when he enjoins that Prayers and Supplications, etc. be made for Kings and all that are in Authority, 1 Tim 2.1. And whereas that Act saith, Such a Prayer was never heard or read to have been used by any good Christian man against any Prince, though he were a Pagan; you think you have given precedents for it in the case of Julian, where the Christians prayed for his Destruction, not his Conversion. If (as you say) you pray as hearty for his R. H. as any man, in the Collect for the Royal Family, you cannot but mind his Conversion. And no precedent that ever I heard of will warrant any other Prayers, but to this effect: ENDVE THEM WITH THY HOLY SPIRIT, ENRICH THEM WITH THY HEAVENLY GRACE, PROSPER THEM WITH ALL HAPPINESS, AND BRING THEM TO THINE EVERLASTING KINGDOM, etc. Here is nothing at all for Destruction, but all for Conversion. And though I know you are a daring man, yet pray do not think of reforming the English Liturgy by your Julian nor Gregorian Account, and teach us by your example to say our Prayers backward.  
Gregory himself was so great a Lachrymist, that our Author, if he have any spark of Grace, or intention to repent, must needs weep with him, and (as he did) recant that as publicly, in other more serious Writings, which he delivered in a fit of Passion, or to show his Rhetoric. Gregory Nazianzen, Orat. 17. p. 267. to the Citizens of Nazianzum, that were in great fear by reason of the displeasure of their Praefect, persuades them to make use of these weapons, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Ps. 34.17. If thou turn to the Lord with mourning, thou shalt be saved: Ye see (saith Gregory) how Salvation is annexed to Mourning, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, nothing can come between your Prayers and the Blessings that you ask. Doth the Spirit of God prescribe Mountebank-Receipts in the opinion of Gregory? or ought not he to repent that calls them Mountebank-Receipts▪  
Than minding them of the instability of Humane Affairs, and of the great benefit they may reap by their patience and submission to God's Chastisements, he adds,— Let us submit ourselves to God, to one another, and to those who have the Government on Earth, (the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the same that St. Paul useth Rom. 13.5.)— To God in all things, to each other in brotherly charity, and to our Governors for the sake of good order. (He adds) it is a heinous and dangerous thing to exhaust the Clemency (of the Ruler) by needing daily pardon. Among other Laws of our Religion, we have this given us by the Spirit of God; who hath joined that which we are able to do, to that which is just and honest, and hath established it by a most laudable Law; That as Servants obey their Masters and Wives their Husbands, and the Church Christ, and Disciples their Pastors; so we also are commanded to obey the higher Powers, not only for Wrath, but for Conscience-sake, as being bound to yield them Tribute; nor let us give occasion by our wickedness to bring the Law into contempt, and to provoke the revenging Sword, but rather being made better through our fears, endeavour to obtain praise from the higher Powers. Decies repetite placebit. I wish I could say of our Author, Et hinc illae Lacrymae; but our Author hath other thoughts: he thinks he hath much obliged the whole Nation, turning their Mourning into Mirth, and instructing them, after the new fashions of Rome and France, to exchange their Prayers and Tears for Fire and Sword, for Gunpowder, Pistols, Poniards? and therefore he first says it was a Christian that killed Julian; and from Zozomen, that he was to be commended for the fact, p. 60, 61.  
Sigebert, in his Chron. ad Anno 1088. tells us, That this novelty, that I say not Heresy, was not yet risen up in the world, that the Priests of God (who saith to a King Remove, and maketh an Hypocrite to reign for the sins of a people) should teach the people that they own no subjection to wicked Kings; and though they have given an Oath of Fidelity to them, yet they own no Fidelity to them; nor are to be accounted perjured, though they fight against them; and that he that obeyeth the King shall be excommunicated, and he that opposeth him shall be absolved from the guilt of Injustice and Perjury. So that although these Ancient Bishops were never in Scotland, yet a man may think our Scotizing Presbyters have been at Rome; whose Principles and Practices run such parallels, as would fill a bigger Volume than I intent.  
I shall only show, that the Fathers give us a better Form of praying for Kings than your Directory doth; and the Law of God and Man enjoins us Uniformity in the use of it.  
Tertul. Apol. c. 31, etc. You that say we regard not the welfare of Caesar, look into our Scriptures, which command us to pray for our Enemies and Persecutors, especially that we pray for Kings, and all in authority: For with them the whole Empire is shaken, and we ourselves as Members thereof are in hazard: therefore we sacrifice for the safety of the Emperor, but to God; and as God hath commanded, with pure Prayer we pray for them and their Officers and Magistrates, for faithful Armies, seasonable Times, and a quiet Age, etc. Having our arms spread to God, let Hooks tear us, Crosses hang us, etc. a praying Christian is prepared for any torment: Come then, you Praefects, and force out our Souls praying for the Emperor.  
Athenagoras in his Apology to M. Aurelius: We pray for your Empire, that the Son (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) as it is most just, may succeed the Father in the Kingdom, and that your Empire may increase and flourish; all being subject to you: which would be much for our good, that we leading a quiet and peaceable life, may readily obey you in all your commands.  
St. Cyprian to Demetrian: We pray day and night, propitiating and appeasing God for your peace and safety, and that the Reign of Valerian and Galen may continue unshaken. So Eusebius observes, l. 6. c. 11. Eccl. Hist. of Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria, That he prayed for the same Emperors, that their Kingdom might continue. St. Sebastian lived under Dioclesian and Maximian, and fought for them, and prayed; and assures us, the rest of the Soldiers did the like. The Priests of the Temples do possess your Majesty's minds (saith he) with unjust surmises, as if we (the Christians) were Enemies to the Commonwealth; whereas by our Prayers the Commonwealth is bettered and increased: for we cease not to pray for your Empire, and the safety of the Roman Army. See Surius on Jan. 20.  
Optatus, l. 3. contra Parmen. The Apostle teacheth us to pray for Kings and those that are in Authority, etiamsi talis eslet Imperator qui Gentiliter viveret, though he were a Pagan. The Council of Paris 6th, p. 534. of the Second Tome of the French Councils: If Jeremy the Prophet admonished to pray for the Life of Nebuchadonozor that Idolatrous King, how much more ought Supplications to be made for all Christian Kings? Aphraates a zealous Christian, being demanded by Valens an Arian Emperor, whither he went; I am going (saith he) to pray for your Empire. Theophilus' Bishop of Antioch: I will honour the King, not adoring him, but praying for him.  
So likewise in the Preamble of the Council of Agatha, where the Catholic Bishops pray for an Arian King after this manner: With Knees bended on the ground, we pray for the continuance of your Kingdom and People; that as you have granted us liberty to assemble ourselves, so God would extend your Kingdom with Happiness, govern it with Justice, and protect it with Virtue. Prooemium Synodi Agathensis.  
When by the instigation of Pope Paschal the Second, the Emperor was unjustly deprived, the Church of Liege blame the Pope for it, saying, If he were such as you describe him, yet should we suffer him to reign over us, because our Sins have deserved it; and such a Prince ought not to be repelled by taking Arms against him, but by pouring out our Prayers. Resp. Eccles. Leoardensis ad Epistolam Pasch. 2d.  
So that whether our Author will or no, it will still be owned as a Maxim among Christians, Preces & lachrymae sunt Arma Ecclesiae. Prayers and Tears are the Church's Artillery; and your new MILITIA will never prevail against this COMMISSION OF ARRAY.   

An Answer to our Author's CHAP. VII. Julian's Death.  
THis Chapter is mostly the relation of two wonderful discoveries of Julian's Death; the one of a Christian Schoolmaster, (for it seems the Christians at Antioch, though it were the place that Julian most hated, had Christian Masters to instruct their Children) who being asked by Libanius the Sophister what the Carpenter's Son was doing, answered, He is making a Coffin. And yet perhaps he thought no more of Julian's death than Libanius, whose expression of a Carpenter's Son might give occasion to such a Reply.  
Then for his other story of his double St. Julian Sabba, (for our Author hath Sainted him before and behind); That he whilst he was praying should be in a Trance, and cry out, The wild Boar, the Enemy of the Lords Vineyard, hath suffered the punishment of his faults, and lies dead: I cannot admit such Miracles into my Creed 〈◊〉 but look on them no otherwise than such conjectures as Julian himself made, when at the fall of the man that lifted him up to his horse, he cried out, He that raised me up is fallen; and as the Historian says, Constantius died at that very time. But the merriest Scene is behind, p. 58. That as soon as the Christians at Antioch heard of it, they had public joyful meetings, and had not only Dances in the Churches and Chapels of their Martyrs, (and then likely they had the music of Organs, or some other instruments too) but likewise in the Theatre they proclaimed the Victory of the Cross. Such Thanksgivings we had in this Nation at the Butchery of the Royal Martyr. But though they brought their Horse-guards into St. Paul's, I do not find they danced in the Churches.  
The manner of his death our Author reports, p. 59 as an uncertainty, but jumps in his Opinion with the Heathen Libanius, that he who killed him was a Christian, although I have quoted two Authors who aver that it was done by the hand of an Enemy: Yet to serve his Hypothesis, that it is lawful for a Christian to kill a Heathen Emperor, he will needs cast it on the Christians.  
Yet our Author, p. 60. says, Truly this is a strange concession: but that which we may more wonder at, is, that Zozomen should justify such a traitorous Assassination, as he doth (in these words, p. 60.) It is not improbable that some one of the Soldiers might take into consideration how the Heathens and all men to this day do still praise those who long since have killed Tyrants, as men that were willing to die for the Common Liberty, and defended in that manner their Country men, Kinsmen, and Friends: and you can hardly blame him who shows himself so courageous for God, and for that Religion which he approves; in Zozomen's words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (i. e.) quam colebat, referring not to God, but the Votary. And then at this rate, the Murder of the two Henry's of France, and that of our Royal Sovereign may be justified, by our Author's Rule, because they were slain as Enemies to that Religion which their Assassinates professed: A very dangerous insinuation this, and not fit to be presented to such a Prince as Theodosius was. Yet that Author speaks of the Opinion of the Heathen Greeks, and of slaying Tyrants in the days of old (not after Christianity prevailed, that teacheth a contrary behaviour.)  
They were the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and they were Heathens that commended them: for the ancient Greek Cities had wholly rejected the Government of Kings, and set up Aristocracy or Democracie, so that in time the word Tyrannus, which in a good old sense signified a King, was by them generally used for a Tyrant or Oppressor; and if any such attempted the reducing their Popular Government into Monarchy, they thought it lawful to kill them. But will this warrant a Clement or Ravilliack to assassinate their Prince; or a High Court of Justice to murder their King? If Zozomen or our Author mean this, I look on them as Heathen Greeks still, of whom it hath been observed, Inter Regem & Tyrannum non discernunt Graii. Lampridius wondered that no man slew Heliogabalus the Tyrant, Cum Neroni, Vitellio, Caligulae, caeterisque hujusmodi nunquam Tyrannicida defuerit. But no such thing was attempted by good Christians.   

An Answer to our Author's CHAP. VIII. How they used his Memory.  
DE mortuis nil nisi bonum: That we ought to speak well of the dead, or nothing, is a Rule commonly received by all men. To trample on a dead Lion is no point of valour, much less to rail at them that have received the just punishment of their sins. Such language therefore as Gregory useth, and our Author would have inscribed on Julian 's Pillars long after his death, was as unseasonable, as it would have been offensive in his life-time, viz. p. 63. Thou Persecutor next to Herod, thou Traitor next to Judas, (only thou hast not testified thy Repentance by hanging thyself) thou killer of Christ after Pilate, and next to the Jews thou hater of God. These are very hard names in the mouth of a Divine, concerning a dead Emperor.  
Well may our Author say he is weary of such reproachful and ignominious Titles which the Christian Tongues lavishly bestowed on him. Doubtless you cannot find in all the rest of the Ecclesiastical Historians such as these: and if an Index expurgatorius had passed only on such Sentences, it would have been less culpable than it is.  
But what Protestants (say you) ever treated their worst Persecutors at this rate? Shall I tell you again what sort of Protestants treated not a Persecutor, but a meek and gracious Prince, at a far worse rate? And who ever called Queen Mary Mad Bitch? Sir, you do very ill to prepare such expressions for the Vulgar: Children are too apt to learn naughty things of their Teachers. Some have called a Queen of England by the names of Proserpina, and Lupam Anglicanam; which I forbear to English. But what little reason there was for all these passionate Expressions, you show us in the next.   

