A Combat Between Two Seconds, Text
A COMBATE betweene TVVO SECONDS.
One for obeying the Preſent Government.
The other, the ſecond part of a DEMURRER; Undeſervedly called RELIGIOUS.
JAMES. 1. 26. If any man among you, ſeeme to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart; this mans Religion is in vaine.
LONDON: Printed for John Wright, at the Kings Head in the Old-Bayley, 1649.
A Combate between two SECONDS, One for obeying the PRESENT GOVERNMENT; The other, the ſecond part of a DEMURRER.
WHen a Scholler of the lower forme doth offend, the Uſher takes him into his hands for correction; And this Demurrer being of the lower forme, at leaſt in regard of charity, I think I may make bold to beſtow ſome chaſtiſements, if not upon him, yet upon his faulty workes. The wiſedome that is from above, is firſt pure, then peaceable, gentle, and without partiality. Therefore to be impure, unpeaceable, injurious and partiall; muſt be the wiſedom from below, and brings him down to a very low forme, that is guilty therein.
This Demurrer wanting ſtrength in his Arguments, or doubting of them, thinkes to fortifie his diſcourſe, by laying ſcandalous and uncharitable ſuſpitions, on the perſon of him that wrote for obedience; neither are they uncharitable only, but untrue; and ſuch that upon the proofe of them: the Demurrer would hardly adventure a ſmall ſumme of Money, though he thus eaſily adventure his ſoule: And yet he ſayes he ſees, (and becauſe he ſaith ſo, his ſinne remaines, for an untruth is never truly ſeene) and without reſtitution, and reparation, hee cannot expect his ſinne ſhould be taken from him. He ſaith, He ſees that it is a great ſnare to be poſſeſt of great eſtates by that power which can diveſt them, if they aſſiſt not their wicked deſignes; And that the Author he ſpeaks of, is entangled in this ſnare, or elſe he would never undertake the Patronage of ſo bad a Cauſe. For anſwer; Firſt, This man cannot poſſibly fetch any convincing proof, or demonſtration of that which he ſaith, He ſees; But fetches it wholly from uncharitableneſſe; even a contrariety to that charity which thinketh none evill. This 1 Cor. 13.is all, becauſe the Author will not comply with this mans errors and party. And whereas he calls it a bad Cauſe, certainely it may be good ſtill; for he hath very badly proved it to be bad. And why doth he not accuſe Calvin, and Bucer, and Paraeus, and Gualter, and Peter Martyr, for maintaining a bad Cauſe, and doing it for a place of Profit. As for any deſigne, the whole life of the Author ſhewes him very cleare of deſignes; And for this, be it what deſigne it will be, he was no actor in it, but a ſpectator onelyonly, untill he ſaw a Government ſet on foot, and that juſtice might be had this way, and no other. And then having a right to act, he beleeved that he might exerciſe it in juſt things; yea he beleeved that it was a duty, though the Government had been taken by deſigne, and force, that thoſe who had taken it and excluded all other, ſhould give Juſtice; and if he aſiſt in that which is good, and which ſhould be ſinne if it were not done; I thinke it goes beyond the ſkill of this Demurrer, juſtly to charge that which is good, with Sinne and Guilt. Sure it is that he had the councell and conſent of impartiall Authors, (and ſuch are the dead, not intereſted in our affaires) even Authors to whom this Demurrer is but an Infant, eſpecially if this diſcourſe be the top of his ſtrength, as it ſhould be, or elſe he is falſe to his Cauſe. For a more weake, irreſolute and unreſolving paper, is ſeldome ſeene; for in it there are ſo many [perhaps] concerning the chiefe points in queſtion, that he ſeemes unreſolved himſelfe; and how can he then reſolve others? But of this more in the concluſion; And now becauſe his matter is weake, therefore his chiefe ſtrength is laid upon ſcandalizing the Author; and ſo his beſt argument is his owne uncharitableneſſe; I am therefore the larger in this point to make a plaiſter proportionable to the large poyſon of this ſerpentine Diſcourſe, that bites the Heele, when it can not come to the Head. In the meane time he may learne to conſtrue his Latin, by his owne actions in Engliſh, Scelere tuendum eſt ſcelus. That a falſe Doctrine muſt be maintained by falſe Slanders.
