A88587:182
A modest and clear vindication of the serious representation, and late vindication of the…
A modest and clear vindication of the serious representation, and late vindication of the ministers of London, from the scandalous aspersions of John Price, in a pamphlet of his, entitled, Clerico-classicum or, The clergies alarm to a third war. Wherein his king-killing doctrine is confuted. The authors by him alleged, as defending it, cleared. The ministers of London vindicated. The follies, and falsities of John Price discovered. The protestation, vow, and the Covenant explained. / By a friend to a regulated monarchy, a free Parliament, an obedient army, and a godly ministry; but an enemy to tyranny, malignity, anarchy and heresy.A modest and clear vindication of the serious representation, and late vindication of the ministers of London, from the scandalous aspersions of John Price, in a pamphlet of his, entituled, Clerico-classicum or, The clergies alarum to a third war. Wherein his king-killing doctrine is confuted. The authors by him alledged, as defending it, cleared. The ministers of London vindicated. The follies, and falsities of Iohn Price discovered. The protestation, vow, and the Covenant explained. / By a friend to a regulated monarchy, a free Parliament, an obedient army, and a godly ministry; but an enemy to tyranny, malignity, anarchy and heresie.
London: printed for Stephen Bowtell, 1649
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
Answ. 'Tis true, Dr. Ponnet is of large principles in this point, yet 1. 'tis to be observed that when he made his book it was in the reign of Queen Mary, Ann. 1556. and so spake of Popish, not Protestant Princes; yea it was during the time of his banishment out of England, at which time his discontent might make him to be led more by passion then reason. 2. Though he holds it lawful for a People to depose and kill a Tyrant, yet he gives not this power absolutely to a particular party, but to the body of the People;1 The body (saith he) •f every State may (if it will) yea and ought to redress and correct the vi••• of their Heads and Governors. I am sure you cannot say the body of this State was for the execution of the King; there were an hundred against it to one for it. Yea 3, Though he goes further, that ⟨p. 46⟩[…] ⟨p. 47⟩[…] ⟨p. 48⟩private men may kill a Magistrate, yet he holds it with some special limitations,2 In some cases private men (saith he) may kill their Magistrates, as when a Governor shall with his sword run upon an innocent, or go about to shoot him with a gun, or if he should be found in bed with a mans wife, or ravish a mans daughter, or go about to make away his Country to Foreigners. Now can you prove the King to be guilty of such things as these? If not, your quotation of Ponnet doth not reach our case. To close this, I would ask you, Are you of Dr. Ponnet's mind that any private man may kill a Tyrant? do you think that Moses his practise in killing the Egyptian, and Ehud slaying Eglon, is to be imitated by every private man? It seems you do so, why else do you urge these instances out of Doctor Ponnet to justify your King-killing Doctrine? If you do, I fear you will often times follow the Devils instigation to murder the innocent, when you think 'tis the impression of Gods spirit on your heart to do justice on the guilty. Oh take heed that you be not given over to believe lies, and then to work wickedness with greediness. Before I leave this unsafe assertion in Dr. Ponnet's Book (of which you approve) viz. that private men may kill a Tyrant: I desire that this might lye sadly on your heart, suppose you should think such a Magistrate to be a Tyrant and a murderer, and because none will put to death that Tyrant, therefore you hold your self bound to do it: