PURITANO-IESVITISMUS, THE PURITAN TVRNED JESUIT; OR RATHER, OUTVYING HIM IN those Diabolical and dangerous Positions, of the Deposition of KINGS; from the year, 1536. until this present time; extracted out of the most ancient and authentic Authors.  
By that Reverend Divine, Doctor OWEN, Bachelor of Divinity.  
Showing their concord in the matter, their discord in the manner of their sedition.  August in Psal. 36. Conc. 2. 
Tunc inter se concordant cum in perniciem justi conspirant, non quia se amant, sed quia cum qui amandus erat simul oderunt.  
Printed for William Sheares, at the sign of the Bible in , 1643.   

To the dutiful Subject.  
THe Puritan-Church-Policy, and jesuitical Society began together: 
a See M. Hockers preface. And the preface of Chemnic. before his examen. against the first part of the Council of Trent.  the one in Geneva, 1536 and the other in Rome, 1537. since their beginning, they have bestirred themselves busily (as he that compasseth the 
b job 1.7.  earth, or they that coasted 
c Mat. 23.15,  sea and land,) each one in his order. The Puritan to break down the wall of Zion, by disturbing the peace of the reformed Church: the jesuite to build up the ruins of Babylon, by maintaining the abomination of the deformed Synagogne. These (though brethren in sedition and heady) are head-severed, the one staring to the Presbytery, and the other to the Papacy, but they are so fast linked behind, and tayle-tied together with firebrands between them, that if they be not quenched by the power of Majesty, they cannot those (when the means are fitted to their plot) but set the Church on fire, and the state in an uproar. Their many and long Prayers, their much vehement preaching, and stout opposition against orders established; their show of austerity in their conversation, and of singular learning in their profession, (as the evil fiend transformed into an angel of light) brought them first to admiration. Whereby they have not only rob widows houses, under pretence of prayer, and ransacked their seduced disciples by show of devotion, but also battered the courts of Princes, by animating the Peers against Kings, and the people against the Peers, for pretended reformation. And whereas, God hath inseparably annexed to the crown of earthly Majesty, a supreme ecclesiastical sovereignty for the protection of piety; and an absolute immunity from the judicial sentence, and Martial violence, for the preservation of policy: These sectaries bereave Kings of both these their Princely prerogatives, exalting themselves (as the son of perdition) above all that is called God: 
2 Thess. 3.4.  Lest they might seem, sine ratione insanire, to sow the seeds of sedition without show of reason, Caedem faciunt scripturarum (as the heretics in Tertullia's time were wont to do) in materiam suam; they kill the Scripture to serve their turns: and pervert the holy word of the eternal God, by strange interpretation, and wicked application, against the meaning of the Spirit, by whom it was penned; the doctrine of the Church, to whom it was delivered; and the practice of all the Godly, (as well under the Law as the Gospel) that did believe, understand, and obey it; to maintain their late, and lewd opinions. I have in my hand above forty several places of the old and New Testament, which both the brethren of the enraged opposite faction do indifferently quote, and seditiously apply, in defence of their dangerous opposition, and damnable error, against the Ecclesiastical supremacy, and the indelible character of Royal inunction. Unto the which places, falsely expounded, perverted, and applied, I haved added the interpretation of the learned Protestants since the time of Martin Luther, who began to discover the nakedness of the Romish Church, 1517. More especially insisting in the 
a K. Henry 8. K. james. Th' Cranmer Io. Whitgift. Ric. Bancroft Arch. of Cant Henry Earl of Northam. Robert Earl of Salisbury. The L. Burleigh. L. Treasurer of England. The L. Elsmere Lord Chancellor of England. The L. Stafford. The L Cook B jewel. B Horn. B Pilkington B Elsmere. B Couper. B Bilson. B Babington. B Amirewes'. B Barlow. B Bridges. D Ackworth. D Saravia. D Cousins. D Sutcliffe. D Prythergh D Wilkes. D Morton. D Tocker. M Bekinsaw. M Fox. M Nowell. M Hooker, & many others.  most mighty Kings, the most reverend Prelates, honourable Lords, loyal Clergy, and other worthy men, that have in the Church of England, learnedly defended the Princely right, against disloyal, and undutiful opponents: which by God's help I mean to publish, when I have added the exposition of the Fathers, to confute the falsehood of the Puritan popish-faction, and to confirm the truth of the Protestants Doctrine in each particular quotation. I protest in all sincerity, that I neither have in this treatise, nor mean in the other, hereafter to be published, to detort any thing, to make either the cause itself, or the favourers of it more odious, than their own words, (published with the general approbation of their several favourites) do truly infer, and necessarily enforce. I hope the loyal subject and Godly affected, we accept in good part my endeavour, and industry, intended for the glory of God, the honour of the King, and the discovery of the seditious. The displeasure of the male contented factions (which can no more abide the truth, than the Owls can light, or the Frantic the Physician) I neither regard nor care for. Farewell.   

The Table of the Book.  

The 

duty of 

Prelates,  
Peers,  
People, by 

Scripture, Chap. 1. pag. 1.  
Fathers of the 

first 300 years. cap. 2 pag. 3  
second 300 years. cap. 3 pag. 7  
third 300 years. cap. 4 pag. 18  
fourth 300 years. cap. 5 pag. 21  
fifth 300 years. cap. 6 pag. 26        
sedition of 

Puritan  
Papists 

Concord in the matter, of sedition. cap. 7. p. 31  
Discord in the manner of sedition. cap. 7. p. 31  
Danger of their Doctrine to Prince, Peopl cap 8. p. 37.  
Puritan-Jesuitisme, or the general consent of the principal Puritans and jesuites, against Kings, from the year 1536. until the year 1602. out of the most authentic Authors. cap 8. p. 40.          


THE FIRST CHAPTER Proveth by the testimony of Scripture, that Kings are not punishable by man, but reserved to the judgement of God.  
KIngs have their authority from God 
a Rom. 13.1.  and are his Vicegerents in earth, 
b Prov. 8.15.  to execute justice and judgement for him amongst the Sons of men 
c 2 Chron. 19.6. . All subjects (as well Prelates and Nobles, as the inferior people) are forbidden with the tongue, to revile Kings, 
d Exod. 22.28. , with the heart, to think ill of them 
e Eccl. 10.20. , or with the hand, to resist them 
f Rom. 13.2. . The great King of Heaven doth impart his own name unto his Lieutenant's the Kings of the Earth: and calleth them Gods, with an ego dixi 
g Psal. 82.6. , whose word is Yea and Amen: with this only difference, that these Gods shall die like men 
h Psal. 82.7. , and fall like other Princes. Wherefore Nathan the man of God, must reprove David 
i 2 Sam. 12.7. , that he may repent, and be saved. And the Sages, judges, and Nobles, (without fear or flattery) must advise and direct Roboam 
k 1 Reg. 12.7. . Other attempts against Kings, the King of Kings hath neither commanded in his law, 
Apolog. David cap. 10.  nor permitted in his Gospel. David (saith Ambrose) nullis legibus tenebatur, etc. David though he were an adulterer, and an homicide, was tied to no law: for Kings are free from bonds, and can by no compulsion of law, be drawn to punishment, being freed by the power of Government. Thus fare Ambr.  
Saul the first King of Israel was rather a monster, than a man: after the Spirit of God had forsaken him, and the evil Spirit was come upon him 
m 1 Sam. 16.14. . There were not many sins against God, Man, or Nature, wherein he trangressed not; yet his excess was punished, neither by the Sacerdotal Synod, nor the secular Senate: Who can lay his hand on the Lords anointed, and be guiltless 
n 1 Sam. 16.9. ? The very Annointment was the cause of saul's immunity from all humane coercion: as Augustine affirmeth, 
Aug. contr. lit. Petil. l. 2. 〈◊〉 48.  Quaero si non habebat, Saul sacramenti sanctitatem; quid in eo David venerabatur? If Saul had not the holiness of the Sacrament, I ask what it was that David reverenced in him? he honoured Saul for the sacred and holy unction, while he lived: and revenged his death. Yea, he was troubled and trembled at the heart, because he had cut off a lap of saul's garment. Lo, Saul had no innocency, and yet he had holiness: not of life, but of unction. So fare Augustine.  
Who questioned David for his murder and adultery? who censured Solomon for his idolatry? though their crimes were capital by the law of God. After that Kingdom was divided, all the Kings of Israel, and most of the Kings of judah, were notorious Idolaters: yet during those Kingdoms, which endured above 200. years, no Priest did challenge, no Statesmen did claim power from the highest, to punish or depose their Princes. And the Prophets persuaded all men to obey, and endure those idolatrous Princes, whose impiety they reproved with the loss of their lives.  
Christ fled when the people would have made him a King 
a Joh. 6.15. . He paid tribute for himself and Peter 
b Matth. 17.27. . When the question was propounded concerning the Emperor's subsidy, he concluded for Caesar 
c Matth. 22.21. . And standing to receive the judgement of death before Pilate, he acknowledged his power to be of God 
d joh. 19.15. . This Saviour of Mankind, whose actions should be our instruction, did never attempt to change that Government, or to displace those Governors, which were directly repugnant to the scope of Information that he aimed at.  
john Baptist did indeed reprove King Herod with a Non licet 
e Mark. 6.18. , but he taught not the soldiers to leave his service, or by strife and impatience, to wind themselves out of the band of allegiance, wherein the law had left them, and the Gospel found them 
f Luk. 3.14. .  
The Apostle delivered unto the Church the doctrine of obedience and patience, which they had learned by the precept, and observed by the practice of our Lord CHRIST. Peter commandeth obedience to all manner of men in authority 
g 1 Pet. 2.15. . Paul forbiddeth resistance against any power 
h Rom. 13.1.2.3.4. judc 8. . And Saint Judas maketh it blasphemy, to revile government, or to speak evil of Governors i. If therefore an Angel from heaven preach otherwise, than they have delivered, let him be accursed 
k Gal. 1.8. .   