An Answer to our Author's CHAP. IX. Reflections on the Behaviour of those Christians.  
JUlian 's Persecution was but a Flea-biting to what the Christians formerly felt; a short and weak assault of the Devil; so that if any fell from Christianity, they were ridiculously overcome; and if they persevered, it was no great matter to lose a Trade or Profession for their Religion;— and this was the greatest severity (says our Author) of all Julian 's Edicts.— To speak properly, he was rather a Tempter than a Persecutor; seducing some with Money, others with Places of Trust and Honours of all sorts; others by the witchcraft of his words, and by his own example.— And as for what he designed against Christianity, it was far short of what other Emperors had executed. So far our Author, whom I must name, lest you should not think it his: For how could the man of such a Character deserve all those virulent expressions of Gregory (of which before) or those rudenesses of some Christians which follow in our Author? p. 66. How do the Christians treat this Emperor, reproaching him, ruffling with him, vexing every vein in his royal Heart, saying all their Prayers backwards, calling down vengeance upon his head, dancing and leaping for joy at his death, and insulting over his memory; calling him by the bloodiest names of the Devil! P. 67. and (pray mark them, they are our Author's words) But for he name of Christians, he had better fallen among Barbarians. And would our Author have these to be examples for true Protestants?  
But doth not our Author also say his lesson backward, and write a Panegyric for Julian, and Invectives against Christians? Or is it his meaning, that if a Prince incline (though but a little) to Tyranny or Irreligion, it is lawful to use him as those Christians did Julian? He doth plainly at once Calumniate the whole body of Christians and their Teachers in that Age, from the mis-behaviours of a few; and seeks to debauch the present Generation, which are too bad already.  
Julian taught better Doctrine to them that were his Christian Subjects, (though he did it spitefully— Not to avenge themselves, not to go to Law, nor render evil for evil, but pray for and wish well to their persecutors) than you do for their behaviour towards their Princes, and that spitefully enough: for this (as you acknowledge) is a right course to gloss away all their duty, and to break all the measures by which all the Ancient and Suffering Christians have gone in all former persecutions. And doth it become a Christian, or a Divine, one that would be numbered among the more peaceable and stricter sort of his Brethren, to vent such things? What? to deride the prayers and tears, the faith and patience of Martyrs and Confessors, and to applaud the insolences and extravagancies of the seditious Rabble? Let me whisper it softly in your ear: I think Julian the Apostate did less prejudice the Christian Religion, than such a one as Lucian the Scoffer. Mr. Baxter, Christian Direct. p. 20. I do not think Nero or Dioclesian martyred near so many, as the People turned lose would have done. Much more was Julian a Protector of the Church from popular rage, etc. And you shall sooner wash a Black-more white, than cleanse yourself from that Contagious Leprosy which overruns your whole Book: (and I pray God it hath not seized on your Heart), which you do in vain endeavour by the following Discourse; which I now consider.  
P. 68 you say, The truth of the Matter is this: Their case differed very much, and they were in quite other circumstances than the first Christians were. When Julian came to the Crown, he found them in full and quiet possession of their Religion, which they had enjoyed without interruption for almost fifty years, and which was such an inestimable blessing, that they had plainly undervalved it, if they had not done their utmost to keep it: and then to have this treasure wrested out of their hands by one bred up in the bosom of the Church, who professed himself a Christian, and never pulled off his Masque till it was too late for them to help themselves; this was enough to raise not only all their Zeal, but all their Indignation too. Your almost saves your computation of fifty years wherein the Christians enjoyed a full and quiet possession of their Religion without interruption, from a great Untruth: for it was a good while after Constantine came to the Empire, that he did or could show any great favour to the Christians, he being brought up under Dioclesian, and not being baptised himself until towards the end of his Reign. That he banished Athanasius the great Pillar of the Christian Religion, is not to be denied; nor that Constantius was himself an Arian, and promoted those destructive errors in such a manner, as that the Orthodox Bishops whom Constantius had banished, and were recalled by Julian, seemed to be in a better condition under him than under Constantius; many Bishops being banished for refusing to subscribe against Athanasius and his Creed in the Council of Milan: And Athanasius, with many others of his persuasion, lived in desert places until the death of Constantius. So that though the fifty years did run out at length; yet in all Constantius his time, which was reckoned above twenty years, the Orthodox were mightily afflicted by the Arians, Donatists, and Circumcellians. And you may as well say the Church of England had a full and quiet possession of their Religion without interruption in the times of our late Confusion, when every Mushrome-Sect sprung up above it, as that it was so with the Primitive Christians during the time of Constantius.  
I might add much more; but desire the Reader to be satisfied with that one instance of the Arians dealing with old Hosius a Bishop of a hundred years old; whom in a Council of theirs at Sirmium they so tormented, that they forced him to subscribe to them to save his life. And how ill it was with others, even in the days of Constantine, see the History of the Donatists lately printed.  
But then for the poor Primitive Christians of all, they were born to Persecution; they neither knew better, nor expected it— The Laws of the Empire were always in force against them— their Religion at best was in the world but upon sufferance, as Abraham in the Land of Canaan, where he had no Inheritance, no not so much as to set his foot on. But as his afflicted Posterity were afterward Lords of that Country, so after another Egyptian Bondage, Christianity was advanced to be the established Religion of the Empire. All this, and much more, is but Mr. Hunt's Argument in other words: for p. 46. he says, The Reformed Religion hath acquired a civil Right, and the protection of Laws: if we ought not to lose our Lives, Liberties and Estates, but where forfeited by Law, we ought much rather not to lose them for the profession of the best Religion, which by Law is made the public National Religion. And it is strange that some men of the same Religion in profession, can think (that notwithstanding) it makes no matter what is done to a man if he be Religious; but if he be not so, the least public injuries and injustice may be resisted, vindicated, remedied, and by right defended by old Laws, or new ones to be made for that purpose. The Christian Religion was published when the whole world was Pagan, and therefore it was submitted to such usage as the Governors would give it. But when the Christian Faith had by Miracles of patience declared itself to be of Heaven, according to the Prophecies on that behalf, it took possession of the Empire, and Crowns and Sceptres became submitted to the Cross; and the Christians acquired a civil Right of protection and immunity, which they ought not, they cannot relinquish and abandon, no more than they can destroy themselves. Such as thus perish, shall never wear a Martyr's Crown, but perish in the next world for perishin in this. This will be interpretatively Crucifying Christ afresh, after that he is received up into Glory, (i. e.) after his Religion is exalted into Dignity, Honour, and civil Authority, etc.  
Thus far Simeon and Levi are agreed; and these were precious hints to our Julian; for till he hit on this new Notion, there was nothing in the whole Book, that favoured of Common sense, or had any show of Reason; but his Pages, as the Builders of Babel, misunderstand one another; and what one builds up, the other throws down; and after a long evaporation of smoke and ashes, and sometimes fire, (as ancient Historians relate of Aetna) our modern Historian makes the same Mountain to pour out such a deluge of Water as drowns all the Faith and Patience Christian men, and leaves only Julian to triumph at the overthrow of Christianity.  
If these men be not in too great haste, and their Gild and Fears drive them not into Corners, I would expostulate with them a while: Can the Laws of men make void the Law of God? and have you Authority to distinguish where the Law of God makes no distinction? Doth not that speak plain, that we must submit not only to Masters that are good and gentle, but also to the froward, 1 Pet. 2.18. and to Parents that correct us according to their pleasure: and the believing Wife is to submit herself to her unbelieving Husband in every thing, Eph. 5.24. not contrary to God's Word? and is it not true, that what is said of the submission of Servants, Children, and Wives, the same may be said of Subjects? as St. Augustine affirms, after Gregory Nazianzen. Was a Heathen Emperor to be submitted to in all things, and not a Christian? Shall the Privileges which Christian Princes grant us, be used as Weapons to fight and rebel against them? Was it lawful for the Catholics to rebel against Constantius when he was a declared Heretic, and by great violence promoted that damnable Heresy, as Bishop Usher calls it, suppressing and banishing the Orthodox, and setting up the Arian? Is it not said, that if we suffer wrongfully, (i. e. against Law and Equity) and take it patiently, this is thankworthy with God?  
Can you without Sacrilege take away the Crowns from all the Martyrs that died ever since julian's time, and tell us they died like Fools or mad men, and were feloes de se, for not selling their Lives at a dearer rate, and like Samson, pull down the Pillars of the Empire, with an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, If I must perish, let the whole world perish with me! Or can you think that they perished in the next world for perishing in this, when Christ tells them, he that loseth his life shall save it? If it be unjust in the Prince to deprive us of our Rights against the Law of the Land, is it not much more so, for us to deprive him of his against the Law of God, as well as that of the Land too? And have we not generally (I mean the Clergy at least) Subscribed, That it is not lawful, upon any pretence whatsoever, (not of Religion, nor of the Laws) to take up Arms? etc. Non debet minor potestas irasci, si major praelata sit: The Laws of the Land must give place to the Law of God.  
The contrary to all these, are the monstrous Consequences of your new distinction, that allows of Rebellion when we suppose the Laws of the Land to be on our side: I say, suppose them; for Wars have been raised and maintained on such a false Supposition. And if when the Prince declares that he doth and will govern by the known Laws, we shall Remonstrate that he doth not, and suggest our groundless and unreasonable Fears and Jealousies that he will not; who shall be Judge in this Case? Shall the people take the Sword in their hands to cut this Gordian-knot, and cut us all in pieces? We have (God be thanked) many good Laws for our security, and a gracious Prince that hitherto hath and will govern by them: but we have one great Law of God, and another of the Land, that though he should not, yet we may not rebel.  
That excessive commendation which our Author gives of Constantius, makes me think he hath exceeded also in the dispraise of Julian, p. 70. Never any man in this world set his heart so much upon any other thing, as he did to see the Christians flourish, and to have all the advantages of glory and power: And neither conquered Nations, nor a well-governed Empire, nor great Treasures, nor excessive Glory, nor being King of Kings, nor all other things which make up other men's notions of Happiness, did delight him so much, as to have the honour of bringing honour to the Christians, and of leaving them established for ever in the possession of Power and Authority. And yet as it was said of Naaman that mighty man of Valour, But he was a Leper: so it is recorded of Constantius, he was an Arian, and persecuted the Church of God.  
I think I have said enough already to confute the insignificant Instances produced by our Author, when I gave you the more sober sense of St. Gregory himself, of St. Basil, Ambrose, and Bernard, all which lived when they had the Laws on their side, and the best Religion in the world to defend; and yet they durst not do it by the Sword, if they could have done it; for I shall not now question their power; Tertullian did assert that of old, and the Learned Hammond hath put the truth of it out of question, in his Answer to Mr. Stephen Marshal.  
But says our Author, p. 70. For Julian, who by his Baptism first, and entering into Orders after, and going to Church after that, sufficiently engaged himself to maintain Christianity; to endeavour on the other hand to dispossess them of their Freehold, is an insupportable injury. It was so indeed: and I would have our Author consider, whether for a man that hath been received into the Bosom of the Church, and hath eaten of her Bread, and approved of her Doctrine, to become an Apostate from that holy Profession, and expose that Church and Christianity itself to scorn and contempt, be not to outdo Julian.  
I shall desire the Reader patiently to look on, while I remove those few Blockadoes which our Author hath laid in my way; and then I shall attack that enchanted Castle, wherein those two Giants think themselves so secure, as to laugh at all opposition that can be made against them. That of Juventinus and Maximus, mentioned a third time in p. 72. is already levelled: if there were a Sham-plot against them, our Author seems to be one of their accusers for talking too boldly against the Emperor, which they utterly denied. A second Sham-plot was of Sacrilege, p. 72. but I see no man concerned in that; neither shall I fight with Shadows, as our Author doth.  
P. 73. Old Bracton is conjured up; and he presently flies in the face of the Conjurers, and tells them, that when Laws are made by. the consent of the people and the Royal Authority, they cannot be altered or destroyed without the joint consent of all those by whom they were concerned: And yet the Laws of Queen Elizabeth for keeping her Subjects in due obedience are exploded as some of the Grievances of the Nation. With what face can they plead the Laws of the Land for their security, who daily violate and contemn them, and teach others to do so?  
And in p. 74. our Author is surprised with the Thebaean Legion, which appeared to him as a Legion of Noonday Devils; and he wonders who should raise them up: he cries out as that Legion, Matth. 8.22. Art thou come to torment us? What have we to do with thee, O Thebaean Legion! what have we to do with their Example! No, I'll warrant my Author he shall never die for his Religion as they did, he hath parted with that already for fear of what might come. And this Thebaean Legion is such a terrible immortal Army, as will defeat all Rebels to the world's end. Are we (says our Author) to go to Mass to morrow, or else to have our Throats cut? No; nor are we to cut our Prince's Throat to day, for fear lest he should compel us to go to Mass to morrow. Such fears were as groundless in the days of Charles the First, as of Charles the Second, yet we see what was then done.  
Again, Are we under a Sentence of Death according to the Laws of our Country, if we do not presently renounce our Religion? No; but if we presently renounce our Religion, as our Author hath done, and then contrive a Rebellion, we are under a Sentence of a twofold death; one by the Law of God, and another by the Law of Man. The Thebaean Legion so frighted our Author, that he cannot get them out of his mind: Poor men they were! to sacrifice or be sacrificed! They never heard the Doctrine of Resistance preached to them, but professed another Doctrine which they received according to the commandment of Christ, and practised after his example, suffering patiently for well doing. They never were in Scotland, to learn that there was a reward due to them that should kill tyrannical Princes: They never had the examples of a Christians killing Julian, and being commended for it in Ecclesiastical History. These glorious lights and achievements were reserved for our blessed Age, whereof (notwithstanding) the Scripture foretold, that in the latter days there should be traitors, heady, high minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God, having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof. And many such who have called themselves good Protestants, have made a shift to die in Rebellion under the pretence of their Religion.  
But the comfort is, as our Author says, That can never happen to us, but by our own treachery to our Religion, in parting with those good Laws which protect it, and in agreeing to those that shall destroy it. What needs then all these Celeusma's and barbarous clamours of Ho-up against a Popish Successor which may never come; or if he should, can never do us hurt without our own consent? Queen Marry herself could not so much as out a Parish-Priest, till she had procured a Parliament for her turn; and still kept the Church-lands, and by Parliament had the Supremacy settled on her as far as any of her Predecessors enjoyed it. And if such things can never happen but by our treachery in parting with those good Laws as protect our Religion, and agreeing to such as shall destroy it, why are we so willing to part with those, whereby that otherwise-impregnable Fortress and Bulwark against Popery is preserved, and to make new ones for Comprehension, Indulgence, and Toleration, even of Popery itself, as well as other Sects and Factions? which is the ready way cast up by our Adversaries to bring us to confusion. When it is come plainly to this Dilemma, That we must agree to obey our Superiors, or perish; we must agree among ourselves as Brethren, or be swallowed up by a common Enemy: Yet no Law of God or man can prevail to keep us in obedience to our Governors, or Charity among our selves; Is not this as near a way to ruin, as our Adversaries can chalk out?  
P. 76. It is a general Notion among the Fathers, that we ought to spare our persecutors, and not suffer them to be guilty of Murder: Gregory gives that as a very good reason of Marcus his flight from Arethusa. Gregory gives a better reason than that, viz. that he was moved by that Precept of our Saviour, Matth. 10.23. When you are persecuted in one City, flee ye to another; and p. 88 he foresaw, that if he had tarried, the people might for his defence have risen against the Officers and Soldiers of the Emperor; and if they had died then, they had been feloes de se. To prevent their destruction therefore, as well as the guilt of their Persecutors, he quietly yielded himself into their hands; and though he endured great torments, yet, as if he had been a felo de se, is he as little pitied by Gregory as by his Persecutors: for Gregory having noted that this Mark was one of them that saved Julian's life when Gallus was slain; for this one thing (saith Gregory) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he suffered those things deservedly, and was worthy to have suffered more. This Passive Obedience is an abominable thing!  
In the same p. he relates a passage of Chrysoslom, and infers from it, that David meant no more than only to prevent the effusion of innocent blood, as appears by the several opportunities he had to cut off Saul, but the sense of his duty made him to abhor the least thought of it. This I like so well, that I shall transcribe a little more concerning David's behaviour towards Saul, out of the excellent Book of Homilies. P. 287. Now let David answer to such demands as men desirous of Rebellion do use to make: Shall not we, being so good men as we are, rise and rebel against a Prince hated of God, and God's enemy? and therefore likely not to prosper either in war or peace? but to be hurtful and pernicious to the Commonwealth? No, saith good and godly David, Gods and such a Kings faithful Subject: and so convicting such Subjects as attempt any Rebellion against such a King, to be neither good subjects nor good men. But say they, Shall we not rise and rebel against so unkind a Prince, nothing considering and regarding our true faith and painful Service, nor the safe guard of our posterity? No, saith good David, whom no such unkindness could cause to forsake his due Obedience to his Sovereign. Shall we not, say they, rise and rebel against our known mortal and deadly enemy that seeks our lives? No, saith good David, who had learned that lesson which our Saviour afterward plainly taught, that we should do no hurt to our fellow-subjects, though they hate us and be our enemies; much less to our Prince, though he were our enemy. Shall not we assemble an Army of such good fellows as we are, and by hazarding our lives, and the lives of such as stand with us, and withal hazarding the State of our Country, remove so naughty a Prince? No, saith godly David; for I when I might, without assembling force, without tumult, or hazard of any man's life, or shedding a drop of blood, have delivered myself and Country of an evil Prince, yet would I not do it. Are not they, say some, lusty and courageous Captains, that do venture to kill and depose their King, being a naughty Prince, and their mortal enemy? They may be as courageous as they list, yet, saith godly David, they can be no good or goodly men that so do; for I not only have rebuked, but commanded him to be stain as a wicked man, which slew King Saul my enemy, though he being weary of his life, desired that man to slay him. What shall we then do to an evil and unkind Prince, an enemy to us, hated of God, hurtful to the Commonwealth? etc. Lay no violent hands upon him, saith good David, but let him live until God appoint and work his end by natural death, or in War by lawful enemies, not by traitorous subjects. So far our Homily: and if good and godly men answered No to all these Questions, they are not of the godly party, though they call themselves so, who answer Yea to them; although it be not against a wicked, malicious, and Apostate Prince, as Saul was, but a pious and gracious one.  
P. 77. We are to suffer persecution 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if need be, as St. Peter's words are, and not else. Now I humbly conceive, seeing the Writ De Haeretico comburendo is taken away in time, and the Laws protect us in our Religion, it is a needless thing to go to Smithfield, and there be burnt for an Heretic. It is better, if it pleased God, that we should die as Heretics, if with St. Paul we truly worship God in a way that is so called, than to go to Tyburn and be hanged as Traitors and Regicides— For, though that Law be taken away, yet the Law of God stands firm, which enjoins us to submit ourselves not only for fear, but for Conscience sake; and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in St. Peter in the case of our submission for Conscience sake as well as for fear of wrath, is determined by St. Paul with an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ye must needs be subject.  
P. 77. And so far it is fit to inform the Popish Crew; lest they should be mistaken in the good Protestant Religion of our good Church, as Coleman calls it. I pray let them not be informed that we obey more for fear than for Conscience sake; No, nor that we are afraid to die for our Religion of God call us to do it. As to your Parenthesis that we have no apprehension of persecution from any other quarter; I tell you, we have felt a greater persecution in our Age from Geneva, than from Rome; and if the one have since the Reformation in this Nation killed a thousand, the other have slain ten thousand.  
Your next Reflection is on the Pulpit-law (as you say the Lord Faulkland called it) of Sibthorp and Manwaring, and complained it had almost ruined the Nation. That noble Lord was indeed a great lover of his Religion and Country, and therefore was an enemy to Arbitrary Government. But when he perceived that the outcry against arbitrary power in the King, was made with a design to grasp it into other men's hands; and they began to exercise it not only on the Gentry, Clergy, and Nobility of the Land, but the Royal Family also; he repent, and so faithfully adhered to the King in defence of his Authority, that he lost his life in the Quarrel. It was the Pulpit-law in 41. and 42. that destroyed us, and brought in Arbitrary Power.  
But how near doth our Author come to put a border of Treason on his impolitic discourse, p. 78. where he says, The Arbitrary Doctrine of those times, (to which both he and Mr. Hunt impute the beginning of the Late War) did not bring any great terror with it; it was then but a Rake, and served only to scrape up a little paltry passive money: But now it is become a Murdering-piece loaden with I know not how many bullets. Who are they, I wonder, that preach up such an arbitrary Power? or who are they that make such a Murdering-piece of it? Is it not rather a Fiction of some men, who would find a pretence for a second War?  
For if, as Mr. Hunt says, p. 52. That the Panic fear of a change of the Government that this Doctrine (to wit, of Arbitrary Power before 41.) occasioned, and the Divisions it made among us, was the principal cause of the Late War, is it not evident that the same fears are now made Panic or Popular, to prepare the hearts of the People for another War? What else mean the bleat of the Sheep, and the lowing of Oxen? the Vulgar Murmurs, and loud Cries of the Multitude, as if it were intended we should be ruled by a Standing Army, and That his Majesty's Guards are a grievance; That the dissolution of a Parliament gave us cause to fear that the King had no more business for Parliaments? Hunt, p. 22. and p. 60. of our Author, That Parliaments should sit till they have done that for which they were called, (i. e. says our Author in his Marginal Note) till all Grievances are redressed, and Petitions answered. And then for aught I know, they might sit for ever, and so no more need of a King. What means the denying him a Supply, when Tangier was like to be lost? and not only withholding their own, but denying him to dispose of his Credit or Revenues for his just occasions? What mean our new Associations and Bandying into Parties, and advice even to the Clergy, not to suspend all the legal security they have upon the life of our present King? Hunt, p. 49. All these strongly argue that they have a suspicion of Arbitrary Power; and that, by our Author's confession, was in 41, (and therefore may be suspected to be made use of now as) an incitement to Rebellion.  
And though our Author (p. 78.) confesseth, That the malignity of this Doctrine cannot be discovered under his Majesty's gracious Reign; yet he thinks fit to put him in mind of the Security he hath given the Nation by his Coronation-Oath, which all Protestant Prince's value & look upon as Sacred; and likewise of many gracious Promises that he will govern according to Law. All this caution argueth more than Suspicion, it looks like an Accasation; though I know no defect, but the neglect of executing the Laws against Transgressor's. But if it do not fall out in his Majesty's Reign, it will appear in its colours, and we may feel the sting of it, if it please God so sharply to punish us for our sins, as to let us fall under a Popish Successor, p. 78, 79. We have (I confess) deserved such a punishment, for kicking against our Protestant Princes: but by the blessing of God, we may not have such a One: For who shall be King or Queen of this Realm of England hereafter (you tell us) none but God himself knows, p. 21. of the Preface.  
But you tell us of another may be; the Successor may be a Papist, and then he may persecute: but he may not be; or if he be so, yet I have proved he may not persecute; and our Author hath granted, p. 75. That it can never happen but by our own Treachery, etc. Such a formidable Persecution as you suggest, is a thing impracticable, and morally impossible: it hath never yet been acted by any Prince, Papist or Heathen: the Marian Tempest did not so destroy Protestants, though it had been but newly planted, but in Queen Elizabeth's Reign it grew up again, and covered the Land in a few days. Now to disturb our Peace and Settlement with two such may be's as are more likely may not be; to suppose such things as are morally impossible, is unreasonable, and to fear where no fear is, (saith Mr. Hunt, p. 250.)  
But such suppositions as our Author makes, ought not at all to be supposed: for there is greater hurt to be feared from them, (as Mr. Faukner says, p. 545. of his Christian Loyalty) than from the thing supposed; since it is much more likely that such designs should be imagined and believed to be true, when they are false (as they were in the unjust Outcries against our late gracious Sovereign) than that they should be certainly true: And every good man, yea every reasonable man, may have as great confidence that no such Case will really happen, as can be had concerning the future state and condition of any thing in this world. For which he there gives many Reasons, to which I refer the Reader, and proceed.  
P. 80. In this case (says our Author) all Protestants cannot fly— and many may be persuaded not to fly. And men are taught that the Gospel doth prescribe no other remedy but slight, allowing no other means between denying and dying for the Faith. It is certain this is the special remedy prescribed by our Saviour, though there be other means which may be as effectual as this; Prayers and Tears, and Fasting and Humiliation have done mighty wonders. When God by Joel (cap. 22.) threatened his People with an Enemy great and strong, there hath not been ever the like, neither ever shall be, even to the years of many Generations; the chief means prescribed by God himself, you may see was this, vers. 12. Therefore now, saith the Lord, turn ye unto me with all your heart, and with fasting, weeping, and mourning: who knoweth if he will return and repent, and leave a blessing behind him? And vers. 17. Let the Priests the Ministers of the Lord weep between the Porch and the Altar, and let them say, Spare thy people, O Lord, and give not thy Heritage to reproach, that the heathen should rule over them. Wherefore should they say among the heathen, Where is their God? Then will the Lord be jealous over his Land, and spare his people. I hope our Author will not deride such Lachrymists: if he do, Solomon tells him who will laugh at him when calamity comes on him, Prov. 1.  
Again, Supplications and Petitions to our Kings may have the desired success: for hitherto the Kings of England have been merciful Kings; nor have any of them taken delight in shedding blood, or designed the general ruin of their people; their own interest being bound up in theirs. Magnanimo, satis est pros●…asse.  
Besides, it is the duty of the Chief Clergy to reprove them with meekness and lowliness, to mind them of a Superior Potentate who will judge all men without respect of persons; which is excellently done by Gregory, Orat. 17. You govern together with Christ, and reign with him; you are the Image of God, and should imitate him in showing mercy, and not the Devil in exercising cruelty; but should remember that he hath a Master in Heaven, who will so judge him as he doth the people committed to his charge. That whole Oration is worthy your perusal. When Theodosius had made a great slaughter among the Thessalonians, to the number of seven thousand, and coming afterward to the Church, St. Ambrose shuts the doors against him, and minds him of his Cruelty; and tells him, That from dust he came, and to dust he shall return: Let not therefore the brightness of thy clothes hid from thee the weakness of thy flesh that is under them. Thy subjects are of the same metal with thee, and serve the same Lord— wilt thou with those hands which yet drop with the blood of Innocents', receive the body of the Lord? Depart, and refuse not this sentence which the Lord doth ratify in Heaven. This wrought so with him, that he repent, and with much ado obtained Absolution.  
The Church of Liege wrote an Epistle to Pope Paschal, when he persuaded Robert Earl of Flanders to rebel against the Emperor, and invade his Dominions, wherein they told the Pope, That Princes must be admonished and reproved gently; and if they will not amend, are to be left to the just judgement of God. Omne sub Regno graviore Regnum— Reges in ipsos imperium est Jovis.  
To the Assertion of an unnamed Doctor, That the Gospel prescribes no other remedy but flight against the Persecutions of a lawful Magistrate, our Author answers, p. 80. It is one thing what the Gospel prescribes; what it allows, another. As if the Gospel did allow any thing contrary to its Precepts: This is that the Author would be at: for none ever questioned but things in their nature indifferent and expedient, are allowed by the Gospel without an express command. But that which this Author contends for, is Resistance of a lawful power in case of persecution; which is against many express Precepts of the Gospel. The Gnostics held it lawful (for the avoiding of persecution) to deny Christ, and to comply with either Jews or Gentiles. And to resist the Ordinance of God, rather than to suffer persecution, will be interpreted a denial and betraying of our Religion (i. e. of Christ himself). An Argument of so low a Spirit, as falls beneath the courage of a Heathen, or the hearty professors of any Religion. Seneca says of his wise man, Placebit ei ignis per quem bona fides collucebit; That he will embrace the Fire, rather than betray his Faith. And the Stoic says, Tormenta à me abesse velim, sed si sustinenda fuerint, ut me in illis fortiter, animosè, honestè geram, optabo. How is the valour of a Soldier known, but by following his Commander with a generous contempt of death? and shall the Christian Soldier that hath so good a Captain, be the only coward, and follow his Master at a distance, and utterly forsake him, when any Conflict is at hand?  
When therefore he demands by what Law we must die; I answer, By the Law of God: rather than resist a lawful Power, we must submit to the Will of God and our Saviour, who have promised, that he that loseth his life shall preserve it, Luke 17.33. and if we suffer, we shall also reign with him, 2 Tim. 2.12. And herein Christ himself hath given us an example, 1 Pet. 2.21. that we should walk in his steps; who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth: yet when he was reviled, he reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously. And to such a Passive Obedience we are called, saith the Apostle. And it is not our calling only, but an act of Grace and good will, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, given to us, as to believe in Christ, so to suffer for Christ's sake, Phil. 1.29. which they that refuse to do, are said to deny Christ. So that there is little difference between resisting the Command and Ordinance of Christ, and denying him: the sin is the same, and the punishment also; which St. Paul says is Damnation.  
P. 82. As for the King's Prerogative, I dare not be so bold with that as you are: the Disputes between that and Privilege have cost us dear already: if it were as well known as other parts of the Law are, you would not make so bold with it, though you set light by some other Laws. But even other parts of the Law, which are very well known and approved, are yet disobeyed, despised, and opposed, (as well as the King's Prerogative) and counted the Grievance of a great Party.  
P. 82. Old Bracton appears again, and is made to eat his own words: for whereas he had said of the King, That every one is under him, and he under none but God; and that he can have no equal in his Kingdom; for so he should lose his command, because one equal hath no power over another: now he is made to contradict himself, That Rex est sub lege, quia lex facit Regem, etc. which is utterly false, not only because the King's Predecessors came in by Conquest, but also because it is the Royal Assent that passeth all Bills into Laws. Mr. Baxter answers this, p. 14. part 4. of Christian Directory: That Lex being taken for the signification of the Sovereign's will to oblige the Subject, the Law doth not make the King, but the King the Law. For which he quoteth Grotius, lib. 8. p. 195. Neminem sibi imperare posse, à quo mutatâ voluntate nequeat recedere. And Grotius quotes S. Augustine, Imperatorem non esse subjectum Legibus suis. And doubtless this is true in every Free Monarchy; as England is by Historians and Lawyers granted to be.  
Now consider that Bracton wrote in the Reign of Henry the Third, when his Earls and Barons often confederated, and risen actual War against him, and made him to capitulate with them, having got the strength of the Nation in their hands; in favour of whom he seems to write, and calls them the King's higher Court: not (as some) higher than the King, but than other of the King's Courts. Yet was this no Parliament, for the Commons are not mentioned by Bracton. Now let any judge when Bracton was in the right, and when in the wrong opinion, by what followeth in the same Chapter: for as our Author blames the Doctor for not reading on; so do I much more blame him, because he came nearer to it. And thus Bracton says: Si autem ab eo peccatur, locus erit supplicationi quod factum suum corrigat & emendat: quod si non fecerit, satis sufficit ei ad poenam quod Dominum expectet Vltorem: Nemo quidem de factis suis praesumat disputare, multo fortius contra factum suum venire. (i. e.) If the King do offend, there is liberty of petitioning that he would amend what is amiss: which if he will not do, there is no punishment for the King, but to expect God to be his Avenger: but let no man presume to dispute of his do, much less to make opposition against what he doth. And this is agreeable to that Scripture, Eccles. 8.4. Who may say to him, What dost thou? If therefore we should grant it to be true what Bracton says, according to practice rather than Law, in those lawless times; yet Now, (as Plowden, as great a Lawyer as Bracton, says) the Case is altered: And the Oath of Supremacy against the Pope, which Bracton would by no means admit, and the Oath of Allegiance, and Act of Parliament for not taking up Arms on any pretence whatsoever, would have quite overthrown Bracton's Opinion, if he had not done it himself.  
Our Author seems to apply the Premises only against a Popish Successor; and freely grants, that when he is lawfully possessed of the Crown, he is inviolable, and unaccountable as to his own person, and aught by no means to have any violence offered to him, p. 84. To what purpose then hath he given Instances of reproach proachful and provoking Language, Prayers and Devotions that helped on his death, all for his Destruction, none for his Conversion; threatening to kick him, and (from Zozomen) encouraging the Assassination of him, when Julian was in quiet possession of the Empire?  
P. 94. You quote a Saying of Asterius; How great a resort is there from the Church to the Altars? etc. This is answered by Bishop Bilson, p. 502. of Christian Subjection: You find (saith he) that multitudes ran from Christ to Paganism after Julian, to Arianism after Valens; but do you find that the Godly did rebel against them? What presumption is this in you, to control the Wisdom and Goodness of God, sifting his Church by the rage and fury of wicked Princes, and crowning those that be his, as patiented in Trial and constant in Truth! Were you throughly persuaded that the hearts of Kings are in the hands of God, and that the hairs of our heads are numbered, so that no persecution can apprehend his, which he disposeth not for the experience of their faith, or recompense of their sins; you would as well honour the Justice of God in erecting Tyrants that our unrighteousness may be punished in this world, as embrace his Mercy in giving rest to his Church by the favour of good Princes. Experto Crede. This good Bishop says, We have these twenty seven years endured all sorts of calamities that may befall men in exile, therefore charge not us to be worldly minded, p. 501. See Mr. Baxter to this purpose, part 4. of the Christian Directory.  
What our Author says concerning Passive Obedience, p. 85. etc. shall be considered anon.  
P. 89. He is very angry that the Doctor should reflect on some dangerous Pamphlets, as that of the History of Succession, The Dialogue between Tutor and Pupil, and another that affirms, That Parliaments should sit till they have done that for which they were called. And contrariwise, so far commends the treasonable Popish book of Doleman, as that it was impossible to write a History of Succession, without borrowing from it. Their Tools are so dull, they must needs be beholding to the Philistines to set an edge on them upon their Whetstones of Lies and Forgeries. Quam bene conveniunt!  
P. 91. The Thebaean Legion, like a malus Genius, meets him again; and for their sakes, he is resolved rather to die a Murderer than a Martyr: for p. 85. he puts the Case, though he confesseth it to be a rare Case: for bad Princes seldom stoop so low as to be Executioners of their own cruelty. But the Question is, if they should, How far, notwithstanding, men may endeavour to save themselves without breach of their Allegiance, and of that true Faith and Loyalty which they ought to bear of life and limb, and terrene honour. If they have a mind to know, they may ask advice, (i. e.) How far, notwithstanding the Oath of Allegiance, men may resist their Prince. For the Author's part, he is resolved already, but will not discover to every one what is in his heart: if he thought it unlawful to resist the King's person, in case he should offer violence to a Subject, he would certainly have published it; but his Silence speaks his Consent. Now if the King be forced for his defence to take an armed Guard, as our Late Sovereign was; And our Author, with other Malcontents that think themselves highly wronged, because they are not rewarded according to their deserts, should meet him with another Armed Company, and fight him; he may kill his person, without breaking his Allegiance for bearing true Faith and Loyalty of life and limb, or any way injuring the King: for the King may be at Westminster, when they are fight against him in the Field; And it is not Julian they resist, but the Devil that is in him. And yet I suppose that our Author, as the Law requires, hath declared his abhorrence of that traitorous Position of taking Arms by his authority against his person, or against those that are commissionated by him. But where shall we go to be resolved in this weighty Case? shall we go to the Romish Casuists? they are positively for killing the King; Mariana, and Bellarmine, and many others, own it in divers cases. But we need not go so far; our Author hath, tanquam ex Tripod, determined it, in the Case of Julian, that such a King is to be pursued, as if he were a Midnight-Thief, or a Highway Robber, p. 73. and 'tis as lawful to destroy him, as for a hungry Welsh man to eat up his Cheese, and cry, Chud eat mere an chad it, p. 95. To this end Our Author quoteth Gregory calling on the Angels whose work it was to destroy the Tyrant, who had not killed a Sihon King of the Amorites, nor an Og the King of Basan, but (in so doing) had killed the Dragon, an Apostate, the great Designer, the common Enemy and Adversary of all, with an etc. p. 23. And again, p. 61. If any one had killed Julian, he was not to be blamed (no, but to be rewarded rather) as one who shown himself so courageous for God, and for that Religion which he approves. St. Chrysostom in his first Homily of David and Saul, teacheth another Doctrine: If we reverence and fear those Magistrates (saith he) that are elected by the King, although they be wicked, although they be Thiefs and Robbers, although they be unjust; and whatever they be, not despising them for their wickedness, but standing in awe of them for the dignity of him that did elect them; much more ought we thus to do in the Case of God. And Gregory Nazianzen speaks home to the Case, in that 27 Oration, p. 171. Continue faithful to your Kings; but first of all to God, and for him to them also, to whom you have been committed by him. And Elias Cretensis gives this Reason for it; Because if ye fear God, and studiously observe his Commandments, you will be faithful also to your Kings for God's sake. Now Julian's Soldiers, as our Author says, p. 8. were men principled in the true Religion, and therefore thought Julian stood in fear of them, as he says; yet they never did him hurt by Open Rebellion, or Secret Conspiracies: nor is our Author too old to learn of them.  
P. 92. He sums up the strength of what hath been said, in these Five  
PROPOSITIONS. ANSWER. 1. Christianity destroys no man's Natural or Civil Rights, but confirms them. 1. Christianity obligeth us to prefer our Spiritual and Eternal Rights above our Temporal and Civil. 2. All men have both a Natural and Civil Right and Property in their Lives, till they have forfeited them by the Laws of their Country. 2. Our Lives are to be parted with in obedience to God's Laws, though not forfeited by the Laws of our Country. 3. When the laws of God and of our Country interfere, and it is made death by the Law of the Land to be a good Christian, than we are to lay down our Lives for Christ sake. This is the only case wherein the Gospel requires Passive Obedience, namely, when the Laws are against a man. And this was the Case of the first Christians. 3. It is not the only Case wherein the Gospel requires Passive Obedience, when the Laws are against a man. There was no Law of the Romans by which Christ might be put to death; yet when he suffered, he threatened not, leaving us an example that we should follow his steps, 1 Pet. 2.19, 20, 21. and hereunto we are called. To what? to suffer, though wrongfully, v. 19 and take it patiently for Conscience sake towards God. 4. That killing of a man contrary to Law, is Murder. 4. If we suffer death wrongfully, it is Martyrdom, and acceptable to God, though it be Murder in our Enemies. 5. That every man is bound to prevent Murder, as far as the Law allows; and ought not to submit to be murdered, if he can help it. 5. We may so by our appeal to the Supreme Magistrate; as St. Paul, when he was like to be condemned contrary to Law, appealed to Caesar, having all the Law on his side, Acts 25.8. Neither against the Law of the Jews, nor against the Temple, nor yet against Caesar have I offended: yet doubtless if Caesar had condemned him, he would have patiently submitted, after the Example of his Master, though he could have had Legions of Angels to defend him.  
P. 93. Now I desire those men who of late have thundered in all public places with the Thebaean Legion, to keep that complete and admirable Example till they have got another Maximian, and till that Maximian hath got authority at once to cut 6666 throats.  
I think there was never more need than now, to press that noble Example: for though we have not a Maximian, but another Constantine set over us; no Julian that commands us to sacrifice to Idols, but One that makes it his business that we should all with one consent worship God and our Saviour in the beauty of Holiness. Though he have all the Laws of God and man to secure him from malicious and violent men, yet how are the tongues of wicked men sharpened against him, (and all his Ministers in Church and State!) How are all those devilish arts of Calumny and Reproach, the fears and jealousies of Arbitrary Power and Popery renewed, which encouraged a Rebellious multitude to the cutting of the throats not of one Legion, but of twenty at least; and the cutting off the head of a most incomparable Prince too! Would the Thebaean Legion, that laid down their lives at the Command of a Maximian, have murtered a word against so good a Governor? And when the same things are attempted a second time, shall we not bring forth the Thebaean Legion to withstand such impious practices, and rise up in judgement against them, who, notwithstanding the Laws of God and our Country too, would not only decimate us, but, if it were in their power, destroy us (as Nero wished that the Citizens of Rome had but one Neck, that he might cut them all off) at a stroke? I would gladly add the consideration of the Thundering Legion to this of the Thebaean: They by their Prayers obtained relief from Heaven, and Victory too, for the Army of a persecuting Heathen; we are taught to pray for the Confusion of a Christian Prince. But this shall suffice.  
Under those cruel Emperors, Dioclesian and Maximian, that most illustrious example of Passive Obedience presenteth itself to our view, which the Thebaean Legion shown, consisting of 6666 valiant Christians; the tenth man of whom when Maximian had caused to be executed for refusing to slay their Fellow-Christians, and to offer Sacrifice to his false Gods; Mauritius taking the rest of the Legion aside, used this Oration unto them (as Eucherius Archbishop of Lions relateth in the Acts of their Martyrdom.)  
I congratulate your Virtue, most worthy Fellow-soldiers, that for the love of Religion the Command of Caesar wrought no fear at all in you. You have seen your Fellow-soldiers, in a manner with rejoicing minds, to have been delivered up to a glorious death. How did I fear lest any of you, as it was easy for armed men to do (under pretence of Defence) should by lifting up his hands give interruption to their most blessed Funerals? I had now ready at hand for the forbidding this attempt, the Example of our Christ, who by the Command of his own mouth— Put up thy Sword which was unsheathed by his Apostle: teaching thereby, that the Virtue of Christian-Confidence is greater than all Weapons: here Christ our God did clearly Prohibit our minds and hands, that none with mortal hands should resist the Divine Work, but rather with ever-continued Religion add a consummation to the work begun. Hitherto we have read examples inserted into the Holy Scriptures, but even now we ourselves have beheld whom we ought to imitate.  
After this, Maximian having commanded a second decimation of those that remained, (among which it is likely that Mauritius suffered) Exuperius taking the Ensigns of his Legion, spoke thus:  
My most worthy Fellow-soldiers, I hold as you see the Ensigns of a secular warfare; but to those Arms I provoke you not: I excite not your Courage and Valour to such wars as these; another kind of fight is to be chosen by us. It is not by these Swords that you can make your way to the Kingdom of Heaven.  
And then wisheth this Message might be returned to the persecuting Emperor:  
We are thy Soldiers indeed; but withal, God's Servants: to thee we own our employment in the War, to him our Innocence; from thee have we received the reward of our labour, to him we are beholding for the beginning of our life: we cannot so follow thee in this, though our Prince, as to deny God who is our Maker, and, whether thou wilt or wilt not, is thine also— As for us, even this necessity of our Life doth not drive us to Rebellion— Despair itself, which most strengtheneth men in dangers, hath not been able▪ to arm us against thee. Behold, we have our Weapons, and yet resist not, as willing rather to die than overcome; and choosing rather to perish innocent, than live Traitors. If to what thou hast already decreed against us, thou wilt add more, be it Fire, Torture, or Sword, we are ready for it. WE ARE CHRISTIANS; and such as ourselves we cannot persecute. Consider, O Caesar, the courage of this Legion: our Weapons we cast away, and thy Executioner shall find our hands unarmed, but our breasts armed with the Catholic Faith. Kill us, down with us, without all fear; we offer our Necks to be cut off by the Swords appointed to slay us.  
And so they were all cut in pieces, and each of them were more than Conquerors, obtaining a Crown and Kingdom infinitely more glorious than that of the Roman Empire.  
Now suppose some Dissenting Apostate Chaplain of that noble Army, that had rather lose his Religion than his Life, and had more hopes to divide the spoils of a Temporal Crown, than to trust his Saviour for an entire Eternal one, had held forth▪ to them after this manner:  
My dearly beloved Brethren, fellow-soldiers and fellow-Saints, we have hitherto hazarded our Lives under a Pagan and Tyrannical Prince, who hath employed us as a Forlorn Hope on all desperate designs, purposely to destroy us; and though he be drunk with the blood of our Brethren now spilt before our Eyes, yet doth he thirst after ours also, having appointed us as so many Sheep for the Slaughter. Harken, my beloved, the Kings of the Earth ever were, and ever will be, Enemies to the King of Heaven: It is not I, but the Spirit of God by David tells you, The Kings of the Earth set themselves, and the Rulers take Counsel together against the Lord, and against his Anointed; but the same Spirit tells us, that notwithstanding, he hath set his King upon the holy hill of Zion, who shall break the Kings of the Earth with a Rod of Iron, and dash them in pieces like a Potter's Vessel; and his Saints shall have the honour of binding their Kings in Chains, and their Nobles with Fetters of Iron. Moreover, Brethren, we read how in old time, for the sake of his Elect, God reproved Kings, saying, Touch not mine Anointed, and do my Prophets no harm. It is true, that God hath appointed Government as his Ordinance, but he hath not tied us up to Monarchy, which all the Wise men of Greece have rejected, and called them all by the name they deserved, Tyrants. And though our Emperors came in upon us by Conquest and Surprise, yet we have been governed heretofore by a Senate; and sometime the Senate, and sometime the Soldiery have cut off their Emperors for their Arbitrary Government, and set up others in the room. So that if we grant the Office to be from God, yet the person appointed to that Office is a Creature of man, or a Humane Creature; and they that set them up, may pull them down; for they are appointed to be a terror to evil-doers, and to be the Ministers of God to us for our good: But when he is a Murderer of them that do well, as we see by this bloody Execution on our Fellow-soldiers, he is the Devil's Minister, not Gods; and in resisting, we fight not against him, but the Devil that is in him. Besides, that which this Tyrant intends, is such an arbitrary Act of his own, that the great Senate, whose Counsel and Authority he hath rejected, are afraid of the like cruelty, and would be glad to be restored to their Authority. Let us therefore be no longer Servants of such men, but stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free: Hath not he made us his Firstborn, higher than the Kings of the Earth? Are not we a Royal Priesthood? and have not the Saints a promise that they shall inherit the Earth? The Gentiles may permit Kings to exercise Lordship over them, but it ought not to be so with us, 'Tis in vain to expect till the Emperors become Christians; we Christians must make ourselves Emperors; at least we may divide the Empire among us, and set up Christ alone to rule as King in the midst of us, in a HOLY COMMONWEALTH. And now is the time, or never: If we should tamely submit to the Tyrant's Sword, our Religion, which is bound up in our Lives, will perish with us, and the Generations yet unborn will curse us. Did not Moses slay the Egyptian that assaulted his Brother? and were not the Israelites commanded to kill the Canaanites? What if some one of our number, who undervalues his Life, go and dispatch the Tyrant? Melius pereat unus quam unitas: you Romans know my meaning.  
Once more, my Brethren, there is a Law and dictate of nature that will justify us in resisting those that would take away our Lives. Self-preservation is a Law above any humane Constitution. By what Law must we die, that have the Law of Nature for our Self-preservation, which is equivalent to the Law of God? And did not Cicero that great Commonwealths-man tell us, that Salus Populi Suprema Lex? If those Infidels that are appointed to cut our Throats will venture their Lives for such an Earthly Master, shall we lay them down cowardly without doing any thing for our Heavenly Master, for our Religion, which he hath entrusted us with, and will require it at our hands, if we betray it, and seek not to convey it to our Children? And if we die without endeavouring it, we may perish in the next world for perishing so tamely in this. And thus I hope I have satisfied all scruples of Conscience. And now, I beseech you, suffer a word of Exhortation.  
Now is the time that God will redeem his People by our hands. Now is the time that we must vindicate our Christian Liberty. Now is the time that we must destroy those Romish Wolves that would devour the Flock of Christ. What though we be in ourselves but few in number? Were not the people so by whom God delivered Israel, by the hands of Joshua and Gideon? What though our Enemies be many? hath it not been known, when one hath chased a Thousand, and two put ten thousand to flight? and may not the Roman Valour, assisted by the Arm of Christ, do more than the Jewish? Besides, though there be but this one Legion that are entirely Christians, there are infinite numbers scattered up and down the Empire, whose hearts are ASSOCIATED with us already, and wait for such an opportunity as our stout resistance will give them. Did not Pliny complain to Trajan, that the Christian Assemblies were so great, that their Heathen Temples were quite forsaken, Et sacra Solennia diu intermissa? Did not Tertullian many years since tell us, that the Cities and Garrisons, and Camp, were filled with Christian Soldiers? and are there not great numbers multiplied now, and ready to join with us? And a later Doctor, Cyprian, a holy Martyr, told us, that our number is Nimius & Copiosus: and the numbers of such faithful brethren are much increased rather than diminished, since that time. Be strong then, and courageous; be not afraid nor dismayed, for Maximian, nor all the multitude with him: there are more with us than there are with him: With them is the Arm of flesh, with us is the Lord our God to help us, and to fight our battles. Up then and be doing, ye mighty men of Valour; fight the Lords battles, and he will fight for you. Do not basely cast away your lives like so many feloes de se; sell them at as dear a rate as you can. It better becomes the Roman Valour to die like men in defence of their lives and Religion, than ignominiously to have their throats cut like so many Swine by a bloody Butcher: If we perish in such a glorious enterpize, yet we shall live in the records of the Ages to come, and give the world a good example: but if we survive, we shall enjoy the honours and glories of the world; Religion will flourish with us, and the Church here on Earth be like that in Heaven, no more Militant, but Triumphant.  
Such have been the Harangues of Dissenters in our latter Age, and by them they have led on a multitude to Rebellion and destruction: and to such an end our Author hath proposed the example of the Julian-Christians.  
But there was not one of these Worthies (of whom the world was not worthy) durst mutter a syllable to such a purpose; they had not so learned Christ, as to scandalise and defame him and his Doctrine, as if they were enemies to Caesar: We are christian's (say they) we have Christ's Example before our eyes to teach us Obedience and Patience, and his Command not to unsheathe our Swords against lawful Authority, neither in our own or his defence. We value not the honours of this life, but hasten to the glories of a better; and in confidence of a speedy enjoyment of them, we will not make resistance, nor accept deliverance by any ungodly act. And though we see the example of Cruelty before our eyes in the death of our Brethren that have been cut asunder and slain with the Sword, we are ready to suffer as patiently, as we hope to reign gloriously with them.  
Now let any serious man among us judge which were the best Christians; these Primitive Worthies, who often took their lives in their hands to fight the battles of a Pagan and Tyrannical Emperor, and patiently laid them down at last, rather than make resistance against him; or those Modern Zealots, who will hazard their lives against a Christian and gracious Prince, and by their resistance, rather take away his life, than live in obedience to him, or surrender their own into the hands of God that gave it, when God calls for it? They who say of a Heathen Persecutor, He is God's Minister, we must obey him, not only for fear, but for Conscience sake; he hath no power but what is given him from above for the punishment of our sins: Or they that say, This is the Heir, come, let us kill him, and the Inheritance shall be ours?  
If our Author be to be credited in any thing, this which he says, p. 68 is the plain truth of the matter: The Julian Christians were in quite other circumstances than the first Christians were; they were in full and quiet possession of their Religion, when Julian came to the Crown; and they should have undervalved it, if they had not done their utmost to keep it:— whereas the poor Primitive Christians were born to persecution; they neither knew better, nor expected it. And after a large flourish, he sums up all in a word, p. 71. The first Christians suffered according to the Laws of their Country, whereas these under Julian were persecuted contrary to Law.  
We never heard that the Christians in Julian's time pleaded the Laws for their indemnite: Nor had they any ground so to do more than the Thebaean Legion had. For,  

