The Peoples Right to Defend Themselves and their Covenanted Religion, Religious tract · Chapter 14
CAP. XIV.
The Surveyers grounds for abſolute Submiſſion to ſuffering, taken from the primitive Chriſtians, and reaſon, examined.
Our Surveyer, cometh next to ſpeak of the example of the primitive Chriſtians Pag. 38. &c. and this he muſt usher in with his ordinaire jeers, and ground leſſe reflections, telling us that His opinion hath been the common ſenſe of the generation of God's children before this fiery yron age; and that their ſober examples, are of more weight and imitation, then the furious practices of any of late, whereunto they have been inflamed by the doctrines of popular paraſites and fierce demagoges, ſuch as this libeller and his complices. But we have found, & poſſibly may yet finde further, how far he is miſtaken in this. And in deed in ſome reſpect, this may be well called a fiery iron age; for I beleeve ſince Chriſtianity was heard of, there was never ſo much obduration of conſciences, ſo ſeared with hote irons, and inflammed with rage againſt piety, fidelity, truth and uprightneſſe of heart, as is this day: It were well to be wished hat this Surveyer and his complices would take either the example of the Prophets, or Apoſtles, or of theſe ſober Chriſtians, who lived neareſt to the light of the Apoſtles times, and learne after their example to be more ſober, and conſtant to his principles; ſure he will not finde in their practices, ſo much perfidy, treachery, debauchedneſſe, hatred of piety, perſecution of truth, and of the godly, as both he and his complices are notoriouſly guilty of. Will he find among them ſuch court paraſites, ſuch patrons of Apoſtafy, ſuch authors of rebellion againſt God, ſuch Tyrannogogues, and baſe flatterers, as he and his fraternity are? Will he finde in all their writings ſuch bitter invectives and reproaches againſt the vvay of God, and his People, as may be ſeen in theſe fevv sheets? Will he find ſuch commendations of tyranny, oppreſſion, bondage and ſiavery, as if it vvere nothing but the compound of juſtice and equity? But vve come to the purpoſe.
The ſumme of his argument is this, That though by the teſtimony of Tertul. Apolog. cap, 1. 33. and 37, and Cyprian. ad Demetrianum. It is apparent, the Chriſtians wanted not might to raiſe armes, againſt the Emperours; yet they never uſed any reſiſtence either for the defence of themſelves, or for thereſcueing of their oppreſsed brethren: Yea even after that in Conſtantin's dayes, Religion had been legally established, and the Chriſtians able enough to defend themſelves, yet they uſed no violence agaiſt the Arrian and Apostat Emperours who ſucceeded: VnderUnder the perſecuter Maximinian there was the Theban Legion conſiſting of 6666. who yet did not reſiſt him: and that the greateſt part of the army, under Julian the Apoſtate, was Chriſtian, appears by their general outcry at the reception of Jovinian, nos ſumus Chriſtiani, yet did they never oppoſe him width force.]
To which we anſwere.
1. Though this Surveyer would appear tobe a man of a very meek and Chriſtian diſpoſition, and cryeth out of ſuch as are not of his opinion, as men of the fiery iron age; yet, though we will not take upon us to judge his heart, any may ſee part of his ſcope and intention, in mentioning this argument, to be this, That we may be reaſoned into a perfect ſtupidity and inſenſibility, and the King encouraged to contrive and proſecute an Eleventh perſecutoion, on all who profeſſe the Name of Jeſus, in his three dominions: For what end elſe doth he adduce the example of the primitive Chriſtians, who would not reſiſt the Emperours their bloody Emiſſaries, ſent out to put into execution their cruel, inhumane and barbarous Edicts, and to fulfil their luſt and deſire, to extinguish the very Name of Chriſtians; but to ſing us a ſleep, ſo that if the King will, the may command his bloody and cruel Emiſſaries, to make amaſſacre on all that will no abjure Chriſt and his intereſt, and cut all their throats in a few dayes, without the leaſt fear of oppoſition? If this be not his deſigne, let him tell me, what he would have Chriſtians doing, in caſe ſuch a thing as this should be? Would he have them reſiſting, or only holding up their throats to the bloody executioners? If he would not have any reſiſtence made, even in this caſe, then we ſee what his principles drive at, and many may judge what a cruel bloody heart he muſt have. If in this caſe he would allow a reſiſtence, where is the force of his argument then? To what purpoſe is their example adduced? and what becometh of his inſolent exclamations. O ſilly, foolish, and feminine Chriſtians then! and o illuminated, maſculous and martial Spirits of Chriſtians now!
2. He may remember what he tels us, when he is ſpeaking to the inſtances of reſiſtence adduced out of Scripture, Pag. 67. That every example recorded in Scripture is not imitable: And may not we ſay here, That every example recorded in Church Hiſtory (far more fallible then Scripture, and far leſſe to be regairded, ſeing what things are recorded in Scripture, are writen for our inſtruction) is not imitable. So that reduce this argument into forme, it will quickly evanish; for it muſt ſtand upon this medium. That what ever the primitive Chriſtians did, layeth a binding obligation upon us; But this is falſe, as we shall undenyably evince; and where is then the force of the argument? Though it appear plauſible and taking, yet when preſſed it doth evaporat.