The second Chapter proveth the same by the Fathers of the first 300. years.  
THe true Church, which had the Spirit of understanding, to discern the voice of Christ, from the voice of a stranger, never taught, never practised, never used or approved other weapons, than salt tears, and humble prayers against the Paganism, Heresy, Apostasy, and Tyranny of earthly Kings.  
justinus Martyr, Tertullian, and Cyprian shall bear witness for 300. years, wherein the Kings and Potentates of the earth, bathed themselves in the blood of innocents', and professed enmity against Christ and his servants.  
Ad inquisitionem vestram, Christianos nos esse profitemur, etc. At your inquisition, we profess ourselves to be Christians, though we know death to be the guerdon of our profession (saith justine Martyr to the Emperor Antoninus, 
Secund. Apolog. ad Ant. Imp. p. 113. ) did we expect an earthly Kingdom, we would deny our religion, that escaping death, we might in time attain our expectation: But we fear not persecution, which have not our hope fixed on the things of this life, because we are certainly persuaded, that we must die. As for the preservation of public peace, we Christians yield to you (O Emperor) more help and assistance, than other men. For we teach, that no evil doer, no covetous man, nor seditious, that lieth in wait for blood, can have access to God: And that every man doth pass to life or death, according to the merit of his deeds: Thus fare he.  
We (saith Tertullian ton Scapula the Viceroy of Carthage) are defamed, 
Tertull. lib. ad Scap.  for seditious against the Imperial Majesty: Yet were the Christians never found to be Albinians, Nigrians: or Cassians, (Albinus, Niger, and Cassius were Traitors against Marcus Antonius, Commodus, Pertinax, and Severus the Emperors) but they that swore by the Emperor's deity, the very day before: they that vowed and offered sacrifice for the Emperor's health, are found to be the Emperor's enemies. A Christian is enemy to no man, much less to the Emperor: knowing, that the Imperial Majesty, is ordained of God, and therefore necessarily to be loved, reverenced, and honoured, whose prosperity, together with the welfare of all the Roman Empire they desire so long as the world standeth. We do therefore honour the Emperor, in such sort, as is lawful for us, and expedient for him: we reverence him as a mortal man, next unto God, of whom he holdeth all his authority, only subject to God, and so we make him, sovereign overall, in that, we make him subject, but to God alone: So fare Tertullian.  
Saint Cyprian showeth many good reasons, for the patience of the Saints, in his book against Demetrianus. God (saith he) is the revenger of his servants, when they are annoyed. Wherefore not Christian when he is apprehended, doth resist or revenge himself against your unjust violence, though the number of our people be very great. The confidence we have, that God will reward, doth confirm our Patience, the guiltless give way to the guilty, the innocent rest content with their undeserved punishment, and tortures, being certainly assured that the wrong done to us, shall not be unrewarded. The more injury we suffer, the more just and grievous shall God's vengeance be on them that persecute us. It is therefore clear and manifest, that the plagues which come down from God's indignation, do not come through us poor persecuted Christians, but from him whom we serve, for the wrong done unto us. So far Cyprian.  
As many as lived according to Christ's institution, did never revile the Government of Tyrants, much less by force resist their violence, following the patience of Christ, who could by his own power, the might of his Angels, or the strength of his creatures, have at the first withstood; or, at the last revenged, the injury of the people, the buffet of the Priest's servant, the scorn of Herod, the judgement of Pilate, 
joh. 19.15. joh. 18.22. Luk 23.11. Mark. 15.15. Matth. 27. 27.28.29.  and the violence of the soldiers. He yielded himself patiently to death, to teach all his Disciples, that an injury done by authority, is patiently to be endured, not forcibly to be repelled. As soon also as Paul became a Christian, his seditious and bloody Spirit, which he had learned of the pharisees, was changed into a desire of peace, and quietness. He honoured the Heathen Magistrates, as Agrippa, Faelix, and Lisias, ratifying his Doctrine, by the practice of his life. I know that Cardinal Alane, Cardinal Bellarmine, Ficlerus, Simancha, & other upholders of the Papal tyranny, that Stephanus Junius, Franciscus Hottomanus, Georgius Buchananus, and other pillars of the Puritan anarchy, do answer, that the Church then, as it were swathed in the bonds of weakness, had not strength sufficient to make powerful resistance. But these Fathers that then lived, do convince them, and all other sectaries of falsehood, by making demonstration, of the strength and potency of the godly Christians, in case they would have put their forces to the strongest proof. Seeing that all public places as Courts, Camps, Consistories, Cities, and Country villages, were stored and furnished with men of that profession and quality, as doth most evidently appear by the words of Tertullian, in his Apologetical defence of the Christians: una nox pauculis faculis, etc. One night with a few firebrands, wound yield us sufficient revenge, if it were lawful for us to requited evil for evil. But God forbidden, that Christians should either revenge themselves with humane fire, or be grieved to suffer that wherewith they are tried. Were we disposed, not to practise secret revenge, but to profess open hostility, should we want number of men, or force of arms? Are the Moors, or the Parthians, or any one Nation whatsoever, more in number than we, that are spread over all the World? We are not of you, and yet we have filled all the places and rooms which you have. Your Cities, Lands, Castles, Towns, Assemblies, your Tents, Tribes, and Wards; yea, the Imperial Palace, Senate, and seats of judgement. For what war, were not we, able and ready, though we were fewer in number than you, that go to our Martyrdom so willingly? if it were not more lawful in our religion to be slain, then to slay? we could without armour, not by rebelling against you, but by departing from you, do you displeasure enough, even with our separation. For if so great a multitude, as we are, should break out from you, as in any other corner of the World, the loss of so many Citizens would shame and punish you. You would fear, to see yourselves left solitary, even amazed, as among the dead. You should then see, silence and desolation every where. You would have many more enemies, than inhabitants. Whereas now, you have fewer enemies, because of the multitude of your Citizens, that are almost all Christians. Haec Tertullian. We see by these three witnesses, that the Church of God, in the first 300. years wanted, neither number of men, strength, nor courage to resist persecution, and to have established the Christian faith, if that course had been lawful: but because their Lord had given them no sword to strike withal, they chose rather to be crowned Martyrs, for their Religion, then to be punished as Traitors for rebellion. What number of men, what strength of arms had the Church (think you) the next 300. years after it had been backed by Princes, defended by laws, provoked by honourable favours, to profess Christianity? Yet all that while, the servants of God, neither did nor would resist Apostasy Heresy, or Tyranny: but yielded their lives, with all submission, though they wanted neither means nor multitude, convenient for any wars, as the next chapter by impregnable demonstration, shall show.   