1. No Law of Man could make void the Law of God, of worshipping God only: And if (as St. Augustine says) he that disobeys the Praefect that he may obey the Emperor▪ is guiltless; so is he that disobeys the Emperor that he may obey God.  
2. There was no Public Law that one Legion should be cut in pieces for being Christians, by another; yet this was their case: They were commanded by that Tyrant Maximius to assist him in destroying the Christians. But they answered. We are Christians, and such as ourselves we cannot persecute. So that either the Emperor's Will was a Law, or else they suffered contrary to Law.   
Therefore the truth of the matter is this: Our Author had committed an error in the Foundation, and now is forced to patch and daub for hiding of it; He supposeth the Christians in Julian's time did generally do or approve of what he represents some few of the weak and ungovernable part to have done; the contrary whereof, as to the sounder, more learned, and pious body of the Christians of that Age, hath been sufficiently demonstrated.  
So that I shall now appeal to the Judgement of the Reader, and to the Conscience of the Author (if it be not seared) whether this be not the plain truth of the matter which follows. The Primitive Christians, for the first 300 years, abounded in Christian simplicity; they never relished the pleasures of the World; Ambition and Covetousness never possessed nor adulterated their spirits; the Blood and Spirit of Christ and his Apostles ran warm in their Veins, and leapt for joy, as brisk as generous Wine, when it was poured out, for the Gospel sake, to bear witness to the truths thereof. Then it was that they were afraid to speak evil of Dignities in the Church or State: than it was said, Ecce quam se invicem diligunt! Behold how they love one another! Then it was that such Dissenters that betrayed any truth of the Gospel, or any of their Fathers or Brethren, were branded with the black character of Traditores or Traitors. If ever we will learn purity of Doctrine, or innocence of Life, we must take our measures from the Example and Practice of those Primitive times, whenas yet they had so many Apostolical Guides among them, that sealed their Doctrine with their blood, as Clemens, and Ignatius, and Polycarp, Justine Martyr, Irenaeus, etc. And therefore we of all others should abhor the Doctrine of Resistance on pretence of the Laws, when our Laws say, We may not resist under any pretence whatsoever.  
Again, is not this the truth of the matter, that when Constantine established the Church in outward splendour, and Christianity was the way to Preferment and Secular honours and advantages, Hodie Venenum infusum est Ecclesioe? From thenceforward the sins of Ambition, Emulation, and Contention, embittered and poisoned their Spirits; they grew wanton, and began to vex and disquiet their Governors; to supplant, by't and devour one another. And Constantine himself favoured the Cause of Arius. But when Constantius espoused and made it the established Religion, then, like Ionas Gourd, Arianism and Donatism sprung up in a night, and overtopped the whole Church: Totus mundus miratur se factum Arianum. Then it was that Christ was crucified afresh indeed, when his Deity was openly denied and disputed, and those few Christians that with Athanasius, Basil, Apollinaris, and some others, defended it, were banished, and accounted Impostors, and Seducers of the people, and dealt with accordingly.  
And from hence most probably it was, that Julian first learned the Principles of his Apostasy, which were improved by the Pagan Philosophers that were his Tutors, who could disprove the Divinity of Christ from the Doctrine of the Arians, that were the greatest part of Professing Christians; and Julian made use of some of their Arguments against Christianity, concluding, that if he were not God, he ought not to be worshipped. And that Apostate often expressed a greater favour to Arius, and particularly to George an Arian Bishop of Alexandria, whose writings he made use of against the Christians, ut Ecclesiam suis configeret telis, than to any of the most pious & learned Catholics.  
Moreover, Julian perceived that the hatred and contention of Christians was so implacable, that his giving them the reins would be a means to destroy them, without his use of the Sword or Whip to drive them on (as when the dogs and wolves had declared war, the wolves sent a spy to discover their numbers, who brought word their number was great, but their colours were divers, and they did so snarl and quarrel with each other, that they were not to be feared at all.) But though the truth of the Matter appears, yet we are not come to the root of the Matter, (for that is not grounded on Truth) and the bitter root lieth deep under the ground; and this it is: (saith our Author) The first Christians suffered according to the Laws of their Country, whereas these under Julian were persecuted contrary to Law. Against which though I have said enough already to convince impartial men, yet I shall now add this further: I wonder how such men can plead the Laws of the Country against Persecution, who every day persecute those Laws, and live in open defiance and opposition of them; contriving and practising how to overthrow the Religion and Government established by those Laws. If the Julian Christians did (as you say) pray for the Destruction of their Emperors, reproach and brave them to their very beards, and threaten to kick them; I wonder what Law of the Land did maintain such practices: or if they could have found out some such Law, yet the Law of God being violated by such practices, God might justly punish them for the breach of his Laws: for no Law of man, that is temporary and mutable, can indemnify us against the Laws of God. This is a Maxim with Lawyers (as Lelius de privilegiis Eccl.) Nulla lex valèat contra jus Divinum.  
But, p. 68 Julian found their Religion in quiet possession. What Religion I pray was then in full and quiet possession? If any, it was the Arian, which yourself cannot call Christian, except you add dissenting. And if, as it hath been said, it were as bad as Popery, it was worse than Paganism. Perhaps this is the Religion of our Author: for no man likely can deride the Doctrine, but he that denies the Deity of Christ. But I have so far a good opinion of you, that you considered this; and do not therefore give it the Appellative of Christian Religion, but the proper name of their Religion, viz. the Arians, or dissenting Christians.  
If this were not the Religion that was in full and quiet possession, what was it? to revile, and threaten, and pray for the destruction of the Emperor, and to contend earnestly against the Divinity of Christ, as Constantius Julian's predecessor did? who, as Bishop Usher observes, promoted that damnable error with all his might. Was this that which you call the reigning Religion? So was that in Cromwel's days, when Iniquity was established by a Law, (such as that lawless Usurper could procure.) Can you produce any Universal Laws made by Constantine, that the Christian Religion should obtain throughout all his Dominions? Licinius and Maximian cruelly oppressed them long after Constantine came to the Throne. And his Senate consisted of unconverted Romans for a great part. Eusebius, chap. 55. of the Life of Constantine, says, he compelled none to turn Christians; and chap. 59 forbidden any one to molest another for his Religion. Our Author might have gone for one of the Godly party in those days.  
I do not read that there was one Law extended throughout the whole Roman Empire, which was almost Universal, but that several Kingdoms and Cities were governed by their own Laws. So were the Jews and Heathen, as well as Christian Subjects, in their several Cities and remote Provinces. As Julian told the Bishops that were of several Persuasions, that they should not disturb the public peace of the Empire, and then they might enjoy their own Liberties and Religion. Constantine seemed to be almost of a like persuasion: for why else did he not suppress the Arian Heresy, which from Alexandria infected the whole Empire? He did take care to prevent Schism and Sedition among Christians, that the administration of the Government might be more easy: But this great man banished Athanasius into France, where he remained till Constantine his Son recalled him, as Eusebius in his Chronologie.  
But what if there were some Edicts for the establishment of Christian Religion in Constantine's days, nothing was confirmed by the Senate; that was accounted then a needless thing. Nor did the Edicts of one Emperor bind another: by the same Authority as Constantine might have settled the Orthodox Religion, Constantius settled the Arian, and after him Julian the Pagan Religion; I mean, by his own Imperial power and Edicts. For the Roman Emperor was an Absolute Monarch; their Will was a Law, as Gregory Nazianzen, quoted by you, p. 13. The Will and Pleasure of the Emperor is an unwritten Law, backed with Power, and much stronger than written ones which were not supported by Authority. So that though he did not, as you term it, fairly enact Sanguinary Laws, yet had he the Law of the Sword in his hands. And I think it was a great mercy of God to the Christians under him, that he did not by public Edicts put the Sword out of his own hands, into the hands of his Heathen Magistrates, who would have written them all in blood. Therefore Mr. Baxter says, p. 20. of 4th part of his Direct. Julian was a protector of the Church from Popular Rage in comparison of other Persecutors, though in other respects he was a Plague.  
Valentinian was a right Christian Emperor, and when he was chosen, the Soldiers were importunate that he should assume another as an Associate in the Empire: he tells them, It lay in you to choose me your Emperor; but being chosen, what you desire is not in your power but mine; it belongs to you as Subjects to be quiet, and rest contented, and to me as your King to consider what is fit to be done. Zozomen, l. 6.86.  
Justinian was another good Emperor, and he assumed the sole administration of the Empire to himself; and demands in his Novels, Quis tantae authoritatis, ut nolentem Principem possit ad convocandos Patres caetorosque Proceres coarctare? Who can claim so great Authority, as to constrain the Prince to assemble the Senate against his will? And Justinian (Novel 105.) excepts the Emperor from the coercive power of the Law, to whom, says he, God hath subjected the Laws themselves, sending him as a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, living Law unto men; And the Gloss noteth, That the Emperor is the Father of the Law; whereupon the Laws also are subject to him. When Vespasian was Emperor, it was declared by the Senate, That he might make Leagues with whom he pleased: And though Tiberius, Claudius or Germanicus had made certain Laws, yet Vespasian was not obliged by them. And Pliny in his Panegyric to Trajan, tells him, how happy he was that he was obliged to nothing. So that the Christians had no more pretence of having the Laws on their side under Julian, than under Dioclesian, Maximus, or Constantius; nor did they ever plead them to justify a Rebellion against him, for want of such an Advocate or Leader as our Author.  
Gregory Nyssene tells us also what the power of the King or Emperor was: he defines him to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, one that hath Absolute power in himself, no Master nor Equal: Cont. Eunomium, l. 1.  
So that our Author's great Babel is fallen, viz. that the Julian Christians had their Religion established by Law, and that they were long possessed of it: For, Laws or no Laws, by the Lex Regia the Emperor could reverse the old, and establish new as it pleased him: and for want of Laws, where the word of the Emperor was, there was power, and none might say to him, What dost thou? Thus it was with Constantine and Constantius, and why not with Julian? And now I hope the good Christians of our Age will no longer trust to such broken Reeds as our Author puts into their hands, much less that they should take up the Sword (which will be no other than a broken Reed also, not only to fail them, but to pierce through their sides).  
Now if we should turn the Tables, and ask our Author, Whether when Jovian and Valentinian were Emperors, and had made some new Edicts for the Orthodox Christians, as well as against the Arians and Pagans, it had been lawful for the Arians or Pagans to rebel in defence of their Religion? Or, to come nearer home, Whether when Queen Mary had established Popery by Law in this Nation, it had been lawful for the Papists to have rebelled against Queen Elizabeth, they having the Laws on their side, yea and questioning her Right of Succession too: yet we do not read that they did contrive a General Rebellion; though, for aught I see, our Author would have justified them, when he tells us from Zozomen, what men may do for the Religion whereof they are well persuaded.  
Or nearer yet: when the Long, too Long Parliament, pretended against the King, that their Religion was in danger by Popery and Superstition, their Laws and Liberties invaded by an Arbitrary Power; did they well or ill from these pretences to raise that War against the King, that turned the Nation to an Aceldama? Were the Laws such as could justify that Rebellion, or no? If they could not, than I am sure they cannot now, since the late Act for Treason, in the 13th of our King, and a Declaration of Parliament, That it is not lawful on any pretence whatsoever, &c And by several Statutes it is declared, That the King is the Only Supreme Governor of his Dominions, over all Persons and Causes whatsoever. And the power of the Sword or Militia is put into his hands, as well by the Law of the Nation, as of God; and I trust he will not bear it in vain.  
Having thus stripped this full-faced Bird of a few borrowed and painted Feathers, how justly is he exposed to be hooted at by every boy, or dealt with as in the Apologue of such another bird, that seeing the Pigeons to be well meated and live securely, he would get himself to be coloured and arrayed like one of them, and feed among them, that he might no longer be forced to pray abroad for his livelihood: but having fed with the Pigeons a while, they perceived that neither head, nor beak, nor claws, were like theirs; and therefore they expel him out of their society; and then thinking to return to his old manner of life, the rest fall on him, and banish him from them also; so that he was forced to remain alone as one in the Desert. The Moral is only this: Though some men may for their own concerns, and for a little time, love the Treason, yet generally all men hate the Traitor.  
For my part, I cannot see any one particular that did so justly render Julian odious to the Primitive Christians, as that he had been (an Apostate) Lecturer in an Assembly of Christians. And if any such shall (for ambitious, covetous, or vainglorious ends) seek Protection and Encouragement from some Great men in this our Age; I shall earnestly beseech them to consider, that as some have entertained good Angels unawares. so others have evil ones to be their Familiars, who usually drive them over Precipices to perish in the deep: and by their fruits you may know them. For as our Saviour said, (Joh. 8.44.) Ye are of your father the devil, because they did the works of the devil; so they, certainly, that by lies and falsehood provoke to Envy, Contention, and Bloodshed; they that falsely accuse innocent and pious persons, and bring railing Accusations against their Governors, such as Michael the Archangel durst not bring against Satan himself: however they may pass for Angels of light with some deluded people, will appear to sober and discerning persons, not as an evil Spirit under a Prophet's Mantle, but in his proper colours and terrors, breathing out Flames of fire, raising Storms and Earthquakes; and at last vanish, leaving an infectious and noisome stench behind them.  
If this Reflection savours too much of an Invective, it is what our Author's two great Leaders have suggested. So Bracton says of a wicked King, that he is Minister Diaboli dum declinat ad injuriam; he is the Devil's Minister that acts injuriously: and Gregory says it not only of Julian, That the Devil was in him, but even of Constantius, That some Devil (he knows not of what kind) stole in with him to his Consultations, p. 25. And when our Author calls the Prayers and Tears of the Primitive Christians, Mountebank-prescriptions. And p. 74. Much wonders at those who trouble the Nation at this time of the day with the unseasonable prescriptions of Prayers and Tears, and the Passive Obedience of the Thebaean Legion. And p. 75. That they throw away their lives, and are certainly weary of them, who practise any such Passive Obedience. And p. 77. That he is a felo de se, and guilty of his own Murder. And thereupon prepares men for resistance of a lawful Power (though it be exercised unlawfully) with an Ei qui vult viribus uti, erit viriliter resistendum; applying what was spoken by Bracton against the violent attempts of one private person against another, to the actions of lawful Princes; and so doth teach the Doctrine of Devils: for, as St. James says, Such wisdom comes not from above, but is earthly, sensual, and devilish.  
Though this might excuse the sharpness of my Reflections on the Author, yet when I shall show the provocation I had thereunto, I think every truly Christian Reader will justify me. And this it was. When I had read that passage in our Author, quoted by him (out of Zozomen) p. 60. it came to my remembrance that Milton (Cromwel's Secretary) in his Defence of the People of England for murdering King Charles the First of blessed memory, made use of the same quotation, totidem verbis, p. 44. From him also he took the Theme on which he declaims in so many Chapters. For thus Milton: Quid Antiocheni homines apprime Christiani? What did the Antiochians, who were the chiefest Christians? did they pray for Julian the Apostate, to whom they came publicly, and rend him (or, as our Author interprets it, vexed every vein in his Royal heart) with their reproaches, and scoffing at his long Beard, bid him make Ropes of it? And when they heard of his death, appointed public Supplications, Feast, and Mirth, can you think that they ever prayed for his life and safety? What? when it is also reported that he was slain by a Christian Soldier?  
These are the Pillars on which our English Solomon hath raised to himself that Temple of Honour; which yet may prove but as so many Pillars of Smoke to the eyes of all that shall inspect them; and perhaps may have a worse effect (which smoke that hath so much fire under it is wont to have) upon the Author. But, let us observe what worthy Lectures our Author reads us on these Texts of Milton. Chap. 3. They reproached him in words. This Chapter consists of 7 pages. Chap. 4. Of their Actions. This hath about 7 more. Chap. 5. and 6. Of their Prayers and their other Devotions, makes 11 pages. Chap. 7. His Death by a Christian Soldier; where you have the passage at large out of Zozomen, commending such as kill Tyrants, 6 pages. Chap. 8. How they used his memory, by joy and feasting at his death, by calling him Persecutor, Traitor, Killer of Christ, etc. with other Reflections on their Behaviour. Chap. 9 Ad finem.  
He quotes also the same passages out of Bracton which Milton made use of, p. 81. Non est Rex, ubi dominatur voluntas, & non Lex: exercere debet Rex potestatem Juris, ut Vicarius & Minister Dei; potestas autem injuriae Diobali est, non Dei: cum declinat ad injuriam Rex, Diaboli Minister est. And as if these Arguments which that Mercenary man made use of to justify the death of Charles the first, were not enough, our Author adds more to them; to what end, he best knows. But certainly, if that Execrable Book deserved to be burnt by the common Hangman in France, this book deserves to be used so by every Loyal Subject in England; it being of much worse consequence than that of Milton: Milton's book being written when the Father was in his Grave, and this when the Son by many miracles of mercy is settled and preserved in the Throne: where God long preserve and prosper him.  
And this I suppose is the reason that our Author and Mr. Hunt cannot endure the mention of 48, no more than that of the Thebaean Legion; because these men are the very Marshals and milton's, the Contrivers and Justifiers of whatever shall be done according to that pattern in the Mount, as the old Phrase was: A Mount like that which is described Heb. 12.18. So full of terrors, as made Moses himself to tremble exceedingly. Perhaps they finding no Preferment in the Established Government, hope to get a Booty by fishing in troubled waters; and like the two Sons of Zebedee (for they were Fishermen also) to sit the one at the right, and the other at the left hand of some Great person, when he shall come into his Kingdom. Or if the hopes of the translation of the Kingdom should fail, and degenerate into a Commonwealth, one of them may be, as Milton was, a mercenary Historian, or under-Secretarie of State. But now I think on it, they will never be so fit as Milton was, of whom they come as short in accuracy of Style, as they may in time exceed him in other of his Virtues and Preferments.  
I would advise our Divine Lecturer to take a Doctor's degree at Salamanca (for he may despair of it here in England) and then he may be the fit to be a Casuist and Confessor to the State's General, to resolve their Cases of Conscience. And for our Lawyer, if he do but read one Lecture more on Doleman, and pursue his Argument as he hath begun, he that is yet esteemed of but as the Pick-lock of the Law, and speaks things doubtfully and mysteriously, as the Devils Oracles were wont, may come to that Top of Preferment which Mr. Br. a Quondam Brother attained: And though he never sit in Judgement, as he did; yet he shall, if his Friends will be at the cost, have that Inscription on his Tomb, which was provided for the other.  
Mr. Hunt speaking of his Adversary, says, p. 152. he observes for our imitation, that the Orthodox did not depose the Arian Emperors. And answers, We ought undoubtedly to imitate them therein, for that no man, much less a Prince, aught to lose any right for a Speculative error, or mere misbelief: But only for wicked practices, and opinions that promote, excite, and encourage them. As if Opinions that overthrew the Doctrine of Christ's Divinity, did not directly tend to wicked practices! Hath not this Lawyer been feed by the Socinians to become their Advocate? But might not an Arian Emperor be resisted, and One who is truly Christian, and a Defender of the Apostolic Faith, be opposed? And doth our Author know of any more than a Speculative error (if so much) in him whom he prosecutes so violently? Or was not Constantius his being of the Arian persuasion, the cause of many actual cruelties practised against the Orthodox, not in remote places only, but chief at Constantinople, where he mostly resided? and were not many of those Cruelties acted by the authority of his Edicts? as I have noted concerning Macedonius his Cruelties.  
And so for the Sitting of Parliaments till all Grievances are redressed. Milton, p. 80. Si Rex Parliamentum prius dimiserit quam ea omnia transigantur quorum causa Concilium indictum erat, perjuris reus erit. Mr. Hunt resembles him in this, as well as if there had been a transmigration of Souls. Let his Majesty satisfy his people never so well by Reason and Authority, and serious promises of frequent Parliaments; yet this man insinuates, that he acts as if there were no intent to call a Parliament any more; And that the design of the Addressers was for discontinuance of Parliaments, and for a Popish Successor: though he himself observes, that in thanking his Majesty for his promise of frequent Parliaments, they do desire them. See his Preface.  
P. 152. He says, as our Author doth after him, That the behaviour of the Church towards the Roman Pagan Emperors was much different from that which they bore to Julian, who succeeded to Christian Emperors, was educated a Christian, and sometime bore a place in the Church: for whereas the Apostles had enjoined the Christians to pray for the Pagan Emperors, though actual persecutors of the Church; yet THE WHOLE CHURCH did curse and Anathematise Julian with an Anathema, Quo Deus rogatur ut aliquem è medio tollat. In Julianum, cum defectioni adderet Machinationes evertendi Christianismi, usa est Ecclesia isto extremae necessitatis telo, & a Deo est audita. Grotius on Luk. c. 6. v. 22. The whole of Grotius his Note to this purpose, is in these words: Sunt quaedam delicta tam atriocia, ut si contumacia accedat; nemo non videat esse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. pro talibus, dum tales manent, Ecclesia non intercedit precum suffragio, quod solis poenitentibus patet: Generaliter tamen his, ut & infidelibus, mentem optat meliorem.  
Chrysostomus, ubi anathema pronunciandum, ait, adversus facta, non adversus homines, intelligit districtum illud anathema, quo Deus rogatur ut aliquem e medio tollat. Hujus sanè rarior est usus; non tamen Nullus: nam in Julianum, cum defectioni adderet machinationes evertendi Christianismi, usa est Ecclesia isto extremae necessitatis telo, & a Deo est exaudita.  
If our Author had not been afraid to discover from what Writers he collected his Posy of Daisies, as he calls it, p. 95. he would have repeated this of Mr. Hunt, which seems to carry more of Reason and Authority than any thing else in all his Treatise of Julian. And because I suspect that he may keep this for a Reserve (for I have heard that he intends to pursue his design against all Opposers) if he bring no other weapons but such as these of the Church-Censures, we shall not fear: for these are Spiritual weapons which the Church makes use of, (and that only against incorrigible offenders that had committed a sin to death) as their last refuge in extreme necessity: yet of these he only says, the Church doth not intercede by supplications proper to the penitents; yet, generally, even to these, as also to Infidels, it prays for a better mind. St. chrysostom (says Grotius) speaking of the Anathema that is to be pronounced against the Actions, not the Persons, understands this severe Anathema whereby God is entreated to take away the offender from the midst of the people, etc.  
So that Grotius and chrysostom having delivered their Judgements clearly in other places concerning Prayers for Heathenish and Persecuting Emperors, they cannot be understood here to write against their own, and the judgement of all those other Christians . To which I add this of Tertull, ad Scapulam: Christianus Nullius est hostis nedum Imperatoris, quem sciens à Deo suo constitui, NECESSE EST ut eum diligat, revereatur, & salvum velit. And in his Apol. We reverence in our Emperor's Gods judgement that made them Governors; for we know that to be in them which God would have; and of this we make account as of a great Oath. And the Oath of Christian Soldiers (as Vegetius de re Militari, l. 2. c. 5.) was; Per Deum, & per Christum, & per Spiritum Sanctum, & per Majestatem Imperatoris, etc. By God, and Christ, and by the Holy Ghost, and by the Majesty of the Emperor, who next to God was to be loved and reverenced— they swore to yield him faithful Devotion, and vigilant Service, etc. And he gives this reason for it: For a man, whether private or military, doth serve God, when he faithfully loves him who reigns by God's authority.  
P. 151. Mr. Hunt hath another Observation that deserves a special remark: Neither will we (saith he) make use in our defence of the Papists excluding the King of Navarre, a Protestant King in France, no more than we will allow the French to murder a Protestant Minister, because we execute a seditious, traitorous Roman Priest.  
Ans. It is well known, the Romish Priests are not executed in England upon the account of their Religion, but for such crimes as are made Treason by the Laws of our Land. And if the Protestants were not executed but upon the breach of such Laws, the cause of Complaint would be less than now it is. But why, on your Principles, a Protestant Prince may not be excluded by Papists, who perhaps are as fully persuaded of the truth of their Religion as we are of ours, and do aver that Salvation is not to be attained in any Communion but that of their own Church, I see no sufficient reason. For they may as well plead that Dominion is founded in Grace, as you do; and that may equally justify both parties in case of Resistance: (i. e.) it can justify neither. And the consequences of that Act of Exclusion may dread us from doing the like: For when the Guises, and other contrivers of the Holy League (as they called it) had by great importunity prevailed with the present King Henry the Third to agree to the Exclusion of Henry the Fourth, the dreadful slaughters of the Subjects on both sides were not the only evil consequences that ensued; but the Guisian Faction grew so insolent, as to affront and distress the King himself, so far, that fearing his own destruction, he was constrained to join his Party to that of the King of Navarre, (to whose Exclusion he had consented) that he might preserve himself from being excluded by the prevailing Faction. So that your Quere, p. 153. Whether if the Crown should devolve upon a Roman Successor we could justify the dethroning of him, (which the Author of Julian resolves we may not) though the French Papists could not be justified in rejecting the King of Navarre, requires no long consideration.  Tum tua Res agitur partes cum proximus Ardet. 
I cannot omit another bold attempt of Mr. Hunt in his Preface, where he conjures up the old Smectymnuan Monster of Curse ye Meroz, to affright all men from an accursed Nutralitie, to bring them into the blessed Association. It was a wise Law of Solon (says he) that if the Commonwealth at any time should be divided into Factions, that the Neuters should be noted with infamy. And that you may know what he means, he adds, If all that are TRUE PROTESTANTS and TRUE LOVERS OF OUR GOVERNMENT would declare themselves on the behalf of our Religion and Government in such terms as befit honestmen, and as the exigency of our present state shall require, we shall find the numbers of Addressers reduced to the Duke's Pensioners and Creatures. And again: Our Traitors would disappear, if we had no Neuters. And to slur the proceed of his Majesty against E. S. he says, that the name of E. S. in the Abhorrences of the Nation, were but like the name of John-a-Styles and John-an-Oakes, in putting a fictitious Case. So that it is most evident that he invites, and threatens all men that refuse, to join in an Association: and to what that tends, the Nation is indisserently well satisfied already.  
If not the Comments which these men make upon that Text, the Authors and Instruments which they make use of, such as were the most notorious Incendiaries in our late War, some Jesuits and eminent Factors for Rome, some Regicides that died in their impenitency; these, and the present endeavours to act over all the Tragedies that were plotted by them a second time, may fully convince us that there is Mors in Olla, some deadly Coloquintida that hath so embittered and poisoned such sort of Writings.  
I must beg the Readers pardon that I have not been more particular in my Remarks on Mr. Hunt: his Book came but lately to my hands; a part of mine being first in the Press, and the rest called for, so that I made it only an Essay to provoke some more eminent persons of his own Gown to chastise him according to his demerit, who have more health and help, more time and advantages than I have. And all that love their Religion and Peace, will abhor such persons, as by the same Methods, the same Libels, and pretences of arbitrary Government and Popery, the same Arguments as were used to defend the War, and the Murder of Charles the First, seek to involve us in another such; and rather than not effect it, will employ and associate with any sort of fanatics, Jesuits, and Regicides, such as Doleman, White, and Milton their great Exemplar and Tutor.  
I cannot stand to give this Age a character of that Pest of the former; I mean this Milton, whose very Sores and Impostumes these Authors suck, and spit them out to poison the People. He was one that wrote against the whole Ministry and their Maintenance; that would have Divorces practised on every slight occasion. And when I shall say, that against his knowledge and Conscience he maliciously opposed the best of Kings, I need say no more to prove him the worst of men.  
That Mercenary wretch was, I confess, a man of more than ordinary parts: and when he came in his Chap. 4. to defend the Doctrine of Resistance and Regicide against that Argument of Salmasius, which proved that none of the Christians before St. Augustine's time did practise or allow of resisting the lawful Magistrate, though a Heathen or an Arian; he stretched his Wit and his Reading so far, as to bankrupt the reputation of them both; as will evidently appear in my Answer to the same Arguments, which both Mr. Hunt and our Author have borrowed from him.  
And because it hath been creditably reported that Milton died a Papist, and it is certain that he had been at Rome, and was there caressed by some great men, (Cardinals and others) I shall desire the Reader to consider with me, whether that defence which he makes of the Popish Doctrine for deposing of Kings, in the same Chapter, be not a probable Argument of the truth of that Report. For thus saith Milton, chap. 4. p. 47. As to what concerns the Pope, against whom you DECLAIM MANY THINGS TO NO PURPOSE, I give you liberty to talk till you are hoarse: yet that which you assert so largely, to take with the vulgar and unlearned, That every Christian was subject to their Kings, whether they were just, or whether they were Tyrants, until the power of the Pope was acknowledged to be greater than that of the King, and till be absolved Subjects from their Oaths of Fidelity; I have shown that to be most false by many examples. Nor doth that seem more true which you say in the last place, that Pope Zachary did abselve the French from their Oath of Allegiance; (his reason is) for Hottoman, a Frenchman and a Lawyer, denieth that Chilperick was deposed by the Pope's authority, or that his Kingdom was given to Pepin; but that all this was transacted by the authority of the great Council of that Nation, as appears by ancient Annals, which show that there was no need of absolving the Subjects from that Oath; which also Pope Zachary utterly denied: for in the French Histories it is recorded, as Hottoman and Girardus witness, That the French did from the beginning reserve to themselves a power as of choosing, so of deposing their Kings; and that they were not wont to swear any other Fidelity to the Kings whom they created, than that they would yield them Faith and Allegiance, if their Kings did perform that which they also swore to do. So that if the King by maladministration first broke his Oath, there was no need of the Pope, the perfidiousness of the King having absolved the subjects from their Oath.  
Yet lest this Invention of Milton's own should not be of weight to clear his Holiness, he brings the Pope's infallible testimony for himself: Pope Zachary (says he) who you say did arrogate that authority to himself, excuseth it, and lays it on the People: for the Pope's words are these; If the Prince be obnoxious to the People by whose beneficence he possesseth his Kingdom, the People that make the King may depose him. So that the result of all is, the Pope and Fanatic are agreed in this Principle, The Majestas realis is in the People; as Bellarmine with Buchanan do assert; and, They that create the King, may destroy him with the same breath.  
How industrious this Mercenary man is to vindicate the Pope, whenas his own Creatures acknowledge that he was the Dux Gregis, the grand Instrument of dethroning that King, and sharing his Inheritance!  
In a Dialogue between Theophilus a Christian, and Philander a Jesuit, Bishop Bilson (p. 418. of Christian Subjection) brings in Theophilus saying: Your Law doth not stick to boast that Zacharias deposed Childerick King of France, and placed Pepin in his room. Philander answers, And so he did. Theoph. Who says so besides you? Philand. Platina saith, Ejus authoritate regnum Franciae Pipino adjudicatur; By Zachary 's authority the Kingdom of France was adjudged to Pepin. And Frisingensis affirmeth that Pepin was absolved from the Oath of Allegiance (by Pope Steven) which he had given to Childerick, and so were the rest of the Nobles of France; and then the King being shaved, and thrust into a Monastery, Pepin was anointed King: which you think much the Pope should do in our days. Theoph. Zachary was consulted with whether it might lawfully be done or no: he did not openly intermeddle with the matter, whatever his privy practices were; though many of your Bishops and Monks, to grace the Pope, make it his only act.— But hear Zachary 's own words, when Volorade and Burchard were sent to understand his judgement: I find (saith he) in the sacred story of Divine Scripture, that the people fell away from their wretchless and lascivious King that despised the Counsel of the Wise men of his Realm, and created a sufficient man of themselves King, (This was likely the case of Jeroboam, who had a special Warrant from God.) God himself allowing their do. All power and rule belongs to God; Princes are his Ministers, and therefore chosen for the people, that they should follow the Will of God, and not do what they list.— All that he hath, as Power, Glory, Riches, Honour, and Dignity, he receiveth of the People: the People create the King, and may when the cause requireth, forsake the King: It is therefore lawful for the Franks, refusing this Monster Childerick, to choose one able in War and Peace, by his wisdom to protect and keep in safety their Wives, Children, Parents, Goods, and Lives. This is the Pope's Divinity, saith Bishop Bilson, that Kings have their power of the People, which the Scripture saith they have from God.  
Now as to the Annals of France, it is true that the Pope had not entirely grasped the power of deposing Princes in those days, but made use of other Instruments; yet this was done, say the Annals, Pontifice prius consulto, as Sabellicus, and the Gloss in verb. Deposuit, (i. e.) deponentibus, consensit. The true reason was this: Pepin was a man on whom the Pope relied to quell the Lombard's, and defeat the Grecians, that he and Pepin might divide the Spoils of the West, as it came to pass: for the Emperor was turned out of Italy.  
Now let the Reader judge how diligent an Advocate Milton is for the Pope; that notwithstanding his own words advising it, and the testimony of his own creatures affirming it, and the matter of fact and the event demonstrating it, would yet excuse him from having a hand in deposing of that French King. And is this a fit Guide for our Modern Writers? Is it not possible (as our Author says) but to take many things from Doleman in the case of Succession? and many more from Milton, when you would irritate or defend the People of England in case of Resistance and Regicide?  
Have the Boutefeus' of this Age nothing to set the Nation into a flame, but those Firebrands which were raked up in the Ashes of that prosligate Villain Milton, who pleaded the Cause of the Pope Gratis, and for money that of— Good God what a Spirit of Rebellion is spread over the Land! when, as it was observed by Dr. Heylen at the beginning of the last unnatural War, No times were more full of Odious Pamphlets, no Pamphlets more applauded, nor more dearly bought, than such as do most deeply wound those Powers and Dignities to which the Law hath made us subject. Methinks we are like the man in the Gospel, Matth. 12.44. out of whom the unclean Spirit being cast out, it walked up and down through dry places, seeking rest and finding none: then said he, I will return to my house from whence I came out; and finding it empty, swept, and garnished, he taketh with him seven other Spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first. Deus avertat Omen!  
I beg my Readers pardon that I may animadvert a little on these Libelers, and acquaint them, that to their Progenitors we owed the kindling, fomenting, and inflaming those late Wars, that made us a confusion at home, a scorn and a reproach abroad. Prynne, Burton, and Bastwick, were like so many Foxes let lose and encouraged, like the Priests and Precoes of Mars, to scatter Firebrands through the Nation. Nor would the times permit a little water to be sprinkled for the quenching of them, but fed them with oil. The Laws were silenced and outlawed then, as they are now, as if indeed we were inter Arma: there wanted not scourges to punish them, but an arm to inflict the legal Sanctions.  
Then it was, first, That Burton in a seditious Sermon compared that excellent Prince to Julian, and his Chapel to Julian's Altar: And tells the same story of Maris Bishop of Chalcedon, who called Julian Atheist and Apostate to his face, as our Author hath done in print. That Malcontent having been admitted to the King's Chapel for a while, and defeated of a Bishopric to which he aspired, turned Apostate, and defamed the whole Order as Antichristian. He had served that excellent Prince in his Closer; and missing of the Preferment in the Court, for his turbulence, being banished thence, he began to court the People, and sought it in the Camp; not being ashamed to profess himself an old out-cast Courtier, worn our of favour and Friends there; which was the reason that he became a Professed enemy both to King and Court.  
Then it was that he made his Pulpit a Drum, to beat up for Sedition and War. Prynne, Bastwick, Leyton, and many others, took the Alarm; and dipping their Pens in Gall, made way for the Sword, that glutted itself with so much blood. He presumes to dedicate his Seditious Harangues, as so many Firebrands, to the Houses of Parliament; where finding too much combustible matter, he made such a flame, as warmed him a little, but made a general conflagration through the three Kingdoms.  
Had it not been much better that two or three such Boutefeus' had suffered according to their deserts, than that the whole Nation should fall a Sacrifice to those Idols of a Seditious party?  
There wanted not then good Laws against such disturbers of the public peace. The Statute of Westm. the first provided, That no man should publish or tell any false News whereby discord or occasion of discord or slander may grow between the King and his People or Nobles. And a Statute was made the second of Richard 2. ch. 5, for punishing counterfeiters of false news, and lies, of Prelates, Earls, Dukes, etc. of things which by them were never spoken, to the slander of the Prelates, etc. And the punishment was left to the discretion of the King and Council. And old Bracton records this ancient usage: Si quis Machinatus fuerit, vel aliquid fecerit, etc. If any one shall contrive or do any thing against the life of the King, or to make Sedition in his Army, or shall give consent or counsel thereto, although they effect not the mischief which they designed; he shall be guilty of Treason. And accordingly one John Bonnet a Wool-man was drawn and hanged for scattering seditious Libels in London. In the 4th year of Hen. 5. as Stow relates, Sir William Stanley, a person of great valour, was condemned and executed as a Traitor, for saying (less than our Author doth) That if he thought Perkin Warbeck to be the undoubted Son of Edward the 4th, he would never bear Arms against him. And in the 9th year of H. 7. Bagnal, Scot, Heath, and Kennington, who had taken Sanctuary in St. martin's le grand, were taken out, and three of them executed, for forging Seditious Bills to the slander of the King and Council. The like proceed were made against Barrow, Greenwood, Penry, Vdal, and many others, who were condemned, and some of them executed for the like Seditious Writings against Queen Eliz. and her Government: concerning which I shall present to our Authors Her Majesty's Proclamation.  

By the QUEEN A Proclamation against certain Seditious and Schismatical Books and Libels, etc.  
THE Queens most Excellent Majesty, considering how within these few years past, and now of late, certain seditious & evil-disposed persons towards her Majesty, and the Government established for causes Ecclesiastical within her Majesty's Dominions, have devised, written, printed, or caused to be seditiously and secretly published & dispersed, sundry schismatical and seditious Books, defamatory Libels, and other fanatical Writings amongst her Majesty's Subjects, containing in them Doctrine very erroneous, and other matters notoriously untrue, and slanderous to the State, and against the godly reformation of Religion and Government Ecclesiastical established by Law, and so quietly of long time continued, and also against the persons of Bishops, and others placed in authority Ecclesiastical under her Highness by her authority, in railing sort, and beyond the bounds of all good humanity: All which Books, Libels, and Writings, tend by their scope to persuade and bring in a monstrous and apparent dangerous Innovation within her Dominions and Countries, of all manner of Ecclesiastical Government now in use, and to the abridging, or rather to the overthrow of her Highness lawful Prerogative, allowed by God's Law, and established by the Laws of the Realm, and consequently to reverse, dissolve, and set at liberty the present Government of the Church, and to make a dangerous change of the form of Doctrine, and use of Divine Service of God, and the Ministration of the Sacraments now also in use, with a rash and malicious purpose also to dissolve the Estate of the Prelacy, being one of the three ancient Estates of this Realm under her Highness, whereof her Majesty mindeth to have such a reverend regard, as to their places in the Church and Commonwealth appertaineth. All which said lewd and seditious practices, do directly tend to the manifest wilful breach of great number of good Laws and Statutes of this Realm, inconveniencies nothing regarded by such Innovations.  
In consideration whereof, her Highness graciously minding to provide some good and speedy Remedy to withstand such notable, dangerous, and ungodly Attempts, and for that purpose to have such enormous Malefactors discovered and condignly punished, doth signify this her Highness misliking and indignation of such dangerous and wicked Erterprises; and for that purpose doth hereby will and also straightly charge and command, that all persons whatsoever, within any her Majesty's Realms and Dominions, who have or hereafter shall have any of the said seditious Books, Pamphlets, Libels, or Writings, or any of like nature already published, or hereafter to be published, in his or their custody, containing such matters as above are mentioned, against the present Order and Government of the Church of England, or the lawful Ministers thereof, or against the Rites and Ceremonies used in the Church, and allowed by the Laws of the Realm: That they and every of them do presently after, with convenient speed, bring in, and deliver up the same unto the Ordinary of the Diocese, or of the place where they inhabit, to the intent they may be utterly defaced by the said Ordinary, or otherwise used by them. And that from henceforth no person or persons whatsoever be so hardy as to write, contrive, print, or cause to be published or distributed, or to keep any of the same, or any other Books, Libels, or Writings of like nature and quality, contrary to the true meaning and intent of this her Majesty's Proclamation. And likewise, that no man hereafter give any instruction, direction, favour, or assistance to the contriving, writing, printing, publishing, or dispersing of the same, or such like Books, Libels, or Writings whatsoever, as they tender her Majesty's good favour, will avoid her high displeasure, and as they will answer the contrary at their uttermost perils: and upon such pains and penalties, as by the Law any way may be inflicted upon the offenders, in any of these behalves, as persons maintaining such seditious actions, which her Majesty mindeth to have severely executed. And if any person have had knowledge of the Authors, Writers, Printers, or Dispersers thereof, which shall within one month after the publication hereof, discover the same to the Ordinary of the place where he had such knowledge, or to any of her Majesty's Privy Council: the same person shall not for his former concealment be hereafter molested or troubled. Given at her Majesty's Palace at Westminster, the thirteenth of February, 1588. In the One and thirtieth year of her Highness' Reign.  
God Save the Queen.   

Imprinted at London by the Deputies of Christopher Barker, Printer to the Queens most Excellent Majesty. 1588.   
Now, either our Authors knew these things, or no: if not, they may give me thanks for minding them of these Laws, some of which are still in force, which ought to bind up their hands from the like practices, lest they meet with the like punishment. Sure I am, they are obliged in Conscience, if not in Interest, timely to beg pardon, and make▪ their Recantations as public as their Crimes. But if they did know these things, and yet act so confidently and industriously against them, Miror admodum ut quorum facta imitantur, eorum exitus non pertimescunt. Certainly these men think themselves in some Utopian Commonwealth, ubi sentire quoe velis, & quoe sentias loqui licet; where they think according to their own lusts, and talk as lavishly. as they think: In magna fortunâ, minima licentia. Every action of our Superiors, every word, yea, the very thoughts and intentions of their hearts, are arraigned, censured, and condemned, as if they only were to be accountable: But as for the Mobile, Nos numerus summus, & magno dominamur Atridi. The confidence of their numbers makes them confident of impunity; and the Privileges of the People far exceed the Prerogative of the Prince. Quidvis impune facere, hoc Regium est.  
Though other Restraints have proved ineffectual, all the wholesome Laws of the Land, all the sad experiences of the national plagues of the Sword, Fire, and Pestilence, which have fallen; or rather have been drawn down on our own heads by our Ingratitude and Rebellion against God and our Superiors, have been baffled: yet those stronger ties of God's Commandments, so plainly, so frequently, and under such intolerable penalties bound upon our very Souls and Consciences, should yet constrain us to live more piously and peaceably than hitherto we have done: Or at least the Mercies of God, who saved and redeemed us with an outstretched Arm, and hath set over us the meekest and most merciful Prince on the Earth. His patience and long-suffering towards us after so long and heinous provocations, his defeating the hellish Plots of our Adversaries, who unweariedly watch for an opportunity to devour us, should at last lead us to Repentance, and cause us to consider and do, in this our day, the things that belong to our peace, before they are hid from our eyes.;  
Against the Sophistry of such unreasonable men for Resistance, I shall oppose the Doctrine of the Apostle for Obedience and Subjection, which he delivers, Rom. 13. Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be, are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist, shall receive to themselves damnation. v. 5. Wherefore we must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.     