And now to make manifeſt that the Author is not ſo fixed to the world, as to maintaine a bad Cauſe, for a place of profit, let the Demurrer firſt know that this Author at the p…ſſing of the ſelfe denying Ordinance, gave his vote clearely for the quitting of his place, and did verely thinke it gone, (whereof he gave very good teſtimony) but that it pleaſed the Houſes, to declare it to be without the intention of the Ordinance. So it ſeemes he hath beene able to quit ſuch a place for the good of the Publique. Secondly for the employments of the profits of his place. He hath ſo communicated them, amidſt all theſe ſales of Lands, and other opportunities which are now going, that he hath not encreaſed his eſtate by purchaſe one five pounds per annum. But thirdly, with giving maintainance to poore Schollars' in Vniverſities, fatherleſſe and poore Children in Schooles, diſtreſſed perſons of Ireland, poore in Weſtminſter, London, and the Country, poore ſervants of the late King, poore diſtreſſed Widowes of Souldiers, and ſuch to whom Arreares are due, and maintainance of Preaching; he hath gone beyond any for ought I know, that have five times his Eſtate. And for getting of reward or advancement by this worke, it is certaine he tooke a courſe to the contrary; for he was ſo farre from acquainting any that are eminent in power, and can give advancement, either with the worke, or with the Name of the Author, that he communicated them onelyonly to one that tranſcribed it, whom he adjured to ſilence. And of this concealing, the Stationer for whom it was printed, can give ſome teſtimony. True it is that upon conference, which he had of this ſubject with ſome Perſons, or by knowing his ſtile, ſome might adventure to put his name upon the worke, among which Mr. Marſhall is one, who being preſent when the worke was communicated to one of the Authors neareſt friends, in a cloſe and concealed manner, and thereupon reading it, gave his judgement concerning the Name of the Author, though he had never any hint of it by any notice from the Author.
But now to the Demurr it ſelfe:
Whereas he ſaith, That he heares few rationall conſcientious men are ſatisfied with the Declaration of Parliament. It may be he converſes with few men, ſo rationall▪ and conſcientious as to be free from partiality: But how unſatisfying ſoever it be beleeved, the Author tooke his ground upon a ſuppoſed unſatisfaction.
Whereas he ſaith, a people may [perhaps] lawfully obey a Government, when there is no probability of recovering their loſt Government. If he would leave out this word [perhaps] wherewith he much troubles his Treatiſe, the buſineſſe is neare at an end. For the Author beleeves there is no probability in ſight, and therefore it ſeemes he may have leave of the Demurrer, to approve of obedience to the preſent Government. And herein it is deſired that this irreſolute writer would reſolve himſelfe better out of thoſe, that as it ſeemes have more knowledge and judgement to reſolve then himſelfe, and particularly that in this point of probability, and poſſeſſion, and others of kin to it, he would looke into Mr. Aschams diſcourſe, and either beleeve it or confute it; It is ſtrange that theſe men ſhould ſwallow that worke of many ſheets, and ſtraine at this ſingle one; But indeed till that Booke be anſwered, Calvin, Bucer, Peter Martyr, Gualter, Paraeus, confuted with the grounds and reaſons of thoſe judicious Caſuiſts (who though of the Church of Rome, yet in theſe caſes of juſtice, not in controverſie betweene us, cannot be rejected as partiall) the cauſe ſtands good, though the Demurrer in his bad language calls it bad, but leaves it good by his doubtfull ſayings, and his weake reaſons.
Pag. 3. He acknowledgeth, When an unlawfull power commands; a man, [perhaps] may obey; So [perhaps] the Doctrine of obeying unlawfull power may be true, and the Demurrer goes about to confute a Doctrine which himſelfe confeſſeth may be true.