The third Chapter proveth by the Fathers, of the second 300. years that the pleasure of Princes, must be endured with patence, when their decrees cannot be obeyed with a good Conscience.  
THe next 300. years, the Christians did as patiently endure Heresy, Apostasy, and Tyranny to the glorious trial of their faith, and the eternal reward of their patience. Whereof we have a cloud of witnesses, namely, Hosius Liberius Athanasius, Hilarius, Basilius Magnus, Gregorius Nazianzenus, Lucifer Calaritanus, Cyrillus Alexandrinus, Optatus Milevitanus, Ambrose, Augustinus, Chrysostomus, Leo the first, and Gregory the great.  
Hosius was a famous Confessor in the Church, before Constantine the great, a worthy Bishop during that Emperor's reign, and after his death greatly esteemed of all good men, yea even of Constantius the Arrian Emperor himself, for his old age, great experience, excellent learning, and good conversation. When this worthy Prelate, was commanded by the Emperor, to subscribe to the condemnation of Athanasius, he returned to the Imperial Majesty, this stout, constant, Christian, and dutiful answer; Ego confessionis munus implevi primum, cum persecutio moveretur, ab avo tus Maximiniano: I was then a Confessor, when your Grandfather Maximinian persecuted the Church. 
Obsequere & scribe contra Athanasium qui enim contra illum scribit ille plane nobiscum, etc.  And if you do now raise persecution, I am ready to endure any thing, rather than betray the truth and shed innocent blood. I do not like your manner of writing against Athanasius: Cease from it, be not of the Arrian opinion: Give no care to the Eastern Bishops: believe me rather, that for age might be your Grandfather. Leave off I beseech you, and call to mind, that you are a mortal man. Fear that dreadful day of judgement. Interpose not yourself (O Emperor) into the Ecclesiastical service, neither command us in this kind, to condemn the innocent: but learn rather of us. God hath entrusted your Majesty with the Empire, and committed unto us, the service of the Church: he that with an envious eye, maligneth your imperial Sovereignty, contradicteth the ordinance of God. Take heed (O Prince) lest drawing to yourself the right of the Church, you become guilty of grievous transgression. It is written, Give unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, 
Hosius apud Athan. ad solitariam virans agentes.  and to God the things that appertain to God; it is therefore, neither lawful for us Priests, to usurp your Kingdom: not for you Princes, to meddle with the sacred service, and sacrifices of the Church. Thus fare Hosius. You see the grounds, that this good Bishop stood upon: rather resolved to suffer any death or torture, then by his consent to betray the truth, or to condemn the guiltless. He admonisheth freely, and reproveth sharply, he offereth his life to the Prince's pleasure: It was fare from his meaning, to revile the sacred Majesty, or to stir up any rebellion, against this Heretical Emperor, which infringed the Canons of the Church, without all regard of truth or equity, to serve the humours of the Arrians, and to wreck his anger on them all, which yielded not to that heresy.  
Liberius a Bishop of Rome, did neither excommunicate nor depose this wicked Emperor Constantius, but appeared at his command, and endured his pleasure, to the admiration of the Arrians, and the confirmation of the Christians, as we find in Athanasius, Trahitur Liberius ad Imperatorem, etc. Liberius was haled to the Emperor, when he came to his presence he spoke freely, Cease (said he) O Emperor, to persecute the Christians, go not about, 
Liberius quo supra apud Athanas.  by any means, to bring Heretical impiety into the Church of God. We are ready, rather to endure any torture, then to be called Arrians. Compel us not to become enemies unto Christ. Eight not against him (we beseech you) that hath bestowed the Empire upon you. Render not impiety to him for his grace, persecute them not which believe in him, lest you hear, It is hard for thee to kick against the prick. 
Act. 9.5.  Oh would to God you did so hear it that you might (as Paul did) believe it. Lo we are at hand, and come to your presence, before our enemies the Arrians can invent any thing to inform against us, we hastened to come at your command, though we were assured of banishment: that we might abide our punishment, before any crime could be objected, much less proved against us. Whereby it may appear, that all Christians are (as we now be) undeservedly punished, and the crimes laid to their charge not true but feigned by sycophancy or deceitful subtlety. Thus spoke Liberius, and every man admired his resolution; but the Emperor for answer commanded him to banishment. Thus ●●e he.  
Pope Liberius had not learned the language of his Suceesfour Pins Quintus, when he bellowed against our late Queen, nor that principle of the Puritans, that the inscriour Officer may use force of arms against the chief Magistrate that shall become a Tyrant (Whereof every seditious Sectary will he judge) and not only defend himself, and his own people, but also any other that shall fly unto him. Which opinion Lambertus Danaus avoucheth, 
Polit. Christ. l. 6. c. 3.  contrary to the Law, the Gospel, and the general consent of all Orthodoxal Fathers.  
Hilarius, a Bishop of France, wrote the same time to this same Emperor in most humble manner, 
Hilarius ad Imper. Constant.  Banefica natura tua Domine beatissime Auguste: Your mild nature, most blessed Emperor, agreeing with your gracious disposition, and the mercy which floweth abundantly, from the fountain of your Fatherly godliness, do assure us, that we shall obtain our desire. We beseech you, not only with words, but also with tears, that the Catholic Churches, be no longer oppressed with grievous injuries, and endure intolerable persecutions, and contumelies, and that (which is most shameful) even of our brethren. Let your Clemency provide, etc.  
Surely, if it had then been known, that the Pope, by his absolute power or indirect authority, could have punished or deposed Kings, which the Papists avouch, or for the Peers or the people to have done it, which the Puritans affirm, some of these old Bishops, would have pressed that point against this Heretical Prince, which abused his sword, to the blaspheming of Christ, the murdering of the Saints, the seducing of many thousand souls: by strengthening, maintaining, and establishing the Arrian error. But they took it to be no Christian man's part, to bear armour (no not desensive) against his Prince, though never so wicked, cruel or ungodly.  
Holy Athanasius confesseth the power of Kings to be of God, and their impiety not to be punished by man. Sicut in toto mundo Deus Rex est Imperator & potestatent exercet in omnibus: As God is King and Emperor over all the World, and exerciseth his power in all creatures: so the King and Prince is over all earthly men, and doth by his absolute power, what he will, even as God himself. 
Ad Antioch. quest. 55.  Haec ille.  
When it was objected against this reverend Father Athanasius, that he had incensed Constance the Religious Emperor of the West, against Constantius, 
Apolog. Athan. ad Constant.  in the behalf of the persecuted Christians: he cleared himself from that accusation, in an Apology to the said Emperor Constantius. The Lord (saith he) is my record, and his anointed your brother, that I never made mention of your Majesty for any evil, before your brother of blessed memory, that religious Emperor Constance. I did never incite him against you, as these Arrians do slander me, but whensoever I had access unto him. I recounted your gracious inclination. God knoweth, what mention I made of your godly disposition. Give me leave and pardon (most courteous Emperor) to speak the truth. The servant of God Constance, was not easily drawn to give care to any man in this kind. I was never in such credit with him, that I durst speak of any such matter, or derogate from one brother before another, or talk reproachfully of one Emperor, in the hearing of another. I am not so mad, neither have I forgotten the voice of God, which saith, Carse not the King in thine heart, and backbite not the mighty in the secrets of thy Chamber: for the birds of the air shall tell it, and the winged foul shall bewray thee: If then the things that be spoken in secret against Princes, cannot be hid: is there any likelihood, that I in the Emperor's presence, and before so many, as continually attended his person, would say any thing otherwise then well of your Majesty: Thus fare Athanasius. This is sounder and seemelier doctrine for subjects, then that which Henry Garnet and Robert Tesmond, caught some Romish Catholic Gentlemen of England, who employed Thomas Winter into Spain, in the Month of December, Ann. Dom. 1601. to make request to the Spanish King, in the behalf and names of the English Pope-catholikes, 
L. Cook in his speech at Garnets' arraignment.  that he would send an army hither into England, for the advancement of their Catholic cause; and to promise, that the forces of the Papists here should be ready to do him service against the late Queen.  
The self same Doctrine of sedition, was published in the year after, viz. Ann. Dom. 1602. by Gulielmus Bucaws, a man of no mean esteem among the Puritans, and that, at the earnest request of Beza and Goulartius, the chiefest Ministers of the Church of Geneva, (if the Author himself belly them not,) whose words are as followeth: Subditis si fit publica & manifesta savitia, licet fieri supplices, implorare auxilia ab aliis, & suscipere corum defensi nem aliis regibus licet: 
Loc. ●om. Theol. loco: 77. p. 845.  Subjects, when they endure public and manifest wrong, may lawfully become suppliants to foreign states, and crave their aid against their Princes: and other Kings ought to take upon them their defence and protection. So fare Bucan.  
Subjects must square their subjection, according to the rule of God's word, not after the affection and fancies of men. 
a 1 Sam. 22.18.  Saul commanded Doeg to murder 85. Priests, to destroy their City, Men, Women, and Children with the edge of the sword. Did David, for whom they were slain, when he had Saul in his power, take revenge, or suffer his servants to do it, when they were ready and offered themselves to slay Saul? David 
b 2 Sam. 11.4.17.  defiled Urias his bed, and caused him to be killed: Did Absalon well to conspire against him, that was both a Murderer and an Adulterer? Solomon 
c 2 Reg. 12.8.  brought into the land many strange Wives, and as many different Religions into the Church: Did the high Priest, the Peers, the Prophets, or the people, offer to chastise or depose him? Achab 
d 1 Reg. 21.8.9.  suffered Jezabel to put Naboth to death, and to kill the Lords Prophets: Did Elias depose him, entice his subjects to rebel against him, or implore foreign aid to destroy him? Herod 
e Mark. 6.27. Act. 12.24.  beheaded john Baptist, killed james, imprisoned Peter, and would have slain him also, if he had not been delivered by an Angel: Did Peter take vengeance on Herod, which he might have done with a word, as well as on 
f Act. 5.5.  Ananiae? No: he did leave him to the Lord, whose judgement ensued in most 
g Act. 12.23.  fearful manner. In a word, wicked Princes have never been lawfully punished by Prelates, Potentates, or people of their Kingdom, as the Papists and Puritans aver: but must be reserved to the judgement of God, as the Protestants affirm.  
Gregory Nazianzen in his oration at the funeral of Saint Basil, reporteth, that the Emperor's Deputy in Pontus, commanded Saint Basil to put out a widow, 
Basilius Magnus.  that had taken sanctuary to save herself from forced marriage. The Bishop (not willing to violate the Ecclesiastical laws granted by the Imperial Majesty) refused so to do. The Governor called the Bishop before him, threatened to whip him, and to tear his flesh with iron hooks: the people hearing that indignity offered to the Bishop, fell to an uproar, and would have slain the Lieutenant, Had not that innocent man of God, with much ado, stayed that furious tumult, 
Monodia Nazian. inter opuscula Basil. fol. 95.  and delivered his persecutor from that peril, to whose pleasure he did afterward submit himself.  
The same Nazianzen, for his admirable learning called the Divine, writeth of julian the Apostata-Emperours death: julian was punished by the mercy of God, through the tears of Christian men: which tears were many, and shed of many, for that they had no other remedy, against that persecutor. Thus fare Nazianzen. 
2 Or●t. cont-Julian.  This godly Father lived under five Emperors. Constantius, julianus, Valene, Valentinianus, and Theodosius, in all which time, he could find no remedy against the Tyranny, Heresy, ●●d Apostasy of Princes, beside prayers and tears: The Devil of Hell had not as yet hatched the distinctions of propriè and impropriè, directè and indirectè, simpliciter and secundum quid, absolutè & in ordine ad spiritualia, wherewith the jesuites do fill the schools with clamorous evasions, the Church with erroneous superstition, and many Christian states with tragical sedition.  
Lucifer Calaritanus in sundry books against Constantius, useth many immodest and disloyal speeches: but he persuaded not the Pope to depose him, the state to punish him, the people to rebel against him, or foreign aid to suppress him, but threatened him with the dreadful punishment of God. He that (in the fervency of zeal) durst call so cruel an Emperor, Thief, Church-robber, Murderer, Beast, Hangman, Heretic, postata, Idolater, the Forerunner of Antichrist, and Antichrist himself, would surely have encouraged the Pope, the Peers or the people, to have removed that evil King, and placed a better in his stead: if there had been any such opinion in those days, as our modern jesuites and Puritans bear now the World in hand. As this Father, in his writings, kept not the modesty of the other Fathers, which lived in that age under Constantius: so he did not continue in the unity of the Catholic Church. 
Orat. in obit. fratris Satir.  Lucifer (saith Ambrose) divided himself from our communion, though he were banished with us for our Religion.  
When Ambrose was commanded, to deliver up his Church in Milan to Maxentius an Arrian Bishop, he declared his resolution in a Sermon to the people: which were very sorry for his departure; Quid turbamini? 
Orat. Ambrosi ad populum inter Epist. 31.33.  volens nunquam vos deseram: Why are you troubled? I will never willingly departed from you. If I be compelled, I have no way to resist: I can sorrow, I can weep, I can sigh, my tears are my weapons against Soldiers, Armour, Goths: such is the munition of a Priest: by any other means, than tears, I neither ought nor can resist: so fare Ambrose. Not disability but duty, not want of strength and martial forces, but a reverend regard of the Emperor Majesty, commanded by the law of God, kept this blessed Ambrose from resisting. For he might easily have wrought the Church's liberty, his own safety, and the Arrians calamity by the overthrow of the Emperor, through the force of the Garrison in that City, which refused, to attend the Prince to any other Church, then that wherein Ambrose was. The stout and peremptory answer of the Captains and Soldiers, is thus reported by Ambrose in an Epistle to to Marcellina, a Religious woman; Si prodire vellet baberet copiam se praesto future's; 
Epist. 35.  The Emperor may go at his pleasure, they would be ready to attend him, if he would go to the Catholic assemblies: or otherwise, they would keep on their way to that Congregation, wherein Ambrose was: Thus fare the Soldiers. They refused (as you see) to obey, and preserved Gods true service, before the Emperor's favour: they reviled not his sacred person, they resisted not his sovereign power; but yielded themselves to his mercy and pleasure, to save their Souls from God's wrath and displeasure, as we find in the same Epistle; Vnum job miraturus ascend●ram, I went to Church to extol the patience of job, where I found everyone of my hearers, 
Epist. cadem.  a job, worthy to be extolled. In every one of you job is revived, in each of you his patience, and virtue shined, what could be said better by Christian men, then that which the holy Ghost this day spoke in you? We beseech (O Emperor,) we offer not to fight, we fear not to die, we entreat your clemency. Oh it was seemly for Christian soldiers, to desire the tranquillity of peace and faith, and to be constant in truth, even unto death. Thus fare Ambrose.  
Saint Augustine relateth the same of the Christian soldiers, under julian the Apo●tate-Emperour: julianus extitit Imperator infidelis, julian was an unbelieving Emperor, was he not an Apostata, an Oppressor▪ and an Idolater? Christian soldiers served that unbelieving Emperor. When they came to the cause of Christ, they would acknowledge no Lord but him that was in Heaven: when they were commanded to adore Idols, and to offer sacrifice, they preferred God before their Prince. But when he called upon them to war, and bade them invade any nation, they presently obeyed. They did distinguish their eternal Lord, from the temporal King, yet they submitted themselves to their temporal Lord, 
August. in Psal. 124.  for his sake that was their eternal King: So fare he.  
Optatus Milevitanus, is another pregnant witness: Cum super Imperatorem nemo sit nisi solus Deus. Seeing there is no man above the Emperor, beside God alone, which made the Emperor; 
De schism. Donatist. l. 3.  Donatus, by advancing himself above the Emperor, doth exceed the bounds of humanity, and makeeh himself a God rather than man, in that he feareth and reverenceth him not, whom all men should honour, next after God. So fare Optatus.  
Saint Cyril is of the same judgement. 
Com. in Evang. joh l. 12. c. 36.  Cuilegis prevaricatores liberare licet nisi legis ipsius authori? Who can acquit them that break the law, from transgression, beside the Lawgiver? as we see by experience, in all humane states, no man can without danger, break the law, but Kings themselves, in whom the crime of prevarication hath no place. For it was wisely said of one, that it is a wicked presumption, to say to a King, Thou dost amiss. So fare he.  
And also Saint chrysostom. 
In 1. epist. ad Timoth. c. 2 v. 1.  What meaneth the Apostle (saith he) to require prayers and supplications, inter cessions, and thanksgiving, to be made for all men? he requireth this to be done in the daily service of the Church, and the perpetual rite of Divine religion. For all the faithful do know, in what manner prayers are poured out before the Lord morning and evening, for all the world▪ even for Kings, and every man in authority. Some man will (peradventure) say, that, for all, must be understood of all the faithful. Which cannot be the Apostles meaning, as may appear by the words following, viz. for Kings: seeing that Kings neither did then, nor in many ages after, serve the living God: but continued obstinately in infidelity, which by course of succession they had received: Thus fare chrysostom. Our Modern Reformers teach us that which Paul and chrysostom neither knew nor believed, 
See the preface before Basilic. Dor.  that wicked Princes are not to be prayed for, but to be resisted, etc.  
When the faction of Eutiches had prevailed against the Catholics, Leo the first, had no other remedy than prayers to God, sighs, tears, and Petitions to the Emperor: 
Epist. 24. ad Theod. Imper.  Omnes partium nostrarum Ecclesiae, etc. All the Churches of these parts, all we Priests, even with sighs, and tears, beseech your Majesty, to command a general Synod to be held in Italy, that all offences being removed, there may remain, neither error in faith, nor division in love. Favour the Catholics, grant liberty to protect the faith against Heretics, defend the state of the Church from ruin, that Christ his right hand may support your Empire: Thus fare Leo.  
When Gregory the great was accused for the Murder of a Bishop in prison, he wrote to one Sabinianus, to clear him to the Emperor and Empress. 
Epist. lib. 7. epist. 1.  Breviter suggeras serenissimis Dominis meis: You may briefly inform my sovereign Lord and Lady, that if I their servant, would have busied myself with the death of the Lombard's, that nation would by this time have had neither Kings, nor Dukes, nor Earls, and should have been in great confusion and division: but because I stood in awe of God, I was ever afraid, to meddle with the shedding of any man's blood: so fare Gregory. These Lombard's were Pagans, Invaders of the Country, Ransackers of the City, Persecutors of the Saints, Robbers of the Church, Oppressors of the poor: whom Gregory the first, might, and would not destroy, Quia Deum timuit, because he feared God. It is very like, that his Successor Gregory the seventh, feared either God nor man, when he erected the Papal Croisier against the regal sceptre, and read the sentence of deprivation, against the Emperor Henry: Ego authoritate Apostelica, etc. I by my power Apostolical, do bereave Henry of the German Kingdom, and do deprive him of all subjection of Christian men, absolving all men, from the allegiance, which they have sworn unto him. And that Rodolph, whom the Peers of the Empire have elected, may govern the Kingdom: I grant all men, that shall serve him against the Emperor, 
Carol. Sigon. de Regno Ital. lib. 9 in vita Hen. 3.  forgiveness of their sins, in this life and in the life to come. As I have for his pride dejected Henry from the Royal dignity, so I do exalt Rodolph for his humility, to that place of authority: Thus fare Gregory the seaventh.  
It is no wonder, 
Benno Card. in vit. Gregor. 7.  that Gregory his chair clavae asunder, as some Writers affirm, at the giving of this sentence; because the proud Pope, and his wicked sentence, were too heavy a burden for Peter's stool of humility to bear.   

