The Truth of the Times Vindicated, Chapter 6
CHAP. 6.
WHereas the Dr. had ſaid, we ſharpen many of our Weapons at the Philiſtims forge, and I had ſhewed the difference between us and Papiſts in this cauſe. He replieth, difference there muſt needs be between you and Papiſts in this particular, for they challenge ſuch a power from the Pope; you from the People.
Anſ▪Very well and is not here a vaſt difference, the Papists ſay the Pope may deſpoſe Princes, we ſay in caſe that Prince doth not performe his truſt, the People may look to their owne ſafetie.
Dr. Fern, But we ſee your party making uſe of thoſe examples which the Papiſts being for depoſing of Kings, as of Saul, Uzziah, and Athaliah.
Anſw.The Papiſts bring theſe examples of Vzziah, Atholiah, &c. to ſhew that the High …rieſts did, and ſo the Pope now may depoſe Princes, proving that the Pope is above Princes. Wee ſay with Chriſoſtome and others, that every ſoul, even Prieſts as they and you call them, are to be ſubject to higher Powers, That that lyes in the powre of no Prieſt to deſpoſe Princes.
2. Is this to whet our Sythe at the Philiſtims Forge, to uſe the ſame Scripture for one purpoſe, which the Philiſtims doe for another: The Papiſts uſe that Scripture, Tibi dabo claves. Thou art Peter, and on this Rock I will buila my Church, to prove the Popes Supremacie; The Reformed Churches uſe the ſame Scripture to prove that the power of the Keyes is penes Eccleſiam, given to the whole Church, and not unto a Peter onelyonly: do all the Reformed Churches therefore whet their weapons at the Philiſtims forge, or are they therefore Popiſh becauſe they uſe the ſame Scripture to other purpoſes: So here.
Put you will give the Prince leave, ſaith the Doctor to change his Religion, ſo will the Papiſts, if al… his Subjects may have free liberty for their Religion.
Anſw.Not ſo but he turning Heretick, as the Papiſts phraſe it, is to be excommunicated and ſo depoſed. Dr. Fern, But in caſe he endeavour to force the contrary Religion upon his ſubjects, for that muſt be ſuppoſed how then will your Allegeance bold?
Anſw.Very well and yet not whet our …ythes at the Philiſtims forge for they ſay that a Prince apoſtatiſing, is to be excommunicated and ſo depoſed, as you ſhall preſently ſee: We ſay that Princes are not to be depoſed for altering their Religion, yea though they ſhould be excommunicated, for the Crown is not intailed upon Religion.
2. They deprive Princes, we only defend our ſelves.
3. They deprive by the Popes authoritie we defend our ſelves by the higheſt civill authority of the Land.
Againe, whereas I ſaid the Papiſts hold it lawfull to kill a Prince and that a private man inveſted with the Popes authority may doe it, we abhorre it; The Doctor replieth, that is their new forge under ground, ſet up of late by Jeſuites, I did not meane you ſharpened your weapons there, but at the old forge, and however you ſay you abhorre this Doctrine of killing Kings, yet I feare and tremble, to thinke, if your Soveraigne had fallen in battell by the edge of your ſwo…d, or ſh…t of your artillery, you would have found him guilty of his owne death, in that he would not (being deſired) forbeare to goe downe himſelfe into battell.
Anſw.1. 'Tis well the Dr. will excuſe us from Jeſuitiſme in this particular, and well he may in all things elſe, eſpecially here where he knowes there is ſo much correſpondency between his own opinion and the Jeſuites who (for the moſt part of them) hold, that as all Fccleſiaſticall power is given to Peter, and ſo to the Pope and Biſhops, not to the Church ſo that all Civill Power is given immediately to the King, and not to the Common-wealth, but only as derived from him; And therefore well may the Doctor excuſe us from whetting our Swords at the new forge of the Jeſuites, that being a forge which he reſerves to whet his owne weapons at.
2. Neither doe we whet our weapons at the old forge, for I ſuppoſe the Doctor will ſay, that Aquinas his forge, is of the oldeſt frame, and he ſpeaketh directly contrary to us, thus, as ſoon as ever any is denounced excommunicate for Apoſtacie from the It ideo quam rito aliquis per ſententiam denimciatur e…communicatus propter apoſta…ram a ſide, ipſo facto ejus Subditi abſoluti ſunt a domnio ejus et juramento fidelitaris quo eitenebantur Tho. Aq. 2. 2. …. 12. a…s. 2.faith, his Subjects are ipſo facto, abſolved from his dominion, and the Oath of Allegeance, whereby they were bound to him.