And then with another [perhaps] he ſaith, That Judah knowing none of the Regall Seed ſurviving, [perhaps] Submitted to Athaliahs Government. A moſt frivolous, and ignorant [perhaps.] For beſides that God had promiſed, that Davids ſeed ſhould not faile; 2 Chron. 21. 7.Jehoiada the high Prieſt knew, there was one of that ſeede alive: And why did not he preach this Demurrers Doctrine to the people, that they ſhould not obey the preſent Tyrrant, and that by it they eſtabliſhed Tyranny; betrayed the title of the juſt Heire? But no ſuch 2 Chron. 22.Doctrine appeared, but the daughter of Ahab, and Jezabel (very farre from any Title to the Crown of Judah) was obeyed ſix yeares. Beſides, ſee here the ſlightnes of this man, (whoſe Doctirne generally is a perhaps and adventure) doth not the very Text ſay, Jehoſhabeth the high prieſts wife, was Daughter of Jehoram and 2 Chron. 22. 11.ſiſter of Ahaziah the late King; And if ſo, was not her Title better then that of Athaliah a ſtranger?
Item, Pag. 3. He ſayes, The Author concludes more then he undertook to prove. But would the Demurrer be offended, if a man promiſing to give him ten pounds, doe make his guift twenty? And whereas he would gladly know, what difference betweene lawfull and unlawfull powers, if both neceſſarliy muſt be obeyed; Here indeed by confeſſing his ignorance, he might deſerve pardon, if it were not affected; For, he might know from the Caſuiſts, that the one is given as to a perſon commanding by Right of Title. The other by an interpretative conſent, and pro tali rerum ſtatu, for …he preſervation of the Common-Wealth; which is in ſuch a ſtate that it would otherwiſe be ruined. If I muſt give money to a poore honeſt man for charity, and to a thiefe for ſafety, is there no odds betweene an honeſt man, and a thiefe?
As for his rejecting the interpretation of Rom. 13. Firſt, he argues from a ſingle late writer, but ſhewes not from him what the Text ſpeakes againſt obeying a Tyrant that wants right, but of a Tyrant that does wrong. For he writes that this Tyrant, is a Terrour to good workes: Now we know a Tyrant in Title may be an encouragement to good workes, and ſuch there have beene.
It is commonly ſaid that ſome of the beſt lawes were made under Richard the third. But Secondly againſt the Demurrer and his interpretation, are the judgement of theſe Pillers of the Church; who underſtand that this place affirmeth the preſent powers to be the Ordinance of God, and are to be obeyed. Thirdly, let one Greek word be foreign Power or Force, and the other foreign Authority or Magiſtracy; Though Nimrod by the former did obtaine the latter; Yet Paraeus ſayes that his Authority gotten by power was of God. And ſo by vertue of that Text was to be obeyed; See that place, and others alleadged upon this very Text, by the Author in the laſt Edition, and they will abundantly overpoyſe this ſingle Doctors opinion, both by reaſons and Authority.
Pag. 4. He comes to Caudius and Nero, And firſt ſaith, That the Apoſtle might meane it of …ny other p…wer abſtract…dly from the Romanes. So that he will have the Apoſtle moſt impertinently, to tell the Romanes what obedience is to be given by others in another ſtate, but not by them in their owne. Secondly, Let him remember, that as Peter M…rtyr ſaith, the Romanes had now gotten the Empire of the world; And then what was the ſtate, this Demurrer would have the Apoſtle to meane? Thirdly, He ſayes nothing to Claudius, who was ſet up directly againſt the Councells and Reſolutions of the Senates: Neither was there following a free conſent. But yet further, If the Souldiers ſet up a Governour or Government, and a conſent be ſo gotten, let this Demurrer talke with his learned Councell, and then ſpeak out plainely, whether Votes gotten by or under force be valid. For in ſome caſes they ſpeake aloud they are not: Yet it ſeemes they are, when they may make for their turne. Fourthly, he ſpeakes of ſucceeding upon Caeſars Title: But was not that Title interrupted by a triumvirate? And had not Claudius a Sonne when the Souldiers made Nero his Succeſſor? Doth not this man betray his maine buſineſſe by yealding; That he who is not the Heire, may be a lawfull Succeſſor, though an Heire be living?