The fourth Chapter proveth the Immunity of Kings by the Fathers of the third 300. years.  
AFter the death of Gregory the great, which was about the year of our Lord 604. Sabinianus did succeed him, who lived but one year, after whom came Boniface the third, which obtained of Phocas to be called Universal Bishop; since that time Periit virtus Imperatorum & pietas Pontificum, the Emperors waxed weak, and the Bishop's wicked. What the judgement of those Fathers than was, concerning subjection to wicked Kings, I will make evident by the testimony of Gregorius Turonensis, Isidorus, Damascenus, Beda, Fulgentius, Leo 4. and the Fathers assembled in a Council at Toledo in Spain.  
Gregory Turonensis acknowledgeth such an absolute power in Childerick, a most wicked King of France, as was free from all control of man. 
Histor. l. 5. c. 1.  Si quis de nobis (Rex) justitiae limites transcendere vol●erit, etc. If any one of us (O King) do pass the bounds of justice, you have power to correct him, but if you exceed your limit, who shall chastise you? We may speak unto you; if you list not to hearken, who can condemn you, but that Great God, who hath pronounced himself to be righteousness? Hactenus ille.  
Isidorus saith no less for the immunity of the Kings of Spain. Let all earthly Princes know, that they shall give account of the Church, which Christ hath committed to their protection. Yea, whether the peace and discipline Ecclesiastical be advanced, by faithful Kings, or dissolved by the unfaithful, he will require a reckoning at their hands, which hath left his Church in their power. So fare Isidorus.  
John Damascene pleadeth not only for the exemption of wicked Kings themselves, but also of their Deputies. The Governors (saith he) which Kings create, 
Parallel. l. 1. c. 21.  though they be wicked, though they be thiefs, though they be unjust, or otherwise tainted with any crime, must be regarded. We may not contemn them, for their impiety: but must reverence them, because of their authority, by whom they were appointed our Governors. So fare he.  
Fulgentius saith, that no kind of sedition can stand with religion Cum pro nostra fide libere respondemus, etc. When we answer freely for our profession, we ought not to be taxed with the least suspicion of disobedience or contumely, seeing we are not unmindful of the Regal dignity, and do know, that we must fear God, and honour the King, according to the Doctrine of the Apostle, 
Fulgent. ad Thrasim reg.  Give to each one his due, fear to whom fear, honour to whom honour appertaineth Of the which fear and honour, 
1 Pet. 2.17.  Saint Peter hath delivered unto us the manifest knowledge, saying, As the servants of God, honour all men, love brotherly fellowship, fear God, honour the King. Thus fare Fulgentius.  
Our Countryman Beda, for his great learning called Venerable, 
Lib 4. exposit. in Samuel.  is of the same mind. David (saith he) for two causes spared Saul, who had persecuted him most maliciously. First, 
1 Sam. 21.6.  for that he was his Lord, anointed with holy oil. And secondly, to instruct us by moral precepts, that we ought not to strike our Governors, (though they unjustly oppress us) with the sword of our lips: nor presume slanderously, to tear the hem of their superfluous actions. So fare he.  
Leo the fourth about the year 846. agnised all subjection to Lotharius the Emperor: I do profess and promise (saith Leo) to observe and keep unviolably, 
Cap. de capit. dist. 15.  as much as lieth in me, for the time present and to come, your Imperial ordinances and commandments: together with the decrees of your Bishops, my Predecessors: If any man inform your Majesty otherwise, know certainly, that he is a liar. So fare Leo.  
The Bishops of Spain assembled in a national Council at Toledo, 
Concil. Tol. 5. Can. 2. circa annum Dom. 636.  made this decree against perjury and treason. Quicunque amodo ex nobis: Whosoever among us shall from this time forward, violate the oath which he hath taken for the safeguard of this Country, the state of the Gothish nation, and the preservation of the King's Majesty: whosoever shall attempt the King's death, or deposition: whosoever shall by tyrannical presumption aspire to the regal throne, let him be accursed before the holy Spirit, before the blessed Saints, let him be cast out of the Catholic Church, which he hath polluted by perjury, let him have no communion with Christian men, nor portion with the just, but let him be condemned with the Devil and his Angels eternally, together with his complices, that they may be tied in the bond of damnation, which were joined in the society of sedition. Thus fare the Fathers in that Synod.  
I conclude therefore with these learned Fathers, that it is not for the people, otherwise then with humility and obedience, to control the actions of their Governors: but their duty is only to call upon the God of Heaven, and so submit themselves to his mercy, by whose ordinance the Sceptre is fallen into his hand and power, that enjoyeth the Crown, whether he be good or bad. A right of deposing, must be either in him that hath an higher power, which is only God: or in him, that hath better right to the Crown: which the Pope cannot have, because he is a stranger: nor the Peers, or people, because they are subjects. Be the King for his Religion impious, for his Government unjust, for his life licentious, the subject must endure him, the Bishop must reprove him, the Counsellor must advise him, all must pray for him, and no mortal man hath authority to disturb or displace him, as may evidently be seen by the Chapter following.   

