power, to do what they please, have wronged kings and kingdoms. It had
been good that kings, of late, had carried themselves so, as this
question of the king's power might never have come in debate; for they
have been great losers thereby. Kings are very desirous to have things
spoken and written, to hold up their arbitrary and unlimited power; but
that way doth exceedingly wrong them. There is one, a learned man, I
confess, who hath written a book for the maintenance of the absolute
power of kings, called _Defensio Regis_, whereby he hath wronged himself
in his reputation, and the king in his government. As for the fact, in
taking away the life of the late king, (whatever was God's justice in
it) I do agree with him to condemn it, as a most unjust and horrid act,
upon their part who did it: but when he cometh to speak of the power of
kings, in giving unto them an absolute and unlimited power, urging the
damnable maxim, _quod libet licet_, he will have a king to do what he
pleaseth, _impune_, and without controlment. In this, I cannot but
dissent from him.
In regard of subordination some say, that a king is accountable to none
but God. Do what he will, let God take order with it; this leadeth kings
to atheism, let them do what they please, and to take God in their own
hand: in regard of laws, they teach nothing to kings but tyranny: and in
regard of government, they teach a king to take an arbitrary power to
himself, to do what he pleaseth without controlment. How dangerous this
hath been to kings, is clear by sad experience. Abuse of power and
arbitrary government, hath been one of God's great controversies with
our king's predecessors. God in His justice, because power hath been
abused, hath thrown it out of their hands: and I may confidently say
that God's controversy with the kings of the earth is for their
arbitrary and tyrannical government.
It is good for our king to learn to be wise in time, and know that he
receiveth this day a power to govern, but a power limited by contract;
and these conditions he is bound by oath to stand to. Kings are deceived
who think that the people are ordained for the king; and not the king
for the people; the Scripture sheweth the contrary. The king is the
"minister of God for the people's good." God will not have a king, in
an arbitrary way, to encroach upon the possessions of subjects, "A
portion is appointed for the prince." And it is said, "My princes shall
no more oppress My people; and the rest of the land, shall they give
unto the house of Israel, according to their tribes." The king hath his
distinct possessions and revenues from the people; he must not oppress
and do what he pleaseth, there must be no tyranny upon the throne.
I desire not to speak much upon this subject. Men have been very tender
in meddling with the power of kings; yet, seeing these days have brought
forth debates concerning the power of kings, it will be necessary to be
clear in this matter. Extremities would be shunned. A king should keep
within the bounds of the covenant made with the people, in the exercise
of his power; and subjects should keep within the bounds of this
covenant, in regulating that power. Concerning the last, I shall
propound these three to your consideration.
1. A king, abusing his power to the overthrow of religion, laws and
liberties, which are the very fundamentals of this contract and
covenant, may be controlled and opposed; and if he set himself to
overthrow all these by arms, then they who have power, as the estates of
a land, may and ought to resist by arms: because he doth, by that
opposition, break the very bonds, and overthroweth all the essentials of
this contract and covenant. This may serve to justify the proceedings of
this kingdom against the late king, who, in an hostile way, set himself
to overthrow religion, parliaments, laws and liberties.
2. Every breach of covenant, wherein a king falleth, after he hath
entered into covenant, doth not dissolve the bond of the covenant.
Neither should subjects lay aside a king for every breach, except the
breaches be such as overthrow the fundamentals of religion, and of the
covenant with the people. Many examples of this may be brought from
scripture. I shall give but one. King Asa entered solemnly into
covenant with God and the people. After that, he falleth in gross
transgressions and breaches. He associated himself and entered into
league with Benhadad, king of Syria, an idolater; he imprisoned Hanani,
the Lord's prophet, who reproved him, and threatened judgment against
that association, and at that same time he oppressed some of the people:
and yet, for all this, they neither laid him aside, nor accounted him an
hypocrite.
3. Private persons should be very circumspect about that which they do
in relation to the authority of kings. It is very dangerous for private
men, to meddle with the power of kings, and the suspending them from the
exercise thereof. I do ingenuously confess that I find no example of it.
