The Wounded Conscience Cured, Section 4
Sect. IV.
NOw we come to the forfeiture (ſaith the Doctor) of this power, if the Prince, ſay they, will not diſcharge his truſt, then it falls to the people or the two Houſes (the repreſentative body of the people) to ſee to it, and to reaſſume that power, and thereby to reſiſt. This they conceive to follow upon the derivation of power from the people by vertue of election, and upon the ſtipulation or covenant of the Prince with the people, as alſo to be neceſſary in regard of th…ſe meanes of ſafety which every ſtate ſhould have within it ſelfe. Wee will examin… them in order.
Anſ. Herein he doth charge us with this opinion, that wee hold it lawfull for the people to reaſſume their power, in caſe the Prince diſchargeth not his truſt, making the world beleeve that we contend for depoſing of Kings; or that the Parliament goes about ſuch a worke as that is▪ for what elſe is it for the people or Parliament to re-aſſume their power from the Prince? whereas we deſire all the world ſhould know, that we now take up armes as an act of ſelfe-preſervation, not endeavouring o… intending to thruſt the King from his Office, though for the preſent the State ſets ſome under the King at the Ster…e, till the waters be calmed, as we ſaid before.
Then the Doctor ſaith, concerning the derivation of power, we anſwer, firſt▪ if it be not from the people, as they will have it, and as before it was cleared, the… can there be no re-aſſuming of this power by the people.
Anſ. How doth this follow? for all that the Doctor had cleared before, was this; that power abſtractively conſidered was from God, no… from the people; now let us ſee whether the clearing of that will brin… in ſuch a conſequence as this, that there can bee no re-aſſuming of this power by the people: if it will enforce ſuch a conſequence, then the ſyllogiſme is this; …f power and magiſtracy and authority it ſelfe be of God and the forms of government and deſignation of perſons be of man, the… there can be no re-aſſuming of this power by the people. But the powe… itſelfe and magiſtracy is of God, the formes of government and deſignation of perſons is of man (ſaith the Doctor Sect. 3.) Therefore there ca… be no re-aſſuming this power by the people, ſaith the Doctor, Sect. 4.
Anſ. Will not his imagined adverſaries eaſily deny the ſequell? indee… if he had proved that neither the power nor the qualification, nor the d… ſignation were of man but of God, and cleared that firſt, then hee had t… ken that argument from his adverſaries: but ſeeing he hath granted th… the wayes of government and deſignation of perſons to bee of m… (though he hath proved the power it ſelfe of God) ſure he hath no w… ſtopped the courſe of their arguments, or practice againſt whom he d… putes.
The… he comes to ſhew the inconſequence, and ſaith. If the people ſhould gi… the power …abſolutely …they would have it, leaving nothing to God in it but approbation, yet could they not therefore have right to take that power away, for many things which are altogether in our diſpoſing before we part …ith the… are not afterward i… our power to recall them.
Anſ. He ſuppoſeth we goe to take the power away from the Prince, (which we doe not, as hath beene ſaid.)
2. There is a difference between diſpoſing of things by way of donation or ſale, and diſpoſing things by way of truſt: true; thoſe things which we diſpoſe of by way of donation or ſale are not afterward in our power to recall, as they were before the donation or ſale; as if a man give his childe land, or ſell land to his neighbour, it is not in the power of the father or neighbour to recall or diſpoſe of the land, as before the donation or ſale: But if a thing be diſpoſed of by way of truſt, then if the fiduciary or truſted ſhall not diſcharge his truſt, it is in the power (at leaſt of the truſting) to looke to the matter himſelfe; as in caſe that a Steward bee …uſted with a mans houſe; and thus when any government is ſet up in a land by a people, they truſt the governour, they doe not give away their liberties or rights, but truſt them in the hand of the governour, who if abuſed that he doe not performe his Stewardly truſt as he ſhould, the people or repreſentative body as an act of ſelfe preſervation (I doe not ſay, as an act of juriſdiction) are to looketo it. Neither herein doe they ſo reaſſume their power as to take away any thing which they gave to the King, but ſo as to actuate that power which they alwaies had left in themſelves, (as the power of ſelfe-preſervation.)
Then the Dr. ſaith, Although it were as they would have it, that they give the power, and God approves, yet becauſe the Lords hand alſo and his oyle is upon the perſon elected to the Crowne, and then he is the Lords Anointed, and the Miniſter of God, thoſe hands of the people which were uſed in lifting him up to the Crown, may not againe be lifted up againſt him, either to take the Crowne from his head, or the ſword out of his hand.
