The truth of the times vindicated whereby the lawfulness of Parliamentary proceedings in taking…The truth of the times vindicated whereby the lawfulnesse of Parliamentary procedings in taking…

Again, saith the Doctor Mr. Bridge answers that only active obedience to Lawful Commands is there enjoyed, but passive under unlawful Commands: To which the Doctor answereth, both say we, but not so Origen: not so Jerome, not so Chrysostom and divers others: and Paraeus his reason is good, who observes, that according to the Apostle, the denying of obedience is all one with resistance forbidden in this 13 Rom, for in one verse the Apostle saith submit or he subject unto the higher Powers; in th next v he gives the reason, for he that resisteth, &c. So that resisting and not subjecting, or obeying is all ⟨p. 40⟩one. It is no sin not to obey unlawful Commandments, but the Apostle makes it a sin here to resist, and therefore the resistance forbidden doth not relate unlawful Commandments but if lawful. But then the Doctor tells us that if these words should be understood only of active obedience to Lawful Commands, and not of passive to unlawful Commands; the Apostle had given the Romans but a lame instruction, page 60. and his reason for that speech follows at a distance, page 61. because then the Romans should not have been sufficiently instructed how to answer the unlawful Commandments of Princes, as also, there would have been a gap open to Rebellion, for saith he, how easy would be the inference, therefore we may resist when they command unlawfully.

Againe, saith the Dector Mr. Bridge answeres that only active obedience to Lawfull Commands is there enjoyed, but passive under unlawfull Commands: To which the Doctor answereth, both say we, but not so Origen: not so Ierome, not so Chrysost•me and divers others: and Paraeus his reason is good, who observes, that according to the Apostle, the denying of obedience is all one with resistance forbidden in this 13 Rom, for in one verse the Apostle saith submit or he subject unto the higher Powers; in th next v hegives the reason, for he that resisteth, &c. So that resisting and not subjecting, or obeying is all ⟨p. 40⟩one. It is no sinne not to obey unlawfull Commandements, but the Apostle makes it a sinne here to resist, and therefore the resistance forbidden doth not relate unlawfull Commandements but if lawfull. But then the Doctor tells us that if these words should be understood onely of active obedience to Lawfull Commands, and not of passive to unlawfull Commands; the Apostle had given the Romans but a lame instruction, page 60. and his reason for that speech followes at a distance, page 61. because then the Romans should not have been sufficiently instructed how to answere the unlawfull Commandements of Princes, as also, there would have been a gap open to Rebellion, for saith he, how easie would be the inference, therefore we may resist when they command unlawfully.