3. We ſay, if a ſhot of our Artillery had fallen on the King (whereas you ſay we would have found him guilty of his own death,) we ſay, we would have found you▪ and ſuch as you are guilty thereof, that put him on ſuch deſignes; As if a man make a fire to preſerve himſelfe and his family, and another comes and thruſts a third man into it, we will not fault him that made the fire to preſerve his family, but him that thruſt the man into it; but in this matter Doctor you have anſwered your ſelfe, for you told us in your former Treatiſe, That it is lawfull for Subjects to ward their Princes blowes, to hold his hands, and the like pag. 9. Now if the Prince raiſe an Army againſt his Subjects, how can his blowes be warded, but by an Army, and if his Army diſcharge their Ordnance and Muſquets upon his Subjects, how can his Subjects ward them blowes, but by diſcharging likewiſe. And then anſwer your ſelfe: what if a ſhot of Artillery ſhould fall upon your Prince: But ſaith the Doctor, if you back againe will gather ſtrength for your aſſertions from the Papiſts Reaſons, be as like as you will to one another, &c.
An. Who are moſt like to the Papiſts you, or wee, I referre you to all that knowes us. See the Canterburian ſelf-Conviction. And if we may not gather ſtrength of reaſon from Popiſh Authors to diſpute againſt them; why do either you or we reade them. Reaſon is good where ever we finde it; neither would Abraham refuſe the uſe of the Well becauſe Ahimilechs men had uſed it, no more will we refuſe good reaſon, becauſe the Papiſts have uſed it; they uſing it rather from us, and not we from them, and yet in this matter (as I have ſhewed) we doe differ much from them.
But you prove a Power in the Body politick, ſaith the Doctor, to diſburthen it ſelfe (at the Church hath) of evill Members, as Papiſts doe.
An. But not as the Papiſts: for we onelyonly preſſe a necesſity of Power in the body, to defend and ſave it ſelfe from the injury of Princes; they plead for a power in the Church, (& who that Church is you know) to depoſe Princes; but then ſaith the Drs. hath this Church a power of excōmunication ſtill; ſo it ſhould be indeed, but ſince the Act which tooke away the High Commiſſion; and (as the party you plead for would have it interpreted) all Eccleſiaſticall Cenſure too, where doth the exerciſe of that power reſt, upon, whom now is the Argument turned? page 73.
An. Surely upon your ſelfe, for there is no Church of Chriſt, but whil'ſt it remaines a Church hath a power left in it (though the exerciſe may be long ſuſpended) to ſee to it ſelfe, and its owne preſervation, I ſay a power from Chriſt to excommunicate, though it ſhould bee denied from men; and it ſeemes a ſtrange thing to mee, that the Churches of England have no power left, becauſe the High Commiſſion is downe, as if that Court were ſet up by Chriſt himſelfe. The body naturall hath power to diſburthen it ſelfe ſaith the Doctor, ſo hath the Common-wealth too; but will you have the naturall body disburthen it ſelfe of the head, or worke without it.
An. Neither doe we goe about to cut off our head, but ſay in the generall; if the Head ſhould bee diſtempered through ill vapours that ariſe from inferiour parts, ſo that it cannot diſcharge its Office, it's lawfull for thoſe that are in place, to give Phyſick to the body, that even the very head it ſelfe may be the more healthfull.
And whereas I had ſhewne, that there is not the ſame reaſon, that the People ſhould re-aſſume their truſt in caſe the Parliament be negligent; as there is, that in caſe a Prince neglect his truſt, the Parliament and People ſhould ſee to it, the Doctor replies, but if by Ordinances thence iſſuing, they bee spoyled of their property and Liberty, which is ſuppoſed in the caſe they will quickly feele it ſo.
An. This is but an infinuation of a groſſe ſcandall, no reaſon: onelyonly the Doctor argues p 75. will not the people as eaſily conclude, they may free themſelves from the truſt given to thoſe Parliament men, choſen by them, as renounce (according to your Leſſons) their truſt given to their Prince: in all reaſon they will hold their repreſentatives more accountable to them then their Prince can be.
An. This is a ſcandalous charge to ſay that we leſſen men to renounce their truſt given to their Prince, whereas wee onelyonly ſay; the people have a Power to defend themſelves, and when cauſe requires to excite, and actuacte that Power which was alwayes reſiding in them, and never given from them. Secondly, how can the people as eaſily renounce their truſt given to the Parliament, when the People themſelves conclude and ſay, that what is done by the Parliament is Law; which they doe not ſay, as concerning the Prince, but rather know that for Law he is directed by them; but ſaith the Doctor this is to make them arbitrary, and to lead the people after them by animplicite Faith.