To the obedience given anciently in this Kingdome and yet continued to lawes of uſurpers, He anſwers generally with doubts, and ſuppoſes according to his irreſulute manner, and ever and anon, comes in which the uſuall burden of the Song; Oathes and Covenants with a paire of [perhaps.] And whereas he would lay this obedience on the darkeneſſe of the times by Topery; Certainely there were very good Lawyers in times of Popery, and in thoſe point, Popery did not darken wherein it had nothing to doe. Our preſent Lawyers fetch the maine ground of their profeſſion, from Lawyers that were Papiſts, or in times of Popery. And it would be a weak and ridiculous anſwer at a Bar to ſay; That Br…cton, Forteſcue, or Ploydon, were Papiſts, or under the darkeneſſe of Popery, and therefore their Teſtimony muſt be rejected; and as little truth as law he ſhewes, in ſaying that theſe Lawes have beene ratified by ſucceeding Parliaments, which he ſhould have produced: …ut to Salve all, he concludes, that [perhaps] till then not to be judged valid in Law. But were they not held valid and obeyed by the Generation that made them? and that this man will not alow us to doe. But Secondly, let me anſwer him, that if he onelyonly ſay [perhaps] they were not valid, he leaves roome for another to ſay [perhaps] they were valid, for one [perhaps] leaves roome for another.
Page 5. To the Teſtimonies of Divines and Caſuiſts, And firſt to that of Azorius. He moſt diſcretly anſwers, That there was a tacite conſent of all; And is there not ſuch a one now, all men being taken for reaſonable creatures. For it is ſuppoſed, every man as a rationall creature ſhould, and doth give his conſent; But it is ſeene by his reaſoning, that every man is not de facto a rationall man. To the reaſon of the Second, He with a [perhaps] ſaith, It is a Popiſh Nicety; But this a blunt anſwer to call all that Popery, which he c…n not anſwer. And if acute reaſons of Pap…ſt, muſt be Popiſh Niceties, what will he leave for Proteſtants but Duncery? But in queſtions that concerne not Popery but Reaſon and Juſtice; why is the word Popiſh brought in, but to caſt a blemiſh on that truth, which he cannot otherwiſe confute? In rationall things and not of Popiſh concernment, it is farre more ſatisfactory to heare a Papiſts wiſe reaſon then a Proteſtants folly. Beſides, the terme of Popiſh, indeed doth rather give force to their Reaſons then weaken them, when a Papiſt ſpeakes againſt Popiſh Intereſt. And ſo doth this and other Spaniſh Authors, who ſpeake herein againſt the Spaniſh and Popiſh intereſt in England, (under Queene Elizabeth) and in Holland; So he uſeth the word Popiſh to his owne diſadvantage. And now having added two Queſtions, he leaves the Matter in Queſtion, under Queſtions. To Paraeus who ſaith, Vſurping Nimrods power was of God, and muſt be obeyed; He anſwers, He beleeves Nimrods Vſurpation was over a people not engaged by Oathes and Covenants. So here hath hee given up the maine Queſtion it ſelfe, That uſurped power may be obeyed, if there be no Oathes and Covenants. Thus there remaines now no doubt of the maine poſition; But all the doubt is come to Oathes and Covenants, ſo that we have nothing now to doe, but to cleare Oathes and Covenants. As for Bucers Teſtimony, he feſſeth his blindneſſe, that he ſees not how it can be juſtified, Neither doe I thinke he will ever ſee as long as the webb of prejudice and partiality covers his eyes. Yet in this blindneſſe, he kicks and throwes at Bucer, becauſe he hardly toucheth his Gall; and yet out of partiall love to Paraeus, he grants him the very ſame for Nimrod, which here he denies to Bucer. As for his obj…cting Iack …de againſt Bucer, why doth he not object alſo the uſurpations of William Rufus, Henry the fourth, or Hen. the ſeventh, who not having right Titles to the Crown, might be encouraged, as well as Jack Cade? But the name of Iack Cade he thinks may ſerve for a ſtumbling block to a blind Reader, whereas he that ſeeth, will ſtep over both that and the reſt. This man no queſtion hath heard, that God is the Lord of Heaven and Earth, and diſpoſeth all things as he pleaſeth; And if he pleaſe to give a people into the hands and power of ſuch a one, (as he hath often done) will or can this man reſiſt and overcome the higheſt? or will he reſolve not to obey them whom God is reſolved to ſet over him? If ever he Dan. 8. 18. 25. 