ly meant of the juft power wherewith God hath 'armed his magiftrates, which whofo refifts, resists God's ordinance; but if men, in the fear of God, oppose themselves to the fury of princes, they then refift not God, but the devil, who abuses the sword ' and authority of God: it is evident the people refifted Saul, when he had fworn Jonathan fhould die, whom they delivered: the Spirit of God ac'cufes them not of any crime, but praises them, and 'condemns the king: this fame Saul again commanded the priests of the Lord to be flain, his guard would not obey, but Doeg put the king's cruelty in execution; I will not afk, whether the king's. fervants, not obeying, refifted the ordinance of God; or whether Doeg's murdering gave obedience to just authority? The Spirit of God condemns that fact, Pfal. lii. that God would not only 'punish the commander, but also the mercilefs exe cutor; therefore they who gainftood his command, refifted not the ordinance of God. (4.) ibid. He argues from examples, not only of refifting, but of punishing tyrants; chiefly the example of Uzziah is pertinent to this purpose, 2 Chron. xxvi. who after his ufurping the prieft's office, was put out of the temple.' When it was replied, that they were the priests that withstood the king, not fimple people: he answered,The priests were fubjects, as Abiathar was depofed by Solomon, &c. yet they made him go out of the temple for his leprofy, and the people put him from the kingdom.' It is noted alfo, that Mr. Knox, in that discourse, adduces examples of those, who use to be brought in as objections against defenfive arms, even the primitive Christians, before that paffage laft cited: what precepts,' fays he, the apostle gave, I will not affirm; but I find . two things the faithful did; the one was, they affifted their preachers even against the rulers; the other was, they fuppreffed idolatry wherefoever God gave unto them force, afking no leave of the emperor, 6 nor nor of his deputies: read the Ecclefiaftical hiftories, and ye fhall find examples fufficient.' IV. In the next place, we may enquire into the judgment of these reformers, concerning that question that is now fo puzzling to many; which indeed was never started before this time, as a head of fuffering; but now, when it is ftarted, we may gather from our ancestors actings and determinations about it, how it ought to be answered. They were indeed in capacity, and accordingly did improve it, for difowning the authority of both the Queens; for their capacity was not the thing that made it duty, if it had not been fo before. Capacity makes a thing poffible, but not lawful it does indeed make a duty feafonable, and clears the call to it, and regulates the timing of affirmative duties, but the want of it can never dispense with negative precepts: and a duty, negative efpecially, may become neceffary, when it hath not the advantage of seasonablenefs or capacity; certainly it were duty to depofe the Pope from his ufurped authority, and to difown it even in Rome itself, but there it would not be thought very feasible or seasonable, for twenty or thirty people to avouch fuch a thing there; yet, at all times, it is a duty never to own it. It is thought It is thought unfeasonable and un feasible to difown the tyrants authority; but it is made neceffary, when urged, never to own it. And for this we have the grounds of our anceftors, fhewing who may be difowned, and muft not be owned. I fhall first infert here John Knox's propofitions, profecuted in his fecond blaft, extant at the end of Anton. Gilbie's admonition to England and Scotland, 1. It is not birth only, nor propinquity of blood, that maketh a king lawfully to reign ' over a people profeffing Chrift Jefus and his eter'nal verity; but, in his election, the ordinance which 'God hath established in the election of inferior 'judges, must be obferved. 2. No manifeft idola'ter, nor notorious tranfgreffor of God's holy pre cepts Ac cepts, ought to be promoted to any public regimen, honour, or dignity, in any realm, province, or city, that hath fubjected themfelves to Chrift Jefus, and his bleffed evangel. 3. Neither can oath, or promife, bind any fuch people to obey and maintain tyrants, against God and his truth known. 