3. If their practice be a binding precedent in this matter; ſo muſt it be in all other things: and particularly it muſt be unlawful for us now to reſiſt, in our owne defence, a raſeal multitude, aſſaulting us with ſtones in the open ſtreets, againſt all law and equity; for Tertullian in the ſame place tells us, that they would not reſiſt the Inimicum vulgus the common people, who was malitiouſly ſet againſt them, and did invade them with ſtones and fire, ſuo jure with out any kinde of law or judicial procedoure: Yea Tertullian puts no difference betwixt the Emperours and meane perſons, in poynt of reſiſtence; Saying, Idem ſumus Imperatoribus, qui & vicinis noſtris, malè enim velle, malè facere, malè dicere, malè cogitare de quoquam ex aequo vetamur. Quodcunque non licèt in Imperatorem, id nec in quenquam, we may do no more, whether in word, thought, or deed againſt any whatſomever, then againſt the Emperour. But who will ſay that in this, their practice or judgment is to us a binding precedent? 2. Several of theſe Fathers thought it unlawful to kill in their owne defence. See A… broſ. de Offic. Lib. 3. cap. 4. and Auguſtin alſo Epistola ad publicolam, 154. and Lib. 1. de Libero Arbitr. cap. 5. And yet this cannot now be maintained as a truth; See the contrare proved by Rivet. in 6. Praec. oper. Tom. 1. Pag. 1391. 3. Private Chriſtians, not only refuſed to reſiſt violence with violence, but they refuſed alſo to flee from the fury of perſecuters, when they might ſaifly have done it, Potuimus (ſayes Tertull. in Apolog.) & inermes nec rebelles, ſed tantummodo diſcordes ſoltus divortii invidia adverſus vos dimicaſſe, &c. That is, naked as they were, they might have removed themſelves to ſome other part of the world, and they would not. Yea Tertullian did condemne flight in time of perſecution, in his Book De fugâ in perſecutione. But will any condemne this practice now, or think it unlawful, or unbeſeeming Chriſtians to flee from the fury of enraged perſecuters? Sure this Surveyer doth often grant it to be lawful. It ſeemeth then that either he hath catched ſome errour in his head, that is not Chriſtian (as he ſpeaks of us, Pag. 39.) or all which the primitive Chriſtians maintained in opinion and practice, was not ſo Chriſtian as to be perpetually obligeing. 4. The primitive Chriſtians ran to martydome, when neither cited, nor accuſed, as is ſeen in Fox his Acts and Monum. Vol. 1. Will any ſay that Every Chriſtian is bound and obliged to do ſo now? How then shall their meer example be obligeing in the other practice? 5. The primitive Chriſtians would not bow their knees upon the Sabbath Dayes nor eat blood. Muſt that example of theirs perpetually oblige us now? 6. Yea it was the opinion of Ambroſe, Libr. 5. Orat. in Auxenti…, that no armes should be uſed by him againſt the Goths who then invaded Italy, to waſte and deſtroy the ſame, but teares: will it hence follow, That a Church-man may defend himſelf againſt open invading enemies, no other way now, but by teares; becauſe he ſaid, Aliter nec debeo, nec poſſum reſiſ…ere?
4. The Anabaptiſts make uſe of this example of the primitive Chriſtians to diſprove the lawfulneſſe of warr, as may … ſeen in Gerhard upon that head: and would this Surveyer have us yet more Anabaptists, then he (wickedly and falſly) alledgeth we are, in his bitter preface? It ſeemes he would joyne hands vvith the Anabaptists as to this, and upon that accountvve have as good ground to call him an Anabaptiſt, as he hath to call us, Iam ſumus ergo pares.
5. He cannot shevv us, that theſe Fathers did account it unlavvful, ſimply in poynt of conſcience, to reſiſt Emperours vvickedly perſecuting: They hold forth no ſcriptural ground condemning the ſame, but rather ſeeme to ſay that it was out of a deſire of Martyrdome, which (as Sulpitius Sever us ſayeth) they ſought for more earneſtly, then in his dayes men gaped for Bishopricks; & therefore they willingly yeelded up their lives and all, to the cruel rage of perſecuters, that they might obtaine the crowne of Martyrdome, It is true, Tertullian ſayes, Apud iſtam diſciplinam magis occidi licet quam occidere. But this ſayes not that it is ſimply ſinful t kill in ſelf-defence: but that they chooſed rather to be killed or martyred.
6, Though we shall not goe about to call in queſtion the truth of Tercullian's narration concerning the number & power of Chriſtians in his time (and yet Mr Goodwin in his Antica…valieriſme makeyth it very probable that he vvas miſtaken in his computation, if he did meane it through the vvhole Empirre. Or that if it vvas ſo, it vvas not knovvn to the Chriſtians, and ſo it vvas all one, as to reſiſting upon that ground.) Yet vve may ſay, That there might have been many things, vvhichwhich in prudence might have made them to forbeare to goe to an open vvar, or riſe in armes againſt the Emperours, even this, that the Emperours alvvayes had a greart militia, many and ſtrong armies on foot, againſt vvhichwhich, for naked perſons (though many) ſcattered up and dovvne the Empire, having fevv or none to command or lead them forth to battel in their defence, to riſe in this caſe, had been no probable meane of ſaifty to themſelves, or of defence; but rather a meane to provoke the Tyrant more, and procure unto themſelves more ſuddaine deathe and deſtruction. So that not withſtanding of their number, their capacity to effectuat ſuch an interpriſe, vvas but ſmall and very improbable.