OF OBEDIENCE ACTIVE & PASSIVE Due to our SUPERIORS.  
THose few directions of the Apostle, Rom. 13.1, 2, etc. are so full and plain, that there needs no Comment on them, if men were not resolved against their duty, and employed their wits to palliate their sins, and destroy their Souls. For from that Text we are taught,  

1. That all lawful Government, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is from God; The powers that be are ordained of God.  
2. That God often gives this Power to wicked men. The Powers that were in being when the Apostles wrote, were such as Nero and Claudius, Heathen Persecutors.  
3. That in every Government there is a Supreme or higher Power, that judgeth all, and can be judged of none; for without such a Power no Government can subsist.  
4. That such Powers must be cheerfully obeyed in all things not contrary to the Will of God; paying them Custom, Tribute, Honour, and Fear, as to God's Ministers.  
5. That in things contrary to the Will of God, as we ought not to obey, so we ought not to resist.  
6. That the penalty of Resistance is the Wrath of God, eternal Damnation.  
7. That we are obliged as well not to resist in things contrary to God's Will, as cheerfully to obey in things agreeable thereunto, for conscience sake; that is, in consideration of the Command of God, which layeth an Obligation on our Conscience.   
1. That all Government is originally from God. This seems to be granted by our Author, and therefore I shall say the less concerning it; Mr. Hunt also asserting, p. 38. that it is impossible any thing can be of man's appointment, which is of God's ordination: There can be no such thing as a Co-legislative power of men with their Maker. Government therefore (says he) is of God, but the Specification thereof is of men: and the best definition that can be made of Government, is in the words of both the Apostles, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is God's Ordinance, but a Humane Creature: Wherein he contradicts himself as it were even in the same breath, having said immediately before, It is impossible any thing can be of man's appointment which is of God's ordination, understanding it as he doth, not of the Species, but of the Original Right and Authority of Government: For p. 36. he demands, Where is the Charter of Kings from God Almighty to be found? for nothing but the declared Will of God can warrant us— to give up the Rights and Liberties of the people. If they are lawful, I am sure it is villainy to betray them. Here you plainly see the people are encouraged to resist their Prince, on pretence of defending their Rights and Liberties, or else they are declared Villains and Traitors.  
But let us examine the ground of this Assertion: He quotes 1 Pet. 2.13. Where (he says) the Apostle styles Kings, as well as Governors under them, the Ordinance of man: which cannot have any other sense, but that men make them, and give them their power; and therefore (says he) when the Apostle calls the power of Government God's Ordinance, it is because in general God approves of Governments; as if there were any Governors which were advanced if not Gratia Dei, as our stile hath it, yet Decreto ac Dono Divino; when Pilate himself, who condemned Christ, had his power given him from above.  
I wondered to read this, in a man that had showed much diligence and reading (as to matters of Law) in his Treatise concerning the Bishops Right, thus to falter and prevaricate, in asserting (p. 36.) that Kings have no Charter from God. And my wonder is yet increased, when I read his confident conclusion. That these two places could not be reconciled by any other interpretation but his own. I am much inclined to think that Mr. Hunt knew a better way of reconciling these Scriptures; only, finding no other offering themselves willingly to serve his Hypothesis, he thought to press this of St. Peter to it. Now the design that he drives is against the Succession, p. 42. which (says he) is of a Civil nature, not established by any Divine Right;— and the several limitations of the Descent of the Crown, must be made by the People in conferring the Royal Dignity and Power. Had Mr. Hunt talked at this rate in Cromwel's days, when he was about to make himself a King, it had been tolerable; but to talk thus in a Kingdom so long continued in a Legal Succession, and so well constituted, that nothing but such new suggestions are like to disturb it, needeth Pardon, though he expects Praise for it.  
In other things I thought Mr. Hunt an ingenuous and bold man, that spoke his own Sentiments, as if he were in Civitate libera; and I would willingly have excused him upon that account here, or as a man labouring under the common fate of such as meddle with matters out of their Spheres: for seldom meet we with such Blunderers as Divines, when they attempt the work of Lawyers and Statesmen; or Lawyers, when they invade the Office of the Divine. But none of these things can be pleaded in Mr. Hunt's excuse: for no doubt he had consulted with such Divines as wrote in the time of the Late War, at least such as had a hand in that War, and yet survived.  
The Assemblies Annotations were at his hand; and I suppose he would have consulted them, or such as they were, (i. e.) no great friends to Kingly Government. Hear then what they say on the words Ordinance of man. By Ordinance is meant the framing and ordering of Civil Government; called the Ordinance of man, not because it is invented by, or hath its original from men; for all power is from God, Rom. 13.1, 2. though sometime he useth men as means to derive Power or Government to such or such a person or persons, that so they might be the more willing to yield Obedience: but because it is proper to men, or because it is discharged by men. And on the word Supreme they note: There is therefore no other Supreme on Earth above the King in his Dominions.  
Pareus is another common Author, and one whom Mr. Hunt probably would have consulted about this Opinion above others, he having written such things against the power of Kings as deserved to be committed publicly to the flames. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apellatio ad Deum primum autorem nos revocat; The word Creature recalleth us to the consideration of God, who is the Prime Author of Magistracy: for though Magistrates are said to be created, that is, ordained by men, yet their first Creator properly is God alone. Thus he, in the Appendix to his Comment on Rom. 13. Dubio 3.  
And there he teacheth you plainly how to reconcile St. Peter with St. Paul, whom you make to contradict each other. The Apostle (says he) calls Magistracy a humane Ordinance, not causally, as it is devised by men, and set up at their pleasure; but subjectively, as it is administered by men; and objectively, as exercised about the government of humane Societies; or lastly, in respect of the end, as constituted of God for the benefit of men.  
Calvin and Beza, and generally all the Modern Expositors, say the same: and whoever reads the words following, where this Ordinance of man is divided, to the King as Supreme, and to Governors sent by him, must needs acknowledge, that the Apostle speaks not of the thing, but the persons. Omni personae, omni principatui, cui nos divina dispositio subdi voluit, saith Bede on that place.  
Dr. Hammond's Paraphrase I think is beyond all exception, because it perfectly reconciles the sense of St. Peter with that of St. Paul: for by every Ordinance of man, he understands every Heathen Governor, every mortal Prince. And his learned Notes do evince the truth of his interpretation; which being too long to insert, I refer the Reader to them, and shall only give you his Reason, which is this: That the Gnostics, who had so early troubled the Church, taught, that Christian Servants and Subjects were not bound to obey their Heathen Masters and Magistrates; whereas the Apostle enjoins them to obey both, not only if they be good and gentle, but also if they be froward, if they be unbelievers.  
We may not make our Liberty a cloak for Ambition or Rebellion; and pretend to vindicate our Country, when we intent to enslave it: As Antiochus, who brought a great Army into Greece, pretending to deliver it, when it was in a condition of Freedom and Prosperity: And thus the Lacedæmonians endeavouring to free themselves from one Tyrant, made way for Thirty to domineer over them.  
But Mr. Hunt's demand is, what Scripture we have for the King's Charter. I answer, That Saul had a Charter, 1 Sam. 8. for God chose him: and how far it extended, read there, and Skiccard de Jure Regum apud Hebraeos. And after God had rejected Saul, who had first rebelled against God, yet he hath the Title and the Reverence of the Lords Anointed given him by David still. And God himself calls Cyrus his Anointed (though a Heathen). And Daniel acknowledged of Nabuchadnezzar, The God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, strength, and glory, Dan. 2.27. These than had it not from the People.  
Pilate himself, though an Inferior Magistrate, had his Charter owned and submitted to by Christ himself. And when it is said in the Old Testament, By me King's reign, Prov. 8.15. and in the New, even of the Roman Emperors, such as Nero and Claudius, that they are ordained by God, and that our Obedience is due to them for the Lords sake, and for Conscience sake; He must be an Ignoramus, or worse, that can see in Scripture a Charter for the People's rights and power even to resist their Prince, and none for the Prince to vindicate his Authority over the People.  
It would be irksome to the Reader to relate what is obvious in Heathen Writers concerning the Original of Kingly power. Nature did at first find out a King, saith Seneca: And Aristotle says, That by nature not only the Father hath rule over his Children, but also the King over those that are within his Kingdom. This is the Government that God himself erected from the beginning, giving to Adam a Patriarchal, which is tantamount to a Monarchal power. This he granted to Israel, and continued to the coming of Christ. To this power in the Romans, Christ and his Apostles submit themselves, and command every Soul to follow their examples: and all the Primitive Christians did so, till the Pope of Rome, to the great scandal of Christianity, invaded the Thrones, and usurped the power of their lawful Emperors. Gregory the Seventh, Pope Vrbane, and Paschal were the first that stirred up Subjects against their Princes, and the Son against his Father.  
We are taught (saith Polycarp) to yield Obedience to all Principalities under God, except in things destructive to our Souls. Therefore do as you please; cast me to wild beasts or the fire, which is not to be compared to that eternal fire prepared for the ungodly. In the Constitutions of Clemens, it is declared a heinous sin to resist the Prince: and the Councils for 1200 years taught no other Doctrine. And when those Pope's first turned Rebels, and proceeded so imperiously as to Excommunicate the Bishop and Churchmen of Liege for adhering to the Emperor, and stirred up Robert Earl of Flanders to destroy all that Clergy; they wrote a most excellent Epistle, declaring, That they never had heard of any such Doctrine or Practice from any of the Fathers, and that they had observed fearful Judgements of God falling on such as did rebel against their Princes. And so it fell out: for all the Pope's great Instruments, Radolphus, and Herman, and Egbert, were cut off; and gave the World magnum Documentum, a severe Caution not to rise up against their Princes, no not for the sake of an Infallible Pope.  
This was the sense of the Primitive Fathers. Irenaeus proves it by Scripture, and concludes, By whose command they are born men, by his command they are made Princes. So Tertul. Ind Imperator, unde homo; inde potestas, unde Spiritus. It is God (saith Origen) who setteth up Kings, and removeth them; and in his own time raiseth up such a one as is useful to the State: Contra Celsum. Theophilus' Bishop of Antioch; I will honour the King, not adoring him, but praying for him; knowing that by God the King is ordained. So Athenagoras, of Aurelius and his Son Commodus, says, They had received the Kingdom from above. St. Basil also on Psal. 32. The Lord setteth up Kings, and removeth them; and there is no power but what is ordained of God. And to conclude with Greg. Nazianzen, concerning the Power of the Governor of his Province, Orat. 17. to the Citizens of Antioch, That together with Christ he did rule the people committed to his charge; that from him he had received the Sword, and was to be accounted as the Image of God. So S. Chrysostom: And if we reverence those Officers that are chosen by the King, though they be wicked, though they be Thiefs and Robbers, not despising them for their wickedness, but standing in awe of them for the dignity of him that elected them; much more ought we thus to do in the case of God, and the King chosen by him. Serm. 1. of David and Saul.  
So that even wicked Princes have a Charter from God. So, our Saviour said of Pilate, Joh. 19.11. Thou couldst have no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 authority or power against me, except it were given thee from above. And St. Paul of the Roman Emperors, There is no power but of God, the powers that be, are ordained of God; and he that resists, resisteth the Ordinance of God. And that St. Peter says the same, though in other words, hath been made evident: Submit yourselves to every Ordinance of man for the Lords sake, whether to the King as supreme: for so is the will of God, 1 Pet. 2. 13-15.  
St. Augustine, de Civitate Dei, l. 5. c. 21. Regnum terrenum dat Deus piis & impiis: Qui Mario, ipse Caio Caesari; qui Augusto, ipse & Neroni, etc. God gives an Earthly Kingdom both to good and evil Princes: He that gave it to Marius, gave it to Caius Caesar; he that gave it to Augustus, gave it to Nero; he who gave it to the Vespasians, Father and Son, most mild and loving Emperors, gave it likewise to that most cruel man Domitian: And not to recount them all, he that gave it to that Christian Prince Constantine, gave it to that Apostate Julian. These things, without doubt, that one and true God doth rule and govern as he pleaseth, although for secret causes, yet not for unjust. So the Prophet, Dan. 2.37. Thou, O King, art a King of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, strength, and glory. And chap. 5.21. The most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, chap. 4.  
And as God setteth them in the Throne, so he rules by them, and overrules them, guiding all their actions to his own just and wise ends. If all the Princes of the World should conspire, they can do no more than what God's hand and counsel have determined before to be done, Acts 4.28. God knows how to effect good and gracious ends, even by wicked Kings. He made Cyrus an Instrument to build him a House in Jerusalem, 2 Chron. 36.23. and calls Nabuchadnezzar his Servant, Jer. 25.9. The heart of the King is in the hands of the Lord as the rivers of water; he turneth it whithersoever he pleaseth. He can restrain the spirits of Princes, as he did Abimelech, and not suffer them to touch his People. He can cause the wrath of man to turn to his praise. He stirred up the spirit of Cyrus to deliver the Jews from the Captivity of Babylon, Ezra 1.1. He made Darius and Artaxerxes instrumental in building and beautifying the House of the Lord, Ezra 6.22. and chap. 7.27.  
Wherefore, as the Psalmist says, Psal. 97.1. The Lord reigneth, let the earth rejoice: let the multitude of the isles be glad thereof. For though Clouds and Darkness are round about him, and we cannot see the reason or end of his Providences; yet Righteousness and Judgement are the habitation of his Throne, v. 2. Were the Almighty like the Epicureans God, that could not intent the affairs of the world without great trouble, and therefore retired himself, and left all to Chance, we might then think it fit to choose for ourselves: but when every Choice and every Chance is ordered by the Almighty and wise God; when it is said, Sam. 18.18. The people had chosen Saul, chap. 10.24. it is said, The Lord had chosen him. And if the Magistrate be chosen by Lot, yet, as Solomon says, Prov. 16.33. The Lot is cast into the lap, but the whole disposition thereof is of the Lord. We may not say therefore as that Prince did, 2 King. 6.33. when God had sent a Famine in Samaria, This evil is from the Lord, why should I wait on him any longer? much less should we resist the established Ordinance of Heaven: for, if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it, lest haply ye be found even to fight against God, Acts 5.39. in whose alwise dispensations we ought to acquiesce, and patiently to submit to them.  
When Jeroboam rebelled against Rehoboam a wicked Prince, you may find what a black character he and his Confederates have in the Scripture, 2 Chron. 13.5. Ought you not to know that the Lord God of Israel gave the kingdom over Israel to David and to his sons for ever, by a covenant of salt? yet Jeroboam the servant of Solomon the son of David is risen up, and hath rebelled against his Lord. And there are gathered to him VAIN MEN THE childs OF BELIAL, and have strengthened themselves-against Rehoboam when he was young and tenderhearted, and could not withstand them. And now ye think to withstand the kingdom of the Lord in the hands of the sons of David.— v. 12. O ye children of Israel, fight ye not against the Lord God of your fathers: for ye shall not prosper. From this Scripture these Observations are obvious.  

1. That a Succession to the Crown, Jure Divino, is no new thing, v. 5.  
2. That it is no Excuse for breaking Gods Command, to plead we followed Providence.  
3. That to rebel against an evil Prince, such as Rehoboam was, is to rebel against the Lord, v. 8.  
4. That such as strengthen such a Rebellion, are Sons of Belial, v. 7.  
5. That the Kings harkening to evil Counsellors, is no sufficient Plea to warrant a Rebellion.  
6. Nor his oppressing the People.  
7. That notwithstanding their great numbers (Jeroboam having eight hundred-thousand chosen men of valour) they shall not prosper, v. 12. and v. 17. there fell with Jeroboam five hundred thousand men of valour.  
8. That Rehoboam was not so bad, but Jeroboam was much worse: for he made all Israel to sin, setting up Calves as Gods, for the People to worship; whereas under Rehoboam the Worship of God was preserved (though the People were oppressed) v. 10. The Lord is our God, and we have not forsaken him; and the Priests which minister to the Lord, are the sons of Aaron, and the Levites wait upon their business.  
9 That after that bad King, God sent other, good ones, to establish his Worship: and therefore we must wait the Lords leisure, and not murmur against, nor resist his Ordinance and Decrees, but submit to the hand of God, who often punisheth a wicked People by an unrighteous Prince.   

HOW FAR Wicked Princes Ought to be obeyed.  
1. NEgatively: not in any thing contrary to the revealed Will of God: to all God's Laws they are bound themselves, Deut. 17.18. And God will call them to a more severe account than others, there being greater obligations laid on them, and their evil Examples like to do more hurt. And much more are we bound to obey those Laws of God which oblige the greatest Potentates, above any Laws of men. 'Tis St. Augustine's Gradation, De Verbis Dom. Ser. 6. If thy Curator command thee any thing, must it not be done? yet if the Proconsul countermand it, thou despisest not thy Curator, but servest a greater. And if the Emperor command one thing, and God another, what do you judge fit to be done? And it is resolved thus: Da veniam Imperator; tu carcerem, ille Gehennam minatur: We ought to obey God rather than man.  
2. Positively: In all things that are not contrary to God's Will, we ought cheerfully to obey: So St. Basil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Regula Ethic. 79. Where the Command of God doth not hinder or interpose. For otherwise they have no power at all. Whatever is really good, God hath commanded us already, and forbidden whatever is evil; but hath left the command of things indifferent to his Vicegegerents, to judge of the expediency and usefulness of them: And if we obey them not in this, we obey them in nothing. Which is well expressed by Aulus Gellius a Heathen, in the person of a Father commanding either what is right or what is wrong. If it be right, it is to be done, not because he commands it, but justice requires it: If it be wrong, it ought not to be done, because it is unjust; and therefore the Father is not to be obeyed in any thing. To this Awls Gellius answers, that the division is imperfect, because there are things of a middle nature, wherein the Father is to be obeyed with a filial ingenuity and readiness: which is much more strong in behalf of the Prince.  
The word used by the Apostle is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a military word, signifying to be under command: and as the Centurion said of his Soldiers, Matth. 8.9. If I say to this man, Go, he goeth; to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my Servant, Do this, and he doth it. And thus the Centurion did himself: for he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 under Authority. And such obedience we must yield, as St. Paul requires by Titus 3.1. where to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he adds, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (i. e.) dicto obedire, and to be ready to every good work.  
We ought to obey even a Popish Prince, saith Mr. Baxter. And there can be no question but we ought to obey them in what God hath commanded: We ought to pay them Tribute and Custom, as Tertullian testifies of the Primitive Christians: we ought to show them Reverence, Honour, and Fear: we ought, as good and profitable Members of the Commonwealth, diligently to follow our Callings, and advance the Trade and happiness of the Nation: We ought to defend their Persons, and fight their Battles against their Enemies; and in extraordinary cases, to give them extraordinary assistance. We bring unto you, said Justine Martyr to Antonius, more help and Tribute than all others, being taught by our Lord to give to Caesar the things that are Caesar's: We ought to pray for the welfare of them and their people, that with and under them we may lead quiet and peaceable lives. So Tertullian prayed for Domitian a great Tyrant, for his long Life, secure Empire, stout Armies, faithful Senators, & quaecunque hominis & Caesaris vota sunt. We ought to bless God for the good things we enjoy under them; we ought not to envy at their prosperity, to murmur and repine at every severe Dispensation; but to our Prayers join Intercessions and Thanksgivings: for though there be some Evils in their Government, yet there would be more, if that Government should be turned into Anarchy and Confusion.  
Si ubi jubeantur (Milites) quaerere singulis liceat, pereunte obsequio, etiam Imperium intercidit, as Tacitus, l. 1. If Soldiers be permitted to dispute the Commands of their General, the whole Empire may fail on the neglect of obedience. It was a severe Counsel given by St. Augustine (Epist. 73.) to Possidonius: Rather think what course you ought to take with them that will not obey, than to convince them that what they do is unlawful. And in truth, there would be endless Dissensions, if every Subject should be permitted to dispute the lawfulness of such Commands as are enjoined him, not by his Prince alone, but by the mature deliberation of his Council; especially when, as it is with us, every one hath his vote in choosing those Counsellor, that in our names consent to the Laws. This were to do what is foretold by Solomon, Prov. 20.25. After vows to make enquiry.  
It is a pernicious Opinion, that hath infected too many of this Age, That though we do not actively obey the Prince's Commands, yet if we submit to the Penalty, the Law is satisfied, and we are free from guilt. In answer to which, I say:  
1. That Obedience is more than Nonresistance; it must be active and cheerful, as in paying Tribute and Custom, so in other parts of obedience; to go and come, and do what is commanded.  
2. Suffering, or paying the penalty, is not the chief intention of the Law; but the duty of Obedience, without which the ends of Government will be frustrated, viz. Peace and good Order.  
3. The Law of God enjoins us to obey the Laws of men that are not contrary to his Law. Now though we satisfy the Law of our Country by bearing the penalty, yet the Law of God is not thereby satisfied; that Law requires Repentance and Amendment, (i. e.) that we do so no more. As in that instance of frequenting Divine Service, we do not think a Papist hath satisfied the Law when he pays Twelve pence; neither indeed do others: For it is God's Law that is broken, who commands us not to forsake the public Assemblies; and to obey them that have the rule over us: For we are to obey for Conscience sake, (i. e. because of the obligation which the Command of God hath laid upon us). And when the Magistrate calls for our obedience in this or that particular which is not against God's Word, God commands our obedience to him, he having God's Authority in such cases; and to disobey, is not only to disobey man, but God: Submit yourselves to every Ordinance of man for the Lords sake, and for Conscience sake: and the penalty of disobedience is damnation.  
So that it is an Atheistical Suggestion, that Rulers and Tyrants did first invent Religion, to keep men in awe. For although no other Terrors are sufficient to keep men in obedience but those of Hell and eternal Damnation, because men may carry on their mischievous designs so secretly, or with such a high hand, as to escape punishment in this life; yet it is not man but God that requireth obedience even to humane Laws, under the Severest Sanctions of Eternal Death ..  
Object. But what if the thing commanded be not good? then we own no Obedience: for the Magistrate is no longer Gods Minister than he commands for God: When he commands against God, he commands without Authority, and so we may disobey him without sin.  
Answ. There are but two Rules whereby we are to judge whether the Commands of our Superiors are good or not.  
The first is the Law of God; and when we make that our Rule, we must be as sure that the Word of God condemns what the Magistrates command, as we are sure that God commands us to obey our Magistrate: And in all reason we should choose what is our most plain and indispensable duty, before that which is doubtful; especially when the penalty of not obeying is no less than Damnation: for that is the wages of sin, or disobedience to Gods Law.  
2. A second Rule is the Laws of men, which do bind the Conscience when the Command is not contrary to God's Word. So that the Case to be resolved is only this: What we must do when the Magistrate commands things which we judge not expedient. In which case, considering especially our circumstances, the Laws established being such as we ourselves have consented to, it is too late for us to dispute the inexpediency of them; for so there can never be an establishment, it being impossible to make such Laws as may not be excepted against by some, especially such as transgress the Laws. In such cases therefore, the Magistrate, not the Subject, is to expound the Law.  
It is sufficient that the Laws have a tendency to the public and more general good, though some private men may suffer in the Execution of them: And when resisting those Laws which are made, will do more hurt than good, we ought to obey them, though we suffer unjustly in so doing. As Dr. Sanderson gives an instance in Soldiers who for their Cowardice, or some other crime, are adjudged to be punished in a way of Decimation, (i. e. every tenth man): now although some of those that suffer may be guiltless and valiant men, yet the private inconvenience must be endured, rather than a public mischief should be tolerated. Of this the Learned Casuist speaks so largely and satisfactorily, that I shall refer my Reader to his last Praelection, p. 356. De Obligatione Conscientiae.  
When we are commanded to do what we apprehend not to be for our good, we must have a double consideration: First, to the person commanding, who is God's Minister, and therefore may not be resisted, though, in the second place, he abuse his power in commanding what is not good or lawful: For if in this case we resist, we usurp the Power, and invade and destroy the Order and Government that God hath set over us. If we might resist when we apprehend that we are commanded things against our Religion, our Laws, or Liberties, than there could be no such thing as Rebellion; and then there would not long be any such thing as Religion, Liberty, or Government in the world. Doubtless the Apostle was sensible what kind of Governors were in Rome when he wrote his Epistle, namely, such as commanded for the most part things that were impious; yet we read not of any resistance: and doubtless those Primitive Christians best knew the Apostles mind, and practised accordingly.   

THE REASONS For not resisting Wicked Princes.  
BEcause, 1. He is God's Minister. For the Lords sake, we must submit, saith St. Peter, and for Conscience sake (i. e.) for the Obligation that God hath laid upon us as he is God's Minister. This swayed with David: He was the Lords Anointed, and therefore, he could not lift up a hand against him: nor would St. Paul speak evil of any of the Rulers of the People. For, to speak evil of them, is accounted as Blasphemy, and Disobedience is as Sacrilege: And, as St. Paul, A resisting of the Ordinance of God.  
Obj. As he is God's Minister for good, we are ready to obey him▪ but when he commands what is evil, he is no longer God's Minister, but the Devils, and we ought not to obey him.  
Ans. He is God's Minister still as to his Office, though in respect of the abuse of it by unrighteous Actions, he do the work of the Devil. And many times God placeth cruel and unrighteous Kings, (as a just Judgement) over an unrighteous people; according to the Imprecation of David against those that were enemies to so good a King, Set thou an ungodly man to have rule over them.  
Regis quando boni sunt, muneris est Dei; quando mali, sceleris est populi. When good Kings bear rule, it is a token of God's Favour; when wicked ones, it is the effect of the people's Iniquity. As Job says, Chap. 34.30. juxta Septuag. Regnare facit Hypocritam, propter peccata populi. God takes away good Kings in his anger, and sets evil ones in their rooms: yea, many times, for the sins of the people, he permits good Princes to fall, as he did David in numbering the people, that they and their King might suffer under a common Calamity. It is an observation of Aeneas Silvius, de Ortu Imperij, c. 16. Deus saepe propter peccata Subditorum deprivari permittit vitam Rectorum. When Rehoboam harkened to evil Counsellors, 1 Kin. 12.15. The Cause was from the Lord, that he might bring to pass his saying, etc.  
Now who shall judge whether the thing commanded be for our good or not? We have very plain precepts which require our Obedience to Princes in all things that are not against the word of God: And we ought to have as plain precepts Affirmative or Negative for the things that we resolve to do or not to do according to the King's command: i. e. Nothing can justify our disobedience to our Prince, except there be as plain Scripture-proofs for the  evil of the action commanded, as there are for the necessity of Christian Obedience. Where is it said, Ye must needs disobey your Prince when he commands you to worship God in the public assemblies, or to pray uncovered, or to receive the Sacrament on your knees; as it is said, Let every soul be subject to the higher powers; and, Submit yourselves to every Ordinance of man; and, Obey Magistrates and them that have the rule over you?  
In this one Common Good of Order and Government, many good things are included: for, as Cicero said, de Legibus 3. Without Government, neither House, City, or Nation, nor Mankind, nor Nature, nor the World itself could subsist. And St. Chrysostom on Rom. Hom. 23. Take away the higher Power, and all goes to wrack; neither City, nor Family, nor Assembly, or any thing else can stand; the stronger will devour the weaker, and all things be turned upside down. It is therefore concluded by all Wise men, That a bad Prince is better than none. For a demonstration whereof, the Persians after their King's death permitted the people to live in a Lawless manner for five days together, that after the experience of the outrages and violences committed in the interregnum, they might be the more endeared to their Prince. Consonant to which is that in Judges, chap. 21.16. when there was no King in Israel, every one did that which was right in his own eyes: which made them on any terms to desire a King.  
2. We are to obey them, that we may silence the ignorance of foolish men, that think and speak evil of Christianity, as if it set up Christ's Kingdom against Caesars, and a good Christian could not be a good Subject; which slanders we should confute by our peaceable conversations: and this will gain us favour at home, by mitigating the Prince's displeasure; or toleration abroad, if we be put to fly for our lives, when it shall be known that we are of peaceable and patiented Conversations.  
The Christian Religion was from the beginning reproached as a disturber of the Secular powers; and therefore it was the Care of Christ to clear his Disciples from this Crime, by paying tribute, and living in subjection to the Rulers of this world, that he might give them no offence. And the Apostles knowing that they were reported to be Seditious, and such as would turn the world upside down, have taken all possible care to undeceive the enemies of the Gospel, by obliging the professors thereof to obey their Rulers, under the greatest obligations that the wit of men could invent.  
So that in case the King do command such things as are evidently forbidden by God, we see what is then to be done: we must peaceably acquiesce in the providence of God; as Tacitus said, we may bonos Imperatores voto expetere quoscunq: tolerare, l. 4. Submit to them as Instruments and Rods in the hand of God, correcting or punishing us for our sins. God hath the devil himself in a Chain, and hath set bounds unto him: as in the case of Job, whose life he could not take away, nor go beyond God's Commission. Commit yourselves therefore to God in well doing▪ who hath said, Vengeance is mine, and I will repay it. And as David to Saul, 1 Sam. 24.12. The Lord judge between thee and me, and the Lord avenge me of thee; but my hand shall not be upon thee: or, as in 1 Sam. 26.10. The Lord shall smite him, or his day shall come to die, or he shall descend into the battle and perish: the Lord forbidden that I should stretch forth my hand against the Lords Anointed.  
We may not impute all that we suffer to our enemies; the hand of God is in it, and we must (as David did) acknowledge it to be the Lords doing. We must receive evil at the hands of God, as well as good; and bless him when he takes away, as well as when he continues his Mercy to us. Jer. 29.7. The Jews were commanded to seek the peace of that City (though it were Babylon) wherein they were Captives, and to pray to the Lord for it: for in the peace thereof ye shall have peace: and doubtless in the disturbance of it, they were like to be the first and greatest sufferers.  
Obj. But may we not resist wicked Princes when they unjusty seek our destruction?  
Ans. This (says our Author) is the Mahometan Doctrine of the Bowstring: which I think is a most scandalous, if not blasphemous expression. For this example our Saviour hath set us, who though most innocent and most afflicted, yet was most patiented under all his sufferings: and we must look to Jesus the Author and Finisher of our Faith. And it is directly contrary to 1 Pet. 2.19. where, in the judgement of all Expositors, we are in the same manner to obey Magistrates as Masters, (i. e.) though we suffer wrongfully, to take it patiently, as our Saviour hath given example, who when he suffered he threatened not, etc. Read chap. 4.12, 13. and chap. 3.14, 15, etc.  
Those Christians who wrote their Apologies to the Emperors and Governors that were then persecuting of them, would not dare to speak any thing but what was an apparent truth; yet they all disclaim the practice of Resistance, as contrary to the Doctrine that they had received, viz. to be Subject to the Higher Powers, etc. Thus Justine Martyr, Lactantius, Athenagoras, Cyprian, etc. I shall name one for all. We are defamed (saith Tertull. ad Scapulam) touching the Imperial Majesty; yet never were Christians found to be Albinians, Nigrians, or Cassians: (i. e.) they never sided with any Factions against the Emperors; though if they had so done, their numbers were so great, that they might have overthrown his Forces: They might in one night with a few Firebrands avenge themselves, if they held it lawful to revenge evil with evil. Had we been minded to profess open Hostility, could we want numbers of men, or force of Arms? we have filled your Islands, Castles, Towns, Tents, Tribes, and Wards, yea even the Palace, Senate, and place of Judgement. For what War were not we able, though fewer in number than you, who go so willingly to our Martyrdom, if it were not more lawful in our Religion to be slain than to slay? And yet under all their Persecutions they multiplied: Ligabantur, includebantur, torquebantur, urebantur, laniebantur; & tamen multiplicabantur, saith St. Augustine, de Civit. Dei, l. 22. c. 6.  
Grotius, l. 1. c. 4. de Jure Belli, etc. speaking of that Sacred Maxim of the Apostles, Acts 4. It is better to obey God than man, discourseth thus: If either for this (i. e. our obedience to God) or for any other cause, he that hath the Sovereign power offer us an injury, it ought rather to be patiently tolerated, than forcibly resisted: for although we do not owe an Active Obedience to such Commands of Princes, yet we do owe a Passive: we may not transgress the Laws of God or Nature for the pleasure of the greatest Monarch, yet ought we rather patiently to submit to what shall be inflicted on us for disobeying, than by resistance to disturb our Country's peace. The best and safest course, in such a case, is either to preserve ourselves by flight, or resolutely to undergo whatever shall be imposed on us. His Reason is cogent: Because Civil Societies being instituted for the preservation of Peace, there accrues to that Commonwealth a greater Right over us and ours, so far as is necessary for that end.— And if a promiscuous Right of forcible Resistance should be tolerated, it would be no longer a Commonwealth, (i. e.) a Sanctuary against Oppression, but a confused Rabble.  
For this, among other things, he quotes that noted Saying, Principi Summum rerum arbitrium dii dederunt, subditis obsequii gloria relicta est. God hath given to Princes the Sovereign power, leaving to us the glory of Obedience. If a Soldier resist his Captain, striking him, and but lays hold of his Weapon, he is cashiered; if he break it, or strike again, he shall be put to death. That this was the Hebrew Law, he proves from Josh. 1.18. 1 Sam. 8.11. Deut. 17.14. which he so expounds,  
That the Governors may not be resisted, though they command what is not right. And therefore it is added in that place of Samuel, v. 18. that when the people are so oppressed by their King, that there is no remedy, they are to invoke his help who is the Supreme Judge of Heaven and Earth. And when our Saviour commands in the New Testament to give Caesar his due, he intended doubtless that they should yield as great, if not greater Obedience, both Active and Passive, unto the Higher Power, than what was due from the Jews; which St. Paul (Rom. 13.) expounds more largely, and chargeth those that resist the power of Kings with no less Crime than rebellion against God's Ordinance, and with a Judgement as great as their sin. So that as there is a necessity for our Subjection, there is also for our Not Resisting: Wherefore the Powers set over us are to be obeyed, not servilely, superstitiously, or out of fear; but with free, rational, and generous Spirits, tanquam à diis dati, as being God's Ordinance; and being commissioned by him, cannot do more or less than he orders and permits them to do.  
Another reason is drawn from our benefit, the Government being constituted for our good, and therefore in conscience not to be resisted: for the Apostles Argument respects that universal good for which Government, was first instituted, (i. e.) the public Peace, wherein every one is concerned more than in his private.— Now he that resists, doth as much as in him lies dissolve his Country's Peace, and so will bury himself in the Ruins of it at the end; and were it not for Governmens', a Kingdom would be but like a great Pond, wherein the bigger Fishes devour the lesser. Omnia erit fortiorum.  
Object. The Commands of Princes do not always tend to the public good; and when they decline from that end, they are not to be obeyed.  
Answ. Though the Supreme Magistrate doth sometime, through fear, anger, lust, or other passions, swerve from the path of Justice and Equity; yet these happening but seldom, are to be passed by as personal blemishes: which, as Tacitus observes, are abundantly recompensed by the benefit of better Princes.— Laws may be called good, though they fit not every man's case, if they obviate such disorders as are frequently practised, and so do good to the generality of the People. Thus Grotius.  
If the People may resist their Prince, I would know in what Cases it may be done. It may be done (say some) in case of Religion, when that is in danger; in case of Liberty, when that is invaded; in case of Oppression, when that is heavy; in case of the King's exercising an arbitrary power; in case of his denying his People's Privileges and Immunities. Nay, we have known that mere Fears and Jealousies, which were fancied only to promote a Rebellion, have been used as an Argument to justify it.  
But will any of these things justify the resistance of a Son against his Father, or a Servant against his Master? Or if we may make the People Judges of the lawfulness of resisting in one or more of these Cases, why may they not in all, and in as many more as they shall please to be sufficient?  
But if any cause can justify Resistance, it must be that of Religion; and, if any Religion, that which is the true Religion. Now if we admit the Christian Religion to be the truest Religion, that condemns Resistance above any other, as hath been demonstrated by its Precepts, and the practice of those Primitive Christians, who best knew the sense and the mind of our Saviour in those Precepts: and if any Christians should maintain the contrary, it would give the Princes of the World a just occasion to be jealous of it, and root it out of their Dominions: for what Prince would permit any such number of men to abide and multiply in their Dominions, that profess it to be lawful to make resistance against them?  
Besides, there are few men bred up in any Religion, but they think their own to be the true Religion: and then they may resist their Prince, how false and destructive soever it be; and so a Papist or Anabaptist, a Jew or a Pagan, may think it lawful for them to resist; and so no Prince can be secure of the Obedience of his People. Therefore we must take away all pretences of the lawfulness of Resistance, or we must grant All pretences to be lawful that the People shall judge so to be. Therefore the Scripture hath forbidden resistance in any case, as our Law, grounded on Scripture and Reason, hath also done, on any pretence whatsoever.  
It had been enough to oppose Bishop usher's sole Judgement against our Author's. Bishop Usher, of the power of Princes, p. 214. The patience of the Saints was not only seen in the Primitive Persecutions, but continued as well under the Arian Emperors, who retaining the name of Christians, did endeavour with all their power to advance that damnable Heresy; but also under Julian himself, who utterly revolted from the very profession of the Name of Christ. Sr. Augustine observed the same, on Psal. 124. Julian was an Infidel, an Apostate, and Idolater; yet, Milites Christiani servierunt Imperatori Insideli; Christian Soldiers served this Heathen Emperor. When they came to the Cause of Christ, they would acknowledge no Lord but him in Heaven; but when he said, Go forth to fight, Invade such a Nation, they presently obeyed: They were subject to their Temporal Lord, for his sake that was their Eternal Lord.  
The Arian Persecution by Constantius (who had also Apostatised from the true Faith) was as violent, and of much longer continuance than that of Julian; yet though the Christians had then (as you pretend) the Laws on their side, they made no resistance. I am constrained to repeat this again, because I meet with a contrary Assertion in Mr. Hunt, p. 153. I must remember him (saith he) out of Socrates, Eccl. Hist. l. 2. c. 38. when the Soldiers of the Arian Emperor Constantius were by his command sent to enforce them to become Arians, they took Arms in defence of their Religion. Where I perceive, as great a Lawyer as Mr. Hunt is, he hath taken honest John Milton into his Consult; who says, Chap. 44. of the Primitive Christians (Idem bellum Constantio indixerunt, & quantum in se erat, Imperio & vita spoliarunt) That they waged War with Constantius, and as much as in them lay, spoiled him of his Life and Empire. This being said by Milton, how notoriously false soever, Mr. Hunt is ready to assert the truth of it, and makes an offer of as good Authority for it, as ever Milton did for the King's Condemnation; as will appear by the History.  
This passage refers us to a horrible Relation of the Arian Persecution acted by Macedonius, who procured Edicts from that Emperor to force the Christians to the Arian infidelity. The History gins chap. 27. Macedonius after the death of Paul Bishop of Constantinople (who was banished first, and then slain in exile by the Arians, Athanasius hardly escaping them) enters on those Churches, who having great power with the Emperor, stirred up as great Wars and Cruelties between the Christians themselves, as any that were acted by the Tyrants; and he got his impious actings to be confirmed by the Emperor's Edicts. Presently he proclaims the Edicts in all the Cities, and the Soldiers are enjoined to assist him: The Orthodox are banished not only from their Churches, but their Cities— Then they constrain the people against their wills to communicate with the Arians, and used as great violence as ever any of those used that forced the Christians to the worshipping of Idols, applying Whips, Tortures, and all kind of Cruelties. Some were Sequestered of all their Goods; others Banished; many died under their Torments; and those that were to be Banished, were slain in the way. These Cruelties were practised throughout all the Cities of the East-part of the Empire, especially at Constantinople.  
This Persecution when Macedonius was made Bishop, was increased more than before; of which Socrates, in chap. 38, gives a fuller relation, p. 142, Edit. Valesii: That he then persecuted not only Catholics, but the Novatians also, who agreed with the Catholics in the Consubstantiality. Both were oppressed with intolerable mischiefs. Agellius the Bishop of the Novatians is forced to flee; but many, eminent for their piety, were apprehended and tormented for refusing to communicate with them; and after other Tortures, they gagged their Moveths with Wood, and forced their Sacrament into them: which was to those good men the greatest torment of all. They also forced the Women and Children to receive their Baptism. If any resisted, they used Whips, Bonds, Imprisonment, and other cruelties; of which it shall suffice to relate one or two instances, leaving the Auditors to judge by them, of the inhuman actings of Macedonius and his Party. Such Women as would not communicate with them, they first squeezed their Breasts in a Box, and then cut them off; some with Iron, and others with Caustics of scalding Eggs. A new kind of torment, never used by the Heathen against us Christians, was invented by these who professed Christianity. These things I am informed of, saith Socrates, by Auxanontes a very old man, a Presbyter of the Novatian Church; who before he was made Presbyter, endured many indignities, being cast into Prison with one Alexander a Paphlagonian, and beaten with many stripes, whereof this Alexander died in prison, but Auxanontes lived to endure more torments.  
I have not time to translate the entire History, which may be read in that Chapter; I shall therefore come to that part of it related to by Mr. Hunt: which is thus:  
Macedonius, hearing that in the Province of Paphlagonia, especially at Mantinium, there were such a multitude of Novatians as could not be expelled by the Arian ecclesiastics, procures four Companies of Soldiers to force them to turn Arians. They, in defence of their Sect, armed themselves with despair, as with Weapons; and gathering together in a Body, with Hooks, and Hatchets, and what Weapons were at hand, met the Soldiers; in which scuffle many of the Paphlagonians, and near all the Soldiers, were slain. This I heard (saith Socrates) from a Paphlagonian that was in the Fight: And he adds, that the Emperor himself was offended with Macedonius for this action.  
I should indeed have wondered at the confidence of Mr. Hunt in accusing from this story the Orthodox for arming themselves in defence of their Profession, when it was only a rout of Novatians that were by the Arian cruelty driven to despair, that defended themselves against them. But I am so transported at another saying of his, that I have no admiration of any thing else, how false or pernicious soever: You shall find it, p. 192. of his Treatise concerning the Succession, where having suggested, that if the D. be not excluded, he doth certainly make us miserable; and mincing the matter a little, saying, We exclude only his Person, not his Posterity: he is not afraid to add— And we will not entail a War upon the Nation, though for the Sake and Interest of the glorious Family of the STVARTS. The speech is so heinous, that it cannot admit any aggravation. Well may such men as he and his Plagiary seek to justify resistance of lawful Powers, having in effect not only drawn the Sword, but cast away the Scabbard. We are told of one that was ready to kick an Emperor, and of others that played with his Beard; but this is little less than kicking at the Crown, and striking a blow at the root, to render the whole Family as glorious as they made the Father of it: Unless he can give some other sense of it than this: Rather than not exclude the D. we will exclude the glorious Family of the Stuarts. And in what sense he calls it a glorious Family, needs his explication.  
But will the Exclusion of the D. as certainly prevent our misery, as his Succession effect it? Did you never read how zealous some Priests and Pharisees were for a Bill of Exclusion against a far better person? John 11.47, 48. What do we? for this man doth many Miracles: if we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him, & the Romans will come, & take away both our place & nation And did not the passing that Bill, make way for the Romans to bring all their fears on their own heads? And was not our late dear King excluded from Crown, Kingdom, and life, upon such fears; and was that a means of our Peace and Happiness? I wish I could say our fears now, are as false as they were then. We have his R. H. Declaration for our Security, viz. That the Members of the Church of England are the best supporters of the Crown. Insomuch that if it fall to him to be concerned, he will ever countenance and preserve them and it. And p. 225. Why may we not suppose that a Popish Successor will defend his Regalia against the Pope? Our Ancient Kings did so in the Reign of Rich. 2.16. c. 5. In a Statute of Praemunire the Parliament declares. That the Crown of England, (against the Encroachments of the Pope, hath been so free at all times, that so hath been in no earthly subjection, but immediately subject to God in all things touching the Regalty of the same Crown, and to none other. And God defend (say they) that it should be submitted to the Pope, and the Laws and Statutes of the Realm be by him defeated and avoided at his will, in perpetual destruction of the Sovereignty of the King our Lord, his Crown, Regalty and of all his Realm. And I hope his Royal Highness will say as they did, God defend. Moreover, the Commons say, That the things so attempted (viz. purchasing Bulls from Rome, executing Judgements given in the Court of Rome, translating of Prelates out of the Realm, or from one Preferment to another) be clearly against the King's Crown and Regalty used and approved of the time of all his Progenitors: Wherefore they and all the siege Commons of the same Realm will stand with our said Lord the King, and his Crown and Regalty in the Cases aforesaid, and in all other cases attempted against him and his Crown and Regalty in all points, to live and to die. And moreover they pray the king, and him require by way of Justice, that he would examine all the Lords in the Parliament, as well Spiritual as Temporal, severally, and all the Estates of the Parliament, how they think of the Cases aforesaid, which be so openly against the King's Crown, and in derogation of his Regalty, how they will stand in the same cases with our Lord the King in upholding the rights of the said Crown and Regalty.  
The like promises were made by the Lords Temporal and Spiritual, and the default was to be punished by a Praemunire, which is, To be put out of the King protection, and their Lands and Tenements, Goods and Chattels forfeited to the King; and that they be attached by their body, if they may be found, and brought before the King and his Council, there to answer to the Cases aforesaid, etc.  
Now if these professed Papists did so resolutely and unanimously contest the Regalia against the Pope, what greater zeal and resolution may we justly expect from a Protestant Parliament (for such we may have, if it be not our own fault) if the Pope or any Agents of his should attempt to destroy the foundations of our established Religion and Laws!  
Moreover, in the days of Queen Mary, we read how much time, and what contrivances and largesses it cost that Queen to form a Parliament to liar liking, though then the Nation were mostly Papists; and how much they contended still for the Regalia against the Pope, and reserving of Abby-lands, etc. to the Purchasers: nor, when all was done, did any man suffer without public process in form of Law: there were no throats cut, nor bloodshed by private Messengers or Assassinates, as we are taught to expect from every Justice of Peace and Tything man, p. 85. and by I know not what Janissaries; and that we shall be slain to see what Grimaces we make, p. 89. Besides, the number that suffered in her five years, were not comparable to the number that have been slain in one hours fight during the Rebellion; nor indeed to those that were Martyred for their Religion and Loyalty by illegal proceed in the Mock-Courts of Justice, during that Usurpation: the number of the Marian Martyrs being not above three or four hundred (though they were too many.).  
Now a Wise man should look back upon the mischiefs that have befallen the Nation by resisting the lawful Prince, and the endeavours to alter the Succession from the right Heir; as well as forward upon the mischiefs that may never be, and which upon a supposition of a Popish Successor are aggravated almost beyond a possibility of being effected. Remember what it cost the Nation when the Succession to the Crown was disputed between the Houses of York and Lancaster: There perished in that War, as Historians do account, two Kings, one Prince, ten Dukes, two Marquesses, twenty one Earls, twenty seven Lords, two Viscounts, one Lord Prior, one Judge, one hundred thirty nine Knights, four hundred twenty one Esquires; and of the Gentry and Commons an incredible number. So that in such cases, the Remedy is generally worse than the Disease.  
I have not said this (God is my witness) to abate the just and honest care of the Nation to keep out Popery, by such timely provision as his Majesty and his great Council shall see most probable; but to allay the inordinate Hearts which may set the whole Kingdom in a sudden flame, only to prevent the fear of the suffering a Trial of our Faith, if God should call us to it. And I cannot consider, without some horror, what sore and long Wars and Devastations may follow upon a Bill of Exclusion, as well as on a Popish Successor. And if of two evils the least is to be chosen, I should rather (if the Will of God so be) submit to my lot, how hard soever, under such a One, than that the whole Nation should be rend in pieces again, either by a Rebellion at home, or Invasions from abroad; which may happen upon such an Exclusion: for, Regum afflictae fortunae facile multorum Opem alliciant ad misericordiam, maximeque eorum qui aut Reges sunt, aut vivunt in Regno quod Regale iis nomen magnum & sanctum esse videatur: The oppressed estate of Kings easily moves many to pity, especially them who are either Kings themselves, or do live in a Kingdom to whom the name of a King is August and Sacred; Saith the great Orator, Pro lege Manil.  
Let us therefore leave the King and his Great Council to their free Determinations, and acquiesce in the sage advice of Gamaliel, St. Paul's Master, Acts 5.39. Let us refrain from these things: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought: but if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it, lest haply ye be found even to fight against God. And I shall conclude the business of Exclusion with the Determination of Bishop Sanderson, whose single Judgement will outweigh in an equal balance all the Opinions of the Opposers: You have it, p. 350. of his book the Obligatione Conscientiae. I think (saith he) that an Hereditary Kingdom may not lawfully be changed for an Elective (as in and by the Exclusion it is like to be), nor for any other form of Government, either by the People alone, nor by the People and Nobles jointly, nor by the whole body of the People in their greatest latitude, that is, the People, Nobles, and the King, consenting together: unless perhaps the Royal Progeny should so totally fail, that there is not one surviving, who may claim it as his due by Right of Inheritance. And let it be considered, that he wrote this before the Bill of Exclusion was ever dreamt of.  
And now I cannot but reflect upon the Prognosticators and Wizards of our Time, that amuse the people with the fancies and fears which their own guilt hath created, as if we should be all swallowed up in a moment, and there were a fatal necessity of endless miseries attending us: such as Mr. Baxter in his Prognostication, and our Author, who, p. 89. tells us of such a dismal prospect as makes every honest man's heart to shake. I remember, some years since, upon the great Eclipse of the Sun, Lilly and some others made such a dismal representation of it, as struck a terror into a great part of the Country, and made them take home their  to their houses, and seek Sanctuary themselves in the Churches, as if Doomsday were come; when the cause was natural, and nothing fell out but according to that course which God had appointed for the Motion of the Heavenly bodies. Though wise men are not moved at such bugbears, yet they have an ill Aspect on the people, to dispose them for such Commotions as may promote the interest of discontented and designing men.  
For my part, I shall continue to pray for his Royal Highness, as our Liturgy directs; and if it be the will of God to send us a Popish Successor to punish us for our resistance of a Protestant King, whose blood still cries for Vengeance; I had rather die for not resisting him, than to be as instrumental in procuring a Bill of Exclusion, as this man would be, and as successful as he can hope to be, & at my death to have it written on my Tomb, Here lieth the first Author of this Sentence: RATHER THAN THE DUKE OF Y. SHOULD NOT BE EXCLUDED, WE WILL EXCLUDE THE GLORIOUS FAMILY OF THE STVARTS. And I will yet pray against the wickedness of these men: Lord cloth all such his enemies with shame; but upon his head, and the heads of his seed, let the Crown flourish,  
I perceive Mr. Hunt to be a great devoto to some kind of Parliaments; and that which was convened in the first of King James, was one that consisted of Wise, Loyal, and Pious persons; I entreat him therefore to consider what was Enacted by them in their Recognition, 1ᵒ. Jacobi; where after the Preamble it is thus declared: We therefore your most humble and Loyal Subjects, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, do from the bottom of our hearts yield to the Divine Majesty all humble thanks and praises, not only for the said unspeakable and inestimable benefits and blessings , but also that he hath further enriched your Highness with a most Royal Progeny of most rare and excellent gifts and forwardness, and in his goodness is like to increase the happy number of them. And in most humble and lowly manner do beseech your most excellent Majesty, that (as a memorial to all Posterities amongst the records of your High Court of Parliament for ever to endure, of our Loyalty, Obedience and hearty and humble Affection) it may be published and declared in this High Court of Parliament, and enacted by the authority of the same, That we being bounden thereunto (N. B.) by the Laws of God and man, do recognize and acknowledge, and thereby express our unspeakable joys, that immediately upon the dissolution and decease of Elizabeth sat Queen of England, the Imperial Crown of the Realm of England, and of all the Kingdoms, Dominions, and Rights belonging to the same, and by inherent Birthright (N. B.) and lawful and undoubted Succession, descend and come to your most Excellent Majesty, as being lineally, justly, and lawfully next and sole Heir of the Blood-Royal of this Realm, as is aforesaid. And that by the goodness of God Almighty, and lawful right of Descent under one Imperial Crown, your Majesty is of the Realms and Kingdoms of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland, the most potent and mighty King, and by God's goodness more able to protect and govern us your loving Subjects in all peace and plenty, than any of your noble Progenitors: and thereunto we most humbly and faithfully submit and oblige ourselves, our heirs and posterities for ever, until the last drop of our bloods be spent. And we beseech your Majesty to accept the same as the first-fruits in this High Court of Parliament of our Loyalty and Faith to your Majesty and your Royal Progeny and Posterity for ever.  
Now, as Grotius says, a People may be presumed to be the same that they formerly were, till some public act show that their judgements are altered. How dares Mr. Hunt then to say, p. 47. If any man is so vain as to say that an unalterable course of Succession is established among us by Divine Right; I say he is a man fitted to believe Transubstantiation, and the Infallibility of the Pope? etc. And if any man shall add, that this is the Doctrine of the Reformation, and adventure to tell the people so; they are the most impudent falsaries that ever any Age produced; when there is scarce a Child but hath heard what was done and maintained by the Clergy in the Case of Mary Queen of Scots.  
How can this man, (who doubtless is an Ignor●mus if he never knew this Recognition) declare so often as he doth, particularly in p. 198. that the Succession of the Crown is the right of the whole Community, their appointment, their constitution, and creature in Parliament? Did he never read what is said by Grotius de Jure belli? He says, If a Kingdom descend by Succession, an Act of Alienation is in itself null, l. 1. c. 4. s. 9 Which agrees with what Bishop Sanderson delivered before. And Mr. Hunt himself says, Grotius is more than ten witnesses: and if you add the Bishops, I think them of more value than a hundred.  
In quâ tandem Civitate Catilina arbitraris te vivere, saith Cicero: you that make Hue and cry after such as write for Religion and Loyalty, as if they were ready to banish themselves, or prove feloes de se; consider, I pray, under what Government you are: and though you may escape the Magistrates wrath, yet you ought to be solicitous 〈◊〉 you may escape the wrath of God, to which you have made yourself obnoxious.  
I have but one Remark more on Mr. Hunt, which is, that he hath consulted another famous Author, one Mr. Thomas White, who, being a Romish Emissary, made it his business to continue our distractions. This man wrote a Book entitled, The Grounds of Obedience and Government: And his Motto is, Salus Populi Suprema Lex esto; whereof I have given you the genuine sense already.  
Now among many other Notes transcribed by Mr. Hunt from this Jesuitical Writer, p. 158. he comes to answer the Objections of Divines concerning the Authority of Princes, and nonresistance. Up steps the Divine (saith he) to preach us out of Scripture the Duty we own to Kings, no less than Death and Damnation being the guerdons of Disobedience and Rebellion. And p. 159. They will speak Reason too, telling us, that God by nature is high Lord and Master of all: That whoever is in power receiveth his right from him: That Obedience consists in doing the Will of him that commandeth; and conclude, that his Will ought to be obeyed till God taketh away the Obligation, (i. e.) till he who is to be obeyed himself releaseth the Right. Besides, p. 160. They allege that God by his special command transferred the Kingdom from Saul to David, from Rehoboam to Jeroboam. So that in fine, all that is brought out of Scripture falleth short of proving that no time can make void the right of a King once given him by the hand of God. Now mark what Mr. White says to overthrow the sense of these Scriptures. The reason (says he) of THIS WEAK WAY OF ALLEGING SCRIPTURE is, that when they read that God commandeth or doth this, they look not into Nature to know what this Commanding or Doing is, but presently imagine God commands it by express and direct words, and doth it by an immediate position of the things said to be done; whereas in Nature the Commands are nothing but the natural Light God hath bestowed on Mankind, and which is therefore frequently called the Law of Nature. Likewise Gods doing a thing is many times only the course of natural second Causes; to which because God gives the Direction and Motion, he both doth, and is said to do all that is done by them.  
Now to the same end (viz. to prove that Kingly Government is not from God but the People, and therefore may be altered and resisted) and in the same words for the most part, doth Mr. Hunt deliver this black invention of Mr. White, p. 144. The nature of Government and its Original hath been prejudiced— by men that understand nothing but words: and Grammar-divines, that without contemplating Gods Attributes, or the Nature of man, or the reasonableness of moral Precepts, have undertaken to declare the sense of Scripture; and infer, that Sovereign Power is not of Humane Institution, but of Divine Appointment, because they find it there written, That by him Kings reign: Imagining, that when the Scripture saith God commands or doth this, that God commanded it by express words, or doth it by an immediate position of the thing done; whereas in nature his Commands are nothing but the natural Light God hath bestowed on Mankind: Likewise Gods doing a thing is only the course of natural and second Causes, to which because God gives Direction and Motion, he doth both, and is said to do all that is done.  
Likewise Gods doing a thing, is only the course of natural and second Causes, to which; because God gives the Direction or Motion, he doth both, and is said to do all that is done. All this is verbatim Mr. White: So is his Raillery in the same Phrase, to bring an Odium on Divines that would prove Government out of the Scripture: White calls them Grammar-Divines, Verbal and windblown Divines, p. 162. And Mr. Hunt calls them Men that understand nothing but Words, and Grammar-divines. Who (saith Mr. White) without Logic, Philosophy, or Morality, undertake to be Interpreters of the Sacred Bible: Who (saith Mr. Hunt) without contemplating Gods Attributes, or the Nature of man, or the Reasonableness of Moral Precepts, have undertaken to declare the sense of the Scripture.  
It is not strange to me, having read a Defiance to the Royal Family, to read the like against the Clergy. But that the Scripture also should suffer, and the uncertain and mutable Traditions and Effects of natural Causes be made equivalent with the immediate Commands of God in the Scripture, though it be no new thing among Jesuits, yet a true Protestant should abhor it. The man is so angry that he hath done the ungrateful Bishops any right, that he will have satisfaction right or wrong from the rest of the Clergy: And though he call the younger sort only Coxcombs, yet his design is to bring the whole Clergy into contempt. But any young Divine may draw such Conclusions out of the Premises, as might exclude him out of the Society of all good and learned men.  

1. That to conclude from the sense of Scripture, is a weak way of Arguing. In this Mr. White and Mr. Hunt consent.  
2. That non obstante what the Scripture says of Divine Right of Sovereign Power, it is not of Divine, but Humane Institution.  
3. That Providence, and the Effects of second Causes, being influenced by God, are of equal Authority with the Precepts enjoined by the Word of God.  
4. That the Sovereign Power being but of Humane Institution, may be resisted, and is alterable.  
5. That they who mock the Messengers of God, do go on to despise the Word of God, and abuse his Prophets; a sin which often stirs up the Wrath of God, so as there is NO REMEDY. And this I observe in the behalf of the abused Clergy.  
6. That having cast off our Loyalty to our Governors and their Laws, puts us in a fair way to cast off the Sovereignty of God and his Laws.  
7. That the worst of Papists, and their most Atheistical Arguments, are made use of by some that call themselves true Protestants, against the express Commands of God for obedience to the Higher Powers.   
From all which Premises I shall only conclude as to myself, That it is much more desirable to perish by the hands of a known Enemy to God and the true Religion, than to outlive that Religion, and by a successful resistance against the Ordinance of God, to live in the enjoyment of Temporal wealth and Honours, and to deserve this Epitaph to be engraved on my Tomb.  
Plorate quotquot estis  
Pacis vitaeque placidae Pertaesi:  
Conservator optimi Populi, pessimus  
Legum, Libertatis, Religionis Protector:  
Post Oliverum Primus, nulli Secundus:  
Deperditae Respublicae Instaurator:  
Regum timendorum tremendus Judex,  
Regiae Stirpis Extirpator Perfidus,  
Juris Consultorum Doctor Ignoramus.  
Qui Consentientibus dissentit ab omnibus  
Orthodoxis, Antiquis & Modernis:  
Qui Dissentientibus consentit omnibus  
Papistis, Anabaptistis, Regicidis:  
Scrutator Majestatis oppressus à Gloria,  
Inglorius obiit.   

OF Passive Obedience.  
IT is a very hard Case, that when the Scripture enjoins such as are of the Ministry in this Nation to put the people in mind to be subject to Principalities and powers; and the Canons of the Church to which we have subscribed, oblige us four times in the year at least, to manifest, open, and declare, in our Sermons and Lectures, That the King's power within his Majesty's Realms, etc. is the highest power under God, to whom all men born within the same, do by God's Laws own most Loyalty and Obedience, afore and above all Powers and Potentates on Earth; that for so doing, we should be reproached as Time-servers, and such as advance an arbitrary power; and that such Doctrine is calculated and fitted on purpose for the use of a Popish Successor, and to make us an easier prey to the bloody Papists, p. 89. And all this, by those men who are equally obliged by Oaths and Subscriptions to do the same as we.  
Of these things the Author accuseth a learned Doctor, who had affirmed (in a Sermon I suppose, and he quotes p. 8.) That the Gospel doth not prescribe any remedy but flight against the Persecutions of the lawful Magistrate; allowing no other means, when we cannot escape, between denying and dying for the Faith. This is in p. 80. and p. 85. for saying, That the Gospel by its own confession is a suffering Doctrine, and so far from being prejudicial to Caesar's authority, that it makes him the Minister of God, and commands all its Professors to give him and all that are in authority under him their deuce, and rather die than resist them by force.  
Now to remove the prejudice of such as are of our Author's Judgement, I shall first propose the Judgement of Mr. Baxter, (as a preparative to the more candid entertainment of what I shall propound concerning Passive Obedience.) P. 24: of the 4th part of Christian Directory, Direct. 31. Resist not where you cannot obey; and let no appearance of probable good that may come to yourselves or to the Church, by any unlawful means, as Treason, Sedition, or Rebellion, ever tempt you to it: for, evil must not be done, that good may come by it.  
But, Sect. 61. it is objected, If we must let Rulers destroy us at their pleasure, the Gospel will be rooted out of the Earth: When they know we hold it unlawful to resist them, they will be emboldened to destroy us, and sport themselves in our blood, as the Papists did by the poor Albigenses. Answ. All this were something, if there were no God that can easilier restrain and destroy them at pleasure, than they can injure or destroy you. If God be engaged to protect you, and hath told you that the hairs of your head are numbered, and more regardeth his Honour, Gospel, and Church, than you do, and accounteth his Servants as the Apple of his eye, and hath promised to hear them, and avenge them speedily; than it is but Atheistical distrust of God, to save yourself by sinful means, as if God could not or would not do it. Thus he that saveth his life shall lose it.  
This Mr. Baxter speaks against Rebellion and unlawful Arms and Acts. To this purpose he quotes Grotius de Imperio, p. 210. answering the like Objection, (viz.) Mutato Regis Animo, Religio Mutabitur; That if the King change his mind, the Religion will be changed also. Answ. In this case the only remedy is in the providence of God▪ who hath the hearts of all men in his hand, but especially the Kings, God worketh his ends both by good and evil Kings: sometime a calm, sometime a storm is most profitable to the Church. If the King be of a perverse and corrupt Judgement, it will be worse for him than for the Church. But all this, you will say, is against unlawful acts and means, which they that have the Laws on their side cannot be said to use. To this Mr. Baxter answers, p. 26. What power the Laws have▪ they have it by the King's Consent and Act. And it is strange impudency, to pretend that his own Laws are against him. If any misinterpret them, he may be confuted. I suppose Mr. Baxter means, by some other method than that of arguing, as St. Augustine advised in the like case.  
The Law and Ordinance of Government, and especially of Monarchy, is founded on the Law of God and Nature; and no positive Laws, or condescensions of Governors, can make void the Law of God. For though a righteous Prince will not violate those Laws which he hath consented to, yet if he should, it will not justify those Subjects that shall violate the Law of God and Nature, in resisting and rising up against him in Rebellion; which would as it were argue great ingratitude to them who by Acts of Grace have obliged themselves: (for, as St. Augustine observes, our Prince, like God himself, becomes a Debtor to man, Non aliquid à nobis accipiendo, sed omnia nobis largiendo; Not by receiving any thing from us, but by promising all good things to us.) So it is a certain way to bring us all to Confusion, if the King should be judged as a Criminal upon every transgression of the Law.  
And I would ask those who would bind their Kings in such Fetters, By what authority they would proceed against him and judge him: would they erect another High Court of Justice, or bring him from his Throne to the Block? Would they arm the people again, on pretence of fight for their Laws and Liberties? The end of those things we have seen to be the death of a most righteous Prince, and the general destruction of the Subjects. Wherefore I commend to you that of your Bracton: Omnem esse sub Rege, & ipsum sub nullo fed tantum sub Deo. And if he contradict himself in this, the suffrage of Nature, and the Laws of all well-governed Nations, will condemn him; which agree in this, That Principi non est Lex posita, there is no Law above the Prince that makes the Law, and by whose Authority alone the Laws are executed: for it is he that beareth the Sword. And Plutarch says of him, that he doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, not only govern according to the Laws, but hath a power above them. He hath so indeed for the good of his Subjects, to whom the rigorous execution of the Laws, in many cases, would be an insupportable burden, if by the King's Authority they might not be moderated, and interpreted by Rules of Equity; against which our Dissenters have the least reason of any men alive to object. And if we grant him this power for our good, how can we deny it to him for his own?  
That Learned Casuist, Bishop Sanderson, whose modesty in other Resolutions is eminent, in resolving this Question, Whether it be lawful for the Prince in cases extraordinary to do any thing besides or against Law, undertakes to prove the Affirmative, with an extraordinary confidence; and, which is more, to prove it by that abused Maxim which some would invert against the King, Salus Populi Suprema Lex, That the People's Safety is the highest Law. And if I prove not this, as yourselves shall confess, from that very Maxim (saith he) then say, that I cannot see at noonday; and censure me to have been not a Defender of this good Cause, but a Betrayer and Praevaricator. Which thus he doth: First, he tells us the Original of that Sentence, viz. from Cicero de Legibus, in these words, l. 3. Regio Imperio duo sunto, iique praeeundo, judicando, consulendo, Praetores, Judices, consuls appellantur: Militiae Summum Jus habento nemini parento, Ollis Salus Populi Suprema Lex esto. Now to whom doth this power belong? to them (says the very Letter of those Laws) to whom the Imperial power was committed, that is, to the two Consuls for the time being. Come now. (says the Bishop) all you that are the Patrons of Popular confidence, read, weigh, and examine every Word, Syllable, and Comma, and show where you can find the least hint of any power granted to Subjects against their Princes will, either to judge concerning the safety of the people, or to determine and do any thing against the Laws. Doth not the whole series both of Things and Words loudly proclaim, that the Supreme Authority which is above all Law, and that the care of the Public safety properly belongs to him alone to whom the Imperial power, the right of the Militia, and that Supreme Authority which is subject to none, is granted?  
When the Law commands one thing. (says Aeneas Silvius, de Ortu Imperii, c. 20.) and Equity another, it is fit the Emperor should temper the rigour of the Law with the bridle of Equity. Seeing no Decree of the Law, though made by never so deliberate advice, can sufficiently answer the various and unthought-of plottings of man's nature— and it is manifest that the Laws which aforetime were just, in aftertimes may prove unjust, harsh, and unprofitable; to moderate which, it is needful that the Prince, who is Lord of the Laws, interpose his Authority. And where it is said, that a Law, though it be severe, should be observed; this respects inseriour Magistrates, not the Emperor, to whom the power of moderating the Laws is so connexed, that by no decrees of man it can be pulled from him.  
Bishop Sanderson gives a pertinent instance to this purpose, in his Book de Oblige. Consc. p. 384. That when upon discovery of the Gunpowder-plot the Traitors fled, some of them were pursued by the High Sheriff of Worcester-shire, who having hunted them from place to place, came to the Confines of his County, beyond which he was not to pass with his Soldiers by the Law: yet fearing that they might otherwise escape, he pursues them into another County, takes them, and brings them Prisoners. Yet knowing he had transgressed the Law, and lest others in matters of less moment should be encouraged to do the like, or himself be exposed to future trouble, he presently goes to the King and obtains his Pardon.  
What excellent Chemists were they, who out of those golden Laws should draw out so many Swords and Axes against their Sovereign and Fellow-subjects, on such a vile pretence! And is not our young Empiric near of kin to them, who by his Mountebank-Receipts would poison the People with a conceit that they may by the Laws arm themselves against the King, if they shall judge that he doth transgress those Laws? that then he is no longer a Minister of God, but of the Devil, and may be persecuted as a Midnight-Thief, or Highway-Robber, or in the words of Gregory, as a common Cutthroat, pag. 25. And that he is hardly to be blamed, who shows himself so courageous for God, and for that Religion which he approves, as to assassinate his Prince.  
To conclude, it is the judgement both of Divines, Civilians, and Statesmen, that there must be in Kings and Governors a Supreme Power to mitigate the rigour of the Laws, and to suspend the execution of them; to pardon some Delinquents, and in case of necessity to provide for the safety of the People, besides, and against the Laws: and that to arm the People, and teach them on pretence of the Law to resist their Prince, is a pernicious Tenet, destructive to Government.  
It is Criminal, (saith Mr. Hunt p. 41.) and not less dangerous to the being of any Polity, to restrain the Legislative Authority, and to entertain principles that disable it to provide remedy against the greatest mischiefs that can happen to any Community. No Government can support itself without an unlimited Power in providing for the happiness of the people. No civil Establishment but is controlable and alterable to the Public Weal: Whatever is not of Divine Institution, aught to yield and submit to this Power and Authority. And this is all that I, or any of my Brethren that I know of, ever intended to say of the extent of the King's Power: That such distempers as are incurable by common and prescribed Remedies, such as the King's Evil usually is, must have extraordinary applications, such as the King's hand, and none but his, may successfully administer.  
Nor doth any among us plead that the King is above the Directive power of the Laws, but only that he is not under the Coercive power of them. For which cause Antony would not permit that Herod should be called to an account of what he did as a King, for than he should in effect be no King at all: for what power can judge him who is the Supreme power on Earth? The Emperor (saith Tertull.) is solo Deo minor, inferior to God only, and under the power of God only; In cujus solius potestate sunt, à quo sunt secundi, post quem primi. And St. Ambrose spreaking of David, applieth it to other Kings: He was a King, and obnoxious to no humane Laws, because Kings are free from punishment for their offences, being secured by the power of their Empire. If the People have power to call the King to an account, the Estate is Democratical: if the Peers, it is Aristocratical; but if indeed it be; Monarchical, neither, nor both, can judge their Prince.  
In the first Homily against Rebellion, p. 1. our Church says, that in reading of the Holy Scriptures we shall find in very many places, as well of the Old Testament as the New, That Kings and Princes, as well the evil as the good, do reign by God's Ordinance; and that Subjects are bound to obey them.  
The Augustan Confession, Article 16. Christian's must necessarily obey the present Magistrates and Laws, except when they command to sin.  
French Confession, Article 11. We ought to obey Laws and Statures, pay Tribute, and bear other burdens of Subjection, and undergo the Yoke with a good will, although the Magistrates should be Infidels; so that God's sovereign Authority remains inviolate.  
The Belgic Confession. All men, of what dignity; quality, or state soever they be, must subject themselves unto the lawful Magistrates, pay them Imposts and Tributes, and please and obey them in all things not repugnant to the Word of God: Also pray for them, that God would be pleased to direct them in all their actions, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life under them in all piety and honesty.  
The Helvetick Confession. Let all Subject's honour and reverence the Magistrate as the Minister of God: Let them love and assist him, and pray for him as their Father; let them obey him in all his just and equitable Commands, and pay all Imposts. Tributes, and other Deuce faithfully and willingly: And in case of War, let them also lay down their lives, and spill their blood for the good of the Public, and of the Magistrate; willingly, vailiantly, and cheerfully. For he that opposeth himself to the Magistrate, provoketh the heavy wrath of God upon himself.  
The Bohemian Confession. Let every one yield subjection in all things not contrary to God, to the Higher Powers and their Officers, whether good or bad.  
The Saxonick Confession. The more a Christian is sincere in Faith, the more he ought to subject himself to the public Laws.  
But I shall end where I began, with the Doctrine of our Martyrs and Confessors, who sealed with their blood the Truths that they published with their Pens; for whom in vain do we build and garnish Monuments of Fame to their memories, while we are Apostates from their Doctrine and Practice.  
The first Reformers of our Religion, in the Institution of a Christian man, on the Fifth Commandment, say, That Subjects be bound not to withdraw their Fealty, Truth, Love, and Obedience from their prince FOR ANY CAUSE WHATSOEVER IT BE; ne for any cause may they conspire against his person, ne do any thing towards the hindrance or hurt thereof, or of his estate: And by his Commandment they are bound to obey all the Laws, Proclamations, Precepts, and Commandments made by their Princes and Governors, except they be against the Commandment of God. And likewise they be bound to obey all such as are in Authority under their Prince, as far as he will have them obeyed. 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, or of the defence of any of the same against all persons. And there be many examples in Scripture of the vengeance of God that hath fallen upon RULERS and such as have been disobedient to their Princes. But one principal example to be noted, is of the Rebellion of Core, Dathan, and Abiram, 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, and a great number of other people with them, with their houses, and all their substance; but caused also a fire to descend from Heaven, and to burn up two hundred and fifty Captains which conspired with them in the Rebellion.  
And again, on the Sixth Commandment: No Subjects may draw their Sword against their Prince, for what cause soever it be, nor against any others (saving for lawful defence) without their Prince's licence. And it is their duty to draw their Swords for the defence of their Prince and Realm, whensoever the Prince shall command. And although Princes which be the chief and supreme Heads of Realms, do otherwise than they ought, yet God hath assigned no Judges over them in this world, but will have the judgement of them reserved to himself.  
Sir John Cheek, who was Tutor to King Edword the Sixth, and a person of great Learning and Integrity, in his Book called, The true Subject to the Rebel, speaks to this purpose: If you were offered persecution for Religion, you ought to fly for it; and yet you intent to fight. If you would stand in the truth, you ought to suffer like Martyrs; and you would slay like Tyrants. Thus for Religion you keep no Religion, and neither will follow the Council of Christ, nor the Constancy of Martyrs. And then ask the people why they should not like that Religion which Gods word established, the Primitive Church authorized, and the whole consent of the Parliament confirmed, and his Majesty had set forth; he says, Dare you Commons take upon you more Learning than the Chosen Bishops and Clerks of this Realm have?  
I suppose that the Author of julian's Life might transcribe that Act of Queen Mary , out of Mr. Prynnes second part of the Loyalty of pious Christians, etc. where we have it printed at large, p. 65. from whence he might very honestly have told us Mr. Prynnes Judgement of such Prayers as were made against the Queen; who, (p. 64.) says, That Queen Mary's zealous Protestant Bishops, Ministers, and Subjects likewise, made constant prayers for her: But some overzealous Anabaptistical fanatics using some unchristian expressions in their prayers against her, That God would cut her off, and shorten her days, occasioned this special Act against such prayers. And having repeated the Act, he adds, p. 66. These prayers were much against, and direstly contrary to the Judgement of Archbishop Cranmer, Bishop Farrer, Bishop Hooper, Rowland Taylor, John Philpot, John Bradford, Edward Crome, John Rogers, Laurence Sanders, Edward Laurence, Miles Coverdale Bishop of Exon, and others of our Godly Protestant Bishops and Ministers, who soon after suffered as Martyrs. They in their Letter (May 8. 1554.) professing, that as Obedient Subjects we shall behave ourselves towards Queen Mary, and 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, there to submit themselves with all patience and humility, to suffer as well what the will and pleasure of the higher Powers shall adjudge, as we are ready through the goodness of the Lord to suffer whatsoever they shall judge us unto. And Bishop Hooper wrote an Apology against the Slanderous report made of him, that he should encourage and maintain such as cursed Queen Mary: printed 1552. wherein his Innocence and Loyalty to the Queen, in praying for her, are vindicated at large, So far Mr. Prynne.  
Take the sense of one Marian Martyr more, Mr. William Tindal, in a Book de Christiani hominis Obedientia, saying, In every Kingdom, the King, which hath no Superior, judgeth of all things; and therefore he that endeavoureth or intendeth any mischief or calmity against the Prince that is a Tyrant, or a Persecutor, or whosoever with a forward hand doth touch the Lords Anointed, he is a Rebel against God, and resisteth the Ordinance of God. And as it is not lawful upon any pretence to resist the King, so it is not lawful to rise up against the King's Officer or Magistrate that is sent by the King for the execution of those things that are commanded by the King.  
And Mr. Barus in Tract. de Humanis Constitut. saith, That the Servants of Chrict rather than commit any evil, or resist any Magistrate, ought patiently to suffer the loss of their goods, and the tearing of their members: Nay, the Christian, after the example of Christ his Master, aught to suffer the bitterest death for Truth and Righteousness sake: and therefore who ever shall rebel under pretence of Religion, aeternae damnationis erit reus.  
Now these men gave their Opinions for Passive Obedience, even before Queen Mary had altered the Laws, (i. e.) their Religion was by the established Laws of the Land, the only allowed Religion; yet they were far from defending it by resistance and Rebellion.  
It is a difficult matter to persuade them to suffer, that never knew what it was to obey: such as were educated in a time of Rebellion, and instead of being catechised in the Principles of the Gospel, were from their childhood taught how to stand on their guard, and defy their Governors; and being become wealthy by the Spoils wrested by themselves or their Ancestors from the King, the Church, or their more Religious and Loyal Brethren, think that Providence will justify them in all their Seditious attempts, and that the Millennium of Christ's reign upon Earth is begun; and that all Laws now must be subservient to the support of that Persuasion of theirs; and that their Religion hath been in full and quiet possession ever since 42 at least; and therefore to teach men now, that they ought to suffer rather than resist their lawful Princes, is the Mahometan Doctrine of the Bowstring; which is indeed the whole Oeconomie of the Gospel, as will appear by what followeth.  
If we compare Deut. 28. with Matth. 15. it will appear, that as Prosperity was the Blessing of the Old Testament, so Persecution is of the New And there is no Robbery in the Exchange: for though we are called to forsake house, friends, and lands for Christ's sake, we shall receive in this time a hundred fold, though with persecution, Mark. 10.40. besides the Aureola, or double Crown, in the life to come. How comes it then to pass, that the Doctrine of the Cross is become Foolishness, and a Stumbling-block to us Christians, as it was to the Jews and Greeks? That which was the Glory of the Apostles, and esteemed above earthly Kingdoms by the Primitive Christians, even the Crown of Martyrdom, is now trampled on, despised, and discredited, as the reward of Fools, and men weary of their lives.  
The Gnostics drew tears from the Apostles eyes, when he considered how they both taught and practised the lawfulness of denying Christ in times of persecution: (Phil. 3.18.) Many walk of whom I have told you often, and now tell you with weeping, that they are enemies to the Cross of Christ. Such were crept in among the Galatians, who by all art and industry increased their numbers, that they might not suffer persecution for the Cross of Christ, Gal. 6.12. But God forbidden (saith the Apostle) that I should rejoice save in the Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, whereby the world is crucified to me, and I unto the world.  
The Scars that Soldiers receive in the service of their Prince, are esteemed Marks of Honour: and every petty Prince can lead forth Legions to look Death in the face at his command: Every new Sect can boast of their diptychs and Martyrologies; and there is scarce a good man in the world, but some or other would even dare to die for him: And what difficulties do affright men of resolution, when they contend but for a Garland of Flowers or Laurel, fading and unsatisfactory rewards! And hath our blessed Redeemer only so ill deserved of us for all the great things that he hath done both for our Souls and Bodies? or is he only so unable to requite our service and labour of love, that we should forsake him, when a small Storm threatneth us, or falls upon our heads? When Henry the Fourth of France was engaged in fight against his Enemies, and his Friends began to give ground; he minds them what a Reproach it would be to the Nobility and Gentry of France, that of all their numbers, there were not fifty that stood by him in the Camp, that had thousands waiting on him in his Court. Pudet haec opprobria, etc.  
It is no rash, fruitless, or desperate design that our Saviour calls us to: He forewarned us at our first entrance to our Holy Profession, that we could not be his Disciples except we deny ourselves, and take up the Cross and follow him: and he that doth not so, saith our Saviour, is not worthy of me, Matth. 10.38. Matth. 16.24. Luke 14.27. Nor is it fruitless: he hath wise and great ends, not only for the glory of his Father, but the good of his Church, in every affliction: that Vine, as well as the common ones, spreads and prospers the more, when it is at the wisdom of the Vine-dresser watered with blood. As in lesser afflictions God chastiseth us for our good, that we may be partakers of his Holiness; so doth he with greater, that he may bring us to glory.  
Many a man might have perished eternally, if they had not perished temporally; God by his Righteous judgements calling their sins to remembrance, and working in them repentance unto life. Behold, saith St. James, we count them happy that endure. You have heard of the patience of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord; that the Lord is very pitiful, and of tender mercy. Jobs Graces had not given so great a light and ground of Consolation to the world, if they had not been tried in the fire of affliction; which is so needful for the purging out our Corruption, that we are told▪ All that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution; and that we must through Many tribulations enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.  
The Afflictions which God sends do often bear an Inscription of those sins that procured them: as when joseph's brethren were under apprehension of great fear, they said one to another, We are verily guilty concerning our Brother, in that we saw him in the anguish of his Soul, when he besought us, and we would not hear him. If we are oppressed and persecuted by our own Countrymen and false brethren, let us consider whether we have not been such, and dealt so with our Brethren. If God permit us to be persecuted by a Christian Prince, consider what guilt yet lieth on the Nation for the Persecution and Murder of a most Christian King; and learn to improve the Judgement into a Mercy, by repentance and patience under God's afflicting hand. If no such guilt lies upon us, then think that God calls us forth as Combatants, to show examples of Christian Faith, Love, and Resolution, in an Age that is corrupted by long prosperity, and become effeminate and delicate, through plenty and luxury: and a Plethory is to be cured by Phlebotomy.  
How the Church thrived under Persecution, we have many instances. The first Persecution scattering the Disciples, caused the Gospel to be planted through the world; and being planted, the blood of those that died made it so fruitful, that the Precedent of Palestine wrote to Tiberius, that they were weary of slaying them; who never so much as fled or hid themselves, and yet multiplied the more for being put to death. Pliny also writing to Trajan, complains, prope jam desolata templa, & sacra Solennia diu intermissa. It was otherwise when the Church flourished outwardly in the days of Constantius: the Christians drove one another from the Altars, and by their ambitious and popular Contests, made the Sacrifices of God to be abominated by the heathen.  
Whatever the punishment be, we must accept it as the demerit of our Sins, and as inflicted by a most righteous and glorious God. And if because, as in the days of Constantius, we deny the power of godliness, and exercise of Charity to one another, it is just with God to deprive us of the very form of it, and commit us to be Chastised by a common Enemy, as they were by Julian; We must bear the Indignation of the Lord, because we have sinned against him.  
Consider what Christ suffered for us; he endured the Cross, despising the shame; and being now at the right hand of God, calls on us to follow his Example, promising, that if we suffer, we shall also reign with him. And shall our Saviour be forsaken as soon as he is apprehended, and be again called on to come down from the Cross, that we may believe in him? shall we draw back, as the beasts were wont, from that Altar which our Saviour hath sanctified and made our surest Sanctuary against Evils? Think it not strange, saith St. Peter, 1.4.12.) concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as if some strange thing had happened to you; but rejoice, in as much as you are made partakers of Christ's sufferings; that when his Glory shall appear ye may be glad with exceeding joy. Would our Saviour have bid us to rejoice and be exceeding glad when we suffer persecution for his sake, if it were a thing impossible, that as Afflictions do abound so our Consolations shall also?  
With what an Emphasis doth the Spirit of God describe the blessedness of them that suffer or die for the sake of Christ! 1 Pet. 4.14. the Spirit of God and of Glory (i. e. the glorious Spirit of God) resteth on you: and vers. 15. If any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God on this behalf. And so St. John, Blessed are the dead that die in the Lord for they rest from their labours, and their works follow them, Revel. 14.13. Be thou faithful unto death (to the suffering of death) and I will give thee a Crown of life, Revel. 2.10.  
If we did indeed believe all that to be true which our Saviour hath told us, we would not be offended at the Cross. The growth of our fears, is from the decay of our Faith: Why are ye fearful, O ye of little Faith! Abraham, who was strong in Faith, was also persuaded that what God had promised, he was able to perform, and therefore offered up his only Son, who was dearer than his own life; and left his Country and Kindred at the Command of God. This was the Victory whereby the ancient Worthies overcame a world of Persecutors, even their Faith, that Faith that gave a subsistence to things to come, and apprehended them as present: that Faith that made them look through things Temporal to things Eternal. They could, as the Proto-martyr St. Stephen, see the heavens opened, and Christ standing at the right hand of God; Et quid pulchrius Deo spectaculum, quam Christianus cum dolore congressus, quum adversum minas, supplicia, & tormenta, componitur! No spectacle is more pleasing to God, than a well-composed Christian conflicting with punishments and torments.  
Christ as it were leaves his seat, and stands up, not only to behold, but to encourage and assist such Combatants. Non enim nos spectat tantum, sed in nobis ipse luctatur. And when Christ takes all that is done to his Members as done to himself; when in all their afflictions he is afflicted; when he assures us as by his Word and Oath, that he will never leave us nor forsake us; And that all things shall cooperate to our good: If the love of Christ were indeed shed abroad in our hearts, it would constrain us to do and suffer any thing that he shall call or command us to do or suffer. For there is no fear in love: perfect love will cast out all base fears. Love would so unite us to him whom we love, that as nothing could on Christ's part separate us from his love; so neither would any thing on our part work a separation, Rom. 8.38.  
And what is there in the world, or in ourselves, of such weight, as the full enjoyment of our Saviour may not outweigh! here is nothing but sin and misery, infirmities and temptations daily assaulting us, and leading us Captives. The very Heathen, that had no hopes of a better life, saw cause to be weary of this, and esteemed it the greatest blessing, not to be born; but the next to it, to die speedily. But to us Christians, to whom Cita mors est victoria laeta, death should be esteemed a gain; it is a passage from a vale of tears, to a Crown and Kingdom, where we shall be ever with the Lord. Wherefore lift up the hands that hang down, and the feeble knees, and make yourselves ready for your last journey to your everlasting Rest. And let them that are called to suffer according to the will of God, commit their souls to him in well doing, as to a faithful Creator, 1 Pet. 4.19.   

AN APPENDIX, Containing A more full and particular Answer to Mr. Hunt's Preface and Postscript.  
THe Author of the life of Julian having taken his Measures and chief Materials from the late Libels of Mr. Hunt, and both of them their whole Scheme from John Milton's Defence of that most execrable Murder committed on the Royal Martyr, by those whom he calls the People of England, who were indeed the very scum and offscouring, the reproach and pests of the Nation; I shall make my way to the Confutation of the first, by some Remarks on the Writings of the other. And whereas I did only occasionally reflect on some passages of the Postscript of Mr. Hunt, in my Answer to the Life of Julian; I shall now more particularly examine those other seditious and treasonable Writings of Mr. Hunt. which since came to my hand.  
The first Pamphlet which I have answered in the precedent Papers, is, the Life of Julian. He gins his Preface to the Reader with a story of Mahomet's Horns, half Fire and half Snow; which by altering the phrase he borrowed from a parallel expression of Mr. Hunt's upon the like occasion: for he compares the Addressers to those pleasant Knaves that cry with one side of the face, and laugh with the other, Postscr. p. 13. And to him that acted a grave Spaniard with one side of his body, and a brisk Frenchman with the other. This drew on his conceit of Guelphs and Gibellines; and it was very easy by so strong a Chain of thoughts as our Author hath, to pass from Spain and France into Turkey; with the Religion and Manners of which Country he seems better acquainted, than with that of Christendom, or else he would never have compared the Doctrine of the Cross with the Mahometan Doctrine of the Bowstring, p. 8. of his Preface.  
But sure he stretched his Chain very much, when from the Address of the men of Rippon, thanking his Majesty for his Declaration to govern by Laws, and to maintain the established Religion, and to call frequent Parliaments, and desiring that the Crown might descend in the right Line; he concludes, that they prayed against all these, and made it their humble request that they might be sure of a Popish Successor, and were weary of their Religion, p. 5, 6.  
But he broke every link of this Chain, when (though he put on his considering-Cap) he could not find any Precedent or Example for such an Address. But presently had an imperfect remembrance (for such indeed it was) of the contrary Carriage of though Primitive Christians towards Julian: whereas our Author might more easily and fit to his purpose, have remembered the Behaviour of some other Christians (as they professed themselves) towards King Charles the First; and then he might have deserved the Office of a City-Remembrancer.  
But he wickedly, and (I hope by what I shall discover) in vain endeavours to impose his Seditious Doctrine on the Nation. For this Notorious Plagiary hath taken his whole design (as Mr. Hunt had done before him) from an Argument of that profligate Villain, John Milton, whereby he attempted to defend the Murder of our Royal Martyr: and that some passages in the Life of Julian have the same malignant aspect and influence, I have shown in my Observations on a passage quoted by our Author out of Sozomen, in commendation of Regicide. So that his Chain of Thoughts will hang no more together than a Rope of Sand: for he runs so far from the Loyal Addressers, as to fall in with Rebels and Regicides. His whole design is to justify Resistance of Lawful Powers in defence of that Religion which we profess and allow of, especially when we are in possession of that Religion, and it is established by Law: (though by the way, both the established Religion and Christianity itself, as well as the Laws of the Land, are ipso facto destroyed by resistance.)  
This Leviathan fancying to himself a wide difference between the Case of those Christians that lived under Julian, and the Case of the first Christians, sports himself in the depth of this great Invention, and scoffs at all the Arguments brought for Obedience and Subjection from the Primitive Christians before Constantine, as the Leviathan in Job 41. who esteemed Iron as Straw, and Brass as rotten wood, and laugheth at the shaking of the Spear. Their case (saith he of the Christians in Julian's time) and that of the Primitive Christians, was as widely different, as Laws for men and against men can possibly make them: Yet for aught I see, be the Laws for or against his Doctrine of Resistance, it must be swallowed; for though he tells us that our Laws do not admit of such thoughts as his Julian Christians did put in practice, yet the design must on, or the whole labour of our Author must perish.  
And who can help it? when men will build on the Sand, and daub with untempered Mortar, such as blood and slime, whatever cost or time is bestowed on such a Fabric, is cast away, and the fall of it will be great. On this false supposition these two Master-builders, with whom I am now accounting, do with an unaccountable Confidence lay the stress of all their Discourses. And though I have said enough to destroy this false Hypothesis in the Answer, yet because they think to supersede the Arguments brought for Obedience, from the practice of the first Christians for three hundred years, and persuade the present Age that they do not at all concern us, but that we may rather do as the Julian Christians did, that is, rail at and resist our Superiors, having our Religion established by Law, though both our Religion and Law declare precisely that we may not resist, for any pretence whatsoever; I shall add somewhat here to prevent that prejudice and preoccupation which our Authors have falsely and maliciously insinuated, And to this end, I shall prove, that the Christians in Julian's time were under the same Government and circumstances (abstracted from the Christian Religion) with those of the first three hundred years; and if they had resisted, it was altogether as unjustifiable as that of those Primitive Christians would have been, or ours now can be.  
Cicero acquaints us wherein the Imperial Power did consist when it was first founded among the Romans, l. 3. de Legibus, in these words: Regio Imperio duo sunto, iique praeeundo, judicando, consulendo, Praetores, Judices, consuls appellantor: Militiae Summum jus habento, nemini parento: Ollis salus Populi Suprema Lex esto. (i. e.) Let there be two persons in the Royal Empire, and let them be called from their precedence Praetors, from their Judicature Judges, from their Consultations Consuls: Let them have the highest command of the Militia: Let them obey no man: Let the safety of the people be to them the Supreme Law. How this latter Clause is to be understood, is fully resolved in the preceding Discourse. But all these do certainly amount to an Absolute uncontrollable power, which being first settled in the two Consuls, was afterward by the Senate conferred on Augustus, and called the Lex Regia; by which it was declared, that (Quicquid per Epistolam statuit, cognoscens decrevit, aut per Edictum propalavit, Lex esto) Whatever he should determine by his Epistle, whatever he should decree upon Cognizance, or declare by his Edict, should be a Law.  
This very power of the Empire was in being when our Saviour and his Apostles lived on the Earth; who, though they were far remote from Rome, yet precisely submitted to the Roman Emperors, and did indispensibly oblige his Disciples in all times to come to do the same; because the powers that then were, though an Augustus, Nero, or Claudian, Heathen and Persecutors, were ordained of God, to be his Ministers, to bear the Sword, to receive Tribute and Custom, Fear and Honour, etc. And that therefore they must needs be subject, not only for fear of wrath, but for the Lords sake, and for Conscience sake. And the obedience which was to be given them is expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to be at their Command as Soldiers are to their General, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to obey them at a word, Titus 3.1. Hence it was (I mean from the Roman Laws, not from the Scripture) that Dion says of Augustus, that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Free, and of absolute Authority, both over himself, and over the Laws: for, Rex est Lex viva, & reipsa praecipit ut Lex per scriptum: That the Emperor is a living Law, and commands as much by word, as the Law doth by writing: and the S.P.Q.R. by their own abbreviation, became an unintelligible cipher.  
Thus the Roman Empire continued until the Reign of Constantine, or else he could not have propagated the Christian Religion so much as he did by his Edicts; there being, as is supposed, many strict Laws against it. And it is not to be credited by Christians, that the Imperial power should be disannulled by their becoming Christians. If it be said that they themselves did consent to the abridgement of it, let the Records be produced, and let the Donation of Constantine in this respect be more probable than that fictitious one which the Pope produceth for the Western Empire, of which I have spoken in another place. See the History of the Donatists. What was done by Constantine, who was not baptised till the latter end of his Reign, and made many Edicts for the toleration of all Religions, as is shown in the foregoing Papers, will scarce amount to an Establishment of the Christian Religion.  
But granting that he had to the utmost of his power established the Christian Religion, yet his Successor thought himself not at all obliged by his Edicts: for, by the same Reason that Constantius should be bound by the Edicts of Constantine, Constantine should be bound by the Edicts of Dioclesian for the persecution of Christians. But, as our Author hath observed from Gregory Nazianzen, who speaking of Julian's Soldiers, who (were most of them Christians, and yet besides the Law of God) knew no other Law than the Will of their Prince. Invective 1. p. 75. And in truth, if the Christian Emperors had been explicitly and absolutely bound up to their Subjects to maintain their Religion and Privileges which by the favour and grace of those Emperors were granted to them, and the Subjects left at liberty to defend and obey their Emperors, the Emperors had been in a worse condition than their Subjects: for upon the People's changing of their Religion, as we know they did when almost the whole World became Arians. they might have resisted their most Orthodox Emperors; as Mr. Hunt affirms they actually did in the Reign of Constantius.  
But what Religion could the Christians plead that they were long in possession of, and was established by Laws! When Constantius nothing regarding the Constitutions of his Predecessor, did with all his might, and frequent Edicts, establish the Arian Religion, and suppress the Orthodox, hath been already shown. Besides, there were Vrbes liberae, not only free Cities, but free Nations under the Romans, who were governed by their own Laws and Magistrates, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which they held inviolable. Of this nature Josephus, l. 16. c. 4. of his Antiquities, observes the Asian Churches mentioned in the Revelations to be, who had jus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a right of Liberty, and legal Privileges, yet did none of those Churches ever plead their Privileges, or plead exemption from the Emperor's Edicts. Yea, Christ himself, who might have pleaded exemption from paying tribute unto Caesar, (the Children as he says being free) yet to avoid scandal, he works a Miracle for the payment of it, and enjoins his Disciples to give unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's.  
The weight of these and those other Arguments which follow, will I doubt not sink that Triumphant Arch which our Author hath raised, into those Quicksands on which he grounded it. And I shall now proceed to erect a lasting Pillar to the perpetual Infamy of this Author, upon such firm and impregnable grounds, as shall continue against all the impetuous but impotent blasts of this Boreas.  
It hath been accounted a good method for refuting of Errors, to reduce them to their first Principles and Originals. Be it known then to all men, that our Author hath bid defiance to the Laws of God and Man, in teaching the Doctrine of Resistance, which was never taught among any Christians until Popery was come to its perfection. That he hath as much as in him lierh, scandalised and even condemned the Primitive Christians, as allowing of and practising that intolerable Doctrine of Resistance. That both he and Mr. Hunt, have defended this Doctrine by the same Arguments as the Jesuits, John Milton, and other Regicides have done. That John Milton, etc. received the same Principles from Mr. Burton, Mr. Burroughs, Bridge, Marshal, and others, in defence of the late Unnatural War against Charles the First. That their design is to raise another War, on the same grounds, against their present Prince. And though they seem to blind their designs by preparing only to exclude a Popish Successor, yet 'tis beyond denial, that all the Arguments of the Author of Julian are leveled against the Prince that is in possession, and that he doth with the show of Authority recommend the assassination of such a Prince, and that Mr. Hunt's Original far exceeds the Transcript in such impious designs.  
If this Character be not black enough, let him that reads and understands, only subscribe the name of the Author of the Life of Julian with that of Mr. Hunt, In perpetuam Rei memoriam; and you have all in two words.  
As for Mr. Hunt, if this passage which I shall name do not amount to more direct Treason, than those for which he says he would indite a great person (no less than a Secretary of State) of— Treason in a plea for the Succession; I think there can be no such thing. The Paragraph, p. 193. as it is marked in my Copy, is verbatim this: Speaking of the Duke— Let him attempt the Crown notwithstanding an Act of Parliament for his Exclusion, he is all that while but attempting to make us miserable: if he be not excluded, he doth it certainly, (we exclude only his Person, not his Posterity). And WE WILL NOT ENTAIL A WAR UPON THE NATION, THOUGH FOR THE SAKE AND INTEREST OF THE GLORIOUS FAMILY OF THE STVARTS.  
Is not this spoken Dictator-like? Did Cromwell say more when he bragged that he had the Parliament in his pocket? Then, We will have this, and we will not have that; We will proclaim the Family of the Stuarts Traitors, and we will have our own will. His premise is this— If the Duke be not excluded, he doth certainly make us miserable, by entailing a War upon the Nation: (which may be false, if the ancient Proverb be true (Gen. 22.12.) In the mount of the Lord it shall be seen: it was spoken when the knife was lifted up to make Isaac a Scrifice, (and we know that the burning bush was not consumed.) But the Conclusion is certainly most impious, We will not entail a War up-the Nation, though for the sake and interest of the glorious Family of the Stuarts. To let pass that Irony of THE GLORIOUS FAMILY OF THE STVARTS; The plain sense of the words to a Logician is this: Rather than not exclude the Duke of York, who will certainly make us miserable, we will exclude the glorious Family of the Stuarts. This is as much as need to be said at present, to cure the prejudice of a deluded and unthinking people, as Mr. Hunt calls them  
Had. Mr. Hunt's Preface and Postscript come to my hands before I had well-nigh finished my Answer, and sent some sheets to the Press (the rest being called for with all expedition) that the Printer might not be prejudiced by the edition of other Tracts on this subject; I should have taken a more particular view of all that is contained in them: whereas I can now only cursorily make a few Remarks, and leave the Reader to judge Ex ungue leonem.  
We live (saith he, p. 150.) in an Age of mystery and prodigy, producing things monstrous and unnatural; and our language must be agreeable to the things we speak. And so it is very obscure, and yet unnatural, But I shall endeavour to drag this Author to the light, and present him with his three heads.  
The first is his Invective against the Clergy. This poureth forth floods of Contempt upon the whole Order.  
The second is his Justification of the late Unnatural War: and this Head breathes out an horrible and infectious stink.  
The third, his endeavour to promote another such War as that was: And this Head casteth out Firebrands and Swords, to alarm and arm all the Malcontents in the Nation, for a resistance of their Governors.  
I know he doth not want his lurking holes and Subterfuges to hid these monstrous deformities: but all in vain, Treason will out; and Magna est veritas▪ & prevalebit.  
The first Head breathes out a contempt of the Clergy; to which he makes way by a Preamble that will rather aggravate than excuse the Crime.  
1. Our Author complains that his honest design (as he calls it) to serve the Church hath been by many perverted, p. 1. of the Preface: and p. 5. that some have endeavoured to set his two Discourses (viz. his Argument for Bishops, and his Postscript) at variance; that the first was written to set off the latter with some advantage, and that the Author designed to get from the Argument, a more pardonable liberty of inveighing against the Churchmen in the Postscript. Habetis consitentem Reum.  
Doubtless the Argument did not effect that grateful Acknowledgement from the Bishops which he expected. They knew him perhaps to be a mercenary man, one that had or would write as much falsely against them, as he had done truly for them, if it might tend to his better advantage; and therefore he was resolved to pull down what he had built up, and to seek more beneficiary Patrons.  
Let us therefore consider who they were that thus resented and complained of Mr. Hunt, p. 5. If it had been (says he) the conceit of the Popish Faction only, and not also of those Gentlemen whom I principally designed to serve, and in them the Church of England, etc. Here it is as plain, as if it had been written with a Sunbeam, that he means the Bishops, who were mostly, if not only, concerned in that Argument.  
But how maliciously doth he suggest, that they were influenced by the Popish Faction! who, p. 6. (he says) had corrupted some of our Churchmen with Principles that subvert our Government, and betray the Rights of our people: They have debauched the manners of our Churchmen, and lessened their authority and Esteem with the people: The Order is enslaved, by collation of Preferments upon less worthy men. Qui beneficium accepit, libertatem amisit.  
Is not this a stout Advocate for Bishops, that tells the world, that those of that Order (indefinitely) are contemptible slaves, that have sold their Liberty for Preferment; that they are corrupted in their Principles, to the subverting of our Government, and betraying the Rights of the people; and so debauched in their manners, as that they have lessened their esteem and authority with the people? Is not this the old Censor Morum, or Cato Redivivus? And is it possible that a learned man should thus prevaricate and contradict himself so grossly, as it were in the same breath?  
Let not Mr. Hunt think to evade this, and say he speaks this of our younger Divines, (of which we shall hear enough by and by, to make all good men's ears tingle at the horrid falsehood of it): he speaks this of the Order, and particularly of the dignified men of that Order; of these it is that he speaks, p. 7. (for he is not yet come to his distinction of young and old Divines; those that are enslaved by the Preferment they have, and those that seek Preferment by other arts, of which anon) That they lick up the Vomit of Popish Priests; and whatever is said maliciously by them against the first Reformers, is daily repeated by (now come in) our young Clerks out of the Pulpit, with advantages of immodesty and indiscretion.  
Now for our young Divines, whom (p. 50. of the Postscript) he calls good-natured Gentlemen of the Clergy, Tom Triplet is the only young man that I knew, who was so lashed after he came from the University; Old Gill never laid on so unmercifully, as this Demagogue doth, p. 9 We have a sort of young men that have left nothing behind them in the University but the taint of a bad example, and brought no more Learning with them thence, than what serves to make them more assured and more remarkable Coxcombs; who will undertake to discourse continually of the Interest of Religion, of which they have no manner of sense; and of the Constitution of our Government, of which they are utterly ignorant. P. 8. These, like Dotterels, Apes, and Parrots, who have no more understanding than those Animals, are perpetually repeating any thing, though never so destructive to Church and State, that is suggested by any Popish Mercenary Writer; if he hath but the cunning to bestow an idle Compliment upon the Church, or calls Rogue or Villain seemingly, or in pretence, for their sakes, (I hope our Bishops have not hired any for such purposes) especially if he can furnish to their young Invention any Topics of Raillery against an Imaginary Presbytery, and against the Parliaments, etc. a very fair Capacity and Recommendation this, as they imagine, to Preferment: These are the men I confess for whose sake I writ the Postscript. The Preface than it seems was writ for the Bishops.  
But this unmerciful man hath not yet done lashing our young Divines. P. 10. Too many of the young Clergy (says our Aristarchus) do assist the Gentry in their Loyal Debauches most scandalously, for the service of the Church, and maintaining the honour of their Order. These degenerate Levites are magnifying perpetually the privileges of their Tribe, extolling their Order, yet in terms that disgrace it; and by their lives they vilify it. And now, like the old Persecutors, he hath wearied himself, to torment poor Innocents'.  
I hope our young Divines have yet so much of their Grammar-learning, (for the Subject is scarce capable of the more serious Stelliteuticks of the Vniversity-studies) as to return some Reflections on the laborious Travels of this infamous Tom Coriat, and make him feel what it is, Ludere cum Sanctis, in our Lawyer's Latin, (i. e.) to play with Edgetools. In the mean time, his own folly and impiety will chastise him, it being evident that Mr. Hunt deals with the Bishops, not only as men use their Dogs, who feed them with a bit and a knock; but as Butchers are wont to use their Hogs, who claw them and scrape them a little, that they may with more conveniency cut their Throats: He advanceth them as it were on a Pinnacle of the Temple, that he may cast them down the more irrecoverably.  
He tells us, p. 15. that Calvin, Beza, and P. du Moulin, Monsieur Moyne, Claude, and the l'Angle highly approved of the Order and Office of Bishops: And from Grotius, that Non debent res bonae damnari, quia sunt qui iis abutuntur: That good things ought not to be condemned, because there are some that do abuse them. Yet p. 11. he tells them also, the Apostolicalness of their Order will not secure it, if they do not fill up the duty of their Office, (i. e. if they do not fully comply with his design:) And p. 12. he remembers them that there are Churches of Christ that do make a shift without their Order, and Religion need not perish though the Order fail. So that it is plain, that by the word Order he means Episcopacy; and insinuates, that it is a needless thing, it may be grubbed up root and branch. And is not this a fair Apology for his real intention to serve the Bishops?  
P. 23. He complains that too many eminent men in our Church are brought to a dead neutrality; and thereby we are brought to this pass, That Religion itself must be the devoted thing to the rage and folly of the Priests of that Religion: (As if they had all conspired to be feloes de se). And on this ground he proclaims his Curse ye Meroz against them as execrable Neuters. P. 6. he says, They have raised a bitter Zeal against that Separation which themselves have contrived, fomented, and promoted: and it is brought to that pass, that those are accounted Church-Fanaticks, though Conformists, that cannot contentedly see and endure the nearer approaches of ruin both of Church and State: These are their fear and their hate, the Sons of Anak, the Giants of the Land, that they imagine so insuperable, that they are for making themselves a Captain, and returning back into Egypt, p. 7. This he repeats, p. 46. where he endeavours to lay the sin of Corah. etc. upon those who in our days do most faithfully adhere to Moses and Aaron; and would excuse those, who having lost their Corah and other renowned Leaders, by an exemplary Divine Judgement, did the very next day murmur again against Moses and Aaron, falsely accusing them, who were the meekest men upon Earth, of taking too much upon them, (i. e.) of ruling by an Arbitrary power, and making themselves absolute: For so, v. 13. of that 16th Chapter, they accuse Moses of seeking to make himself altogether a Prince: and v. 14. he is accused of seeking to put out the eyes of the People, as Mr. Hunt also doth, p. 13. Postscr. We are used (saith he) as Samson, bound, and our eyes put out, and made sport for the Philistimes. I fear Mr. Hunt will hardly have his eyes opened, till (as the mole) he comes to die. With such murmur as these they so provoked Moses, that the Lord was angry with him for their sakes; and, as the Author of Julian's life observed of the Prayers of the Christians in Julian's time, they contrived and effected his death: for he died in the Land of Moab, and was not to enter into Canaan.  
Who they are that murmur at the Conduct of Moses and Aaron, is too visible to be denied (viz.) they that accuse them of Arbitrary Government, that proclaim themselves the Holy People; they who harken to those false Spies that discourage the people with stories of Insuperable evils, of being certainly miserable, and having a War entailed on the Nation, fire and faggot, and an Inquisition, etc. For my part, I think these murmuring Prognosticators are they who are for making another Captain in the room of Corah, and going back again to Egypt. And though we do not look on these as the Sons of Anak, invincible Giants; yet are they as the Canaanites were to Israel, thorns in our sides.  
They are still troubling us with their wiles and their lies, their Associations and Consults, their Seditious Libels and Pamphlets, such as these of our two Authors; their Doleman, and the Rights of the Kingdom; Their Plato Redivivus, their No Plot, and Sermons of Persecution, and Daniel in the Den; which, like the Frogs and Plagues of Egypt, are croaking in every corner, and infecting every part of the three Nations. They which cry up those for the godly Party, and devout Men, that are inspired with Scruples from God himself, on purpose to put a bar against the proceed of Moses and Aaron.  
By such men and means (the truth is) we are brought into a great strait; we have a deep Sea before us, and a howling Wilderness behind us. And yet we murmur not; our Sins have deserved these things: Nor do we think of making any other Captains to ourselves, than those whom God in great mercy, and by many Miracles, hath preserved and continued unto us. We are not for Egypt in your sense, nor for being reduced to a State of Bondage through the Wilderness of a new War: We are for standing still, keeping our places, and doing our duties, and wait for the Salvation of God. Though we were by the wickedness of unreasonable and cruel men deprived of our Moses, yet God hath sent us a Josua, and with him are the Priests of the Lord, and the Ark of his Covenant, to which, we doubt not, the swelling streams of Jordan will give way, and we shall yet pass to Canaan on dry land. Now let the Reader judge who do abuse the Scripture to serve their turn, as Mr. Hunt doth advise, p. 46.  
P. 35. Mr. Hunt becomes an Advocate for a sort of Gibeonites, that they may have an act of Comprehension; and represents them as a very harmless and friendly people. The Dissenters (says he) have neither power nor will to destroy our RELIGION or Government; they are already of our Church, and it is expected that they should be Petitioners to the Bishops for their intercession towards the obtaining some indulgence in some little matters, that they may bring them into an entire communion with us. And again, That they are in profession as Loyal as any that boast themselves true Sons of the Church of England, p. 19 But though some profess an irreconcilable hatred, even in their pleas for Peace; the great question is, what their practice is and hath been.  
Postscr. p. 89. Can any man imagine (says he) that any prejudice can accrue to the Church of England, if she did enlarge her Communion by making the Conditions of it more easy? And p. 90. Is it fit that the Peace should be hazarded, or the Nation put with reason or without in fear of it; or a Kingdom turned into a Shambles, for a Ceremony or a Ritual in our public Worship? etc. What is it the Advocate of these men pleads for? hath he full instructions from his Clients? doth he know their minds, and what will give them satisfaction? What he contends for, hath by several men of the Church been granted to them.  
Why may not (say you) standing at the Sacrament be granted— And the signing with the Cross in Baptism be dispensed with when desired? When the Dean of St. Paul's and the Bishop of Cork have made some overtures for conceding these things, Mr. Baxter answers the first, that he made them sibi & suis, for the advantage of himself and others of his own Persuasion; and without taking any notice of them in the latter, answers his Discourse with scorn and contempt.  
But our Liturgy must also be altered for their sakes: p. 91. you would have more Offices, and those we have, not so long: though some complain they are too many and too short already. And for the Rubric, that must be altered, (not for the present only) as general scruples shall arise; and that may be to the world's end.  
But to answer more particularly: you say the Dissenters have neither power nor will to destroy our Religion and Government.  
Answ. When they were less considerable for their numbers than now, being (as you say) four fifths of the Nation, they had both power and will to effect both. What hath been done, may be done; and Mr. Baxter justly feared that they were Nati ad bis perdendam Remp. Anglicanam. That they are the trading and wealthy part of the Nation, is generally boasted by themselves.  
We know Mr. Baxter urgeth in the name of his Brethren, that there are many heinous sins in our present Constitution that hinder their Conformity; the taking off of which will be an acknowledgement of our guilt, and their justification. As for the prejudice that may accrue by altering the conditions of our Communion, you give us a fair warning, p. 93. telling us of the Church of Rome, that their Doctrine of Comprehension is so large, that they destroy their Religion to increase the number of their Professors: by granting the demands of some, we shall but encourage others, and make them presume to be Judges in their case and quarrels. And we have found by sad experience the inconvenience of admitting such as the Country-conformist and the Author of the Life of Julian into our Communion.  
And you say, p. 35 and 36 of the Preface, That the King and States of the Realm will never suffer so excellent an Ecclesiastical Constitution as we enjoy, to be subverted: Yet the Dissenters project in Mr. Humphrey's Half-sheet, intended to be presented to the Parliament, doth certainly tend to her destruction, as hath been showed elsewhere.  
And if the King and States will not admit an alteration, you know the Bishops cannot: and if the States will not, and the Bishops cannot, ought not they that would make themselves wiser than their Rulers to submit, (notwithstanding their scruples against a Ceremony) rather than to hazard or disturb the peace of the Kingdom? And is it not an unjust complaint of yours, of turning it into a Shambles for a Ceremony or a Ritual? And to conclude, if (as you observe, p. 92.) a discourse managed with almost irresistible Reason, Candor, Temper, and Address, be matter of exasperation, and they turn again, and be more confirmed in their separating way, what condescensions will reclaim them?  
P. 36. It is added— That absurd Opinion that Dominium fundatur in gratia, is charged on those that are for the Exclusion of the Duke: And they think that by pronouncing that absurd piece of Latin, they have at once put to silence and shame all reasons of Nature, Religion, and State that urge and require it.  
How we can maintain the Negative against the Papists, if we should practise the same as they do, on this Position, I cannot perceive: and therefore we must charge it impartially on all that deserve it. Bishop Davenant admits it for good Latin; and I think that you quarrel at the words, to avoid the sense of the Thesis which that learned Bishop maintained against the Papists, concluding, that the Pope could not challenge the power of Deposing Kings by any Title but that of Antichrist, whose Founder was Hildebrand, who like Satan, claimed a power to dispose of all the Kingdoms of the World: And you yourself think that our Saints ought not to do so.  
We come now to the Postscript, which he hath told us was written for the sake of our young Divines, those good-natured Gentlemen, who doubtless will return his Civilities. His pretence is to answer some Objections that were made against them; but in truth, they are his own accusations of them, which he prosecutes with all the might and malice he can, upon this ground, because the Bishops must be made out of them; and being so bad already, he hath foretold how much worse it will be, when they sell their Liberty for that Preferment.  
It is said then, p. 1. (our Author knows by whom) That they affirm it to be in the power of a Prince by Divine Right to govern as he pleaseth: That the power of the Laws is solely in him: That he may, if he please, use the consent of Parliaments to assist the Reason of his Laws, when he shall give any; but it is a great condescension in Kings to give a Reason for what they do, and a diminution to their most unaccountable Prerogative: That they are for a Popish Successor and no Parliament, and do as much as in them lies, give up our ancient Government and the Protestant Religion, the true Christian Faith, to the absolute Will of a Popish Successor, giving him a Divine Right to extirpate Gods true Religion established among us by Law, and to evacuate our Government by his absolute pleasure.  
Then, after a little pause, having almost run himself out of breath to tell the Nation these Falsehoods, he thus enlargeth himself, p. 2. That just now, when we are under the dread of a Popish Successor, some of our Clergy are illuminated into a Mystery, That any Authority in the Government, not derived from the King, and that is not to yield to his absolute Will, was rebellious, and against the Divine Right and Authority of Kings in the establishment, against which no Usage or Prescription to the contrary, or in abatement of it, is to be allowed. That all Rights are ambulatory, and depend for their continuance on his pleasure: So that though the Reformation was made here by the Government established by Law, and hath acquired Civil Rights not to be altered but by the King and the three Estates, these men yet speak (says our Lawyer) as if they envied the Rights of their own Religion, and had a mind to reduce the Church back again into a state and condition of being persecuted, and designed that she should be stripped of her legal Immunities and Defensatives, and brought back to the deplorable helpless condition of Prayers and Tears, do utterly abandon and neglect all the provisions that God's providence hath made for their protection: Nay, by this their new Hypothesis they put it by Divine Right in the power of a Popish Successor, when he pleaseth, at once, by a single indisputable and  decree to destroy our Religion and Government.— That they believe no Plot but a Presbyterian Plot; for, of them they believe all ill, and call whom they please by that hated name, and boldly avow that Popery is more eligible than Presbytery, for by that they shall have greater Revenues, and more authority and rule over the Laymen,  
A heavy Charge this, (saith Mr. Hunt, p. 4.) if true: but he is sure it is imputable but to a few, though he had told us in the Preface, that many, too many were so corrupted: and in many places he speaks indefinitely of the whole Order. Now our Lawyer cannot but know, that it lies on him who hath divulged these slanders, to make proof of them, though he pretends they were objected by others. And all the Conforming Clergy are cast under the suspicion of these unsufferable Crimes. If Mr. Hunt had any regard to the welfare of the Church, he would have singled out such Criminals, and brought them to shame and condign punishment, there being sufficient Laws for the punishment of them: and it being the interest of the Magistrates to free the Church and State from such pests. A Judas may creep in among Christ's own Disciples, and a Jonah hid himself in the bottom of the Ship: But doubtless it is the interest of all that are in such a Ship, to have them discovered and cast out, that the storms which threaten their common destruction may be allayed; especially when (as Mr. Hunt says) they come often under observation, frequent public houses, and talk loud. He that doth not according to his power seek to prevent these evils, is consenting to, and contracts the guilt of them. Qui non vetat cum potest, jubet.  
But it consists not with Mr. Hunts design to do the Church such a real Service as to free her from such miscreants, but to involve the whole Clergy under the same defamation, that they may fall under the same condemnation. To this end, instead of extenuating the number of such, he aggravates their faults; as,  