The prophets taught not such doctrine to their people, nor the apostles,
nor the reformed kirks. Have ever private men, pastors or professors,
given in to the estates of a land as their judgment, unto which they
resolve to adhere, that a king should be suspended from the exercise of
his power? And, if we look upon these godly pastors, who lived in king
James's time, of whom one may truly say, more faithful men lived not in
these last times: for they spared not to tell the king his faults, to
his face: yea, some of them suffered persecution for their honesty and
freedom, yet we never read nor have heard, that any of these godly
pastors joined with other private men, did ever remonstrate to
parliament or estate as their judgment, that the king should be
suspended from the exercise of his royal power.
II. It is clear from this covenant, that people should obey their king
in the Lord: for, as the king is bound by the covenant to make use of
his power to their good; so, they are bound to obey him in the Lord in
the exercise of that power. About the people's duty to the king, take
these four observations.
1. That the obedience of the people is in subordination to God; for the
covenant is first with God, and then with the king. If a king command
any thing contrary to the will of God--in this case, Peter saith, "it is
better to obey God, than man." There is a line drawn from God to the
people, they are lowest in the line: and have magistrates inferior and
supreme above them, and God above all. When the king commandeth the
people that which is lawful, and commanded by God, then he should be
obeyed; because he standeth in right line under God, who hath put him in
his place. But if he command that which is unlawful, and forbidden of
God, in that he should not be obeyed to do it; because he is out of his
line. That a king is to be obeyed with this subordination, is evident
from scripture; take one place for all. At the beginning, ye have both
obedience urged to superior powers, as the ordinance of God, and
damnation threatened against those who resist the lawful powers.
It is said by some, that many ministers in Scotland would not have king
JESUS, but king Charles to reign. Faithful men are wronged by such
speeches. I do not understand these men. For, if they think that a king
and JESUS are inconsistent, then they will have no king: but I shall be
far from entertaining such thoughts of them. If they think the doing a
necessary duty for king Charles is to prefer his interest to Christ's,
this is also an error. Honest ministers can very well discern between
the interest of Christ, and of the king. I know no minister that setteth
up king Charles, with prejudice to Christ's interest.
There are three sorts of persons who are not to be allowed in relation
to the king's interest, 1. Such as have not been content to oppose a
king in an evil course, (as they might lawfully do) but contrary to
covenant vows and many declarations, have cast off kings and kingly
government. These are the sectaries. 2. These who are so taken up with a
king, as they prefer a king's interest to Christ's interest; which was
the sin of our engagers. 3. They who will have no duty done to a king,
for fear of prejudicing Christ's interest. These are to be allowed, who
urge duty to a king in subordination to Christ.
I shall desire that men may be real, when they make mention of Christ's
interest; for these three mentioned profess and pretend the interest of
Christ. The sectaries cover their destroying of kings with Christ's
interest; whereunto, indeed, they have had no respect, being enemies to
His kingdom. And experience hath made it undeniable. The engagers
alleged they were for Christ's interest; but they misplaced it. Christ's
interest should have gone before, but they drew it after the interest of
a king, which evidenced their want of due respect to Christ's interest.
As for the third, who delay duty for fear of preferring the king's
interest to Christ's, I shall not take upon me to judge their
intentions. I wish they may have charity to those who think they may do
duty to a king in subordination to Christ, yea, that they ought and
should do duty, whatever men's fears be of the prejudice that may
follow.
If to be against the suspending of the king from the exercise of his
power, and to be for the crowning of the king, according to the public
faith of the kingdoms, he first performing all that kirk and state
required of him in relation to religion, and civil liberties: if this
be, I say, to prefer a king to Christ, let all men that are unbiassed,
be judges in the case. We shall well avow, that we crown a king in
subordination to God and his interest, in subordination to Christ's,
which we judge, not only agreeable to the word of God, but also, that we
are bound expressly in the covenant, to maintain the king in the
preservation and defence of the true religion, and liberties of the
kingdom, and not to diminish his just power and greatness.