7. The ancient Chriſtians vvere not ſo utterly ignorant, nor ſo void of humanity and Chriſtian love and Zeal, that being able to help, they vvould ſuffer their brethren to be dravvne to death; what ever this Surveyer ſayeth: but ſome times they reſcued the oppreſſed out of the hands of the oppreſſours: For vve read that about the yeer 235. certane men inhabiteing Ma…ëota vvith force reſued Dion…ſius of Alexandria out of the hands of ſuch as were carrying him away. So about the year 342. the good People of Alexandria did vvith force, defend Athanaſius. About the yeer 387. the People of Caeſaria did defend Baſil: See Nazianz Orat. 20. And alſo the People of Samoſata purpoſed to retaine their Bishop Euſebius Pius banished at the command of Valens the Emperour, had not Euſebius himſelf reſtrained them. And about the year 356. the People of Conſtantinople did in like manner ſtand to the defence of Paulus: ſee for this Blondel's Scholia in Grot. de Imp Sum. Pot. Pag. 65.
8. Before Conſtantin's dayes, none of the Emperours owned or profeſſed the Chriſtian faith, ſo that religion was not then eſtablished by lawes, as our Religion is: and therefore all that Tertullian or Cyprian ſay, cometh not home to our caſe: Yea Tertullian ſayeth they were but a number of ſtrangers, exteri ſumus, ſayes he, & vestra omn…o implevimus.
9. Though it is true that when Conflantine obtained the Empire, Chriſtian Religion was more ſecured and eſtablished then formerly, yet did not the ſucceeding Emperours when they came to the throne, ſweare to maintaine the ſame, and all who owned it; they did not receive the imperial crowne on theſe tearmes; nor were the ſubjects bound unto them on theſe conditions; and ſo the inſtances adduced after Constantin's dayes, ſute not our caſe, wherein Religion is become not only a legal right of the People, but a fundamental right, and the maine clauſe and condition of the compact betwixt Magiſtrate and Subject, as hath been ſaid.
10. As for the Chriſtians not reſiſting the Arrian Emperours, it ſpeaks nothing: For, that controverſy was long under debate, even in Conſtantin's dayes, and decreaſed nothing, for all the ſentence of the Nicene Councel, which paſſed againſt it; and hereby Bishop was againſt Bishop, Province againſt Province, Council againſt Council, and at length all the world almoſt was turned Arrian. What wonder then that there was no general oppoſition made againſt theſe Arrian Emperours, when their Subjects imbraced the ſame deluſion? And as for particular oppoſitions, we shall ſee ſome inſtances afterward.
11. As for the Theban Legion, their non-reſiſtence ſpeaks nothing to our caſe, for then Religion was not ſetled by law. 2. For ſix thouſand, ſix hundered, ſixty ſix men to interpiſe a warre againſt the Emperour and al his army, had neither been an act of prudence nor policy. 3. When he tells us that they offered themſelves willingly to be butchered, holding up their naked bodyes to the Emperour's bloody emiſſaryes, we ſee what he would have all the honeſt People of Scotland doing this day, even going with ropes about their necks, and with open breſts, to the Kings bloody Emiſſaryes, that they may murther them all. O But this man muſt have a blood-thirſty heart.!
12. That all or …he moſt part of Iulian's army was Chriſtian is but ſuppoſed not proved; It was but a ſmall part that being deceived by him under colour of a largeſſe, threw ſome frankincenſe into a fire ſecretly kindled in honour of an idol, and finding the deceit aroſe from the feaſt prepared for them, and ran thorow the market place, and cryed we are Chriſtians, &c. and called upon the Emperour to kil and behead them, till he was enraged and banished them. And as for that proof of it, that he adduceth, it is a non-ſequitur: for it was the ſouldeours affection to Iovinian, and earneſt deſire to have him Emperour, after Iulian's death, that made them cry our we are Chriſtians, when he was refuſeing to accept of the imperial dignity (for they compelled him, ſeyeth Socrates Lib. 2. Cap. 19.) and for this cauſe to diſſuade them from putting that honour on him, Or becauſe of his owne unwillingneſſe to command over Iulian's army, which was Prophaned with ſacrileges, as Ruffinus ſayeth in his hiſtory Lib. 11: Cap. 1. He told them he was a Chriſtian, and that he would not take on him the command of Heathens. See Hiſtoria tripartitae Lib. 7. Cap. 1. and ſo ſuppoſed them to be all heathens: And therefore the ſenſe of their ſpeach was only this: Since yee are a Chriſtian we will be all Chriſtians alſo, take you the imperial throne notwithſtanding of that. Moreover, though the ſouldiers in Iulian's army should have ſcrupled at making reſiſtence againſt their Emperour and General, unto whom they were ſworne as ſouldiers, it ſpeaketh little to the poynt; for ſubjects are not ſo under their Soveraignes, as Souldiers are under their Commanders and Generalls, they are under the General's pay, and ſo his ſervants, and are hired for his behoove, but the King doth not hire Subjects, nor are they his ſervants and under his pay, and he ſtands otherwiſe obliged unto them, then the Emperour did to his ſouldiers: finally Nazianzen in his Orat. 2. in Iulianum ſeemeth to ſay that the reaſon why Iulian the Apoſtate was not oppoſed, was, becauſe they were not able For, ſayes he, Nos autem quibus nulla alia arma, nec Praeſidia, praeter ſpem in Deum reliqua erant, ut pote omni humano ſubſidio prorſus deſtitutis & ſpoliatis, quem tandem alium aut precum auditorem, aut inimicorum depulſorem habituri eramus quàm Deum Iacob, &c. i. e. what could we do, but betake ourſelves to the God of Jacab, ſince we had no other armes, nor walls, nor ſtrengthes, being deſtitute and ſpoiled of all humane help: Sure this will not ſay much againſt us, nor for our Surveyer▪ Yea he hinteth in his firſt oration in Iulianum, That for fear of reſiſtence & of croſſing his end, the Apoſtate Iulian would not make open war at firſt upon the Chriſtians, [Nos enim (ſayes he) ſi vis inferatur, acriores obſtinatioreſque futuros, ac Tyrannidi obnixum pietatis Tuendae ſtudium objecturos cogitavit: ſolent enim fortes & generoſi animi et qui vim afferre parat contumaciter obſiſtere, non ſecus ac flamma, quae a vento excitatur quo vehementius perflatur, eò vehementius accenditur. i.e. [If he had uſed violence, he knew he had found us more peremptory and refractary, and ready to have oppoſed to his tyranny a fixed purpoſe and endeavour to preſerve our Religion; for ſtout and generous ſpirits uſe to reſist with greater violence ſuch as violently aſſault them, as a fire blown at by winde, the more the winde beat… upon it, the more it burneth.] Which she wes clearly that if that Apoſtate had uſed force at firſt, he had met with oppoſition; and therefore he thought it fitteſt by policy to weaken them, diſarme them, and ſubdue them, and then fall on them with force, and perſecute them.
13 If we shall adduce ſome inſtances of the primitive Chriſtians defending themſelves and their Religion by force, againſt the Emperours Emiſſaries, whither will our Surveyer then ſend his ſoul? while he looked upon them as altogether free of any ſuch charge, he cryed out Balaam-like anima mea ſit cum animabus veterum Chriſtianorum but ere it come there, he muſt repent of what he hath done and ſaid: But if their practice was ſuteable to ours, what will he then do with his ſoul? for he vvill not have it with the late Chriſtians, nor can he now have it with the old Chriſtians, and ſo it muſt goe to a diſtinct place; and ſo it will, if he repent not. But to our purpoſe. 1. Blondel, in the forcited place, tels us, that about the year 310. The Armenians waged warre againſt Maximius, who was come againſt them with an army, becauſe of their Religion, and defate him. 2. S…crates in his Eccleſiastick history lib. 2. c. 30, (after the English tranſlation) tels us [That by the command of the Emperour, and cruelty of Macedonius, it was proclamed that the Churches of ſuch as imbraced the creed, containing the clauſe of one ſubſtance, should be thrown down even to the fundations,—as ſoon as the commiſſioners for ſuppreſſing the churches had given the onſet, immediatly a great number of Novatians, and diverſe others, which maintained the doctrine of one ſubſtance pulled downe that Church, removed it to another place, and there erected it againe—againe Macedonius (like the prelate of Galloway) underſtanding that there were many both at Pophlagonia, and at Mantinium of the Novation opinion which could by no meanes be commodiouſly removed by Eccleſiaſtical authority, procured that foure bands of ſouldiers at the Emperours commandement should be ſent to Paphlagonia, to the end the inhabitants might be terrified and thereby brought to imbrace the Arian haereſie. But ſuch as inhabited Mantinium being kindled with an earneſt Zeal towards Chriſtian Religion, went againſt the ſouldiers vvith chearful mindes, and valient courage, after they had muſtered together a great hoaſt, they all marched forward to battel, ſome had taken in their hand long hedging bils, ſome had axes, ſome other met by chance with ruſty armour; when they joyned together and came to handigriping, many of the Paphlagonians were beaten downe, the ſouldiers (few only excepted) vvere ſlaine every one.] Moreover he tels us in the ſame place, when this Macedonius was about to deſtroy the temple in which Conſtantine lay buryed, and had a purpoſe to tranſlate the Emperours bones, the people vvithſtood his interprize, and vvhen he gote the bones carryed into the Church vvhere Acacius the Martyr was buryed, the multitude of the contrary ſide ran thither in haſte; and this occaſioned a very great ſlaughter, ſo that the Church, & the porch, unto the ſtreet, was runing with blood, & full of dead bodyes: & for this Macedonius gote little thanks of the Emperour. 3. in Hiſioria tripartita Lib. 11. c. 15. It is told us, How the Chriſtians oppreſſed by Barabanes or Baratanes King of Perſia, did flee to the Romans to ſeek their help; upon which and ſome other cauſes a war aroſe betwixt the Romans and the ſaid King. It is true they made not head againſt the King while they remained in his countrey, becauſe they were not able; otherwiſe they had not run to the Romans for help. Our Surveyer cannot deny that they ſought the Emperour's help, but he ſaves, This will not neceſſarily Import that they ſtirred them up to invade their King in their behalf, but that having come to them, they might have the help and benefite of their protection. But vvhether they ſtirred up the Emp…rour or not, is not much to the matter, ſeing they came as ſuppliants and (as Socrat. ſayes Lib. 7. Cap. 18.) craved that they vvould pity their caſe, and not ſuffer them to be ſo oppreſſed; and the Emperour made this one cauſe of the vvar, vvhichwhich he undertook againſt him; and vvas one of the cauſes (as the hiſtorie tells us) that made the Romans angry with them: and vvhen the Perſian King demanded back his fugitives, it vvas