The fifth Chapter confirmeth this Doctrine by the Fathers of the fourth 300. years.  
IN this age of the Church, the Popes exalted themselves above all that is called God, and upon private displeasures and quarrels, did curse and ban Princes, incensing their Neighbour-nations, and persuading their own subjects, to make war against them, as if Christ, had ordained his Sacraments, not to be seals of grace, and helps of our faith, but hooks to catch Kingdoms, and rods to scourge such Potentates as would not, or could not procure the Pope's favour. How fare these Popish practices, did displease the godly and learned, I will show by Saint Bernard, Walthramus Bishop of Nanumberg, the Epistle Apolegeticall of the Church of Liege against Paschalis the Pope, and the Author of Henry the fourth his life.  
Saint Bernard, in one of his Sermons upon the words of CHRIST; I am the vine, commendeth the answer of a certain King, Bene quidam Rex, cum percussus humana sagitta, etc. It was well said of a King when he was shot into the body with an arrow, and they that were about him, desired him to be bound until the arrow's head were cut out, for that the least motion of his body would endanger his life: no (quoth he) it doth not beseem a King to be bound, let the King's power be ever safe and at liberty. And the same Father in an Epistle to Ludovicus Crassus the King of France teacheth subjects, how to rebel and fight against their Princes; Quicquid vobis de Regno vestro, de Anima & Corona vestra facere placuerit: Whatsoever you please to do with your Kingdom, 
Bernard. Epist. 221.  your Soul, or your Crown, we that are the Children of the Church cannot endure or dissemble the injuries, contempt, and conculcation of our Mother. Questionless we will stand and fight even unto death in our Mother's behalf, and use such weapons, as we may lawfully, I mean not swords and spears, but prayers and tears to God.  
When Gregory the seaventh had deposed Henry the fourth, he gave away the Empire to one Rodolphus Duke of Saxony, that was a sworn subject to that distressed Emperor; which Rodolp, in a battle against his Sovereign Lord, lost his right-hand, and gained a deadly wound. After his death, the Pope made one Hermanus King of Germany, who enjoyed his Kingdom but a little time, for he was slain with a stone, which a woman threw upon him from a turret, as he made an assault (in sport) against his own Castle, to try the valour of his soldiers. 
Ex vita Henr. quanti quae bibotur in fasciculo rerum sciendarum Coloniae impresso.  Then did Egbertus, by the Pope's encouragement ascend the Imperial throne, whereon he sat but a while: for as he stepped aside from his army into a mill, to rest himself in the heat of the day, he was discovered by the miller to the Emperor's friends, and lost his life for his labour. During this hurly-burly in that state Walthramus a godly Bishop, wrote to one Ludovicus an Earl of the Empire, dissuading him from partaking with the seditious against that good Emperor, whom the Pope had deposed. Walthram by the grace of God, that he is, to Lewes the noble Prince, with instance of prayer, offereth himself in all things serviceable. Concord is profitable to every Realm, and justice much to be desired: these virtues are the Mother of devotion, and the consecration of all honesty. But whosoever seeketh after civil dissension, and incenseth other to the effusion of blood, he is a murderer, and partaketh with him, who gaping for blood, goeth about seeking whom he may devour: The worthy vessel of election, that was taken up to the third Heaven, protesteth, saying. Let every Soul submit himself to the higher power, there is no power but from God. He that resisteth power, resisteth the ordinance of God. If that be true (which some men prate among women and the vulgar sort) that we ought not to be subdued to the Kingly power, Than it is false which the Apostle teacheth, that every Soul must submit himself under power and superiority. Can the truth lie? did not Christ the Lord speak by the Apostle? 
Epist Wald. quae habetur in appendice Marian. Scot  Why do we provoke the Lord? are we stronger than he? Doth not he think himself stronger than the Lord, that resisteth the ordinance of God? seeing there is no power but of God: what saith the Prophet? Confounded be they that strive against the Lord, and they that resist him shall perish. Rodolphus, Hermanus, Egbertus, with many other Princes, resisted the ordinance of God, in Henry the Emperor, but for they are confounded, as though they had never been, for as their end was ill, their beginning could not be good, &c, Haec ille.  
Pope Paschalis seeing the bad success of those seditious subjects, which his Predecessors Gregory and Vrbanus had armed against Henry, that worthy Emperor: did persuade the Emperors own Son, against all Law of God, Nature, and Nations, to rebel against his Father. The Bishop of Liege took the Emperor's part, against this young Prince, for the which he was excommunicate, his Church interdicted, and Robert Earl of Flanders commanded by the Pope, as he hoped to have the forgiveness of his sins, and the favour of the Church of Rome, to destroy that Bishop and his false Priests.  
The Churchmen of Liege terrified with the Pope's excommunication, and fearing the Earl's oppression, wrote an Apology for themselves about the year 1106. We are excommunicate (say they) because we obey our Bishop, 
Epistol. Leodiensium apud Simonem Scard.  who hath taken part with his Lord the Emperor. These are the beginnings of sorrow: for Satan being loosed, compasseth the earth, and hath made a division between the Prince and the Priest: who can justly blame the Bishop that taketh his Lord's part, to whom he hath sworn allegiance? perjury is a great sin, whereof they cannot be ignorant, that by new Schism and novel tradition, do promise to absolve subjects from the guilt of perjury, that forswear themselves to their Lord the King, etc.  
In the progress of their Apology they determine three great questions: First, whether the Pope hath power to excommunicate Kings? Secondly, to whom it belongeth to inflict temporal punishment, when Churchmen offend against faith, unity, or good manners? And thirdly, what remedy subjects have against their Kings, that are impious or tyrannous? Si quis respectu sancti Spiritus, etc. If any man having respect to the Spirit of God, shall turn over the old and new Testament, he shall plainly find that Kings, ought not at all or very hardly be excommunicate, whether we consider the Etymology of their names, or the nature of their excommunication. Even till this day hath this point been questioned, and never determined. King's may be admonished and reproved, by such as be discreet and sober men, for Christ the King of Kings in earth, who hath placed them in his own stead, hath reserved them to his own judgement, etc.  
Their answer to the second question, is grounded on the testimony of Saint Augustine, the practice of Princes, and the authority of Paul. Kings (say they) and Emperors by their public Laws, have forbidden Heretics, to enjoy any Worldly possession. Wherefore seeing we are no Heretics, and that it belongeth not to the Pope, but to Kings and Emperors to punish Heresies, why doth our Lord Paschalis, send Robert, his Armour-bearer, to destroy the possessions and to overthrow the Villages of the Churches, which in case they deserved destruction, aught to be destroyed by the edict of Kings and Emperors, which carry the sword not without good cause? etc.  
For answer to the third question, they show by sundry places of Scripture, that there is no other help against evil Princes, than prayer and patience. Nihil modo pro Imperatore nostro dicimus, etc. We will for the present say nothing in defence of our Emperor, but this we say, though he were as bad as you report him to be, we would endure his government, because our sins have deserved such a Governor. Be it: we must needs grant against our will, that the Emperor is an Archheretic, an invader of the Kingdom, a worshipper of the simonaical Idol, and accursed by the Apostles and Apostolic men, as you say of him: even such a Prince ought not to be resisted by violence, but endured by patience and prayer. Moses brought many plagues upon Pharaoh, whose heart God had hardened, but it was by prayer and the lifting up his hands to Heaven. And Saint Paul requireth prayers to be made for all men, for Kings and such as are in authority: which Kings were neither Catholics nor Christians. Baruch also from the mouth of the Prophet Jeremy, wrote unto the jews, which were captives unto the King of Babylon, that they must pray for the life of Nabuchodonoser the King of Babylon, and Balthasar his Son, that their days in earth may be as the days of Heaven, 
Epist. Leod.  etc. Saint Paul teacheth why we ought to pray for evil Kings, namely, that under them we may lead a quiet life. It would become an Apostolic man, to follow the Apostles Doctrine: it were prophetical to follow the Prophet, etc. Thus fare they in their Epistle Apologetical.  
He that wrote the life of this Emperor Henry the fourth, 
Vita Henr. 4. quo supra.  an ancient, a modest, and an impartial Relatour of such occurrents as happened in his time, declareth his dislike of the Pope's practices, and the Germans tumults against their said sovereign lord Magnum Mundo documentum datum est: A great instruction was given to the World that no man should rise against his Master. For the hand of Rodolph being cut off, shown a most just punishment of perjury; he feared not to violete his fidelity sworn to the King, and his right hand was punished, as if other wounds had not been sufficient to bring him to his death, that by the plague of the rebellious, the fault of rebellion might be perceived: Thus fare he.   

The sixth Chapter proveth the same by the testimony of the Writers from the 12. hundred years downward.  
I Will for conclusion produce Otho Frinsingensis, Thomas Aquinas, Gratianus, Philip the fair King of France, the Parliament of England in the time of Edward the first, Vincentius, and Aeneas Silvius that afterward was Pope, by the name of Pius secundus.  

Otho Frising. in his Epistle Dedicatory before his Chronicle.  Otho Frisingensis hath an excellent saying in his Epistle Dedicatory to Frederick Barbarossa; Cum nulla persona mundialis inveniatur quae mundi legibus non subjaceat, etc. Although no earthly man can be found, that is not subject to the Laws of the World, and in respect of subjection, liable to correction: Kings as it were placed over Laws, are not restrained by them, but reserved to the examination of God, according to the words of the King and Prophet, Against thee only have I sinned. It becometh therefore a King, both in respect of the noble disposition of his mind, 
Psal. 51.5.  and the spiritual illumination of his soul, to have God, the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords, ever in his mind, and by all means possible, to take heed, that he fall not into the hands of God, seeing it is (as the Apostle saith) a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. It is more fearful for Kings, then for any other; because Kings have none but God himself above them, whom they need fear. It shall be so much more horrible for them, by how much they may offend more freely than other men. So fare Otho.  
Thomas Aquinas, (if the Tractate De regimine Principum be his) maketh three sorts of Kings: 
Aquin. de regimine Princ. lib. 1. cap. 6.  Kings by election, Kings by subordination, and Kings by succession. For the first he saith, that they which did establish, may abolish: for the second, we must have our recourse to him that did surrogate the subordinate King: as the jews did to Caesar against Herod: for the last, his resolution is Recurrendum esse ad omnium Regem Deum, that we must fly to God, the King of all Kings, in whose only power it is, to mollify the cruel heart of a Tyrant. And that men, may obtain this at the hands of God, they must cease from sin; for wicked Princes, by Divine permission are exalted to punish the sins of the people, Tollenda est igitur culpa ut cessat Tyrannorum plaga; We must therefore remove our sins, that God may take away his punishment: Thus fare Thomas.  
Gratianus, which compiled the decrees, is very peremptory, that the Bishop of Rome, ought not to meddle with the temporal sword, the state of Commonwealths, or the change of Princes. He saith nothing indeed De Regni ordinibus, which in his time, and a 100 years after him, never dreamt of any such authority. Cum Petrus qui primus Apostolorum à Domino fuerat electus, materialem gladium exerceret: When Peter whom the Lord had first chosen of all the Apostles, drew the material sword, to defend his Master from the injuries of the jews, he was commanded to sheathe his sword: 
Math. 26.52.  For all that take the sword, shall perish by the sword. As if Christ should have said, Hitherto it was lawful for thee a thine Ancestors to persecute God's enemies with the temporal sword, hereafter thou must put up that sword into his place, and draw the sword of the Spirit, 
Caus. 23. quest. 8. parag. 1.  which is the word of God, to slay the old man: whosoever beside the Prince, and without his authority, that hath lawful power, and as the Apostle teacheth, 
Rom. 13.4.  Beareth not the sword in vain, to whom every soul must be subject, whosoever (I say) without or beside the Prince's authority, beareth the sword, shall perish by the sword: Thus fare Gratian.  
About the year a 1300. began a quarrel between Boniface the eight, and Philippus Pulcher the French King, about the collation of benefices, prebend's, and other Ecclesiastical promotions. Whereupon the Pope wrote unto the said King, as followeth: Boniface Bishop, the servant of God's servants, to his well-beloved Son Philip, by God's grace King of France, Greeting, and blessing Apostolical. Fear God and keep his law: We give thee to understand that thou art subject to us both in spiritual things, and temporal, and that no gift of benefices or prebend's belongeth to thee. If thou have in thy hand any vacant, keep the profits of them to the Successors, and if thou hast bestowed any, we decree the collation void, and recall it, how fare soever it hath proceeded. Whosoever believeth otherwise, we account him a fool: Dated at Lateran the fourth of the Calends of December, and in the sixth year of our Papacy. King Philip returned his haughtiness, a correspondent answer, viz. Philip by tho grace of God, King of France, to Boniface bearing himself for Pope, Salutem modicam sive nullam. Sciat tua maxima fatuitas. Little health or none at all. 
Philip. Pulcher.  Let thy great foolship know, that in temporal things we are subject to no man. And that the gifts of prebend's and Ecclesiastical promotions, made, and to be made by us, were and shall be lawful, both in time past and in time to come. For such collations belong to us in the right of our Crown: wherefore, we will manfully defend the Possessors of the said dignities, and do judge them that think otherwise fools and mad men; Given at Paris the Wednesday after Candlemas, 1301. Questionless this King that did so scornfully reject the Popes challenge pretended from Christ, would little regard the claim of the Nobles, derived but from the people.  
The same busy Boniface, of whom some writ, that he came in like a Fox craftily, reigned like a Lion cruelly, and died like a Dog miserably, would take upon him the decision of a controversy between the Kings of England and Scotland, and commanded King Edward of England either to cease his claim, or to send his Procuratours to the Apostolic sea, to show his right, and to receive such order from the Pope, as justice and equity would require. The Lords and Commons then assembled in Parliament at Lincoln sent Boniface this answer in the King's behalf. Whereas our most dread Lord Edward by the grace of God, the Noble King of England, caused your Letters to be read openly before us, touching certain occurrents of state between him and the King of Scotland, we did not a little marvel at the contents thereof, so strange and wonderful, as the like hath never been heard of. We know (most Holy Father) and it is well known in this Realm, and also to other Nations, that the King of England ought not to make answer for his right before any judge Ecclesiastical or secular: 
Parliament at Lincolr c quoted by M. ekenshaw.  by reason of the free estate of his Royal dignity and custom, without breach at all times unviolably observed: Wherefore after treaty had and diligent deliberation, this was our resolution, that our said King ought not to answer in judgement, nor send Procuratours or Messengers to your Court: seeing that tendeth manifestly to the disinheriting of the right of the Crown, the overthrow of the state of the Kingdom, and the breach of the liberties, customs, and laws of our Fathers, for the keeping whereof, we are bound by the duty of an oath, and will (by God's help) maintain and defend with all our power and strength, etc. Dated at Lincoln Ann. Dom. 1301. & Anno Edwardi primi 29. This was then the resolution of the State of this Land: if our late Sectaries Popish or Puritan, bring in any other Doctrine, we may not leave the causeway of truth and obedience, whereon our Forefathers walked to their commendation, to follow these new guides, in their by-paths of pride, disobedience, and contempt of authority, to our destruction.  
Vincentius in his Speculo Historiali hath a notable place to dissuade from sedition and perjury. 
Lib. 15. c. 84.   pace omnium bonorum dixerim, haec sola novitas (ne dicam Haeresis) nec dum è Mundo emerserat. That I may speak with the favour of all good men, this mere novelty (if not Heresy) was not sprung up in the World, that Priests should teach subjects, that they own no subjection to wicked Kings, and albeit they have given an oath of fidelity unto them, they are not bound to keep it: Nay, they that obey an evil Prince, are to be held as excommunicated, and all such as rebel against him, are free from the guilt of the crime of perjury. So fare he.  
I will end this Chapter with Aeneas Silvius, 
Pius 2. de ortu & author. Imperii c. 23.  who died in the year 1464. Sit tandem finis litium, Let there be an end of contention, and one principal head to determine all temporal matters: let the occasion of perpetual debate be taken away, let men acknowledge themselves subject to their Prince, and give reverence to him, whom God hath made his vicegerent on Earth. As that which God commandeth must be obeyed without contradiction, so the temporal Commandments of Caesar, may not be resisted. But let the Kings themselves beware that they oppress no man unjustly, nor give their people cause to cry to God against them, for the Earth is the Lords and the fullness thereof: he will not forget the cry of the poor: and for the sin of the Prince he translateth the Government from one Nation to another. There is nothing more offensive to the greatest God, the King and Creator of Heaven and Earth, than the neglect of justice, and the oppression of the poor: as the Psalmist saith, The poor shall not always be forgotten, and the patiented abiding of the needy shall not perish for ever. So fare Silvius.   