2. That the covenant between God and the king and the people, goeth
before the covenant between the king and the people; which sheweth, that
a people's entering covenant with God doth not lessen their obedience
and allegiance to the king, but increaseth it, and maketh the obedience
firmer: because we are in covenant with God, we should the more obey a
covenanted king. It is a great error to think, that a covenant
diminisheth obedience, it was ever thought accumulative. And indeed true
religion layeth strict ties upon men in doing of their duty. "Wherefore
ye must needs be subject not only for wrath, but also for conscience'
sake." A necessity to obey is laid upon all. Many subjects obey for
wrath, but the godly obey for conscience' sake.
3. That a king covenanted with God should be much respected by his
subjects. They should love him. There is an inbred affection in the
hearts of the people to their king. In the 12th verse it is said, that
"the people clapped their hands for joy, and said, God save the king."
They had no sooner seen their native king installed in his kingdom, but
they rejoiced exceedingly, and saluted him with wishes of safety.
Whatever be men's affections, or respects, this day, to our king,
certainly it is a duty lying on us both to pray for, and rejoice in his
safety. The very end that God hath in giving us kings maketh this clear.
"That we may live under them in godliness and honesty." And therefore,
prayers and supplications are to be made for all kings; even for those
that are not in covenant; much more for these that are in covenant. Ye
are receiving this day a crowned covenanted king, pray for saving grace
to him, and that God would deliver him and us, out of the hand of these
cruel enemies, and bless his government, and cause us to live a quiet
and peaceable life under him in all godliness and honesty.
4. That as the king is solemnly sworn to maintain the right of the
subjects against enemies, and is bound to hazard his life, and all that
he hath for their defence: so, the people are also bound to maintain his
person and authority, and to hazard life, and all that they have, in
defending him.
I shall not take the question in its full latitude, taking in what a
people are bound to in pursuing of a king's right in another nation,
which is not our present question. Our question is, what a people should
do when a kingdom is unjustly invaded by a foreign enemy, who seeketh
the overthrow of religion, king and kingdom. Surely, if men be tied to
any duty to a king and kingdom, they are tied in this case. I have two
sorts of men to meet with here, who are deficient in doing this
covenanted duty: 1. These who do not act against the enemy. 2. These who
do act for the enemy. 1. The first I meet with, are they who act not,
but lie by, to behold what will become of all: three sorts of men act
not for the defence of an invaded kingdom; 1. Those who withdraw
themselves from public councils, as from parliament or committee of
estates: this withdrawing is not to act. 2. These act not who, upon an
apprehension of the desperate state of things, do think that all is in
such a condition, by the prevailing of the enemy, that there is no
remedy: and therefore that it is best to sit still; and see how things
go.
They who do not act upon scruple of conscience. I shall ever respect
tenderness of conscience; and I wish there be no more but tenderness. If
there be no more, men will strive to have their consciences well
informed.
They may be supposed to scruple upon one of these grounds: 1. To act in
such a cause, for the king's interest; sure I am, this was not a doubt
before, but all seemed to agree to act for the king's interest, in
subordination to Christ's, and this day there is no more sought. We own
the king's interest only in a subordination to Christ's. Or, 2. To join
with such instruments as are enemies to the work of God. Our answer to
the estates' query resolves that such should not be entrusted: but we do
not count these enemies who profess repentance, and declare themselves
solemnly to be for the cause and the covenant, and evidence their
willingness to fight for them. If it be said their repentance is but
counterfeit, we are bound to think otherwise in charity, till the
contrary be seen: no man can judge of the reality of hearts: for we have
now found by experience, that men who have been accounted above all
exception have betrayed their trust. If any who have not yet repented of
their former course shall be intrusted, we shall be sorry for it; and
plainly say, that it ought not to be.
But I think there must be more in this, that men say they cannot act.
