Treatise of Civil Policy, Treatise · Question 35
QUEST. XXXV. Whether or no the ſuffering of the Martyrs in the Primitive Church militate againſt the lawfulneſſe of defenſive wars?
ROyaliſts think they burden our Cauſe much with hatred, when they bring the Fathers and ancient Martyrs againſt us. So the P. Prelate extracted out of other Authors, teſtimonies for this, andSacr. ſan…. 6. pag. 74, 75, 76. The Doctors of Aberdeene in their Duplyes. from I. Armagh, in a Sermon on Rom. 1. 3. pag. 20, 21. So the Do. of Aberdeene. The Prelat proveth from Clem. Alexand. l. 7. c. 17. That the King is conſtituted by the Lord. So Ignatius.
Anſw. 1. Except he prove from theſe Fathers that the King is from God onelyonly and immediately, he proveth nothing.
Obj. 2. Iren. l. 5. adv. haer. c. 20. proveth that God giveth Kingdomes, and that the devill lied, Luk. 4. and we make the people to make Kings, and ſo to be the children of the Devill.
Anſw. If we denyed God to diſpoſe of Kingdomes, this man might alledge the Church of God in England and Scotland, to be the ſons of Satan. But Gods Word, Deut. 17. 18. and many other places make the people to make Kings, and yet not devils. But to ſay that Prelates ſhould crowne Kings, and with their foule fingers anoint him; and that as the Popes ſubſtitutes, is to make him that is the ſonne of perdition, a Donor of Kingdoms, alſo to make a man with his bloodie ſword to aſcend to a throne, is to deny God to be the diſpoſer of Kingdoms, and Prelats teach both theſe.
Obj. 3. Tertul. Apol. c. 30. Inde eſt Imperator, unde & homo, antequam imperator, inde poteſtas illi, unde & ſpiritus: God is no leſſe the Creator of Soveraigntie, then of the ſoul of man.
Anſw. God onelyonly maketh Kings, by his abſolute ſoveraignty, as he onelyonly maketh high and low, and ſo onelyonly he maketh Mayors, Provoſts, Bailiffes, for there is no power but of him, Rom. 13. Ergo▪ Provoſts and Bailiffes are not from men. The Reader ſhall not be troubled with the reſt of the teſtimonies of this poore Plagiarie, for they prove what never man denyed, but Prelats and Royaliſts, to wit, that Kings are not from Gods approving and regulating will; which they oppoſe, when they ſay, Sole Conqueſt is a juſt title to the Crowne.
But they deſerve rather an anſwer which Grotius, Barclay, Arniſaeus, and Spalato alledge, as
Obj. 1. Cyprian Epiſt. 1. Non eſt fas Chriſtianis, armis, ac vituori ſe adverſus impetum perſecutorum, Chriſtians cannot by violence defend themſelves againſt perſecutors.
Anſw. If theſe words be preſſed literally, it were not lawfull to defend our ſelfe againſt murtherers; but Cyprian is expreſly condemning in that place, the ſeditious tumults of people againſt the lawfull Magiſtrate.
Obj. 2. The Ancients ſay he was juſtly puniſhed who did rend and teare the Edict of Diocleſian and Maximinus, Euſeb. l. 7. Hiſt. Eccleſ. c. 5.
Anſw. To rend an Edict is no act of naturall ſelf-defence, but a breach of a poſitive commandment of the Emperors, and could not be lawfully done, eſpecially by a private man.
Object. 3. Cyprian Epiſt. 56. Incumbamus gemitibus aſſiduis & deprecationibus crebris, haec enim ſunt munimenta ſpiritualia & tela divina quae protegunt: And Ruſſinus, l. 2. c. 6. Ambroſius adverſus reginae (Iuſtinae Arianae) furorem non ſe manu defenſabat aut telo, ſed jejuniis continuatiſque vigiliis ſub altari poſitus.