The seaventh Chapter showeth the concord of Papist and Puritan for the deposition of Kings, and their discord about the means and persons to be employed in the execution of their designments.  
CHilderick was deposed, and Pipine crowned King of France about the year 750. The truth of which History is this. Childerick void of all princely gravity, gave himself over to pleasure and wantonness, leaving the burden of the state to Pipinus, that was his Lord Martial: Who conspired with the Nobles, to advance himself, by the deposition of the King his Master. To set a better colour on the matter, Pipine sent his Chaplain to Pope Zachary, to have his answer to this Question: Whether should be King, he that bore the name and did nothing, or he that governed the Kingdom? The Pope gave sentence with the Marshal against the King, whereupon, Childerick was made a shorn Monk, and Pipine a crowned King.  
It is a wonder to see how these opposite Sectaries, do insist upon this fact of the Frenchmen, to justify their dangerous doctrine, and seditious conspiracies against Princes. As Cardinal Bellarmine de Pontif. lib. 2. cap. 17. Thomas Harding against the Apology of the Church of England, fol. 181. Franc. Fevardentius in his Commentaries on Hester, pag. 85. Boucher alias Raynolds de justa abdicatione Henrici 3. lib. 3. cap. 14. Ficklerus de jure Magistratuumfol. 30. Alexander Carerius patavinus de potestate Papae, lib. 2. cap. 3. D. Marta de temporali & spirituali Pontificis potestate, lib. 1. c. 23. and Doleman in his conference touching succession part. 1. cap. 3. pag. 48. And also these Puritans, Christopher Goodman in his treatise of obedience, pag. 53. George Buchanan de jure Regni apud Scotos. pag. 47. Danaens de politia Christiana lib. 3. cap. 6. pag. 221. Brutus Celta dejure Magistratuum, pag. 286. Phyladelphus dialogo 2. pag. 65. Franc. Hottomanus in his Francogallia cap. 12. and Speculum tyrannidis Philipi Regis pag. 27. The Papists which ascribe this deposing power to the Pope, endeavour by tooth and nail, to disprove that interest which the Puritans grant the Peers, or the people. First, this example served Gregory the seventh to excuse his presumptuous practices against Henry the fourth. Quidam Romanus Pontifex: A certain Bishop of Rome deposed a King of France, not so much for his ill life, as for that he was not fit for government, 
Lib. de unit. Eccles. apud Scard. pag. 3.  and placed Pipine, which was Father to Charles the great in his place: absolving all the Frenchmen from the oath of allegiance, which they had sworn to their King. Thus fare Gregory in an Epistle to one Herimanus, that was Bishop of Metz in France.  
Thomas Harding concludeth from this fact, a Divine power in the Pope. 
Consut. of the Apolog. fol. 181.  Can you not see (saith Harding) what strength and power is in the Pope, which is able with a word, to place and displace the mightiest King in Europe? with a word, I say, for I am sure you can show us of no army, that he sent to execute his will. Is it in the power of man (think you) to appoint Kingdoms? can the Devil himself, at his pleasure set up and depose Kings? no surely. Much less can any member of his do the same. Remember you what CHRIST said, when the jews objected, that he did cast out Devils in the name of the Prince of Devils? beware you sin not against the holy Ghost, who confess that the Pope hath pulled down and set up Kings. Which thing undoubtedly he could never do profitably and peaceably, but by the great power of God, etc. So fare Harding.  
Cardinal Bellarmine the Grand-master of Controversies, 
De Pontif. lib. 2. cap. 17.  cannot endure to hear that this deposition was done by any other than the Papal authority. The Pope (saith he) judicavit licere Francis, regnum Childerici in Pipinum transfer. The Pope gave judgement that the Frenchmen might lawfully transfer Childericks Kingdom to Pippin: and did absolve them from the oath which they had sworn unto him. No man that hath his right wit can deny this to be lawful. For the very event hath proved, that change to be most fortunate: seeing the Kingdom of France, was never more potent, nor Religion more flourishing, then under Pipin and Charles his Son. Thus fare Bellarmine.  
This Cardinal's reason from the success to the approbation of the fact, will conclude well for the Turk, who hath longer continued, more flourished and enlarged his state, than the House of Pipin. Hear in a word the true success of Pipins' posterity out of Beneventus Imolensis and Paulus 
Beneventus, Imolensis.  Aemilius. The first of that line was Charles the great in whose time the Empire was divided. The second was Ludovicus Pius, against whom Lotharius, an unnatural Son, did conspire: who thrust his Father to a Cloister, and placed himself in the Throne, where he sat like a Tyrant, till he was also deposed. The fourth was Ludovicus secundus, a man unfortunate in all his do. The fifth was Ludovicus tertius, whom they call Ludovicus nihili, or Lewes nobody. 
Paulus Acmilius.  The sixth was Charles the Bald, a very Coward. The seventh was Carolus Crassus, as very a Foole. Arnulphus the eight of that progeny was eaten with louse. The ninth was Ludovicus quartus, in whom that race ended.  
Alexander Carerius inferreth the absolute sovereignty of the Pope over all Kings, even to depose them, and to transpose their Realms, from the insufficiency of the Nobles and People. 
De potest. Pontif. lib. 2. cap. 3. num. 6.  Esto quod verùm sit Papam, non deposuisse Regem Franciae: Be it true that the Pope did not depose the King of France, but gave consent to the Peers and People to depose him, this is a most manifest proof of our intent: that Kings have one, if not many superiors, viz. the Barons and people of their Kingdom: and over throweth their position and conclusion, That Kings have in temporal things no superior, no, not the Bishop of Rome. But seeing the Barons and People could neither judge nor deprive him, because they wanted coactive power, which Vassals or Subjects have not over their Sovereign, it followeth necessarily, that the Pope by his Princely power, as superior to the King in temporalties, might lawfully depose him. Thus fare Carerius.  
D. Marta, is as peremptory for the Pope, against the pretended claim of the Peers, or the People. Childericus privatus est Regno Francia ob stupiditatem & ineptitudinem in administrando: Childerick was deprived of the Kingdom of France, for his stupidity and unfitness to govern. They that say he was not deprived by the Pope alone, but by them that desired another King, do not answer the reasons alleged for the Pope's Sovereign power in temporalties: nay, they confirm the Pope's power. Baldus asketh this question, when the Emperor is unprofitable, or mad, or a drunkard, may the people depose him, or assign him a Coadjutor? No, saith he, the Pope must do it, 
De temp. & spir. Pontif. potest. part. 1. cap. 23. num. 15.16.17.  for the Pope is the crown and brain of the people. And we have proved before, that God did give no jurisdiction to the people, but to Moses and his Successors. Wherefore the Vassals or Peers which represent the people, have no power common with the Pope, in the deposing of Princes. And in that they say, that the Frenchmen desired another King, it is a great confirmation, that the Pope hath right to dispose of Kingodmes. He useth to desire, who hath not of his own: or cannot of himself effect that, which he would have done: Thus fare Marta.  
They that plead for the state of the Laity, are as confident against the Pope and Clergy.  paucis dicam (saith junius) hoc secit Zacharias ut Dominus aut ut mandatarius, authoritate instructus à Domino, that I may use few words, the Pope deposed Childerick either as his Lord, or as a mandatary having authority from the Lord; but he did it neither way. Not as Lord, how could he be Lord in France, that in those days had no Lordship in Rome? he did it not as mandatary, for than he ought to have showed his authority, which he neither did, nor could show. CHRIST would not divide a private inheritance, shall Zachary then presume to depose Kings, or transpose Kingdoms. Thus fare Junius.  
Caeterum quod Monachus iste (saith Lambertus Danaeus) whereas this Monk Bellarmine contendeth, that Childerick was lawfully deposed by Pope Zacharias, a stranger, a Priest, no Magistrate, but (in this respect) a private person, though he were Bishop of Rome. 
Resp. Danae. ad Bellar. l. 2. cap. 17. pag, 316.  Will he ever be able to prove or defend his assertion? Can Zachary have authority in France, being a stranger? can he depose the public Magistrate, being but a private person? or transfer that principality to Pippin that he hath no right unto? and commit so many sacrileges and impieties, stealing from Childerick, and giving to Pipin another man's right? authorising subjects to violate their oaths, which they had sworn to their King? transposing Kingdoms from one man to another, whereas it doth only belong to God to depose Kings, and dispose of Kingdoms? thou mayst see (Bellarmine) how many outrages this thy Zachary hath committed, beside that he did thrust his sickle into an other man's harvest, and meddled with the cobbler beyond his last, in that, being but a Priest he took upon him the decision of the right of Kingdoms. Thus fare Danaeus, who is not so violent against the Pope, 
Danaeus pol. Christ. l. 6. c. 3. pag. 414.  as he is virulent for the deposing power of Peers, or States of the Kingdom. The Kings (saith he) of Lacedemonia had the Ephori to control them. The Statesmen of the Roman Commonwealth, deposed the Emperors, which were Tyrants, and abused their authority. The French-state hath often dethroned their Kings: The Nobles of Spain may do it by their Law: And the History of the Scottish affairs (excellently well written by 
* Mulus mulum scabit.  Buchanan) doth report that the Statesmen of that Country, have many times deprived the Kings of Scotland. Finally, natural reason, and the practice of all nations doth confirm, that the Statesmen in every Kingdom, may depose Kings, that are peccant. 
Cap. 13.  So fare he. Hottoman in his Franco Gallia, hath a long Chapter to prove that this might be done lawfully, by the Peers, or the People, but in no case by the Pope or the Clergy.  
Men cannot say (as it is in the proverb) Nimium altercando veritas amittitur, seeing that in this opposition, the truth is not lost, but divided among them. For their premises, brought together, will unadvoidably conclude, that this deposing power, is neither in the Pope, the Peers, nor the People. Though it were, the reason of the seditious Papists and Puritans, à facto ad jus, is sophistical in the Schools, where nothing can be concluded Ex meris particularibus, of mere particular instances. Absurd in law, Quia legibus non exemplis vivitur, for men must do as the law requireth, not as other men practise. Erroneous in Divinity, Non ideo quia factum credimus, faciendum credamus, ne violemus praeceptum, dum sectamur exemplum. We may not do that, 
August. ad Consen. de mendac. cap. 9  which hath been done by other men, lest we break the law of God, in following the example of man. And dangerous in policy, as my Lord of Northampton, the ornament of learning, observeth. The fly (saith that noble Earl) setting on the cart wheel, might as well wonder at the dust raised in the way, as Gregory or Zachary, draw counsel to power, and make that fact their own, which was hammered in the forge of ambition, countenanced with the colour of necessity, and executed by Pipin, a Minister, that being weary of subordination, resolved by this trick, when the means were fitted and prepared to the plot, to make himself absolute. The case of Kings were pitiful, if Ex factis singularibus, it were lawful to draw leaden rules in their disgrace. Thus fare the Earl.   