anſvvered, they vvould not do that, yea and that not only they vvould endeavour to ſet the ſuppliants at freedome, and deliver them from their oppreſſours; but alſo that they vvould undergoe any thing for the good of the Chriſtian Religion and (as ſocrat ſayeth lib. 7. c. 18.) they purpoſed not only to aide them, but alſo with all might poſſible, generally to maintaine the quarrel in the behalf of Chriſtian Religion. Againe our Surveyer tels us, that the Perſian Kings had once ſubmitted to the Romans. Which whether true or falſe, is not mentioned in all this hiſtory, either as the ground moving the oppreſſed Chriſtians to flee to the Emperour Theodoſius for help, or moving Theodoſius to wage vvarre againſt them. And ſo by this example of theirs, we ſee that oppreſſed ſubjects may run and ſeek releef from ſtrangers, when they cannot help themſelves. Thus we ſee this Surveyer's argument is many wayes weak, and againſt himſelf. Moreover, 4. When Athanaſius was forced to flee out of Alexandria, and Gregorius was brought thither with armed ſouldiers, and put in poſſeſſion of the Church, the Citizens of Alexandria, not withſtanding of Syrianus the captane under the Emperour his being there with five thouſand armed men, were ſo diſpleaſed with what was done, that they ſet St. Denis Church on fire See Socrat. Hiſt. Eccleſ, Lib. 2. Cap. 8. Or, cap. 11. after the greek copy. 5. When the honeſt People at Conſtantinople had choſen Paulus to be their Bishop after the death of Euſebius, the Emperour Conſtantius ſent Hermogenes the captaine to thruſt Paulus out of the Church, and when he came to execute his commiſſion with force, the People prepared themſelves to aide their Bishop, forced the houſe where Hermogenes was, and pulled him out by the eares and killed him: See Socrat. Lib. 2. Cap. 10. 6. When Paulus was againe placed in Conſtantinople the Emperour ſends Philip the preſident to remove him, and to appoynt Macedonius the Arian, in his ſtead. But Philip was ſo affrayed of the People that he went ſtraight unto the publick bath called Zenxippus, and ſends for Paulus, and being in fear of the multitude, who being ſuſpicious flocked thither, conveyes him ſecretly out a back window: Then he and Macedonius went unto the Church, and were guarded all alongs by ſouldiers with naked ſwords, and when they came to the door, the throng was ſuch that they could not enter, till there were ſome thouſands Killed. If Philp the Emperours Lievtenant had not been afraid of the People; he had not done as he did. So for fear of the People the Lieutenant of Valens the Emperour durſt not execute theſe fowrſcore prieſts, who had come … ſupplicate the Emperour in name of all the reſt in Nicomedia, and were commanded to be killed by the Emperour; See Socrat. Lib, 4. Cap. 13. all which ſayes it was no rare thing for People to reſiſt even with force the Emperours Emiſſaries ſent to execute his unjuſt decrees. 7. Socrates tells us Hiſt. Eccleſ. Lib. 7. Cap. 14. hovv divers Monks inhabiting mont Nitria, eſpouſed Cyril's quarrel, and coming to Alexandria aſſaulted the Lieutenant in his Chariot with ſtones, ſo that his guaird was forced to flee away. 8. About the year 404. when the Emperour had banished Chriſoſtome, the People flocked together about the palace, ſo that the Emperour was neceſſitated to call him back againe from his exile, See Hiſt, Tripare, Lib. 10. Cap. 13. 9. When Ambroſe was banished by Valentinian the Emperour, at the inſtigation of his Mother Iuſtina, the People did reſiſt ſuch as came to carry him away, ſuch was their Zeal for the truth, and love to their injured Bishop: ſee Hiſt. Tripart. Lib. 9. Cap. 20. and they would rather loſe their lives, as ſuffer their paſtor to be taken away by the ſouldiers, that were ſent to pull him out of the Church, and thurſt him away by force. See Ruffini Hiſtor. Lib. 11. c. 15.
Now let the Surveyer tels us what he thinks of their practice? And if he think their practice any other commentary to Rom. 13. then our gloſſes; and if it be any thing different from our practice, in theſe dregs of time, as he loveth to ſpeak?
