A26924:585
The English nonconformity as under King Charles II and King James II truly stated…
The English nonconformity as under King Charles II and King James II truly stated and argued by Richard Baxter ; who earnestly beseecheth rulers and clergy not to divide and destroy the land and cast their own souls on the dreadful guilt and punishment of national perjury ...
London: printed for Tho. Parkhurst, 1689
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
L. Do you think any man doubts of that? May not the King and Kingdom defend themselves against Invaders? If one man may defend his Purse or Life against another, a King and Kingdom is more worth than one man: You can hardly name one principle in the Law of Nature more undoubted, than that Kingdoms have a right to defend themselves if they can.
M. And may they not defend themselves, against Usurpers and Rebels, and Traitors at home, as well as against Foreign Foes?
M. And may they not defend themselves, against Usurpers and Rebels, and Traytors at home, as well as against Forreign Foes?
L. To deny that is Treason: How else should we defend the King? Was not Jack Straw, and many a Rebellion lawfully resisted? and did not the Lord Mayor of London Lawfully kill Wat. Tyler? and so of any other in his case.
M. But what if the Irish took on them to rise by the Kings Commission, and showed a Counterfeit of it, was it lawful for the Protestants to have resisted them to save their Lives and Cities?