35.be reſtored to his right reaſon with Nebuchadnezzar, he will confeſſe, That the moſt High doth rule in the Kingdome of men, and giveth it to whomſoever he will, and ſets up over it the baſeſt of men. Let him pitty, and not damne, the once famous, and now diſtreſſed, and oppreſſed Churches in Greece, who lye under the weight of ſuch baſe and heavy Vſurpations, and yet yeild obedience to Vſurpers. Beſides, the ground of obedience being in regard of an authority, gotten by a prevaling Page 5.power; Is it to be thought, that any who have an ambition to uſurpe authority, and have power to get it, will if there were no ſuch Doctrine, forbeare uſurpation, or leave it when they have gotten it, and can keepe it by power? Againe doth not this objection lye againſt the Demurrers yeilding his purſe to ſave his life? for doth not he here encourage a theefe to goe on in his thefts? But if he pleaſe, he may find an anſwer to both, that theſe conſequences ratioanally come not from the ones giving his purſe for his perſonall ſafety, nor from the others giving obedience for publique peace and quietneſſe. As for his preferring of Sathan to Magiſtracy, When Paraus ſpeakes ſo much of an Authority given from God to Sathan, in regard of power, as he did to Nimrod; I will not ſay this Demurrer [p…rhaps] will believe the one, and obey the other; But certainly he doth now in his falſe accuſation (without any Paraeus) obey him that is the Accuſer of the brethren.
Page 6. He findes himſelfe in a ſtraight when either he muſt obey, or elſe bring confuſion to a Common Wealth. But not to obey he is reſolved, and therefore by begging the queſtion, or rather granting it to himſelfe, he breakes through. He ſaith, It is a ſinne to obey; whereas this very argument of confuſion is brought to ſ…ew, that it is not ſinne but a duty; And in Nimrods caſe, and elſe where (with a perhaps) he grants it lawfull. And for his conſequences of not recovering from Bondage, let him give me the ſame leave he takes to ſay, He muſt not do evill that good may come thereof; He muſt not diſobey to avoid theſe conſequences: But the grand Caſe (though the little Caſe will not) very fairely acknowledgeth; That where lawfull and unlawfull are in queſtion, convenience, and inconvenience muſt keepe ſilence. Neither are theſe conſequences ſo neare, and certaine, as the confuſion by diſobeying. Beſides, there have beene often remedies for ſuch conſequences; for often, uſurpations having been upon this very Crowne, they have often been removed. And Ferdinando King of Naples, leaving his people (upon the very ground, and poſition of the Author oppoſed by the Demurrer) to obey the French, who had the preſent power over them, yet the French afterward were expulſed. That of the Maſters mate he can neither anſwer, nor ſuffer. He ſaith, His Right muſt not be acknowledged; whereas there is no ſuch thing in the queſtion, but whether his commands ſhould be obeyed for the ſafety of the Ship. And then according to his uſe, he helps his lame anſwer over the ſtile, with Oathes and Covenants; with are another buſineſſe. Yet neither is here a withdrawing from a bleſſed union, but a preſervation of the Common-Wealth from deſtruction, which by being deſtroyed can hardly preſerve the bleſſed union; yet here ſomewhat bountifully, He juſtifies (with his uſuall perhaps) thoſe that are forced to proſecute ſutes under the preſent C…urts. Yea, He conſents to the power that there manageth the lawes with a diſtinction: But doe not all his objections of breaking Oathes, allowing uſurped power, and acceſſarie poſt factum, come in now againſt himſelfe? For if the Judges have no Authority as well as power, doth not this ſubmiſſion incourage, approve and abet an uſurped Authority? And what ſatisfaction can this give to any man, with a quiet conſcience to enjoy that which they decree to him? No more then if a Neighbour meeting two that have a ſuite in law, ſhould pronounce the law to be for one, and againſt the other; ſhould that one ſatisfie his conſcience in taking the others eſtate into his poſſ…ſſion? Therefore if he will uſe the word juſtifie with ſence and reaſon, he muſt allow an Authroity, which in a caſe of uſurpation is grounded on a tacite and interpretative conſent; He would have all joyne together in diſobeying, and that indeed is the deſigne: But firſt, that is unprofitable; yea, in being over power'd, it is impoſſible to any good effect, becauſe thus joyning, it will bring indeed a diſjoyning, taking away all juſtice, and order, give up all to power, and ſo bring confuſion to the whole. And could not the Papiſts whom he accuſeth of nicetie, have found out this groſſe anſwer, in the time of Queene Elizabeth? yet they never urged it, and therefore were more reformed in the Doctrine of obedience, then this Demurrer.