We proceed now unto his Reaſons, which are but the ſame things we have heard formerly. The ſumme of the firſt is this. [That doctrine cannot be of God, which to the eye of ſound reaſon, doth unavoidably (if practiſed) overthrow God's order for ſetling Societyes, and open a gap to perpetual ſeditions againſt Magiſtrates,—and will pleaſe wicked malefactors well, being a proclamatoin to them, when condemned, to violent the Magistrate—for the matter is referred to each particular perſon to judge of his owne ſuffering, and his diſcretive judgement must determine him to reſiſt.] Anſw. Here is a heap of words, but no ſinewes of an argument, This man is good at catching poor ſimple ones that cannot diſcerne his tallacies: But ſuch as are wiſe will ſmile at his confidence in reaſoning after this manner: For. 1. His doctrine, not ours, overthroweth God's order: It is God's order that Commonwealths be preſerved from ruine and deſtruction; that Magiſtrates should lay out themſelves, and all their power for the good of the Realme over which they are; for as Ciecro ſayeth eo referenda ſunt omnia its qui praeſunt ali…s, ut …i qui erunt eorum in imperio ſint quam beatiſſimi, and elſewhere ut gubernatori curſus ſecundus, medico ſalus, imperatori victoria, ſic moderatori, Reipublica beata Civium vita propoſita eſt. But by his doctrine, if the Soveraigne will (and how mutable and inclineable to tyranny the will of Princes is, all ages hath witneſſed) The Commonwealth is remedyleſty gone; if he will deſtroy the ſame, there is no help; if he turne Tyrant (and one wreatched Counſeller may in a short time by aſſe a Prince, that is not otherwiſe wel balaſted, to this) ruine is unavoydable. But by our doctrine, there is a remedy to preſerve the commonwealth from ruine; &more regaird is to be had to this, which is the end, then to the Prince who as ſuch, is but a medium to this end▪ 2. Such as plead for the good of humane Societyes, should as much labour to prevent the utter overturning of the ſame, as to prevent ſeditions: Good phiſitians will labour more carefully to prevent death, then to prevent a little diſtemper or ſickneſſe; yea and will cauſe a diſtemper to prevent deſtruction: but this montebank, if he procure with his preſcriptions preſent eaſe, careth not though the patient die the next day. But 3. How doth our doctrine open a perpetual gap to ſeditions? Becauſe (ſayes he) by our way every private perſon is made judge not only his owne actions, but of his ſufferings, and he muſt ſuffer no more then he thinks meet. But 1. would he have all the Subjects becomeing more ſenſeleſſe and ſtupide then beaſts? Would he have them caſting away their ſoul & judgment, that they should have no more uſe of their reaſon, to judge what either is commanded or impoſed by penalty? If he grant a judgement of diſcretion in actings, how will he ſalve the Magiſtrat's credite and honour, and prevent rebellion and ſedition, if there be ſuch a neceſſary connexion betwixt the exerciſe of this judgement and the conſequent he dreameth of? For diſobedience is a reſiſtence, as well as non-ſubmiſſion to the punishment. 2. Though we allow to every one a judgement of diſcretion, yet we allow no man's judgement to be the rule of his walking: We ſay not that an erring judgment is a rule to walk by, and therefore we ſay that a ſubject is bound to obey the Magiſtrates lawful commands, though he in his private judgement should account them ſinful; ſo we ſay he is bound to ſubmit to punishment, which is juſt and juſtly inflicted, though he judge otherwayes: Yea we grant furder, he is bound to ſubmit to unjuſt ſentences patiently, when he cannot by faire and poſſible meanes shun them. Yea moreover we grant that in matters of ſmaller moment, he may lawfully beare with the loſſe of a little to redeeme more, or ſave more from hazard. But our queſtion is, if the Body of a land or a conſiderable part thereof, ought ſtupidly to ſubmit to the loſſe of Life, Lands, Libertyes and Religion, when not only they judge theſe to be in hazard; but when all who have eyes in their head ſee it &it is undenyable, being written on all the Acts & actings of theſe in power, & palpably & too too ſenſibly felt by al ſuch as deſire to keep a good conſcience, & to be keeped free from the rageing wickedneſſe & apoſraſy of this generation. 4. Though I know few malefactors, who, when attached, arraigned & condemned, would not do what they could to deliver themſelvs from death, though this queſtion had never been ſtarted; yet our doctrine will not warrand ſuch to do violence to the Magiſtrate: For we judge it not enough that they ſay they are innocent and deſerve on punishment. Our caſe is a caſe that is manifeſt and not our, and a publick injury avowed and maintained: And will he think that becauſe a Malefactor juſtly condemned to die, may not reſiſt the Magiſtrate executing his office, Therefore a Land may not defend themſelves, againſt the Kings Emiſſaries ſent out to execute unjuſt ſentences, tending to the ruine and deſtruction of Religion and Liberties?
His 2. Reaſon Pag. 44. is in ſumme this [That by this way Magiſirates in doing their duty cannot be ſecured: for it is not enough to ſay, let Magiſtrates rule rightly, and not oppreſse, becauſe that in the holy permiſſive providence of God, oft the beſt princes are not beſt uſed—ſome croſſing of the will of a forward, and furi…s party, may move them to fancy ther Prince a Tyrant, and thereupon account themſelves free to offer violence: And from reſiſtence they will goe to revenge (the fury of evil conſciences instigating them)—in hiſtories it will be found, that hardly did ever people reſiſt a prince, but in end it came to revenge; and of times the beſt princes have been worſt uſed, at leaſt as evil as the naughtieſt, as may be ſeen a mong the Roman Emperours, and Chriſtian Emperours and Kings: and amongſt our own Kings &c.] Anſw. Lend us this argument, and we shall ſee what to make of it. By his doctrine people can never be ſecured from unjuſt violence, or from continual oppreſſion and ſlavery; for it is in vaine to ſay, let them do that which is right, and Magiſtrates will do their duty, for albeit it be true that faithful and honeſt ſubjects, may in the way of their duty, expect from God that he will incline the hearts of Magiſtrates to reſpect and encourage them; yet in the holy permiſſive providence of God, it comes often to paſſe that the beſt people are not beſt uſed by their princes: And this all hiſtories both ancient and moderne abundantly demonſtrate. This court divine is all for the ſecureing of the Prince in all his tyrannies & oppreſſions; and ſpeaks nothing for guarding the ſaifty of the people, which is the end, for which Magiſtrates were appoynted: And this is to pervert the order of nature, ſo to ſecure the meane as to deſtroy the end: For that is to make the meane the end, and no more the meane. 