For myself, I love not that word in our case; it is too frequent, he
cannot act, and he cannot act. I fear there be three sorts of persons
lurking under this covert. 1. Such as are pusillanimous, who have no
courage to act against the enemy; the word is true of them, they cannot
act because they dare not act. 2. Such as are selfish men, serving their
idol credit: he hath been a man of honour, and now he feareth there will
be no credit to fight against this prevailing enemy: therefore he cannot
act, and save his credit. Be who thou wilt that hast this before thee,
God shall blast thy reputation. Thou shalt neither have honour nor
credit, to do a right turn in God's cause. 3. Such as are compilers, who
cannot act, because they have a purpose to comply. There are that cannot
act in an army, but they can betray an army by not acting; there are
that cannot act for safety of a kingdom, but they betray it by not
acting. In a word, there are who cannot join to act with those whom they
account malignants (I speak not of declared and known malignants; but of
such as have been, and are, fighting for the cause; yet by them esteemed
malignants), but they can join with sectaries, open and declared enemies
to kirk and kingdom. I wish subjects, who are bound to fight for the
kingdom, would lay by that phrase of not acting, which is so frequent in
the mouth of compliers, and offensive to them, who would approve
themselves in doing duty for endangered religion, king and kingdom.
That men may be the more clear to act, I shall offer to your
consideration some passages of Scriptures, about those who do not act
against a common enemy.
1. There are many reproved for lying still while an enemy had invaded
the land: as Reuben, with his divisions: Gilead, Dan, and Asher seeking
themselves, are all reproved for not joining with the people of God, who
were willing to jeopard their lives against "a mighty oppressing enemy."
But there is one passage concerning Meroz, which fitteth our purpose,
"The angel of the Lord said, Curse ye Meroz, curse ye bitterly the
inhabitants thereof; they came not to the help of the Lord, to the help
of the Lord against the mighty." What this Meroz was, is not clear: yet
all interpreters agree that they had opportunity and power to have
joined with, and helped the people of the Lord, and it is probable they
were near the place of the fight. They are cursed for not coming to the
help of the Lord's people. This may be applied to those in the land, who
will not help the Lord against the mighty.
2. Another passage you have. Reuben and Gad having a multitude of
cattle, and having seen the land of Gilead, that it was a place for
cattle, they desire of Moses and the princes, that the land may be given
them, and they may not pass over Jordan. Moses reproveth them in these
words, "Shall your brethren go to war; and shall ye sit still? Wherefore
discourage ye the heart of the children of Israel?" Reuben and Gad make
their apology, showing that they have no such intention to sit still,
only they desire their wives and little ones may stay there: they
themselves promise to go over Jordan, armed before Israel, and not to
return before they were possessed in the land. Then Moses said unto
them, "If you do so, then this shall be your possession. But, if ye do
not so, behold, ye have sinned against the Lord, and be sure your sins
will find you out."
I may apply this to them that cannot act; will ye sit still, when the
rest of your brethren are to hazard their lives against the enemy? We
have reason to reprove you. If Moses, that faithful servant of God, was
still jealous of Reuben and Gad, even after their apology and promise to
act--for he saith, "If ye do not so"--have not honest and faithful
servants of God, ground to be jealous of their brethren who refuse to
act? Let them apologize what they will; for their not acting, I say,
they sin against the Lord, and their sins shall find them out. It will
be clearly seen, upon what intention they do not act.
3. A third passage. Saul hath David enclosed, that he can hardly escape.
In that very instant there cometh a messenger to Saul, saying, "Haste
thee, and come; for the Philistines have invaded the land." At the
hearing of this message, "Saul returned from pursuing after David, and
went against the Philistines." It is true, the Lord did provide for his
servant David's escape, by this means: but, if ye consider Saul, he took
it not so. Nothing moved him to leave this pursuit but the condition of
the land, by the invading of an enemy. Three things might have moved
Saul to stay and pursue David. 1. He hath him now in a strait, and hath
such advantage, that he might have thought not to come readily by the
like. 2. That altho' the Philistines be enemies, yet David is the most
dangerous enemy; for he aimeth at no less than the crown. It were better
to take conditions off the enemy, than to suffer David to live, and take
the crown. 3. He might have said, if I leave David at this time and
fight with the Philistines, and be beaten, he will get a power in his
hand to undo me and my posterity. These may seem strong motives; but
Saul is not moved with any of them. The present danger is the
Philistines invading the land, and this danger is to be opposed, come of
the danger from David what will. As if Saul had said, I will let David
alone, I will meet with him another time, and reckon with him: now
there is no time for it, the Philistines are in the land, let us make
haste against them. I wish that many of our countrymen had as great a
love to their country, and as public a spirit for it, as this profane
king had, then there would not be so many questions for acting, as men
make this day.