4. But if rafhly they have promoted any manifeft wicked perfon, or yet ignorantly have chofen fuch an one, as after declareth himfelf unworthy of regimen above the people of God, (and fuch be all idolaters and cruel perfecutors) moft juftly may the fame men depofe and punish him, that unadvisedly before they did nominate, appoint and elect.' cordingly this was done in depofing both the Queens; which is fully vindicated by the Earl of Morton, in his discourse to the Queen of England, as Buchanan relates it, book xx. page 746. The deed itself, nei⚫ther the cuftom of our ancestors of taking a courfe ' with their governors, will fuffer it to be accounted new, nor the moderation of the punishment to be odious; for it were not needful to recount fo many kings punished by death, bonds, and exile by our progenitors. For the Scottish nation, being from the beginning always free, hath created kings upon these conditions, that the government entrusted to them by the people's fuffrages, might be alfo (if the matter required) removed by the fame fuffrages: of which law there are many footsteps remaining even to our day; for both in the illes a'bout, and in many places of the continent, in which the old language and inftitutions have any abode, this cuftom is kept, in creating their governors of clanns and the ceremonies, ufed at the entering into government, do yet retain the exprefs reprefentation of this law. Whence it is evident, that the government is nothing elfe but a mutual ftipulation between kings and people: which further appears, 'from the inviolated tenor of the ancient law, fince the beginning of the Scottish government, referved even unto our memory, without the leaft effay ei 'ther to abrogate it, or difable, or diminish it. Yea, ' even when our fathers have depofed, banifhed, and 'more feverely punished fo many kings, yet never ' was any mention or motion made of relaxing the ' rigour of that law, and not without reafon, feeing it was not of that kind of conftitutions, that change. with the times, but of thofe which are engraven in the minds of men from the firft original, and approved by the mutual confent of all nations, and by nature's fanction continued inviolable and per'petual, which, being fubject to no other laws, do 'command and rule all. This, which in every ac tion doth offer itself to our eyes and minds, and 'whether we will or not, abides in our breafts, our 'predeceffors followed; being always armed against 'violence, and ready to fupprefs tyrants. And now for the prefent, what have we done, but infifting in "the footsteps of fo many kingdoms and free nations, fuppreffed tyrannical licentioufnefs, extolling itself above all order of laws, not indeed fo feverely as our predeceffors in like cafes; if we had imitated them, not only would we have been far from all 'fear of danger, but also have escaped the trouble ' of calumnies.-What would our adverfaries be at? Is it that we fhould arm with authority tyrants con'victed of grievous crimes, maintained by the fpoils of the fubjects, having hands embrued in loyal 'blood, and hearts gaping for the oppreffion of all good men? And fhall we put them upon our head, 'who are infamoufly fufpected of parricide, both 'projected and perpetrated?' To which we may add, a foreign conclufion indeed, but adduced and maintained by Mr. Craig, in the affembly, in the 1564, which had been determined by learned men in Bononia, All rulers, be they fupreme or fubordinate, ต 'may and ought to be reformed, or bridled (to speak 'moderately) by them, by whom they are chofen, 'confirmed, or admitted to their office; fo oft as they break that promife made by oath to their fubjects, because princes are no lefs bound by oath to their fubjects, than are the subjects to their princes: ' and therefore ought it to be kept and performed equally, according to law and condition of the oath that is made of either party.' By comparing which two teftimonies together, we may fee the reafonis, why neither of the two royal brothers, that have ruled in our day, could be confcientiously owned as magiftrates, in the cafe they have been in for several years paft: the firft teftimony is for the fecond brother, the latter is for the firft that's gone. But, as for Mr. Knox's opinion, it is evident he had written a book against the government of women; which though he did not intend it particularly against Mary of Scotland, yet it did invalidate her authority as well as other women's. This book he owns and maintains, in his firft conference with her, and confequently could not own her authority as of the Lord, tho' he gave her common refpect, as the title of majesty, &c. yet when he was particularly urged by the Queen's queftion, you think, faid fhe, That I have no juft authority;' he would not anfwer in the affirmative, but shifted it, by telling her, That learned men, in all ages, have had their judgment free, ' and most commonly difagreeing from the common judgment of the world. And though, he fays, he could live under her government (fo may, and would the greatest difowners of tyranny, if they be not troubled with queftions about owning it) yet he affirms that with the teftimony of a good confcience, he had communicated his judgment to the world, and that if the realm found no inconveniences in her government, he would no further dif allow than within his own breaft.' Certainly then, in his confcience, he did not, and could not own her, as the magiftrate of God; and that though many things which before were holden ftable, had been called in doubt, yet neither proteftant nor papist . could |