1. Being such as may choke the Constancy, Resolution and Zeal of the most addicted to the Service of the Churchmen.  
2. That they are acted by the Papists.  
3. That they are agreeable to, and indeed make up the most modern Project and Scheme of the Popish Plot. And  
4. That They deserve to suffer as the betrayers of their Country, and to be prosecuted with greater shame and ignominy than the Traditores were by the Ancient Christians. And thus having breathed a while, he this illnatured Lawyer gins to lash our goodnatured Divines again.   
Upon such scandalous and false Suggestions as these it is (saith he) that the generality of the Clergy, who any way appear for a Christian Subjection to the King, and a defence of the established Government of the Church, are represented as Popishly affected, and betrayers of the True Protestant Religion and the Laws, etc. I would have Mr. Hunt to answer his own Question, p. 101. What Fines and Imprisonments, Pillories and Scourge do they deserve, that persecute the Church with revile, when they themselves are tolerated?  
It must be some large Bribe, or promise of the public Faith, that thus engageth our Lawyer to support a dying Cause, and to take part as well with Papists as fanatics, to bring the English Reformation into contempt. For what nearer way is there to effect it, than first to represent those who he says established our Religion in Queen Elizabeth's days, to be assertors and promoters of the Doctrine of King-killing?  
Secondly to affirm, That in the days of King Charles the first, by preaching up the Divinity of Kings, and their Absolute power, that unnatural War was begun?  
And Thirdly, p. 7. That at his Majesty's return, Fanaticism had expired, if some peevish old and stiff Churchmen had not studied obstacles, and some crafty Statesmen had not projected that the continuance of the Schism would be of great service to destroy the Church.  
And for the present Age, the Clergy great and small are all under the same condemnation; Great Friends to Popery and Arbitrary Government; such as have no sense of Reason or Religion; such as will not when it is in their power prevent the ruin of their Nation, but are either accursed Neuters, or else wilful Actors in drawing down the Judgements of God upon us. And we are like to have no other; the Fountains being corrupted, can send forth nothing but unclean streams. I pray God preserve the Honourable Inns of Court from such Impostors as Mr. Hunt!  
Let not Mr. Hunt think to hid his Malice against the Clergy, by a seeming commendation of their Offices as Apostolical, when he adds, that Religion may subsist without it, and when by all manner of evil arts he seeks to enrage the multitude against them: Nor that he is to be taken as a Friend to their persons or maintenance, who labours so much to take away their good names, which, like precious Ointment, I hope will send forth the better savour, for being thus Chafed.  
Alas! we are not so very Dolts, but that we know such little Arts to be the daily practice of every Sycophant and Tale-bearer, who being minded to disgrace a person, useth the same method as Mr. Hunt doth toward the Clergy; first to invent, then to spread abroad and aggravate their supposed faults or personal infirmities, as pretended Friends. For thus they insinuate: Do you know such a person, and do you hear nothing concerning him? There is a strong Report that he hath done such and such evil things, as will ruin him and all his Family. I am hearty sorry to hear such things of him; but they cannot be hid or denied. I am much troubled to hear of such gross miscarriages. He was in a very good Way, and had many advantages of benefitting himself and others; but he hath abused them, and outlived them all; and his high Place and Calling doth but discover his nakedness the more, and will precipitate his ruin. It could hardly enter into my belief, that a person that knows and professeth better things, could ever have been guilty of such Crimes. And perhaps you will be as incredulous as I was; but they are too true. I perceive it is not all gold that glisters. How a man may be deceived by an outward form and fucus of Honesty and Religion! I thank God I am undeceived myself, and hope others will be so too. He is a very Wolf in Sheep's clothing, a Persecutor of the Righteous, who seemed a Preacher of Righteousness, etc. Have no fellowship or communion with him: he is in the very gall of bitterness, and the bond of iniquity.  
If such Insinuations are vile and odious in a vulgar mouth against a single person, how much more vile are they in the printed Harangues of a man of understanding, against the whole Order of the Clergy, with a malicious design first to disgrace, and then to destroy them!  
Either this Gentleman is well acquainted with the Universities, and the generality of those that from thence are admitted to the Priesthood, or not. If he be not, he is inexcusable for printing such Scandals against them: if he be, he cannot but know that there was never better Discipline in the University, never greater Circumspection used concerning such as are admitted to Holy Orders, than now there is: and that if ever (Clerus Anglicanus est stupor Mundi) it was true that the English Clergy were the admiration of the world, it is so now. And therefore the Author of these obliqne Reflections strikes at all the Heads of the Universities, and at all the Bishops in their several Dioceses, as if they were the Causers and Promoters of all these Disorders.  
I do therefore appeal first to his own Conscience, whether the far greater number, both in the University and in the Clergy, be not men of Learning, Integrity, Piety, and Loyalty; and then he should in justice have given them such a character as the major part doth deserve: Denominatio sumitur à majore. And then I appeal to the testimony of more equal and indifferent men: And such a one I take Dr. Burnet to be, who for his late Writings had the Thanks of the Nation in a Parliament-way: and he deserved it, if he had written nothing else but the Testimony which he gives of the present Clergy.  
God hath not so left this Age and Church, but there is in it a great number in both the Holy Functions, who are perhaps as eminent in the exemplariness of their lives, and as diligent in their labours, as hath been in any one Church in any Age since Miracles ceased. The humility and strictness of life in many of our Prelates, and some that were highly born, and yet have far outgone some others from whom more might have been expected, raiseth them far above censure, though perhaps not above envy. And when such think not the daily instructing their Neighbours a thing below them, but do it with as constant a care as if they were to earn their Bread by it: when they are so affable to the meanest Clergymen that come to them; when they are nicely scrupulous about those whom they admit into Holy Orders, and so large in their Charities, that one would think they were furnished with some unseen ways; these things must needs raise great esteem for such Bishops, and seem to give some hopes of better times. Of all this I may be allowed to speak the more freely, since I am led to it by none of those Bribes either of Gratitude, or Fear, or Hope, which are wont to corrupt men to say what they do not think. But I were much to blame, if in a Work that may perhaps live some time in the world, I should only find fault with what is amiss, and not also acknowledge what is so very commendable and praiseworthy. And when I look into the inferior Clergy, there are, chief about this great City of London, so many so eminent, both for the strictness of their Lives, the constancy of their Labours, and plain way of Preaching, which is now perhaps brought to as great a perfection as ever was since men spoke as they received it immediately from the Holy Ghost; the great gentleness of their Deportment to such as differ from them, their mutual love and charity, and in a word, for all the qualities that can adorn Ministers or Christians; that if such a number of such men cannot prevail with this debauched Age, this one thing to me looks more dismally than all the other affrighting symptoms of our condition, That God having sent so many faithful Teachers, their labours are still so ineffectual.  
If any man think the Doctor speaks partially, let him hear Mr. Hunt's own Testimony, p. 48. of the Postscript: Our Age is blessed with a Clergy renownedly learned and prudent. And p. 105. he commends our Church for the purity of her Doctrine, prudence of her Discipline, and her commendable, decent, and intelligible Devotion. This Testimony is true, and therefore they who contradict it cannot be too sharply rebuked. But what reason can be conceived for these contradictory proceed?  
This Gentleman (I conceive) might fancy himself to be Chairman of the Committee for Trial of Ministers, and hath taken his Measures for proceeding in that case, from the practice of his Predecessors, who form Articles of the like nature against the Clergy of that Age.  
Imprimis, For adhering to the King against his Parliament.  
Item, For preaching a necessity of obedience to the King as Supreme, and thereby endeavouring to introduce an Arbitrary Power.  
Item, For disobeying the Votes and Ordinances of Parliament for demolishing of Superstition, and keeping out of Popery.  
Item, For defending Episcopacy and Liturgy; for not keeping the days of Fasting and Humiliation appointed to crave a blessing on the Parliaments Forces, and the days of Thanksgiving for defeating the King's designs.  
Item, For preaching up Passive Obedience, when the Laws do allow us to make resistance in defence of our Religion, our Liberties, and Lives.  
Item, For insufficiency, not being able to pray ex tempore, or to preach without book. Witness Dr. Pocock, Bishop Sanderson, etc.  
Item, For administering the Sacrament to all that desired it, and for using the Lords Prayer as a Charm.  
Such were the Articles by which a great part of that Clergy was destroyed, of whom the world was not worthy. With such our Gentleman is still in travel; but I hope his labour will be in vain.  
Read some of those Sermons and Treatises which of late years have been published by such as you call young Coxcombs. Consider the strains of Piety and Moderation, of Reason and Judgement, of Industry and acquired Knowledge; and I am confident you will find so little hopes to be believed by others, that you will see reason enough not to believe yourself.  
Let him talk of the persecution of Julian, and other Pagans; this which our Author promotes, exceeds them all. Others did but Occidere Episcopos, this man seeks Occidere Episcopatum; and under a pretence of pleading and praying for them, he contrives how to pray upon them. What else meaneth that insinuation which he quotes from Grotius, to gain it some Authority, having bankrupted his own? Verso in morem abusu intermitti res ipsas non est infrequens, p. 13. of Preface: which he applieth to the Episcopal Office. Nomen & eminentia Episcopalis eorum culpa quibus obtigerat, omnem sui perdiderat reverentiam, & in odium venerat plebis.  
I greatly wondered to hear that Prayer of his against Sacrilege, p. 103. He that designs, contrives, or consents to spoil the Church of any of her Endowments, may a secret Curse waste his substance; let his Children be Vagabonds, and beg their bread in desolate places. But when I call to mind Mr. Humphries project for increasing the number of our Bishops, whom he would have to be chosen by the several Factions, Presbyterian, Independent, etc. and these, whether Laymen, or Clergymen, to preside over those Parties, it remembered me of a passage of Mr. Hunt's, p. 90. of his Postscript, where he demands thus— Will it be any prejudice that the number of her Bishops be increased, and that Suffragans be appointed and approved by the present Bishops? etc. So that when other Trades fail, Mr. Hunt as well as Mr. Humphries may have some hopes of being made Suffragans at least. For the Order of Episcopacy may be laid by, as he intimates, and then some Lay-superintendents may succeed, and enjoy their Honours and Revenues. Therefore to his Curse I shall add my Prayer for a blessing on Levi, Deut. 33.11. Bless, Lord, his substance, and accept the work of his hands: smite through the Loins of them that rise up against him, and of them that hate him, that they rise not again.  
The second Head contains a justification of the late unnatural War, p. 6. It is difficult (he saith) to tell how that late unhappy War began, or how it came to issue so tragically in the death of the late King. And being to speak in so difficult a case, he enters his caution, p. 50. I would not be perversely understood by any man, as if I went about to justify our late Wars. But it will appear to be Protestatio contra factum.  
P. 102. He says, That War would have been impossible, if the Churchmen had not maintained the Doctrine that Monarchy was Jure Divino, in such a sense that made the King Absolute. This was a fiction of Mr. Baxters; and through the Loins of the Clergy, they strike at the King, as if that glorious Prince intended Tyranny. But that good Prince was far from any design of ruling by an arbitrary power: he had no Army, nor Money to raise one; but by the contrivance of some men, his Father was engaged in an expensive War for the recovery of the Palatinate, which exhausted all the Exchequer, and reduced the Royal Family to great necessities; and then they failed in their promised Supplies, and left him to a precarious way of subsisting, and to stretch his Prerogative for the preservation of himself and Family. He would have parted with the half of his Power and Prerogative, as he often offered, to have preserved or restored peace to his Subjects. But when he spoke to them of Peace, they made themselves ready for Battle.  
But were there not some other Doctrines preached in those days, which contributed more to the beginning of that War, than that of the Divinity of Kings? What think you of the Doctrine of the lawfulness of Resistance then preached and printed, under the same Arguments as now it is, by Mr. Marshal, Burton? etc. What think you of that Doctrine which (according to the Jesuits) taught, That the rise and Original of Government is in the People; and that as they gave, so they might recall it as they saw cause? You know who layeth down the same Principle, in a certain Preface— That Government is the perfect creature of men in Society, made by pact and consent, and not othorwise; most certainly not otherwise: and therefore most certainly ordainable by the whole Community, for the safety and preservation of the whole: P. 38. of Preface.  
To what tended this other Doctrine, That the Authority of the King was in the two Houses, when they had frighted away his Person? That the King was Singulis major, but Vniversis minor? That Episcopacy was an Antichristian Order, and to be stubed up root and branch? That the King, Court, and Bishops, were designing to bring in Popery? That our Liturgy was but the Mass-book translated?  
These Doctrines, with such Remonstrances, Votes and Ordinances, began that unhappy War; The Associations made in City and Country, seizing the Forts and Magazines and Royal Navy, and answering all his Messages of Peace with reproaches of his maladministrations; This is that which you call the English Loyalty. When they sent out Armies to fight him, when they had him Prisoner, and voted no more Addresses, they were, if you will believe them, or Mr. Hunt, his Majesty's most Humble and Loyal Subjects still. Such as these I could as easily prove to be the Doctrines of those times, as that they are the Opinions and Practices of too many in these our days, though most absurd and dangerous, as they are now published by too many besides our two Authors.  
P. 20. Pref. There is little reason to charge the guilt of the unexpiable Murder of our late Excellent King— upon Presbytery, which was not thought of here in England till the War was begun. And p. 21. Sure this Gentleman hath read very little, or dissembleth very much. Mr. Cambden in the Life of Queen Elizabeth is full of the Projects and Practices of such as planted the Geneva-Discipline here in England; what troubles they occasioned to the Government both in Church and State, and what deserved punishments some of them received, as Penry and Vdal, etc. It is not possible but this Gentleman hath heard of, if not read the things controverted between Archbishop Whitgift and T. C. between the judicious Hooker and Mr. Travers, and Bishop bilson's dangerous Positions. P. 21. He jumps with Mr. Baxter in his Opinion, That the Parliament in the course of the War, which was managed (says he) by such means and measures as were necessary and possible, in their distress prayed aid of the Scottish Nation: They refused them any assistance, except they would enter into their Covenant— AND AFTER THE COVENANT WAS THUS IMPOSED, THEY STILL RETAINED THE ENGLISH LOYALTY, remonstrated against the Kings feared Murder, and declared out of their Pulpits against the Actors of that detestable Tragedy. If they did preach against his Murder out of Loyalty and Conscience, why had they not preached against Fight, and pursuing him with fire and sword, where he might have fallen as one of his Subjects? Why not against his Imprisonment? there the Covenanters were the Loyal Party, the ROYALISTS were the REBELS; and the guilt to be sure (says he) belongs to the Rebelside, p. 21.  
And as it was in the beginning of that War, so it is now, and by our Author's principles so it will be ever: they that with their lives and fortunes adhere to their Prince, though he be neither Apostate or Tyrant, are pronounced Rebels; And they who fight against him, on any pretence whatsoever, are the true English Loyalists. I would not have them called the true Protestants, lest the Papists should insult over them, and prove themselves more Loyal Subjects. It is another very memorable speech of Mr. Hunt's, p. 171. Speaking of the Bill of Exclusion: If this Bill do not pass, they will take him for a wicked King too, and will say he hath no lawful Issue to succeed him, for his own Sins; and many other remarks of wickedness they will make upon him. What he means by the word too, may be explained by the I, and we which he speaks of just before, and now of others too, that will count the King wicked, etc.  
It is somewhat obscure also to guests what he means, when he says, the passing of the Bill is the only means of the King's Salvation from their traitorous designs; and again, p. 172. If he will follow the Counsel of that excellent Bill, he may live long, and see good days. As if he could not be safe without it. Of such obscure places, we may conjecture by those other plain ones, wherein he hath manifested how great respect he hath for his Majesty and the Royal Family. Nor indeed can we expect better things from a Republican, who speaking of our King's Father as he calls him (sans Ceremony) makes him and his Party the Delinquents, and upbraids him with all the Calamities which a Rebellious people brought upon him: and adds, p. 55. If there were twenty Trojans derived from one Stock, that had reigned in an uninterrupted Succession, Two immediate Successors that should have their Reigns successively attended with civil Wars, were enough to efface their own, and the glories and merits of such Ancestors. And so if another Rebellion should succeed, (which God forbidden) farewel to the glorious Family of the Stuarts. For notwithstanding the glories of that great Prince, his unhappy death, and the admired devotions of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the stories of the Calamities of his people (all his three Kingdoms involved in War during his Reign) (which is a lie by thirteen years) and the remembrance of them will be with some men, (of the same bran with Mr. Hunt, i.e. not very loyal) a stain and a diminution of the glories of the Royal Family, p. 53. Although others, more loyal, do think that it added another Crown to them, more glorious than the other three, (i. e.) the Crown of Martyrdom. In Princes (says Mr. Hunt) their Calamities are reckoned among the abatements of their Honour; and mere Misfortunes are Disgraces, and have the same influence on the minds of the common people (as they have on Mr. Hunt's) as real faults, and male administrations.  
So that the Royal Martyr, who suffered so many barbarous Indignities with invincible patience and Christian fortitude, must suffer another Martyrdom in his Reputation; and the Regicides be renowned (because of their success) as men of real Virtues, and Patriots of their Country.  
Careat successibus Opto,  
Quisquis ab eventu facta nefanda putat.  
I cannot perceive any instance of the least respect to the Royal Family, except that deference which he bestows on Dr. Titus' Oats and Captain Bedlow, the King's Evidence; on whom he writes a full Panegery, p. 24, 25. which he thus concludes: The undoubted truth of their Evidence hath given them the civil respect of all honest men, and will give the Doctor the public honours of the Nation in due time. For my part, I live at too great a distance from such men, to ken them aright; and I would commend Mr. Hunt's own Rule to them that know their conversation, whereby to judge of them, p. 52. of the Preface: That their virtue of Loyalty will bear the same proportion as their other virtues do to the Canon of Morality.  
To this Head of justifying the former War, belongs his Apology for such as were then called Presbyterians; which he (as a faithful Advocate and Orator) still prosecutes.  
P. 13. Pref. Our old Puritans and late Dissenters (he excepts only the Fools and Knaves sent among them, and spirited by the Roman Priests) have not disliked the Episcopal Government. If all the Covenanters and others that disliked the Episcopal Government were Fools and Knaves spirited by the Romish Priests, we have great reason to be jealous of the present Dissenters as such; and the rather, because you tell us, p. 19 of a vile sort of Presbyterians in Scotland, (with whom some in England do conspire) who have deservedly put that name under eternal infamy by their turbulent and contumacious carriage against the Kingly Authority.  
Yet even for these, this Gentleman makes an Apology. First, in respect of their scrupulosity, p. 86. Though the scruples of Nonconformists be as he thinks groundless and unreasonable, and often moves his passion against them, yet upon consideration he thinks their scrupulosity may be of God, and that some men are by him framed to it. Take courage then, all you men of Scruples, the Good Old Cause is still God's Cause: he hath provided this your scrupulosity (saith this Stoic) as a bar and obstacle in the natures and complexions of. DEVOUT MEN against any Innovations whatsoever, that dangerous ones may not steal upon the Church, for the better maintaining the simplicity and purity of the Christian Religion and Worship. Bene dixisti, Thoma.  
But thus the Predestinated Thief could plead for himself, that he was born under the thievish Planet Mercury, and could not resist his fate: Steal he must, and repent of it he could not, nor be sorry for his fault, though he were to be hanged for it: This pilfering humour was in his nature from the God of Nature, and who hath resisted his Will? The same Argument will the lascivious man, who was born under the Planet of Venus, and the Rebel and Murderer, who was born under Mars, use in their defence, as the scrupulous and obstinate, who were born under Saturn. And so any vice may be defended, and the whole blame transferred on God, who sent them into the world with such inclinations.  
But on second considerations, our Author might have told them that these wicked dispositions were the effects of the corruption of their natures, contracted and propagated by original sin; and that there is yet so much light from Nature, but much more from the Grace of God, as to discover, and assist them in the correction of these unreasonable and ground: less affections and passions: and not to encourage them in them, by telling them they are from God, and infused into devout men, that they may put a bar to such dangerous Innovations that are stealing on the Church, and for the maintenance of the simplicity and purity of the Christian Religion and Worship. This is a New Plea to encourage them to a New Rebellion, as well as to justify the Old. And we know what slender pretences scrupulous and obstinate persons are wont to lay hold on, to defend themselves in very unlawful practices, in such cases as are confessedly unreasonable and dangerous, and to which they have a natural inclination. The Vulgar need a Curb to restrain them, and not a Spur to provoke and haste them on.  
When therefore you ask (p. 86.) What affrightment all this while, either to Church or State, from this weak and pitiful scrupulosity? Where lies the Treason or Sacrilege? Let our Author consult the History of the late War, and Experience (which some say is) the Mistress of Fools, may resolve him. It is no more agreeable to a scrupulous man about a Ceremony of the Church, to depose and murder his lawful Prince, than for a man of a nice Conscience to be impiously wicked, p. 33. Pref. Yet Mr. Baxter and others will tell you, that the greatest Impieties and Outrages have been committed by such men as pretended niceness and scruples of Conscience for their justification. And who they were that would strain at Gnats and swallow Camels, our Saviour told us long since.  
But to return. Upon this very Ground of a natural complexion, etc. p. 19 of the Preface, he would excuse a vile sort of Presbyterians in Scotland (as he calls them) who have deservedly put that name under eternal infamy, by their turbulent and contumacious carriage against the Kingly Authority. Which yet (he there says) is not imputable so much to Presbytery, as to the barbarous Manners and rough Genius of that Nation. And is it not strange, that neither the Learning and Knowledge of that Nation, which afforded some men, of all Ages, of great excellency, and which usually (emollit mores, nec sinit esse feros) doth correct the brutish dispositions of men; nor the power of Godliness and purity of Doctrine and Worship, to which, especially in latter times, they pretended beyond all other Nations, and was proposed by them, and accepted by some of our own Nation, as the great Rule next to (if not above) the Word of God, for our Reformation; could so far reform them, as to teach them Obedience to their lawful Princes, but they must still remain infamous, (as our Author observes) for Disloyalty and a barbarous Treatment of their Kings? And is it not yet more strange, that we, who are of a better Genius, should learn of them, who (as you note) do boast of one hundred and fifty Kings in succession in that Kingdom (and you certainly aver) that they really imprisoned, deposed, and murdered fifty at least, before the time of Mary Queen of Scots, that such an Original should be proposed to the English Nation, that their Chronicles may also be defiled with the blood of their Kings?  
As for what you say (p. 20. Pref.) concerning the Queen of Scots, that her prosecution was promoted by the English Bishops; which putrid Vomit the Author of Julian's Life licked up, and hath disgorged again, to make the whole Nation stink: I have said enough to vindicate the Bishops from that foul Aspersion. It being designed by the Wisdom of the Parliament, and by them justified, for many Treasonable actions and Insurrections by her practised and contrived; for which she was legally condemned, not as a Queen, nor as a Popish Successor, much less as our Queen; but as a professed Enemy to her Majesty that then happily reigned over us; from whom she actually claimed the Crown, and endeavoured by force to usurp it. And she having first resigned her Crown, and came hither for protection, which she forfeited by her frequent practices of Treason, was tried and condemned as the Wife of a Subject of this Land. And happy had it been for this Nation, if they had never learned any other Regicide than this Fictitious one wherewith the Bishops are chief charged, for no other reason that I can divine, but because they will not give consent to another more unexcusable action now.  
This rash Assertion of yours destroys all that laudable endeavour which you have worthily attempted for the vindication of our Bishops: in other matters, this is a Scandalum Magnatum with a witness; and I hope you have yet so much ingenuity, as to put yourself to the voluntary Penance of a Recantation, the slander being so notoriously false. And I am persuaded that the convictions of your Conscience will not give you any rest, till you have made them as public satisfaction as the injury you have done them is.  
I proceed now to the third Head of his Discourse, which leads me to show the endeavours used to engage the Nation in a second unnatural War: And I shall begin with that Speech of this Author, p. 52. of Postscript. The panic fear of the change of the Government that this Doctrine (of the Divinity of Kings) occasioned, and the divisions it made among us, was the principal cause of the late War. And p. 102. That War would have been impossible, if the Churchmen had not maintained the Doctrine, that Monarchy was Jure Divino in such a sense as made the King absolute: and they and the Church in consequence perished by it.  
Now you have heard already how loudly the young Divines are accused for preaching this Doctrine. And how false soever the Accusation be, the Nation is called to stand upon her guard, and the Royal Standard is feigned to be set up; and perhaps the Seditious party are really listed and associated. And every man is called on to declare for what Party he will engage: The Neuters are accursed; the Associators declared to be, such as retain the old English Loyalty, after the taking of the Covenant; and all that oppose these, betrayers of their Religion, their Country, and the Laws; yea, they are told, p. 149. that they ought not to subject the Professors of the true Religion again, (as if they had once done it already) to Slaughters, Fire, Faggots, Tortures, Inquisitions, and Massacres: When the Bishops and Loyal party were they who suffered these, or as great tortures as these, for their Religion and Loyalty, from the irreligious and Rebelpartie.  
But to undeceive the multitude, let them consider by what arts a new War is contrived. As,  

1. By slandering all such as oppose the Association, and popular torrent of Sedition and Rebellion: as, p. 27. of Preface, that the number of Addressers may be reduced to the Duke's Pensioners and Creatures. That the Addresses have been obtained by application; and the design was to make voices for the discontinuance of Parliaments, and for a Popish Successor. That such as write for the established Government and Religion, are a hired sort of Scaramouchy Zanies, Merry Andrews, and Jack Puddings. P. 12. and impeacheth a Secretary of State as a Traitor; not considering that one such as John Milton, is the chief Engineer and encourager of all Rebellion and Treason.  
2. By divulging abroad, p. 22. That the Nation gins to grow impatient by the delays of public justice against the Popish Plot: though it be well known at whose door that lies. That the dissolution of Parliaments gives us cause to fear that the King hath no more business for Parliaments, ibid. and p. 17.  
3. By animating the multitude to perplex his Majesty with new Addresses; telling them, p. 30. of Preface, So strong is the tye of duty upon him from his Office, to prevent public Calamities, as no respect whatsoever, no not of the Right Line, can discharge: nor will he himself ever think, if DULY ADDRESSED, that it can. And p. 34. At this time, if ever, the APPLICATIONS of an Active Prudence are required from all honest men. And he himself hath given them a Precedent, in that Application which he intended it seems for the Seditious rabble— We will not entail a War upon the Nation, no not for the sake and interest of the Glorious Family of the STUARTS.  
4. By acquainting the Malcontents that their number is four fifths of the Nation, who are such as love and adhere to our Government and Religion; though they are rendered suspected of destroying again the English Monarch and the Protestant Religion, p. 10. of Postscript. And therefore he doth but profane the Name of God, p. 95. when he says, God be thanked they (the Dissenters, who are imagined very numerous) neither make our Grand-Jury-men, nor the Common-halls of the City for choosing the Lord Mayor or Sheriffs.  
5. By Reprinting such Books as were written in defence of the late War, and improving the Arguments for that Rebellion.  
6. By his pleading for Comprehension and Indulgence, which p. 98. he says about ten years since was designed to slight the Church's Works, and demolish her by a general Indulgence and Toleration; and now they intent to destroy her Garrison, those that can and will defend her against Popery.  
7. By publishing it as an undoubted truth, and evident in itself, That the Succession to the Crown is the people Rights, p. 201.  
8. By making large Apologies in behalf of those men of whom he speaks, p. 96. What animations did their people receive, to defy the Church and her Authority, when their Preachers despised Fines and Imprisonment, to their seeming out of pure zeal against her Order! And yet he adds,— It is well know, several of them were in Pension, and no men have been better received by the Duke than J. J. J. O. E. B. and W. P. etc. Ringleaders of the Separation. And again, p. 98. Consider how the Church of England is used, which is truly the Bulwark of the Protestant Religion.   
And it is a pitiful evasion, to say that these fanatics are acted by the Papists; or if it were true, they were much more intolerable for that reason: and therefore I do with all my heart agree to your Method for rooting out the Popish Plot, prescribed p. 99 By suppressing that contumacy that is grown so rife in the Dissenters against the Church of England, by putting the revilers of her Establishment and Order under the severest penalties. But then, Caveat Author.  
To conclude, we are certainly, as Mr. Hunt calls us, a foolish people and unwise, a stupid and perverse Generation, if we shall reject that gracious and gentle Government whereby God hath hitherto led and preserved us a flock, by the hands of Moses and Aaron; and exchange for a Saturn, or a Moloch, that will devour their own Children, and make them pass through the fire at their pleasure. But,  
From all such Men-monsters; from all Sedition, Perjury, Conspiracy, and Rebellion; from all false Doctrine, Heresy, and Schism; from hardness of Heart, and contempt of thy Word and Commandments,   
Good Lord deliver us.   

THE Life of Julian ENLARGED.  

His Birth and Parentage.  
JULIAN was Born at Byzantium, now called Constantinople. His Father's Name was Constantius, Brother to Constantine the Great. His Mother's Name was Basilina, of a very ancient and Noble Family among the Romans. Now although the Empire was entirely devolved on Constantius (the Second Son of Constantine) his two Brothers Constantine and Constans being dead; yet for securing the Empire to himself, having a jealous Spirit, he contrived the death of his nearest Kindred, viz. Constantius Father of our Julian, Anniballianus, and Dalmatius Caesar: which our Author would impute to the outrages of the Soldiery; forgetting what he tells his Reader, p. 29. That the slaughter of his Kindred was one of those three things whereof Constantius repent him at his death. For which he rightly quoteth Naz. Orat. in laudem Athanasii, p. 389.  
How Julian and Gallus his Elder Brother escaped that Massacre, our Author leaves uncertain: for having said that Gallus being very sick, the Soldiers concluded that the disease would kill him, and save them the labour; and that they thought not Julian dangerous, being but five years old: yet he would have it attributed to Constantius the Emperor, who, for aught we read, gave no Commission to spare them; and had they then died, would doubtless have found cause to repent of their deaths, as well as of the rest of his Kindred.  
That Constantius shown kindness to his two Cousins after the Death of their Father and Uncles, was no more than Nature, and especially the Religion he professed, required of him: nor could all his kindness to the Children, expiate his Cruelty to their Father▪ But that he should cause Gallus to be slain, who is noted, p. 3. to have been sincerely pious, and that after he had given him his 
* Constantina.  Sister in Marriage, and declared him Caesar, and found him a Man of Personal valour and good Conduct and Success, (I may say of it as our Author doth) it was a rash act: and yet if it be true that he designed to Invade the Empire, not content with the Title and Authority of Caesar, it was more excusable than the Death of his other Kindred, who were never reported to design any such thing.  
It had been most commendable in Constantius, if, as he provided a Royal Palace for the Education of his Kinsmen, so being himself a Christian Emperor, he had more carefully provided for their Christian Education. That Age had as many Learned Bishops, well skilled in all Humane Literature, as any one before or since; and yet Constantius permitted the Seeds of Superstition and Paganism to be sown in that rank Soil, as soon as those of Christianity: and 'tis no wonder if our corrupt nature, being left at liberty, prefer that Religion which is accommodated to its lusts, to that which especially tends to the suppressing and extirpation of them. And if Corn and Weeds be permitted to grow together in a fertile ground, it is no wonder to see the weeds to outgrow the Corn.   