The objections I have been touching are in men's thoughts and heads.
First, some say, now the malignants are under, for this enemy is their
rod. It is best to put them out of having any power: yea, there are some
who would more willingly go to undo these, whom they account malignants,
than against the common enemy, who are wasting the land. If they had
Saul's resolution, they would say, the Philistines are in the land, let
them alone, we will reckon with them at another time; we will now go
against the common enemy.
They have also the second objection, the malignants are more dangerous
enemies than the sectaries. I shall not now compare them to equal
distance, and abstract from the present danger: but I shall compare them
to the present posture of affairs. I am sure the sectaries having power
in their hands, and a great part of the land in their possession, are
far more dangerous than malignants, who have no power for the present:
and therefore, the resolution should be, the sectaries have invaded the
land, and are destroying it, let us go against them.
3. The third observation weigheth much with many. The malignants, being
employed to fight for their country, may get such power in their hands
as may hurt the cause. For answer: 1. The resolution given the query of
the estates provideth against that, for therein is a desire that no such
power should be put in their hand. 2. This fear goeth upon a
supposition, that they do not repent their former course. This is an
uncharitable judgment. We are bound to be more charitable of men
professing repentance, for with such we have to do only. And, to speak
a word by the way to you who have been in a malignant course. Little
good is expected from you, I pray you be honest, and disappoint them. I
wish you true repentance, which will both disappoint them, and be
profitable to yourselves. 3. I desire it may be considered, whether or
not, fear of a danger to come from men, if they prevail against the
common enemy, being only clothed with a capacity to fight for their
country, be an argument against rising to oppose a seen and certain
danger, coming from an enemy, clothed with power, and still prevailing.
I conceive, it ought to be far from any, to hinder men to defend their
country in such a case. I confess, indeed, the cause which we maintain
hath met with many enemies, who have been against it, which requireth
much tenderness; therefore men are to be admitted to trust, with such
exceptions as may keep them out who are still enemies to the cause of
God, have not professed repentance, renounced their former courses, and
declared themselves for cause and covenant. I doubt not, but it shall be
found, that the admitting such to fight in our case as it standeth, is
agreeable to the word of God, and is not against the former public
resolutions of kirk and state.
The second sort of persons we are to meet with, are such as act for the
enemy, against the kingdom. If they be cursed who will not come out to
help the Lord against the mighty; what a curse shall be upon them, who
help the mighty against the Lord, as they do who act for the enemy?
Three ways is the enemy helped against the cause and people of God.
1. By keeping correspondence with them, and giving them intelligence;
there is nothing done against kirk or state, but they have intelligence
of it. A baser way hath never been used in any nation. Your counsels and
purposes are made known to them. If there be any such here (as I fear
they be), let them take this to them, they are of these who help the
mighty against the Lord, and the curse shall stick to them.
2. By strengthening the enemies' hands with questions, debates and
determinations, in papers tending to the justifying of their unjust
invasion. Whatever have been men's intentions in taking that way, yet
the thing done by them, hath tended to the advantage of the enemy, and
hath divided these who should have been joined in the cause, to the
great weakening of the power of the kingdom, and this, interpretatively,
is to act for the mighty against the Lord.
3. By gross compliance with the enemy, and going into them, doing all
the evil offices they can, against their native kingdom. If Meroz was
cursed for not helping, shall not these perfidious covenant-breakers and
treacherous dealers against a distressed land be much more accursed, for
helping and assisting a destroying enemy, so far as lieth in their
power? These words may be truly applied to them who are helping
strangers, enemies to God, His kirk, and religion, "Both he that
helpeth, shall fall; and he that is holpen shall fall down, and they all
shall fall together."