2. We juſtify not Subjects as are unruly & ſeditious againſt good Magiſtrates doing their duty; nor do we plead for Subjects riſeing up in armes againſt their Magiſtrates, for every ſmall injury, or when they deviate in a little from the right way: Let him grant to us, That ſubjects may oppoſe their Magiſtrates, and reſiſt unjuſt violence with violence, when, in ſtead of being Magiſtrates they become wolves and Tygers; and in ſtead of being paſtors of the people, they become lyons ſeeking to deſtroy and devoure them; and when they overturne the ends, for which they were appoynted, and deſtroy the liberties of the Subject, & overturne the Religion, which they were obliged & ſworne to defend, in their place and according to their power, and we deſire no more. 3. If any under pretext of repelling of violence, shall unjuſtly injure the Magiſtrate, we approve not ſuch, we juſtify them not, let them anſwere for that themſelves. This is nothing to our queſtion: if he ſay that our doctrine openeth a gap to this, He is miſtaken, for ſuch as ſay that the ſinful and unjuſt commands of Magiſtrates should not b e obeyed, do not open a gap to all diſobedience, even in the moſt juſt commands. And ſince he will grant that unjuſt commands ought not to be obeyed, let him cloſe the door here, ſo that from this there shall be no hazard of mocking the Magiſtrate, when commanding juſt and neceſſary dutyes; And with the ſame engyne shall we cloſe the door, ſo that when we ſay that Magiſtrates deſtroying Religion, Libertyes and what is dear to Subjects, may be reſiſted, we shall ſecure the Magiſtrate from violence and oppoſition, when he keepeth within his ſphaere, and doth his duty. 4. If the matter paſſe from reſiſtence to revenge, we approve it not; if the pride and haughtineſſe of the ſpirit of Princes be the cauſe of this, let them ſee to it, and labour to prevent it, by condeſcending to the juſt & equitable demands of their oppreſſed and grieved ſubjects. 5. We do not deny but God may ſtir up an Abſolome and other conſpirators againſt a Gracious David, for his owne holy ends. But, in ordinary providence it is to be ſeen, that good Princes, while alive and when dead, have had more reſpect of their Subjects; then others, who have been moſt flagitious and wicked: The books of the Kings & Chronicles demonſtrate this. That good Kings have been much honoured and reverenced while living, and much lamented when dead; and upon the contrare, vvicked King's have either been cut off, or when dead have not been deſired, nor burned with the burnings of their fathers, nor buryed in the ſepulchre of their fathers, whatever forced ſubmiſſion & outward reſpect they might have had while living. 6. As for the difference that God in his providence hath put betwixt Heathenish and Chriſtian Kinges ſee what Evagrius ſayeth Eccleſ. hiſtor. cap. 41. ſpeaking againſt Zoſimus, he hath theſe words worth the marking. [Let us ſee if thow will, how the Emperours which were Hethnickes and Panimes maintainers of Idolatry and paganiſme, and how on the contrary, ſuch as cleaved unto the Chriſtian faith, ended their reigne: was not Cajus Julius Caeſar the first Emperous, ſlaine by a conſpiracy? did not certane ſouldiers with naked ſwords diſpatch Cajus the nephew of Tiberius? was not Nero murdered by one of his familiar and dear friends? Had not Galba the like end, Otho & Vitellus, who all three reigned only Sixteen moneths? what shall I ſpeak of Titus whom Domitianus poiſoned, although he was his owne brother? what ſayeſt thow of Commodus?—what shall I ſay of Marcinus? did not the ſouldiers uſe him like a captive, about Byzantium, and cruelly put him to death?—what shall I ſay of Maximinus whom his owne army diſpatched—were not Gallus, and Voluſianus murdered by their owne army? had not Aemilianus the like miſerable end—But ſince Conſtantine began to reigne-was there any one Emperour in that city (Julian a man of thine own Religion-only excepted) that was murthered by his owne ſubjects?] It were an endleſſe work to run thorow hiſtories, and show, how for the moſt part, (contrare to what he ſayes) theſe Kings who have been reſiſted by their Subjects, whether in the time of Heatheniſme, or ſince Chriſtianity was profeſſed, have been moſt flagitious and wicked? Sure, if we should goe no further but to our owne hiſtory, we shall finde this put beyond all queſtion, the Surveyer himſelf being witneſſe, who ſayes Pag. 78. that the inſtances of oppoſition made unto the Scotish Kings adduced by the Apolog. were but [the inſurrection of Nobles againſt the Kings, and violent oppreſſions of ſuch of them, as have been flagitious and tyrannous.] And thus he contradicteth, what he juſt now ſaid. But to what purpoſe is all this ſtir? He ſayes, but can he prove, that we aſſert, That any party of the people, when ſtrong enough, may get up againſt the King and all Magiſtrates, when they judge that they deal wrongouſly and injuriouſly with them? Sure the thing which we affirme is far contrary to this, as hath been often times shewed. We know that [the evil wit of a ſeditious party can ſoon paint the Beſt King as a black and ugly Tyrant] and vve know alſo, that the