And having walked through his diſcourſe, with Oathes continually in his mouth, now he is come to the right place of uſing them; for all this while his uſe of them hath beene but generally a granting of the queſtion, for upon the matter it ſpeakes this, that if it were not for Oathes, obedience were due. But to ſay that the Kings perſon cannot dye, is a matter of Mirth, or if you will of Non-ſenſe; eſpecially to be put into this Oath; for it amounts to this, that I ſweare to preſerve the Kings perſon, which needes no preſervation, becauſe it cannot dye; As for the clauſe of preſerving the Priviledges of Parliament, and Liberties of the Subjects; which is the maine force, and little elſe ſaid by him; I firſt deſire an anſwer of this queſtion: Did this objector urge this Oath out of any Pulpit or Preſſe, with this Vehemencie and Iteration againſt the breach of Priviledges by the Prentiſes? or was it ſo preſt againſt thoſe that ſate ſome dayes, and for ought apeares, would have ſate till this day, if they had power, while many of the Members were driven away? And here, upon this occaſion let the Demurrer know, that though the combination which managed that breach, were ſaid to have many ſcore thouſands in that engagement to abet it, and were confident of prevailing, or elſe would never have undertaken it; yet the Author (though hearing this) did not for any place of profit apply himſelfe to that party, but (as by many witneſſes can be proved) reſolved to leave both his place, and any place in the Kingdome, and began a journey to goe out of both; But that God wrought a change. And indeed I cannot blame him, if it were abominable to him to live under ſuch a Government, it being one of the higheſt Curſes; The rule of Children, and one of the baſeſt Vaſſalages to be ruled Eſa. 3. 4.by them: And yet upon their Rule and Law-making did this engagement, Act and proceed; Yea, the Houſe it ſelf; yet Oathes then not preached as now. So by a ſecond experiment it apperes, he could part from a place of profit, if he ſaw reaſon for it.
But if we looke to the Oath it ſelfe, doth the Oath The words of the Covenat are theſe, wee ſhall with the ſame ſincerity, reality and conſtancy in our ſeverall vocations, endevor with our eſtates and lives mutually to preſerve the Rights and Priviledges of the Parliaments, and Liberties of the people, &c.bind us actually to preſerve the Priviledges of Parliament, or onelyonly to endeavour to preſerve them? For actually to preſerve them, may be, and is often out of our power, and then we ſhould ſweare to doe that which is impoſſible for us to performe. If this Demurrer had received a ſumme of money, and had ſworne that he would indeavor to preſerve it ſafe for the owner; but a Robber takes this ſumme by force from him, or will kill him, if he doe not deliver it; is this man guilty of Perjury, if having ſincerely intended, and endeavoured to preſerve it, yet in theſe caſes he part from the money?
Thirdly, is the giving of all to confuſion by diſobedience, the way to keepe priviledges of Parliament, and liberties of the people; or rather the way to looſe both Parliament and Liberties, and to give up all to a popular confuſion, or to a Military power to be ruled by force, and not by lawes? Breifely, if obedience be a duty in regard of Common good, (which is the generall Tenet held forth by Divines, and Caſuiſts) how doth an Oath binde to the breach of a duty, or to the deſtruction of the Common-Wealth, which indeed was made for the preſervation of it? And let the Demurrer ſay ingenuouſly whether he thinkes that ſuch a deſtructive ſenſe was the meaning of the Oath, and ſo Ordinarily underſtood by the Givers or Takers.