An. The Doctor is much againſt the implicite Faith of the People, both in this▪ and his former Booke: It were well that men of his ſtrayne had been ſo much againſt implicite Faith in the matters of the Church, where it is more dangerous, where they were not, witneſſe the &c. as now they are againſt the implicit Faith in the Common-Wealth, where it is of leſſe danger. Againe, why will this make the Parliament arbitrary, or caſt the people into an implicite Faith? it's granted by all that the King and both Houſes may enact Lawes, whereby the people are to be ruled, beleeving that thoſe Lawes are beſt for the Common-wealth; doth this make the Government of King and Parliament arbitrary, or rayſe the people to an implicite Faith? no more doth it here. An arbitrary government is where a King may rule pro a…bitrio, as a Father in his Family, which power the Doctor doth give unto the King by his paternall right, Sect. 3. and ſo indeed there is roome for an implicite Faith, for that children have moſt of all an implicit Faith in that which their Fathers ſay. Finally Maſter B. endeavours to ſhew (ſaith Dr. Ferne) how they can anſwere the Oath of Supremacy, an… the Proteſtation, by taking of Armes; but who knowes not (ſaith the Docto…) if that party of Browniſts, and Anabaptiſts, which are now ſo prevalent in the Armes taken up againſt the King, ſhould get the upper hand, what would become of the Kings Supremacy and Government?
An. Here is a loud cry againſt Browniſts and Anabaptiſts, but who are Browniſts? not all thoſe that are againſt Prelates, and not for the Engliſh Common Prayer Book; for then all the Reformed Churches are Browniſts. And as for Anabaptiſts, I wiſh it may bee conſidered, whether they doe not take ſome footing for their opinion from the Common Prayer Booke: They deny Baptiſme to Infants, upon this ground, becauſe actuall Faith and Repentance is pre-required to Baptiſme; and doth not the Common Prayer Book ſeeme to acknowledge as much, when as before Baptiſme, the witneſſes in name of the Infant muſt anſwer to theſe Queſtions, doſt thou beleeve? doſt thou renounce the divell and all his workes? I muſt nakedly profeſſe my judgement againſt that opinion, yet were it not good, that the very Common prayer booke ſhould come under conſideration upon this and other Reaſons.
Secondly, if men were ſo much for Proteſtant Religion, and againſt Papiſts, as is here pretended, they would never be more afraid of Browniſts, and Anabaptiſts, then of Papiſts; ſeeing they are of the Proteſtant Religion, and differ not from us in fundamentalls, as the Papiſts doe.
Thirdly, ſuppoſe that that Army ſhould prevaile, wherein there are Browniſts, & Anabaptiſts, as you ſay, yet is there not ſo much danger that they ſhould prevaile to miſlead the Parliament, who are three or foure hundred; as that Papiſts, ſhould prevaile to miſlead one.
Fourthly, though there ſhould be Anabaptiſts, and Browniſts in the Army, yet they doe not ſight againſt the Kings Supremacy and his Government as the Papiſts do againſt the Proteſtant Religion, and being of Parliaments, whoſe Powder Treaſon is famous▪ or rather Infamous to all Generations.
At laſt the Dr. tells us concerning Supremacy, that the King is Supreme, not ſo much in oppoſition to particular perſons, as in relation to the whole body Politique, of which he is head.
We ſay the King is Supreme and head of Kingdome ſeverally and joyntly conſidered, Dr. Ferne indeed tels us, that the two Houſes of Parliament are in a ſort Co-ordinate with his Majeſtie, to ſome act or exerciſe of the Supreme power, that is to making laws, by yeelding their conſent. And if they bee Co-ordinate in that act of Supremacy, Paraeus and others will tell him that the Nomothetick part of Supremacy is the higheſt. We acknowledge the King our Supreme to defend us; But not to defend our ſelves where cauſe requires, gives a ſupra-Supremacy unto him.Dr. Ferne Reply page 6. Poteſtas politica ſeu civilis dupliciter conſideratur; vel ut Architecto nica, quae occupat in legibus …ferendis ad quodvis bonum Reipub. pro novendum; et vocatur foreign ut Architectonicae ſ…bordinata, quae Rempſe…undum leges ill…s deliberando, judicando, et exequendo, adminiſtrat, & vocatur ſimpliciter foreign ſeu Civilis, lib. 6. Ethic. Cap. 6. Perſe vero patet quod Architectonica foreign ſit ſuperior civili ſimpliciter d…cta, et omnibus aliis poteſtatibus ſubordinatis quod que ſit poteſtas Suprema. Par…us in Ro. 13.
What elſe remaines in this Sectionis either matter of words and bare denyall to what hath been ſaid or anſwered to his other Anſwerers.