The eight Chapter showeth the danger of this Doctrine, and the original of the Puritan position, concerning the power of Statesmen to punish and depose Princes in Monarchies.  
THese desperate attempts, suggested by the Devil, executed by the people, encouraged by the state, and approved by the Pope, must serve as admonitions to Princes, to humble themselves before God: Qui non dabit sanctos suos in captionent dentibus corum; Who will not give his Saints for a prey to their teeth. For it is not heard (as our great King remembreth) That any Prince forgetteth himself in his duty to God, 
Law of Monarch. p. 60  or in his vocation? But God with the greatness of the plague revengeth the greatness of his ingratitude.  
These practices therefore must be no precedent for Peers, or People to follow, because God hath forbidden Christian subjects to resist, though King's reign as Tyrants; and commanded them to endure with patience, though they suffer as Innocents'. And also, because that in stead of relecving the Commonwealth out of distress, which is ever the pretence of seditious practitioners, they shall heap mischief on it, and desolation on themselves: as (Aquinas) if he be the Author of the Book De Regimine Principum, showeth manifestly. Esset multitudini periculosum & ejus rectoribus: 
De reg. Princ. lib. 1. cap. 6.  It were dangerous to Subjects and Governors, that any should attempt to take away the life of Princes, though they were Tyrants: for commonly, not the well disposed, but the ill affected men, do thrust themselves into that danger. And the Government of good Kings, is as odious to bad men, as the rule of Tyrants to good people. Wherefore the Kingdom, by this presumption would be rather in danger to forgo a good Prince, than a wicked Tyrant. So fare Thomas.  
They that are the Authors or abettors of sedition, can neither avoid shame in earth, nor escape eternal damnation. Though God the great judge do sometime permit rebels, in his justice to prevail against Kings, for their contempt of the law of the highest, and the neglect of their own duty; The reward of rebellion shall be no better than the recompense of Satan, who is the instrument of the Lords wrath for the punishment of all disobedience. 
chrysostom:  It is most true that as sick men, near their death, have many idle fancies, so the World before the end thereof shall be troubled with many errors. In these declining days of the World, many Countries, Cities, and Cantons, renounced their old Government, and submitted themselves to such a new regiment as they best liked: for confirmation of which practices, there wanted not politic Divines, (what wine is so sourc that some hedge grapes will not yield) to invest the people and Nobles with the power over Kings, to dispose of their Kingdoms. The Heathen Politicians from whom this politic Divinity is derived, knowing not the true God, and having no rule to direct them, but natural reason, thought him no murderer, but a Defender of his Country that killed Tyrants. But this pagan principle, being a plant that CHRIST hath not planted, must be plucked up by the roots. I can find no ground of this lend learning, beyond 220. years in the Christian World: The first Authors of it being Johannes de Parisiis, jacobus Almain, 
Job. de Paris de potest. Regia & Papali. cap. 14.  and Marsilius Patavinus: Vbi peccat Rex in temporalibus, saith johannes de Parisiis, Papa non habet ipsum corrigere: When the King offended in the temporal Government, the Pope hath no authority to correct him, but the Barons or Peers of the Realm, and if they either cannot, or dare not meddle with him, they may crave the Church's aid to suppress him: so fare john of Paris.  
Tota communitas (saith jacob Almain) potestatem habet Principem deponere. 
jacob Almain de potest. Eccl. cap. 1.  All the communality, hath power to depose their Prince, which power the communality of France used, when they deprived their King, not so much for his impiety, as for his disability to manage so great a charge: so fare Almain. Regis depositio & alterius institutio (saith Marsilius Patavinus) the deposition of a King, 
Marsil. Patave. de transl. Imperii cap 6.  and the institution of another in his place, belongeth not to the Bishop of Rome, to any Priest, or to the College of Priests, but to the universal multitude of the Subjects. So fare he.  
From these, the Puritans have learned their error of the power of Statesmen over Kings, than which, no opinion can be more dangerous: where the Nobility are as ready to practise, as the Puritan Preachers are to prescribe. What presumption is it in men, to pass the bounds which God hath set them, to control the wisdom of the Lord, and his unspeakable goodness, when he maketh trial of the patience of his Saints, by the outrage and tyranny of cruel Kings, that they which are found patiented in trouble, constant in truth, and loyal in subjection, may be crowned with glory. Were we persuaded, that the hearts of Kings are in God's hand, that the hairs of our head are numbered, and that no affliction can befall us, which God doth not dispose to the exercise of our faith, the trial of our constancy, or the punishment of our sin, we would as well admire the justice of God, in permitting Tyrants, that our sins may be judged, and punished in this World, as praise his mercy and favour, in giving rest to his servants, under the protection of godly and gracious Princes.   