evil wit of a hired court-paraſite, and beſe flatterer can paint out the blackeſt Nero, or Caligula, or a Heliogabalus, as a brave and virtuous prince. And this is nothing to our caſe, when the acts of Tyranny and oppreſſion, are as legible, as if written with the ſun-beames: It behoved to be ſtrange virmilion that would ſerve to make the apoſtaſy, perjury, oppreſſion and tyranny of the novv Prince and Rulers, appear vvhit and comely; and he needs no great vvit vvho vvould painte out theſe groſſe acts under the forme of ugly Tyranny: Yet vvith all vve shall vvillingly grant to him, that, [All the fearers of God should rather indure ſome acts of real tyranny, then by doctrine or practices of reſiſtence, open a door to the deſtruction of good Kings (by a party not of their ſpirit, but lurking under their pretences) and to the continual diſſolution, concuſſion, and deſolation of humane ſocieties] for this is not the thing vve are againſt: Some acts of Tyranny vve are vvilling to endure, provideing he vvill grant us liberty both to teach & practiſe reſiſtence, vvhen the acts of tyranny are not one or two, but many; nor acts of Tyranny in ſmaller and leſſe conſiderable matters; but ſuch as tend to the deſtruction of the true Libertyes of the Subject, to the overturning of a Covenanted vvork of Reformation, ſvvorne-to by all rankes and degrees of people; hovvbeit men of corrupt principles, and of another ſpirit, should lurk under theſe pretences. Is it not reaſonable, that vve alſo demand of this Surveyer vvhile he is in a good mood, That he vvould evidence ſo much fear of God, as not to condemne reſiſtence unto real tyranny, ſo as to open a gap to all the ingrained & bloody Ner…es and ſuch prodigious Canibales, to vvaſte & deſtroy at pleaſure the beſt of Subjects. What follovveth concerning obedience active and Subjection paſſive, hath been ſpoken to formerly, and it is needleſſe fill up pages vvith repetitions, as he doth: only vvhereas he citeth Apolog. Pag. 376, & 377. granting that ſubjection is neceſſary, and ſuppoſeth that this is repugnant to vvhat Naphtali ſayeth, He vvould knovv that he is in a great miſtake, for the queſtion there is concerning obedience in things indifferent, or of ſubmitting to the penalty, and that by a few privat perſones; and though in this caſe a ſingle perſon, who will not obey the Magiſtrate in theſe matters muſt yeeld the penalty, and ſo acknowledge his ſubjection, it will not follow that a multitude or a Community, forced under intolerable penaltyes to acts of impiety and hainous tranſgreſſion, and who can defend their rights and juſt privileges palpably and iniquouſly violated, may not repel ſuch unjuſt force with force; & reſiſt intolerable tyranny, abuſing the ordinance of God to all acts of wickedneſſe, and to the overturning & deſtroying the very ends of government? And to this Naphtaly ſpeaketh Pag. 28. So that he but gives vent to his profane Spirit, to cry out, as he doth Pag. 46. and ſay [ Good God! to what times are we reſerved? to ſee ſo certane truths, that may be reckoned among the immoveables of Religion, and the ancient land marks removed, by an upſtart furious Crue, who by their new principles (as falſe as new) ſeek to confound both Church and State? The lawfulneſſe of privat men's counter acting, and violent reſiſtence to a whole Church & a whole State, is a maine article of their new faith, & to do ſo is one of their new commands added to God's.] For 1. It never was a certane truth, nor ever was reckoned among the immovables of Religion (except by Court divines, &baſe flattering Sycophants, whoſe maine and only Religion was and is, to pleaſe the King, that he might full their bellies) that abſolute and illimited ſubjection was due to Princes by the whole body of the People, ſo that if he should ſend our Emiſſaries, like ſo many wild Beares, to kill Man, Wife, and Children, Without colour and pretence of Law or reaſon, People should do nothing but caſt open their breſts, and hold up their throats, that they may be devoured at once: what ſound Divine ſayeth ſo? What ſound Divine putteth this brutish ſubjection among the ancient land marks? Yea what ſober Royaliſt (that is not with this ſurveyer intoxicate with Royal gifts, till his braines be crack't, and his rationality brutified) dar poſitively averre that this is to be put among the immoveables of Religion? 2. This principle which he calleth new, and as falſe as new, is an old truth verified by the practices of all ages, and is as true as old; which he might eaſily ſee, if his new dignities and gifts had not blinded his eyes, and made him as falſe and perfidious, as he is notour. 3. He tells that our principle tends to confound both Church and State; becauſe we plead against Tyranny either in Church or State; a pretty reaſon: Becauſe we plead for that, which tendeth to the preſervation of Church and State, in being and purity; therefore we plead for confounding Church and State? whereas his principle of Tyranny, in Church and State, is the readyeſt way imaginable to deſtroy both, as hath been ſeen by many ſad and dreadful examples, before our dayes. 4. This man who hath perfidiouſly renunced his Covenant with God, and avowed his perjury to all the World, and his palpable breach of, and caſting behind his heels the third command, talks of our adding new articles to our faith, and a new command to God's; becauſe we will not deny the principles of nature, nor grant that free-born ſubjects are ſlaves or brutes: And with him, Tyranny is the ancient Land-mark, and the chief poynt of his Religion, and a maine article of his faith, and one of the grand commands of the time. But many know at whoſe girdle his faith and his Religion hangs: But we will chooſe none of his Religion, principles, articles of faith, or commands; For they change with the Court: and we know Court Divinity is a coat of many colours, faire and fashionable, but ſuch as will neither keep from cold, nor cover our nakedneſſe, far leſſe ſave from God's wrath in the day of accounts.