In the next Section▪ page 89▪ the Dr. ſaith, Mr. B. enters upon a looſe Diſcourſe againſt Epiſcopall Government, I reſerve him for his better inſtruction to a Booke entituled Epiſcopacy aſſerted.
Anſ. No other looſe Diſcourſe then what his looſe Treatiſe lead mee into; and for the Drs better inſtruction I refer him to Mr. Baynes his Dioceſan, Mr. Parkers Eccleſiaſticall politieor Altare Damaſcenum. And whereas I ſaid, now the Dr. ſhewes himſelf, he had rather the Kingdom ſhould be imbrued in a bloody Warre, then Epiſcopacy ſhould down, becauſe he had ſaid in his Treatiſe page 25. that the King has Reaſon by power of Armes, to divert the aboliſhing of Epiſcopall Government.
The Dr. Anſwers Nay, Mr. Bridge, you and your party in arms ſhow your ſelves what Spirit you are of, who will have this Land imbroyl'd in a bloody Warre, rather then Epiſcopacy ſhall not down.
Not ſo Doctor, there is not the ſame Reaſon, why you ſhould retort theſe words upon us, for I had no where ſaid, the Parliament hath Reaſon by power of Arms, to divert the evill of that Government; yea I am ſo farre from it, that I profeſſe freely that if the King and Parliament would eſtabliſh that Government ſtill to be continued, that the people is not bound to riſe up in arms, to root it out, though I judge it evill: Yea if any Man be of that opinion I think he is to be ſuffered to live, enjoying himſelfe and his eſtate here.
Then pag. 56. the Dr. ſaith to that of Sauls ſpeare reſtored; Mr. Bridge Replies, though reſtored before demanded, yet not before Saul had humbled himſelfe to David ſaying, I have ſinned, &c. We know, ſaies he, what you looke for, his Majeſtie hath not bin aſhamed to doe it with great condiſcention.
An: 'Tis poſsible a King may faile for not humbling himſelfe before his Subjects, Chron. 2. 36. 13. And Zedekiah did that which was evill in the ſight of the Lord his God, and humbled not himſelfe before Jeremiah the Prophet.
And though His Majeſtie had yeelded and humbled himſelfe yet lower, he would be no loſer thereby, we know what the old Counſellors ſaid, 2 Chron. 10. 7. If thou be kind to this people, and pleaſe them, and ſpeake good Words to them, they will be thy ſervants for ever.
Finally▪ whereas I had ſhewed that Ziba, and thoſe that reſorted to David in his diſtreſſe, were not of another Religion, and by Law to bee diſarmed, as the Papiſts now are; who have entertainment in His Majeſties Army: The Doctor anſwers, though by law Papiſts are not to have Arms at their diſpoſe, yet are they not quit of the duty and ſervice of Subjects.
They owe no more duty to King but according to Law, and by Law they are to bee all diſarmed; Wherefore good Dr. maintaine this illegall way no longer, give glory to God, and ſay you are convinced of this truth; which indeed you cannot but be; if you doe not ſhut your owne eyes: for you told us in your former Treatiſe, that Subjects may lawfully for their owne defence, hold the Kings hands, and how ſo, (if he raiſe an Army) but by an Army. Neither can you be ſo weake as to thinke that the great Senate of the Kingdome, that all the Commons, Gentlemen, and Nobles, ſhould be ſo at the mercy of every meane perſon, inveſted with the Kings Authority, that if a petty Conſtable, or other inferiour Officer doe offer violence unto them, that it ſhall not bee in their power to make a forcible reſiſtance, becauſe they are clothed with the Kings Authority: Good Sir, in the feare of God, make your humble addreſſes to His Majeſtie, and Petition him to return to thoſe that are faithfull to him: The worſt that he can loſe, you know (if you pretend rightly) is but a piece of prerogative, or ſome exerciſe thereof for the preſent; why ſhould ſo good a Land as this be imbrued in blood for ſuch a cauſe warre, being the worſt of all evills, and therefore not to be undertaken but to prevent graviſſimum malum. And is the loſſe of ſome part of the Prerogative or exerciſe thereof for the preſent ſuch; I beleeve you cannot ſay ſo: Wherefore labour, labour you to take off thoſe exaſperations that are amongſt men with you; and doe not ſtill put your unguem in ulcere ut recrudeſoat dolor. Tell the People amongſt whom you are of that ſinfull way wherein they now are ſo ſhall you liberare animam tuam. But if you will not it may bee thoſe words which you read in Ezech. 3. 12. will lie hard on your Conſcience another day. Now the God of all Peace▪ give us peace, but truth with Peace, in Chriſt Jeſus. Amen.
FINIS.
End of the text · William Bridge, The Truth of the Times Vindicated (1643)