Anſw. It is true, Cyprian reputed prayers his armour, but not his onelyonly armour. Though Ambroſe, de facto, uſed no other againſt Iuſtina; the places ſay nothing againſt the lawfulneſſe of ſelfe-defence. Ambroſe ſpeaketh of that armour and theſe meanes of defence, that are proper to Paſtors, and theſe are prayers and teares, not the ſword; becauſe Paſtors carry the Arke, that is their charge, not the ſword, that is the Magiſtrates place.
Object. 4. Tertullian Apolog. c. 37. ſaith expreſly, that the Chriſtians might for ſtrength and number have defended themſelves againſt their perſecutors, but thought it unlawfull. Quando vel una nox pauculis faculis largitatem ul…ionis po et operari, ſi malum malo diſpungi penes nos liceret, ſed abſit ut igni humano vindicetur divina ſecta, aut doleat pati, in quo probetur. Si enim hoſtes extraneos, non tantum vindices occultos agere vellemus, deeſſet nobis vis numerorum & copiarum?
Anſw. I will not goe about to ſay that Tertullian thought it lawfull to raiſe Armes againſt the Emperour; I ingeniouſly confeſſe Tertullian was in that errour. But, 1. ſomething of the man. 2. OfTertullian in an errour. the Chriſtians. Of the man. Tertullian after this turned a Montaniſt. 2. Pamelius ſaith of him, in vit. Tertul. inter Apocrypha numeratur—excommunicatus. 3. It was Tertullians error in a fact, not in a queſtion, that he believed Chriſtians were ſo numerous, as that they might have fought with the Emperours. 4. M. Pryn doth judiciouſly obſerve, 3. part. ſoveraigne power of Parl. pag. 139, 140. He not onelyonly thought it unlawfull to reſiſt, but alſo to flee, and therefore wrote a booke de fuga, and therefore as ſome men are exceſſive in doing for Chriſt, ſo alſo in ſuffering for Chriſt; Hence I inferre, that Tertullian is neither ours, nor theirs in this point; and we can cite Tertullian againſt them alſo, I am ſumus ergo pares. Yea Fox in his Monum. ſaith, Chriſtians ranne to the ſtakes to be burnt, when they were neither condemned, nor cited. 4. What if wee cite Theodoret, fol. 98. De provid. Who about that time ſay that evill men reigne, foreign through the cowardlineſſe of the ſubjects; as the Prelate ſaith of Tertullian, I turne it, If Theodoret wereThe ancient Chriſtians did riſe in Armes againſt perſecuting Emperours. now living, he would goe for a Rebell. About that time Chriſtians ſought help from Conſtantine the Great, againſt Lycinius their Emperour, and overthrew him in battaile. And the Chriſtians being oppreſſed by the King of Perſia their owne King, ſent to Theodoſius to help them againſt him. 2. For the man. Tertullian in the place cited, ſaith, The Chriſtians were ſtrangers under the Emperour. Externi ſumus, and therefore they had no Laws of their owne, but were under the Civill Laws of Heathen, till Conſtantines time; and they had ſworne to Iulian as his ſouldiers, and therefore might have, and no doubt had, ſcruples of conſcience to reſiſt the Emperour. 2. It is knowne Iulian had huge numbers of Heathen in his Armie, and to reſiſt had beene great danger. 3. Wanting Leaders and Commanders, (many prime men doubting of the lawfulneſſe thereof) though they had beene equall in number, yet number is not all in warre, skill in valorous Commanders is required. 4. What if all Chriſtians were not of Tertullians minde. 5. If I would go to humane teſtimonies, which I judge not ſatisfactory to the conſcience, I might cite many; The practice of France, of Holland: The Divines in Luthers time, as Sleidan. 8. c. 8. 22. reſolved reſiſtance to be lawfull. Calvin, Beza, Pareus; the German Divines, Bucanus, and an hoaſt might be produced.