The ninth Chapter showeth the general consent of the Modern Puritans touching the coercion, deposition, and killing of Kings whom they call Tyrants.  
THe Citizens of Geneva, changed the Government from a Monarchy to a Democrity in the year of Christ, 1536. In the which year, john Calvin came into that City, to visit his friend Farellus; And was chosen the public reader of Divinity. At his first coming thither, he published his Theological institutions. Wherein he doth very learnedly, and Christianly entreat of the authority of Princes, and the duty of subjects. One only place is harsh, and dangerous: delivered in obscure, and doubtful terms, to excuse (as I conceive) the outrage of the Citizens, against their Prince, whom they had not many weeks before expelled: not to authorize other men to attempt the like against their sovereign Magistrates. His words are these, Si qui sunt populares Magistratus, ad moderandam regum libidinem constituti. If there be any popular Magistrates, to restrain the licentiousness of Kings, of which kind were the Ephori opposed against the Lacedaemonian Kings, 
Instit. lib. 4. cap. 20. Sect. 31.  the Tribunes of the people, which kerbed the Roman Consuls, and the Demarchy which bridled the Senate of Athens; And such peradventure as things now stand are the three states in every Kingdom, assembled in Parliament. I do not deny, but these in regard of their duty, stand bound to repress the unruliness of licentious Kings: Nay, I affirm, that if they do but wink at those Kings, which peevishly make havoc of their people, and insult against their communality, that they want not the guilt of heinous treachery, because they betray the liberty of the people, whose guardians they know themselves to be appointed. Thus fare Calvin. Since which time all Puritans have turned his conjunction conditional, into an illative, his adverb of doubting to an affirmative, and his permissive, Non veto, into a verb of the imperative mode, in their books of regiment secular, and Discipline Ecclesiastical.  
Christopher Goodman, published a treatise of obedience at Geneva, not without the very good liking and approbation of the best learned in that City, 1557. wherein he affirmeth. 
Pag. 119.  That if Magistrates transgress God's law themselves, and command others to do the like, they lose that honour, and obedience which otherwise is due unto them: and ought no more to be taken for Magistrates: but to be examined and punished as private Transgressors: So fare Goodman.  
Much about the same time was Knox his appellation printed in the same place, wherein he feareth not to affirm, 
Geneva fol. 56.  That it had been the duty of the Nobility, judges, Rulers, and people of England not only to have resisted Mary, that Jezabel whom they call their Queen, but also to have punished her to the death, with all such as should have assisted her, what time that she openly began to suppress Christ's Gospel, to shed the blood of the Saints, and to erect that most Devilish Idolatry, the Papistical abominations, and his usurped tyranny. Thus fare Knox.  
Ann. 1560. Theodore Beza printed his Confessions, wherein he avoucheth, That there are vices inherent in the Persons of Princes, though they be lawfully established, by succession, 
Pag. 216.  or election, viz. Ungodliness, convetousnesse, ambition, cruelty, luxury, lechery, and such like sins which Tyrants delight in. What shall be done in this case to these Princes? I answer (saith he) that it belongeth to the superior powers, such as are the seven Electours in the Empire, and the Statesmen of the Kingdom almost in every Monarchy, to restrain the fury of Tyrants, which if they do not, they are Traitors to their Countries, and shall before the Lord give an account of their treachery. Thus fare Beza.  
1561. The very year after, there was a contention between the Nobility and Clergy of Scotland about this matter, 
Rerum Scot lib. 17. pag. 590.  (as Buchanan reporteth:) let him tell his own tale. Calendis Novemb. Regina ad Missam: The Queen upon the Feast of All-Saints, added to her private Mass all the solemnities and superstitious Ceremonies of the Papists; The Ministers of the Gospel took it very ill, complained thereof to the people, in their public congregations, and admonished the Nobility of their duty in that behalf: whereupon risen a controversy in a house of private meeting, between the Nobles and Preachers, whether the Nobles may restrain Idolatry, that is like to break out to a general destruction: and by rigour of law, compel the chief Magistrate to his duty, 
Note how basely the Puritan esteem the Nobility when they towart them.  when he exceeded his bounds? The Ministers of the Church stood steadfast in opinion, as they had formerly done, that the chief Magistrate may be compelled even by forcible means to live according to law: but the Noble men because of the Queen's favour, hope of honour, or love of lucre, did a little waver, and thought otherwise then the Ministers: and so in the end judgement passed with the Nobles, because they were more in number and of better esteem and reputation. Thus fare Buchanan.  
1568. The outlandish Churches in London concluded this Canon in a classical Synod, 
Bezae epist. 24.  Si quisquam repugnantibus legibus Patriae: If any man usurp Lordship, or Magistracy, against the laws and privileges of the Country, or if he that is a lawful Magistrate, do unjustly bereave his subjects of the privileges, and liberties which he hath sworn to perform unto them, or oppress them by manifest tyranny, the inferior officers must oppose themselves against him, for they are in duty bound before God, to defend their people, as well from a Domestical, as a foreign Tyrant. Thus fare they.  
1574. We had swarms of caterpillars: namely, 
Fol. 105.  Disciplina Ecclesiastica from Rochel, to teach us, that the Senate Ecclesiastical hath the chief moderation of the Christian society, and aught to provide that no Magistrate be defective in his charge, and by common care, counsel, and authority to oversee, that every Governor carry himself faithfully in his Magistracy. Thus fare that author.  
Franco Gallia from Colen, 
Pag. 48.  wherein we find that the people hath power to dethrone their Princes.  
junius de jure Magistratuum (as some think from Geneva, 
Pag. 306. ) wherein it is said, that the people have the same right to depose Kings that are Tyrants, which a general counsel hath to displace a Pope that is an Heretic.  
Eusebius Phyladelphus from Edinburgh, 
Dialog. 2. pag. 57  wherein we read, that it was as lawful for his Brethren of France, to defend themselves against the tyranny of Charles the ninth King of that name in France, as for wayfairing men to resist and repel thiefs, cutthroats, and wolves: nay further, I am (saith he) of opinion with the old people of Rome, that of all good actions the murder of a Tyrant is most commendable. Thus fare he.  
1577. Came forth the Vindiciae contra Tyrannos, 
Pag. 206.  with this resolution, That Princes are chosen by God, established by the people: every private man is subject to the Prince: the Multitude and the Officers of State which represent the Multitude, are Superiors to the Prince: yea they may judge his actions, and if he make resistance, punish him by forcible means. So fare he.  
1584. Danaeus finished his book of Christian policy, wherein among many other he propoundeth, and answereth a Noble question, 
Lib. 3. cap. 6.  as he termeth it. Nobilis quaestio sequitur. A noble question followeth, whether it be lawful for subjects to change and alter their Government? Yea, whether it may be done by godly men with a good conscience? his answer is. The chief Magistrate, that notoriously and wilfully violateth the fundamental Laws of the Kingdom, may be displaced by godly subjects, with a good conscience. And this is his reason, Reges summique Magistratus, Kings and chief Magistrates are the Vassals of the Kingdom, and of the Commonwealth where they rule: Wherefore, they may be dispossessed and dejected when they shall obstinately attempt any thing, against the feudal Laws of the Kingdom where they govern, as Kings and chief Magistrates. And it is truly said, that as a general Council, is above the Pope, so the Kingdom or the Peers of the Land, are above the King. Thus fare Danaeus.  
1585.: 
De jure Reg. pag. 31.  George Buchanan proclaimed Rewards as well for murdering Kings as kill Tigers: If I (saith he) had power to make a Law, I would command Tyrants to be transported from the society of men into some solitary place, or else to be drowned in the bottom of the Sea, that the evil savour of dead Tyrants should not annoy living men. Further more I would award recompense to be given for the slaughter of Tyrants, not only of all in general, but of every one in particular, as men use to reward them for their pains which kill Wolves or Bears, and destroy their young ones. Haec ille.  
The same year Thomas Cartwright commended Dudley Fenners his Sacra Theologia (as they call his book) to the World, wherein men are warranted by sundry Texts of Scripture, most miserably abused, to destroy Tyrants. Therein he (following the Common opinion of the Puritans) maketh two sorts of Tyrants, Tirannus sine titulo, 
Lib. 5. cap. 13. pag. 185.  and Tirannus exercitio. For the Tyrant without title: He is confident, that any man may cut his throat. Huic quisque privatus resistet, etiam si potest è medio tollat, Let every private man resist him, and if he can, take away his life. For the Tyrant exercent: having described him to be a Prince, that doth wilfully dissolve all, or the chiefest compacts of the Commonwealth, he concludeth against him, Hunc tollant, vel Pacifice vel cum Bello, qui ea potestate donati sunt, ut Regni Ephori vel omnium ordinum conventus publicus: The Peers of the Kingdom or the public assembly of States, aught to destroy him, either by peaceable practices, or open war. Haecille.  
Anno. 1588. Hermanus Renecherus published observations upon the first Psalm, wherein he investeth the Presbytery with all the Pope's Prerogatives. Concerning the Presbiterian power over Kings, this is his notable annotation: God (saith he) hath ordained the Civil Magistrate for the good of the Ecclesiastical order, 
Pag. 72.  therefore the Ecclesiastical State is the highest throne of God's earthly Kingdom, the supreme seat of all excellency, and the chiefest Court wherein God himself is precedent, to distribute eternal gifts to his servants. Whereas the political Empire is but as it were an inferior bench, wherein justice is administered according to the prescription of the Ecclesiastical sovereignty: Thus fare Renecherus.  
Robert Rollocke, a man otherwise very learned, is carried with the current of this error, and borrowed his affertion of Master Fenner, whose words he expoundeth by way of paraphrasis, 
In Daniel. cap. 5. pag. 150.  in his commentaries on Daniel printed at Edinburgh, 1591. Though the chief lawful Magistrate (saith Master Rollock,) do many things unjustly and tyrannously, he may not rashly be violated, by them especially which have not authority: but the Nobles or the public assembly of States, must reduce him to his duty by reproof and all other lawful means, 1 Sam. 14.46. If he do still persist in open and desperate tyranny, wilfully dissolving all or the chiefest compacts of the Commonwealth, private men must not yet meddle with him, only the Peers, or the public assembly of all States to whom that charge belongeth, must provide that the Church and Commonwealth come not to desolation: though it cannot otherwise be done, then by the death and destruction of the tyrant. Better it is that an evil King be destroyed, than the Church and State together ruined. Thus fare Rollock, For proof he referreth his Reader first to the 1 Sam. 14.46. viz. Then Saul came up from the Philistims, and the Philistims went to their own place: ergo Kings that are wicked may be reduced to their duty by the Peers, or assembly of States according to the rules of the new Puritan logic. Secondly, for the kill and destroying of Kings, he referreth his Readers to the 2. Reg. cap. 11. verse 4.5.6.7. which place I think he never vouchsafed to look upon, but set it down as he found it quoted in Fenners Divinity, from whom he hath taken all the rest.  
I will make an end with William Bucanus, whose Book was published at the request, and with the approbation of Beza and Goulartius, main pillars of the Church of Geneva. 1602. 
Loco 76. pag. 844.  They (saith Bucanus) which have any part of office in the public administration of the Commonwealth, as the Overseers, Senators, Consuls, Peers, or Tribunes, may restrain the insolency of evil Kings. Thus fare he.  
This Puritan dangerous error is directly repugnant to the Law, the Gospel, the Precepts of the Apostles, the practice of Martyrs, and the Doctrine of the Fathers, Conuncels, and other classical Writers, as I have proved in the six former Chapters: and will more directly show (by the grace of God) in my other Book: wherein the holy texts of Scripture, which the Papists and Puritans do damnably abuse against the Ecclesiastical and Civil authority of Kings, shall be answered by the godly Protestants: whose labour God used to reform his Church since the year of our Lord, 1517. and by the ancient Fathers and Orthodoxal Writers in every age of the Church. This Puritan position, which authoriseth Nobles and assemblies of States against wicked Kings, is the very assertion of the most seditious jesuites, that have lived in our age, as I will demonstrate by two or three: johannes Mariana, 
De Regis instit. l. 1. c. 6●.  whose Book seemeth to be written in defence of Clement the Friar, who stabbed Henry the third King of France. The faults and licentiousness of Kings (saith Mariana) whether they reign by consent of the people, or right of inheritance, are to be borne and endured, so long as the Laws of shamefastness and honesty, whereto all men be bound, are not violated: for Princes should not rashly be disturbed, lest the Commonwealth fall into greater misery and calamity. But if the Prince make havoc of the Commonwealth, and expose the private fortunes of his subjects for a pray to other men, if he despise Law, and contemn Religion, this course must be taken against him. Let him be admonished and recalled to his duty: if he repent, satisfy the Weal-public, and amend his faults, there ought (as I think) to be no further proceeding against him. But if there be no hope of his amendment, the Commonwealth may take away his Kingdom. And because that cannot be done (in all likelihood) without war, they may levy power, brandish their blades against their King, and exact money of the people, for the maintenance of their war: for when there is no other help, the Peers of the Commonwealth, having proclaimed their King a public enemy, may take away his life. Thus fare Mariana.  
The Statesmen of the Kingdom (saith Franciscus Fevardentius) have a sovereign power over their Kings: 
In Hester c. 1. pag. 88  for Kings are not absolutely established, but stand bound to observe laws, conditions, and compacts, to their subjects▪ the which, if they violate, they are no lawful Kings, but Thiefs and Tyrants, punishable by the States. Thus fare Fevardentius.  
Inferior Magistrates (saith johannes Baptista Ficklerus) are the Defenders and Protectors of the Laws and rights of the State, 
De jure Magist. fol. 18.  and have authority (if need require) to correct and punish the supreme King. So fare Ficklerus.  
An English fugitive, which was the Author of the book De justa abdicatione Henrici tertii, affirmeth, That all the Majesty of the Kingdom, is in the assembly of Statesmen, to whom it belongeth to make covenants with God, to dispose of the affairs of the Kingdom, to appoint matters pertaining to war and peace, 
Lib. 3. cap. 8.  to bridle the Kingly power, and to settle all things that belong to public Government. So fare he.  
And the most seditious Dolemon saith, 
Part. 1. cap. 4. pag. 72.  that all humane Law and order Natural, Nationall, and positive, doth teach, that the Commonwealth, which gave Kings their authority for the Common good, may restrain or take the same from them if they abuse it to the Common ill: So fare Dolemon: and of this opinion are many other as may appear by Doctor Morton by whom they are discovered and refuted.  
How fare this gangrene will extend, I know not. The Kings of Christendom are daily crucified, (as CHRIST their Lord was) between two Thiefs; I mean the Papist and Puritan, which have prepared this deadly poison for Princes, whom they in their own irreligious and traitorous hearts, shall condemn for tyranny. I hope neither Peers nor people will be so fond to believe them, or wicked to follow them, which pretend the Reformation of Religion, and defend the subversion of Christian States. If inferior Officers, or the public assembly of all States, will claim this power, it standeth them upon, (as they will avoid everlasting damnation) not to derive a title from Rome, Lacedaemon, or Athens, (as Calvin doth, whom the rest follow) but from the Hill of Zion, and to plead their interest from the Law or the Gospel. Si mandatum non est praesumptio, 
August. in quest. mixed.  & ad paenam proficiet, non ad praemium: quia ad contumeliam pertinet conditoris, ut contempto Domino colantur servi, & spreto Imperatore, adorentur Comites. If their opposition against Kings be not commanded of God, it is presumption against God: for it is a contumely against God the Creator of all States, to despise Lords and honour servants, to contemn the sovereign Emperor, and to reverence the Peers of the Empire. So fare Augustine. 
Prov. 24.21.  My son (saith Solomon) fear God and the King, and meddle not with the seditious: for their destruction shall come suddenly, and who knoweth the end of them? The conclusion of all is, That Kings have supreme and absolute authority under God on earth, not because all things are subject to their pleasure, which were plain tyranny, not Christian sovereignty: but because all persons, within their Dominions, stand bound in Law, allegiance, and conscience, to obey their pleasure, or to abide their punishment. And Kings themselves, are no way subject to the control, censure, or punishment, of any earthly man, but reserved by special prerogative to the most fearful and righteous judgement of God, with whom there is no respect of persons. He whole servants they are, Will beat them with a rod of iron, and break them in pieces like a potter's vessel, If they abuse that great, and sovereign power, (which God had endued them withal,) to support error, to suppress truth, and to oppress the innocent. God, of his great mercy, grant us the Spirit of truth, to direct us in all loyalty, that we being not seduced by these seditious Sectaries, may grow in grace, stand fast in obedience, embrace love, follow peace, and increase more and more in the knowledge of our Lord JESUS CHRIST. To whom be all praise, power, and dominion now and for ever. Amen.   
FINIS.