His Education.  
AS soon as he was Seven years old, he was committed to the Tuition of Mardonius an Eunuch, by whom he was put to learn Grammar and Rhetoric, in the public Schools of Constantinople. Nicocles a Lacedaemonian taught him Grammar; and the famous Turncoat Ecebolius taught him Rhetoric. Libanius the Heathen Philosopher had a famous School at that time in Constantinople, whose Works Julian procured, and read with great delight: and in a little time becomes familiarly acquainted with him, often frequenting his School; and, as the manner of the Grecian Scholars was, he adventured to declaim publicly against the Christians, and (p. 4.) our Author says he would dispute hard with his Brother in favour of the Heathen, pretending that he only tried how he could hold the weaker side of a Question.  
He profited much in that sort of Philosophy which jamblicus taught, being a mixture of the Opinions of Plato and Aristotle, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  of which he calls himself a zealot; and shown great honour and kindness to jamblicus. These were the Masters which Mardonius his Tutor procured for him, and were the Corruptors of his Youth: for being of a light and desultory Wit, and withal very industrious and inquisitive after knowledge, he hastily imbibed such Principles as his Tutors instilled.  
He tells us himself in his Misopogon what he learned under this Mardonius; which he relates to the Athenians. The Names of Plato, Socrates, Aristotle, and Theophrastus, are much talked of with derision. This old Man (Mardonius) having foolishly (he speaks by Irony) observed their dictates, persuaded me, being a Boy desirous to learn, that if I would tread in their paths, I should be better, not only than other men, but than myself: And I (for what could I do else?) obeying my old Tutor, cannot change any thing, though I desire it never so much. And I accuse myself that I did open a more free admission to all the Vices of that old Man. For thus he taught me out of Plato: That Man is worthy of Honour who offends not; but he that deters others from offending, is worthy of more than double Honour: The first is profitable to himself alone, the others to many: that brings the Delinquent before the Magistrates; and if he also join in punishing the injurious, this is a noble and complete Citizen, and may be called a Conqueror in the conflict of Virtue. This and some other Moral Virtues wherein Julian perceived the generality of Christians to be defective as to their practice, raised in him a great opinion of his Pagan Tutors; and from Lectures of Morality, he proceeds to learn more curious Arts. For,  
After this, Maximus an Ephesian Philosopher (who was by Valentinian put to death for his Impostures and Magical Arts) taught Julian to cast Nativities, and make Divinations; and initiated him to the Mysteries of Magic. And as if he had not enough of those devilisbs Arts, he solicits a Journey to Athens, pretending to see Greece, and to be acquainted with their Schools: where he grew into a familiar acquaintance with the best of the Heathen Philosophers of that Age, which abounded with many that were excellent Moralists. A Heathen Writer (Ammianus Marcell. l. 22. c. 3.) says, that Julian from the very first instructions of his childhood was given to the Worship of the Heathen Gods and Idols. It is no wonder, if having such Tutors, he became zealously affected to the same.  
This was his study while his Brother Gallus was living: and as soon as he understood of his death, which was an unnatural, barbarous action, and raised great prejudices against the Christian Religion, he was greatly discontented, and diligently inquired by those who were skilled in Curious arts what would become of him. Twenty years together he dissembled himself to be a Christian, and attained to great knowledge in that Religion; but rather, that he might know how to oppose it: for, as St. Augustine observes, (l. 5. c. 21. De Civ. Dei) Cujus egregiam indolem decipit amore dominandi sacrilega & detestanda curiositas; A sacrilegious and accursed Curiosity perverted his excellent wit. However, his proficiency in Christianity preferred him to be a Reader of the Holy Scriptures to the people; and those Arguments of his which were learnedly and satisfactorily answered by St. Cyril Bishop of Alexandria, do demonstrate his Knowledge both of the Old and New Testament, for which he was admitted into Holy Orders. Now how could Constantius expect but that Julian being put to such Nurses, he should suck in such milk as they yielded? Neglectis urenda silex innascitur agris.  
His Apostasy is imputed to these three causes.  

First, To the levity of his Nature.  
Secondly, To his love of Magical Arts.  
Thirdly, To his ambition of the Empire.   
When Gallus was put to death, the Emperor had such informations that Julian conspired also against him, that he resolved to put him to death also: but by the intercession of Eusebia the Empress, he was sent for to appear at Court, and by her intercession and favour, was not only preserved, but within a short time declared Caesar: and the Emperor, to ingratiate him the more, gave him his Sister Helena to Wise.  
Before we give an account of his Actions while he was Caesar, it will be convenient to give the Reader   

A Character of his Person and Disposition.  
HE was of a middle Stature, his Hair soft, and hanged down; his Beard long and sharp; a full and rolling Eye; comely Kickshaws, and a straight Nose; his Mouth somewhat large; his Under-lip seemed divided; his Neck fat; his Shoulders broad and large; and from the Head to the Foot, his Members were proportionable and well joined: so that he was made both for Strength and Activity.  
Gregory Nazianzene, who knew him at Athens, gives this description of him: That his Neck inclined forward, his Shoulders often in motion; that he had a wand'ring Eye, and furious Aspect▪ his Feet unstable; his Nose and Lineaments of his Face were ridiculous, and signified scornfulness; in his Apparel sordid; his Laughter was loud and frequent; his Grants and Denials were without reason; his Speech slow and interrupted; his Questions hasty and imprudent, and his Answers no better; one following upon another without Gavitie, good Order, or Method. Upon consideration of this Physiognomy, the Bishop thus exclaims: What a mischief doth the Roman Empire nourish! for the inconsistency both of his Manners and Behaviour, and the great commotion of his Mind, made me to give this prediction of him; and as I foretold of him to those that were with me before he had acted any thing, so I found him to be by his Actions afterward: and I wish I had been in this a false Prophet, for that were better than that such a Monster should exist, and fill the World with such evils as never were in any other Age, though there were many Deluges, Conflagrations, Earthquakes, and Cruel men, and prodigious Beasts of divers kinds.  
Some Writers give him a different Character from others: That in Courtesy and Clemency he was comparable with Titus; and as much exceeded his Brother Gallus in those virtues, as Titus exceeded Domitian: in fortunate successes against the Germans, they equal him with Trajan; in Temperance and Modesty, to Marcus Aurelius; in Justice, with Antoninus; and in Knowledge, with the ancient Philosophers. Vir egregius (saith Eutropius) & Rempublicam insigniter Moderaturus: A person of excellent parts, and like to rule the Empire with excellent Moderation.   

His Actions while he was Caesar.  
WHen he was about the age of 23, Constantius declared him Caesar, at such time as the Barbarians had spoiled Gaul; the Emperor being doubtful to carry on the War himself. Marcellinus (l. 15.) saith, that daily Messengers brought him tidings of the deplored condition of the Gauls, whose Country was overrun with the Armies of the Barbarians without any resistance. For remedy whereof, he residing in Italy, and not willing to expose himself to the hazards of that War, having made Julian CAESAR, sends him to relieve that Country. But Julian being ignorant of Martial Affairs, and considering what dangers he was sent to encounter, looks on himself as one designed for Death rather than Honour.  
Neither of us (saith Julian) were pleased with this Honour: not Constantius, who gave it unwillingly; nor he that received it against his will: for which he calls the Gods to witness. And at that very time when the Purple Robes were put on him, he uttered this verse: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and told his Friends that he should gain nothing more by his Honour, than to die in a great Enterprise; and that he was sent to the Gauls, Germans, and Hercynian Wood, to fight as a Hunter with wild Beasts.  
Marcellinus says the same, that it was a common report that Julian was chosen not so much to relieve the distresses of the Gauls, as that he might perish in those cruel Wars; he being then unskilful, & scarce enduring the noise of Arms. As he marched before his Army in Military Accoutrements, This (saith he) is right as the Proverb speaks, A Packsaddle on a Cow's back. It happened that as he was exercising in the Fields at Paris, the Pins that joined his Buckler fell out, and the pieces flew about his ears: which some taking for an ill Omen, he holds up the handle, and bid them not be dismayed; for what he laid his hands on, he held fast.  
Yet did this young man not only defend that part of the Country which was yet free, but expelled the Barbarians from those parts which they had possessed, and in a short time regained many ancient Cities; and in one battle at Strasburg, overthrew Seven of the most potent Princes of Germany, and sent Chodonomarius the chief of them to Constantius at Rome: He also subdued the Almains, took their King Badomarius, and cleared the bounds of the Empire from all its Enemies: and this he did (saith Aurelius Victor) with a few Soldiers, against infinite Armies of the Enemies.  
But these Victories of his did so exalt him, that he believed that the Soul of Alexander was infused into his Body (as Socrates relates). His Soldiers also had so great an opinion of his Valour and Conduct, that they all resolved to proclaim him Emperor: which though in an Apology to Constantius he says was done against his consent; yet as well his ambitious Spirit, as his future Actions, demonstrate it to have been his design. Which Constantius being informed of, commands him to return: And this he willingly obeyed; but carries with him his whole Army, to secure him from the rage of the Emperor. The Emperor also prepared all the Force he possibly could, to give Julian battle. To which Julian was encouraged by his Soothsayers, especially by Aprunculus an Orator in Gaul, who had instructed him in the knowledge of the Entrails of Beasts, and flying of Birds; and from the Liver of a Beast enclosed in a double Caul, foretold Success and Victory to him. When he came to Vienna, an old Woman that had lost her sight, hearing that Julian was come, cried out, that it was he that should repair the Temples of the Gods. About this time he sent to the Senate an Apology for himself, accusing Constantius of many faults and miscarriages; which notwithstanding, the Senate by Tertullius their Praefect answered his Messenger, Autori tuo Reverentiam Rogamus; We have a great respect for your Master.  
It happened that Julian being about to take horse, the Soldier that lifted him up fell to the ground. At which accident he said, in the hearing of many, that he was fallen who had raised him to his Dignity. And this (saith Marcellinus, p. 189.) was done at the same instant when Constantius died in Cilicia. Of whose death, Theolaiphus and Alligildus brought him speedy Notice, declaring that Constantius by his last words named him his Successor. Am. Marcell. l. 22. c. 1. Though the contrary be not only affirmed by Gregory Nazianzen, but confirmed by the battle that was intended between them; of which Julian gives this account to his Uncle, Epist. 13. calling his Gods to witness, that he never intended the death of Constantius, but rather wished for his life; and that he came with his Army against him, only to obtain the easier terms of Peace: or, because he was condemned as an Enemy, he came prepared to decide the quarrel by a battle, if he could not otherwise make his peace.   

Of his Actions while he was Emperor.  
JULIAN being without any opposition settled in the Imperial Throne, sought to gain the affections of all sorts of people by acts of Clemency and Justice: And though he had been long since an Apostate from the Christian Religion, yet did not appear so, till after some time: in his Epistle to the Alexandrians, he says, he had lived Twenty years in the Christian, and Twelve years in the Pagan Religion, p. 200 of his Works.  
He entered on the Government as a Lamb, however he had the Appetite of a Lion, to devour the Church of Christ: but he kept on the sheep's clothing, that he might with more subtlety worry that innocent flock. He frequented the public Assemblies of the Christians, and re-called those Orthodox Bishops from Exile, which Constantius, being himself of the Arian Persuasion, had banished; thereby to lay an Odium on Constantius. And it hath been observed, That not long after Constantius declared against the Deity of the Son of God, the Empire was taken from him, and given to Julian.  
Julian professed it to be his Opinion, That no man ought to force another to be of his Opinion; and charged the people not to injure the Christians, or reproach them, or draw them to sacrifice against their wills. Sozom. l. 5. c. 4. And many Outrages committed by the Heathen upon the Christians, were done without his order. Theodoret. l. 3. c. 6. But as it is known that he did not persecute the Christians with fire and Sword, as Dioclesian did; yet he contrived more mischievous ways to destroy Christianity itself, than others did to destroy the professors of it: and as one probable means to accomplish it, he summons the Bishops of the several Factions, enjoining them to do nothing to the prejudice of the Empire; and on those terms permits them to enjoy their own Opinions, and different Modes of Worship. Eo modo (saith St. Aug. Epist. 166.) nomen Christi de terris perire putavit, si Sacrilegas dissentiones liberas esse permisit; Thereby to keep them in a balance till he had settled his affairs, or to permit them to destroy one another, as in Constantius time the Arians had begun, and to save him the labour.  
He seemed averse from putting any to death for their Religion, not so much perhaps through any innate clemency, as through a devilish Polity: for he had observed, that the Church multiplied under the greatest Persecutions; and the Faith, Fortitude, and invincible patience of Christians, appeared admirable to their Enemies: so that he envied them the glory of Martyrdom. To this purpose he wrote an Epistle to Ecebolius, declaring his mind concerning the Galilaeans, as he called the Christians; That none of them should have any force offered them, or be compelled into the Temples, nor be reproached by the Pagans: and p. 213. writing to the Bostrians, he minds them How he had re-called such as were banished, and by an Edict restored their Goods which were forfeited. And though he practised the ruin of the Christians, yet he seemed to have a reverence of their Religion: for when he assumed the Title of Pontifex Maximus, he wrote to his Idol-Priests, and tells them, That the reason why the Temples of their Gods were so much forsaken, and the Christians frequented, was their different behaviours: The Christians delighting in works of mercy, providing their Hospitals for the Poor, the Widows and Fatherless, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. but his Priests were barbarous and cruel, inhospitable to strangers or their own poor. And to his reproof adds an exhortation, that they would imitate the Christians. And to the people he writes, That they should learn of the Christians to reverence their Priests, and obey their Magistrates and Governors. And he persuades the Priests not to gad abroad without leave of their Superiors, and communicatory Letters; and such as did notoriously offend, he would have them suspended for a time from their Communion in things sacred, and partaking of their Sacrifices. Of this he speaks at large, in his 49 Epistle, p. 202.  
And although he were a bitter Enemy to Athanasius, concerning whom he by an express Edict to Edicius, Praefect of Egypt, gives command to banish him, not only out of the City of Alexandria, where he had won over many Noble persons to the Christian Religion, and caused the Pagan Temples to be quite deserted; but also out of all Egypt: yet did he hold a good correspondence by Letters with divers Christian Bishops, particularly with George an Arian Bishop, whose Library after his death he charged Porphyry to preserve entirely for his use, p. 176. As also with Aetius another Bishop, exhorting him to come and live with him, p. 164. But he had still a hatred to their Religion, though he loved them for their Learning and peaceableness; to which he endeavoured to oblige them by kindness, being yet afraid to exercise cruelty towards them. And that he might avoid the Name of a Persecutor himself, he gave countenance and encouragement to the Jews in their opposition of the Christians; and gave them leave to rebuild Jerusalem, of which Amm. Marcell. l. 23. c. 1. & Eusebius, l. 3. ch. 17. writ thus.  
Julian, desiring to propagate the memorial of his Empire by some great work, intended the re-edifying of the Temple at Jerusalem, committing the work to Alipius of Antioch, who was assisted by the Praefect of Judea. But when they began to dig the foundations, terrible Fire-balls issued out of the Earth, destroyed many Workmen, forcing them to desert the work. With this Heathen Writer Eusebius agrees, and relates more at large, That by an Earthquake the old foundations were cast up, which many came from far to behold; and that there came down fire from Heaven, which consumed all their Tools and working Instruments, for a whole day together. And that the night following, the forms of Crosses were visible in their Garments, shining like the Sunbeams. Yet those hardened Jews, notwithstanding these three Miracles which forced many of them to confess that Christ was an Omnipotent God, believed not.  
He had indeed so invincible a prejudice against the Christian Religion, that though he were convinced of the learning and peaceableness of the Christians, yet could not his heart be moved to embrace it. When that excellent Apology of Apollinaris was presented him in behalf of the Christians, he returned to them with contempt: I have read, I have considered, and rejected it. Yet although he did connive at and tolerate many indignities and violences against the Christians, and made some Edicts against them, they did multiply and increase under him; as Titus Bishop of Bostria remonstrated to him, that their number was nothing inferior to that of the Gentiles; and in Antioch, in Alexandria, and in his very Army, the greater part were Christians.  
And although his designs were as bad as wit and malice could make them, I do not find that he wrote any of his Laws in blood, nor in a Judiciary manner did execute any upon the account of their Christianity: which we must ascribe wholly to the Providence of God, who though he set this wicked Prince over them, as a punishment for their revolt from the true Faith into Arianism, and for their Divisions and Cruelties practised among themselves; this common Enemy being a probable means to unite them both in faith and love: yet the Divine Clemency, who hath the hearts of all kings in his hands, permitted him not to make that havoc of the Church which he intended. And Athanasius was a true Prophet, when he told the Suffering Christians that Julian was Nubecula cito transitura, a cloud that threatened a Storm, but would be soon blown over.  
And ought not we also, who as yet conflict only with our own fears, acquiesce in the Goodness of God, who may yet prevent not only those distant evils which we fear, but those real mischiefs also which we are presently and desperately running into? Either the evils we fear may not come; or if they do, they may be speedily removed; and by the blessing of God, may be Sanctified by our amendment, in a greater love of the Truth and of one another.  
While Julian was meditating against Christians, his vainglory spurred him on to a War against the Persians, intending to have added one Title more to himself, (viz.) Parthicus. And although he were dissuaded from it by Salustius, and other his best Soldiers, (Amn. Marcell. l. 23. c. 4.) as also by those Soothsayers in whom he placed most confidence; yet would he by no means be diverted from that War; which he carried on with such rashness and wilfulness, that we may justly number him with those of whom it is said, Quos perdere vult Jupiter, dementat prius.  
He was in his March presented by a Company of Soldiers with a great Lion wounded to death; which portended the death of some great King, saith Marcellinus: but he took no notice of it. A Soldier also as he had watered his two Horses, was struck dead, together with them, by Lightning; which was interpreted as an ill Omen: yet on he goes towards Persia; and as soon as he had landed his Army in Persia, he caused his Ships to be burnt, reserving only a few of the least of them to serve as a Bridge over the Rivers that might hinder his March: which much offended his soldiery, as arguing a distrust of their valour, and cutting off all hopes of retreat in their greatest necessity. It happened that in the first. Onset which was made by the Persians, Julian had the better, and thereupon appointed a solemn Sacrifice to Mars; for which ten white Bulls are prepared; but nine of them died before they could be brought to the Altar, and the other ran away; but being brought back, was sacrificed; but revenged his death by such ominous signs as highly incensed Julian, and made him resolve and swear by Jupiter never to sacrifice to Mars again. So that here was another Apostasy of Julians from one of his chief Gods, the God of War.  
The grand Battalia of the Persians being at hand, Julian prepares for it; and in the preceding night he told some of his friends, that the public Genius which he saw when he was saluted Emperor in Gaul, appeared to him in a sad posture, and sorry habit, passing by. He saw also an Exhalation in the form of a Torch falling to the ground; which he was afraid had been the Star Mars which threatened him. His Aruspices being consulted upon this, dissuaded him from that Battle, at least for some hours: But he refused; and as soon as it was day, put his Army in order for a fight. The Persians were as early as he; and falling on the Rear of the Roman Army, put them to some distress: which Julian hearing of, made such haste to secure them, that he took only his Target, neglecting any other Armour; and by his seasonable assistance recovered the fault, and repulsed the Persians; and with hands lifted up, urged his men to pursue them, he himself being at the head of them, and on the very heels of his Enemies. In this Conflict he received his mortal Wound; a Javelin slightly wounding his Arm, pierced into his Side, and stuck in his Liver. From what hand it came, we have had occasion to inquire already; and as for the report that he plucked it out, and threw it in the Air, with a Vicisti Galilaee, I find no great authority for it among the Writers of that Age. His wound being searched and dressed, the pain abated; and calling for his Arms and Horse, resolved to enter again into the fight: but his strength failed him; and hearing that the place where he was wounded was called Phrygia, he remembering that it was foretold that he should die in Phrygia, despaired of life, and about Midnight calling for a draught of cold Water, he drank it, and shortly after died.   

His dying Speech.  
THe time of departing this life is (my Companions) now at hand; which as an honest and well-meaning Debtor, I gladly repay to Nature; not, as some believed, with reluctancy and sorrow; for by the common Opinion of Philosophers I am sufficiently instructed in how much more blessed condition the Soul is than the Body; and am satisfied, that when one passeth out of a worse into a better estate, he ought to rejoice, rather than to be troubled: considering also, that the Celestial Gods reward the most pious men with death, as the greatest reward of all others. I also am assured that it happeneth to me after the same manner; lest I should fall under some heavy burdens, as I undergo, or do any thing unworthy of myself: having yet ever found by experience, that sorrows and pains as they domineer over Cowards, so are easily overcome by Valiant persons. Neither doth it repent me of my Actions, nor the remembrance of any Wickedness afflict me, either committed at such time as I lay in the shade and in corners as I could, and studied virtue; or since I came to the Government. I think I have kept myself blameless and without blemish, as one descended from the Gods above.— In times of Peace governing with moderation, not without good consideration making either Offensive or Defensive Wars, though the issue were not always answerable: For the Celestial Powers alone have the Sovereignty of Events; concluding with myself, that the end of Government is the advantage and safety of good Subjects. I have ever been (as you know) more inclined to Peace and Tranquillity by the whole course of my actions; opposing Lasciviousness, as that which corrupts both things and manners; and whithersoever my Mother the Commonwealth, how imperiously soever, called me, though to never so dangerous a Post, there have I stood immovable, being accustomed to despise all fortuitous events. I will not be ashamed to confess, that I have heretofore understood that I should die in War: and therefore I adore and praise the eternal Divinity, that I perish not by any Conspiracy, nor languish through the pain of a Disease; nor am I condemned to death, (he thought it might have been upon his Brother's death) but in the middle course of my flourishing Glory, I have deserved so renowned a passage out of this world. He is equally to be esteemed a Coward, who desireth to die when he ought to live, as he who shuns death when it comes conveniently. Thus much may suffice to have spoken, my strength now failing me. Concerning my Successor I wittingly say nothing, lest through imprudence I should pass by a worthy person, or by naming one I conceive fitly qualified, if another should chance to be preferred, bring him into imminent danger; but as a dutiful Son of the Commonwealth, I wish her a good Governor in my room.  
Having spoken this, he perceived his Attendants to weep, whom he gravely rebuked, affirming it a pitiful mean thing to bemoan a Prince that was a friend to Heaven and the Stars. And they being silent, he entered into a subtle discourse with Maximus and Priscus, two Philosophers; concerning the sublimity of Souls; till such time as the Wound gaping, and the Tumour of the Vessels intercepting his Breath, having called for a draught of cold Water, he died the more easily, about Midnight, in the 32d year of his Age, and the second of his Empire; having been Caesar Six years. He left no Child behind him; his Wife being dead in France before he came from thence. He was buried in the Suburbs of Tarsus by Procopius, to whom he gave order for it: and Zosimus saith his Tomb hath this Epitaph:  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   

Of his Virtues.  
I Shall comprise these under the Heads mentioned by Marcellinus, l. 25. c. 5. (viz.) Temperance, Prudence, Fortitude, and Justice: all which (saith that Author) he so studied and attained, as if they had been but One. As to his Temperance in respect of Chastity, he was so unspotted, that after the death of his Wife in France, he never meddled with any woman; nor was he accused of the least immodesty while he was young, and in his full strength, by those that were of his Bedchamber. To which virtue his spare diet and short sleep very much contributed. His diet was always so slender, as if he intended to return again to his Books. His Supper was usually a little Gruel, such as a common Soldier would refuse, l. 24. c. 2. which he took standing, and presently went to view his Guards and Sentinels, and then returned to his Study, scarce allowing himself so much solace as might content the necessities of Nature. What was provided for him as an Emperor, he seldom tasted of, but distributed it amongst his poor Soldiers.  
He says in his Misopogon, that he had been taught from his youth to wage war with his belly. And never frequented Theatres or Games; which he never beheld but with as much uneasiness as others did with delight. He usually lay only on a Palate spread on the ground, and would scarce eat enough to satisfy Hunger; abstaining from Feasts and public Meetings, saying, No man ought to be esteemed as temperate at home, who was dissolute abroad, and took pleasure in the Threatres. His garments and manner of dress was very plain and neglected, and far from curious or courtly fashions. Dost thou (saith he) desire to see the Circensian Games? you shall find them most elegantly described by Homer; take the Book, and read. Such instructions he says he had from his Tutors, and them he followed with great pleasure, p. 79.  
He was extremely delighted in the society of learned Men and good Books, for which he often professed he could willingly leave his Empire. What intercourse he had with the chief Philosophers of his time, appears by his Epistles to Libanius, jamblicus, Eumenius, Themistius, Elpidius, and Maximus. This last, though one of the worst of them, coming to visit him, of which he was informed while he sat in Judicature, he speedily laid aside his business and his Robes, and went forth in a familiar manner to meet him and embrace him. To the rest, in his Epistles he desired their presence or their Books; and styled himself, Their most dear Brother.  
For his Prudence. This was a Maxim with him, That it was a shame for a wise man, having a Soul, to seek for commendation from any thing belonging to the Body. His proficiency in all manner of learning, gave him great insight as well to Martial as Civil Affairs; which he so managed, that though he adventured on many great and hazardous attempts, yet he mostly came off with good success. He could by his Eloquence, as by a Mercury-Rod, appease the Tumults and Seditions of his Soldiers; and would threaten them, that if they continued their Mutinies, he would betake himself to a private life.  
Again, he shown another instance of his Prudence in remitting many Taxes, rather than to extort them from the poorer sort of people: nor did he exact on the Rich, affirming, that his treasure was safest in the custody of his good Subjects.  
One instance of his Prudence was this, that he would suffer himself to be reproved for any indiscreet action; being conscious to himself of rashness and precipitancy in many particulars. Marcell. l. 25. c. 6. Praefectis proximisque permittebat ut sidenter impetus suos aliorsum tendentes, atque decebat Monitu opportuno fraenarent monstrabatque subinde se dolere delictis, & gaudere correctione.  
He professeth that he used deliberation in all his affairs, especially of Judicature: You know (saith he to Ecdicius Praefect of Egypt) how slow I am to condemn any one; and when I have condemned him, how much slower I am to pardon him. P. 120. And of his prudent conduct in all his affairs, this is a convincing Argument, that during his Reign he was neither disturbed by Sedition at home, nor invaded by any of the barbarous Nations from abroad.  
His Justice appeared also in many notable instances: for he rather shook the Sword than struck with it: and though he made himself terrible, yet was he never cruel; but sought by the punishment of a few, to restrain the vices of many. He pardoned many that had sought to take away his life. Thalassius an enemy to him and his Brother Gallus was forbid the Court, which encouraged his enemies to accuse him; but Julian perceiving it to be of Malice, told them, that Thalassius had injured him, and he must have satisfaction before them: and upon hearing he was reconciled to him, and he discharged him from his Adversaries.  
When one accused a great Citizen for a Traitor, hoping to be rewarded out of his Estate, Julian asked him what the condition of the man was: he answered, he was a rich Burger, and had made him purple  against the Insurrection. If that be all (saith Julian) you shall carry him a pair of purple Shoes too; and let him know, how little success he can hope for from such things, without greater power.  
He would say of himself, That Justice which in former times had left the earth, was returned again, l. 25. c. 6. And if we believe Marcellinus, although he would sometimes inquire of what Religion the parties litigant were, yet he would do nothing partially against any for their Religion.  
As for his Fortitude, besides his patiented enduring of extreme cold and heat, he would encounter his Enemy's hand to hand; and by exposing his own Person, would keep his Soldiers from giving ground to the Enemy; which he often did both in Germany and Persia, slaying divers Enemies with his own hand.  
But he had a better kind of Fortitude than this; namely, that which more becomes a Man, to conquer his own Passions, to bear with Reproaches, to endure cross events with patience. As for me (saith he) I resolve to bear whatever falls on me from above with a stout mind; for this is the property of good men, to do their duty, and to be of a good hope, and to accommodate themselves to what ever fatal necessity shall impose, p. 218. And as men of true valour and magnanimity are seldom cruel, he expressed a natural clemency in all his actions; those against the Christians, towards his later end, only excepted; which yet I cannot perceive to be executed, but upon some great provocations by the rash and ungovernable among the vulgar sort of Christians. Of which the Historians of that time given many instances.  
But all these virtues were sullied with that one vile act of his, in becoming an Apostate from the best Religion, after that he had professed it for Twenty years together, and attained a competent knowledge therein.   

His Vices.  
AS his Virtues were great, so were his Vices; and that which was most predominant, was his levity and unsetledness of mind. For having been false to his Redeemer, he was never true to any of his false Gods. He was so displeased with Mars, the God of War, that he solemnly vowed never to sacrifice to him more.  
He was talkative to excess, and boasted of his own Achievements; Popularity and vainglory being that which he especially aimed at. Marcellinus, who was a Heathen, a great friend and observer of his actions, says, l. 25. c. 6. That he was rather Superstitious, than a devout observer of any Religion. He offered costly Sacrifice, rather to honour himself than his Gods; and though given to Divinations, yet contemned such as boded ill. So resolute and selfwilled he was in the business of Persia, that against all good advice, and ill presages, he cast himself away.  
He shown himself unmerciful in this one Edict, that he forbade the Professors in Rhetoric and Grammar to teach Christians, lest they should wound the Heathen by their own darts. Among his Edicts, those are especially noted which he set forth against the Christians; As first, his forbidding the Children of Christians to be brought up in the knowledge of Philosophy, lest, as is noted by Socrates, they might be better enabled to confute the Heathen Sophisters. 

2. His forbidding Christians to bear any Office in his Guards, or Government in his Provinces.  
3. His Edicts for seizing the Christian Churches, and imposing Mulcts on such as would not Sacrifice to his Pagan Gods.   As for Sanguinary Laws, our Author observes that he enacted none.  
Greg. Nazianzen, who knew Julian, hath sufficiently recorded his Vices in his Stelliteuticks; from whence our Author hath taken his History. But as I would not believe all as truth, which some deliver in Panegyrics of their Heroes; so neither all that is said in such Orations against Professed Enemies.   

Of his Works.  
ALthough we might wish that Julian had never known Letters, because of those virulent Satyrs which he wrote against Christianity; yet the Poison wherewith his Writings do abound, having excellent Remedies prepared against the venom of them, by the Learned Fathers of that Age, such as Greg. Naz. and St. Cyril; there being also some remarkable passages concerning History and Christianity interspersed, they may be read with some benefit by Learned Men.  
He says of himself, in an Epistle to Ecdicius Praefect of Egypt, in which he desired him to send the Books of George an Arian Bishop of Alexandria; Some delight in Horses, others in Birds, others in wild Beasts; but I from my Childhood have been a great lover of Books. His proficiency in variety of Learning will appear by what is now extant, although it is supposed that he wrote many things before he was Caesar, that are now lost, as several Orations sent to jamblicus, the loss, whereof he bewails in an Epistle to him yet extant. My opinion is, that Julian's Vices were real and deep rooted, that he had but the umbrage and appearance of Virtue; which he therefore retained, that he might make them serve his Pride, Popularity, and vainglory.  
After he came to be Caesar, he redeemed what time he could for his study, dividing the night into three parts: one for sleep, another for his Books, and the third for his Military Affairs; and usually he would pen one of his Orations in that part of the night.  
Suidas gives this account of his Writings. First, his Book called the Caesars, containing a short and sharp account of them all, from Augustus to his own time. Secondly, his Saturnalia, and discourse of Three figures. Thirdly, his Misopogon, written against the Antiochians; and another Tract showing the original of Evils: another against Heroclitus, showing how to live Cynically; and many Epistles of several sorts, of which 63 are now extant.  
He wrote his Misopogon to revenge himself upon the Antiochians, who had abused him in words, calling him Monkey, Goatsbeard, and Butcher, for killing so many Bulls for Sacrifices: and that which most provoked him, was the Impress upon some Coin, viz. A Bull lying upon his Back upon the Altar; which the Antiochians interpreted to signify that the World was turned up-side-down by Julian: For these reasons, he upbraids them with their Intemperance, and their fondness of Plays and Theatres; Secondly, for their Religion, which he calls Impiety, though they worshipped God and Christ instead of Jupiter and Apollo: Thirdly, the iniquity of their Magistrates, who countenanced the avarice of the Rich, to the impoverishing of the People. For these things he blames them, speaking as of himself: And when he comes to apologise for himself, he confesses that his life was void of all Pleasure; that he was too religious and severe in Judicature, for which he prays their pardon; imputing these faults to his Master, by whom he was taught from his youth to live temperately, religiously, and justly: and that he had spent his youth amongst the Gauls, a rough and warlike people, ignorant of delicacies. The sum of this accusation we have in this Syllagism.  
He that lives contrary to the manners of other men, is deservedly accused by them.  
Julian liveth contrary to the manners of the Antiochians, in contemning Pleasures, and restraining Impiety and Injustice, which they allow and defend.  
Therefore he's justly accused by them.  
To which if we add one Syllogism more, you have the sum of that whole Book, viz.  
He that bestows benefits upon ungrateful men, is a Fool.  
Julian hath bestowed benefits on ungrateful men, in commending, cherishing and increasing the Antiochians,  
Therefore he is a Fool.  
Concerning his account of the Caesars, Socrates in his Ecclesiastical History, lib. 3. c. 1. says, That he blamed every one of them, not sparing Marcus the Philosopher: And Zonaras in his third Tome, observes his ingratitude to Constantius, blaming him for his prodigality; feigning that Mercury ask him what was the property of a good King, he should answer; To have and to consume much.  
The Books now extant are these: 

1. His Orations in praise of Constantius the Emperor, and of Eusebia his wife.  
2. In praise of the Sun, and of the Mother of the Gods: Against unlearned Dogs: To Heraclius concerning the Sect of the Cynics; and a Consolatory Oration at the departure of Sallust.   His Caesar's: his Misopogon, and sixty three Epistles besides that to Themistius and the Athenians. But the most pestilent of all his Works were those which he wrote against the Christian Religion, which are mentioned and answered by St. Cyril Bishop of Alexandria, in Ten Books, consisting of 362 Pages, in the sixth Tome of his Works, set forth in Greek and Latin by Johannes Aubertus; printed at Paris 1638. to which, for his full satisfaction, I refer the Reader   

THE CONCLUSION.  
IT appears by what hath been said, That Julian was a perfidious and detestable Apostate: A malicious and subtle Persecutor; who designed much more against the Christians, than God permitted him to practise. But as there is an open and declared Apostasy and Opposition of the Truth by professed Enemies: so is there a secret and real revolt from the Truth, and persecution of its Disciples, by some that profess themselves Friends to the same. And in our own Age we have known some, not only of the Roman, but other Persuasions, who may be paralleled with, and in some circumstances exceed Julian.  
For Julian, being a Great Prince, had the unhappiness of being bred in foreign Countries among subtle Pagans, who tempted him to their impieties in his youth: There are some who have had their whole Education among learned and sincere Professors of the Christian Faith, and yet revolt from it. Julian for Six years together faithfully served the Emperor in his Wars, to the great hazard of his Life; Others, even in times of peace, study to involve their Prince in unnatural Wars, to the endangering of his and their own Lives. Julian had a power to have executed his malicious designs, but was restrained: Others live under a just power, and enjoy Protection and Peace; yet their perverse Wills admit of no restraint. Julian employed his Wit in writing against his Christian Subjects; Others employ theirs in writing against their Christian Governors. He wrote Panegyrics of a Constantius, who had contrived his death: Others writ Satyrs and Libels against their Princes to whom they own their Lives. In a word, the greatest aggravation of Julian's Apostasy, was, that he had been a Lecturer of the Holy Scriptures, the truths of which he renounced, and wrote against them: And there are some who have been long in the Order of Priesthood, that have so far revolted from their Profession, as to write point-blank against the plain and most necessary practical duties of the Holy Scriptures, And whether Julian or such as these be the greater Apostates, I leave to the Judgement of the Impartial Reader.  
FINIS.