Anſ. …f this be true, then Princes that are meerly elective and not hereditary, and whoſe comming to the Crowne is meerly pactionall, cannot be depoſed by the people, for they are the Lords Anointed, and the Miniſters of God; but this is contrary to the Doctor himſelfe, who in this ſame Section ſaith thus, Although ſuch arguments (ſpeaking of the forfeiture of the Princes power in the next line before) may ſeeme to have ſome force in States meerly elective, and pactionall, yet can it never be made to appeare by any indifferent underſtanding, that the like muſt obtaine in this Kingdome. And to this purpoſe ſaith the Dr. Phil. Paraeus ex…uſeth what his father had written on Romans 13. in the point of reſiſtance: that it was to be underſtood of elective and pactionall government, and when the government is elective and pactionall, are not the Princes the Miniſters, and the Lords Anointed?
Then the Doctor ſaith, How ſhall the Conſcience be ſati…fied that this their argument grounded upon election, and the derivation of power from the people; can have place in this Kingdome, when as the Crowne not onelyonly deſcends by inheritance, but alſo hath ſo often been ſetled by conqueſt, in the lines of Saxons, Danes and Normans.
Anſw. Firſt, how can the Conſcience be …atisfied in that which the Dr. writes in this his booke, where he acknowledgeth in this Section that it is probable indeed that Kings at the firſt were by choiſe here as elſe where? And in Section 5. ſaith, that the forms of ſeverall governments (whereof Princedome is one) are from the invention of man, and ſo by derivation from man.
2. The Drs. great deſign I perceive by his frequent touching this matter is to make our King a King by conqueſt; for in Sect. 3. He ſaith Gods Vice-gerents here on earth came into their Office either by immediate deſignation, the election of the people, ſucceſſion and inheritance, or by conqueſt; now he cannot ſay that our King came in by immediate deſignation, & he doth not ſay that our Princes lay claim to the Crown by vertue of their election, & if by inheritance, then by the right of an election or by conqueſt; for by meere inheritance a man hath no more, then what thoſe firſt had whom he doth ſucceed; Inheritance being but the continuation of the firſt right upon the children, the right of election he doth diſclaim, and of derivation of power from the people, therefore the right that he makes our Prince to have to the Crowne is onelyonly the right of a Conqueſt; then if any mans ſword be longer or ſtronger then his, hee may quickly have as much right to the Crowne as the King; which opinion of the Drs. for my owne part I muſt abhor from, what danger will it not expoſe our dread Soveraign to? Did not Athaliah reigne as a Conquereſſe ſix yeares? And who knowes not that ſhe was lawfully thruſt from the Throne againe by a ſtronger hand then her owne? Meere conqueſt being nothing elſe but an unjuſt uſurpation: and if the Conquerour rule the whole Kingdome, and keepe them under by conqueſt only, why may not the ſubject riſe and take up armes to deiiver themſelves from that ſlavery? Thus doth the Doctor open the door to greater reſiſtance then thoſe that he diſputes againſt.
3. Though a Prince ſhould hold his right by conqueſt as the next right, yet if he hold it alſo by derivation from the people as the remote right, and the laſt be the more naturall and juſt way, then arguments grounded on that remote right may be more valid, then thoſe that are grounded on the next right, but thus it is with our Prince who although he doth ſucceed the conquerour, yet doth alſo take in the voluntary and free conſent of the Common-weale unto his Crowne, which a meer conquerour doth not, but rules without the conſent and againſt the good liking of the people.
Then the Dr. ſaith, We tell them the Roman Emperors were not to be reſiſted; they reply that they were abſolute Monarchs, was it any other way then by force and arms, the way that the Saxons, Danes and Normans made themſelves maſters of this people. Anſ. Now in theſe words we ſee the Drs. mind plainly that he contends for an arbitrary government; for he ſaith page 11. that the Emperours did rule abſolutely and arbitrarily, and here he ſaith how came they of Subjects to be abſolute Monarchs, was it any other waies then by force and arms the way that the Saxons, Danes and Normans made themſelves maſters of this people, in whoſe right and lines he ſaith before, the Crowne deſcended upon our King. What can be more plaine then this for an arbitrary government? It ſeems the Dr. was conſcious to himſelfe that herein he had diſcovered himſelfe, and therefore he ſaies this, I ſpeake not as if the Kings of this land might rule as Conquerours, but that will not heale it.
Then the Doctor comes to the matter of capitulation or covenant, or oath which the Prince taketh to confirm what he promiſed, which, ſaith he, are ſo alledged as if the breach or non-performance of the Princes part were, a forfeiture of his power. But we anſwer, ſaith he, the words capitulation or covenant are now much uſed, to make men believe the Kings admittance to the Crowne is altogether conditionall: whereas our King is King before he comes to the Coronation.