And now Page 8. He goes about to prove that the Heire is already a Succeſſor, and yet complaines that ſome keepe the Heire from being a Succeſſor; and after (not by a Popiſh nicety, but a Popiſh abſurdity) he maintaines the inceſtuous Title of Queene Mary, and calls her Hei…e to the Crowne. And herewith another [perhaps] He ſpeakes that which is uncharitable with it, and untrue without it; and nothing but want of charity would have ſpoken an untruth in a ſcandalous manner, though with a [perhaps.] For the Gent. hath beene excuſed by reaſon of Age in point of attendance, and ſo the Demurrer having taken back to himſelfe his owne uncharitableneſſe, and untruth, (for perhaps cannot make that to have bin true, which whatſoever happen was not true) he hath nothing left to helpe him, but confeſſion and amendment.
But to draw to an end, I wiſh that this Demurrer would ſo farre know himſelfe, that he is moſt unfit for dealing in controverſies; being moſt irreſolute in himſelfe, and therefore unfit to reſolve others: He hath at his back both a wall, and a back-doore, when he is beaten out of the m…ine queſtion, then he runs to the wall, but ill daw bed of Oathes and Covenants; and when he is preſt not onelyonly by Arguments, but his owne conſcience to confeſſe the Truth, he leaves open a back doore call'd [perhaps] to ſhift himſelfe out: But let him know that at this doore the poſition which he oppoſeth may get out alſo. For example; among many [perhaps] he ſaith thus: A people may [perhaps] lawfully Page 2.obey a Government, when there is no probability of recovering their loſt Government. Here if it be inferred, that there is no probability of recovering, He hath left a [perhaps] to get out of the concluſion. But his oppoſer will tell him that with the ſame [perhaps] his poſition may be true and eſcape alſo. So Page 3. When an unlawfull power commands lawfull things, a man [perhaps] may obey: If ſo, Then [perhaps] the Author affirming the ſame thing, may have ſaid true: And if ſo, why is this party ſo angry and uncharitable, without a [perhaps] for that with [perhaps] may be true? But thus it falls out, when men are reſolved to fight with a truth that ſtares in their faces; the truth breakes out of the mouth of their conſcience, and then they put a Muzell called [perhaps] upon it, that it may not ſpeake plaine. What is this, but to impriſon the truth in unrighteouſneſſe, to leave people in doubt, whom they undertake to reſolve, by blind guiding of the blind, to leave them in the Darke, that they may not know where nor whether to goe, and at laſt fall into the Ditch? Let him ſee the truth himſelfe, before he undertake to teach others. Let him receive the Truth fully, and that ſhall make him fully free. Free from error, free from uncharitableneſſe, and ſlanders, the fruits of it. Let him not out of prejudice againſt the Truth, and the Author that maintaines it, make Warre againſt Calvin, Bucer, Paraeus, Gualter, Peter Martyr; and if he have Charity to forgive them, let him enlarge it a little to forgive the Author alſo, that ſayes after, and with them. But indeed there is little cauſe for him to give, but much to receive forgiveneſſe. For in his Title, having called himſelfe a lover of Truth and Peace, even in the very face of that Title, and in the ſame Page; he is not aſhamed to utter ſuch untrue ſcandals, that he confutes his owne Name, by groſſe evidences, ſhewing that he loves neither truth nor peace. And whereas ſundry other perſons that have written on this Subject, have dealt like men of Religion and Reaſon, anſwering Matter with Matter, Reaſon with Reaſon; This Demurrers tongue being ſet on fire of Hell, anſwers Matter and Reaſon with Scandalous untruthes. And this I charge upon his Conſcience, wiſhing that the worme of guilt may never leave biting, untill by Remorſe it worke Repentance, and by Repentaece Forgiveneſſe.
FINIS.
End of the text · Antony Ascham, A Combat Between Two Seconds (1649)