Anſ. Herein the Doctor miſtakes us: for though we aknowledge a covenant, yet we cannot be ſo weake as to thinke that any breach of the covenant is a forfeiture of the Kings power, for then the beſt man could not be King long; but we firſt affirme a Covenant, for though the Kings of Iſrael were Monarchs, and immediately deſigned by God himſelfe to their office, and ſo one would thinke there ſhould be no need of their comming to the Crowne by a covenant, yet to ſhew the neceſſity of this oath and covenant when they came to their Crowns, they alſo took an oath, and entred into covenant with the people to protect their rights and perſons, 1 Chro. 11. 3. 2. We ſay that this mutuall covenant betwixt the King and the people, binds the King to the people, as well as the people to the King, and that therefore it is as well unlawfull for a King by force to oppreſſe his ſubjects, and to take up armes againſt them, as for the ſubjects to take up armes againſt him.
Thirdly, that hence it followes that the Kings power is limited.
4. From this covenant and capitulation we ſay, thereby it appeare… that the people doe commit a truſt to the King: which,
5. If he doth neglect, as he doth not alwaies forfeit his power, ſo neither are they to forfeit their right of looking to themſelves for the preſent And therefore all that the Doctor ſaies, that we urge the covenant a… capitulation ſo much as if our King were a conditionall King, and that which he brings to prove that he is a King before Coronation is needleſly urged againſt us: for we ſay and ſpeake plainly, that though the righ… that our King hath to the Crowne is firſtly by derivation of power from the people, yet he hath his right by inheritance, and is not ſuch an elective King as is choſen for a time, and his life if he rule well: and ſo his right to end in himſelfe, but to continue upon his poſterity: for the people doe derive their power two waies, either ſo as to chuſe a ma… into office for his life onelyonly in caſe he rule well, and ſo our Kings Predeceſſors were not brought to the Crowne; or ſo as to commit the truſ… of the State unto him, to deſcend upon his poſterity, which when his poſterity comes to, hath both a right of election and inheritance; it being the right of inheritance as it is left by their fore-fathers, and the right o… election in regard of its principle from whence it flowed: and thus w… doe eſtate our King in his Throne, hereby eſtabliſhing him more ſur… therein, and then the oppoſite opinion of conqueſt doth.
Then the Doctor tells us, That though the King doe breake his covenant or not make performance thereof, yet a forfeiture of his power doth not follow from thence: for ſaith hee, could they in this covenant ſhew us ſuch an agreement between the King and his people, that in caſe he will not diſcharge his truſt, thus it ſhall be lawfull for the States of the Kingdome by armes to reſiſt, and provide for the ſafety thereof it were ſomething.
To which I anſwer, we doe not preſſe the forfeiture of the Kings power upon non-performance of covenant, but we ſay this; that the end o… his truſt being to looke to the Kingdome, though there be no ſuch word expreſſed in the covenant or agreement betwixt the King and his people that in caſe he ſhall not diſcharge his truſt, then it ſhall bee lawfull fo… the State of the Kingdome by armes to reſiſt, and to looke to their own… ſafety: their ſafety being the end of this truſt, & ratio legis being lex in reaſon that muſt be implied, there is a covenant ſtricken betweene man & a woman at Marriage; when they marry one another it is not ve… bally expreſſed in their agreement, that if one commit adultery, th… party ſhall be divorced; and yet we know that that covenant of marri…g… carries the force of ſuch condition. What followed in this Section i… either… repetition of what was before, or what in ſubſtance we have anſwered already.
OnelyOnly at the laſt the Doctor moveth this queſtion: What then if the Prince take to himſelfe more power, or not performe what hee is bound to? and anſwers, then may the ſubjects uſe all faire meanes as are fit to uſe, cryes to God, petitions to the Prince, deniall of obedience to his lawfull commands, deniall of Subſidies, &c. but are left without all meanes to compell by force or reſiſtance.
Anſ. The ſubjects are conſidered two wayes:
Socially
Severally
Severally as private men, and ſo it hath beene taken for granted, that in …aſe of oppreſſion the ſubjects have uſed no armes but teares and prayers. Before this Parliament, how many oppreſſions were there upon the people, both in their eſtates and in Gods worſhip, by thoſe who had un…uly gotten authority from the King; and yet wee ſaw no forcible reſiſtance made, but every man quietly ſubjecting himſelfe under that ſuffering condition.
Socially and joyntly, and ſo there is other remedy for the ſubjects then onelyonly prayers and teares, and that the ſubjects are conſidered in this poſture wherein now we are, profeſſing that wee take not up armes as we are private men barely, but as ſubjects united and joyned in the repreſentative body of the Kingdome, which never yet was counted unlawfull by any Divines, as I have ſhewed before.