were criminal of his sin; even as Scotland is guilty of the Queen's idolatry this day.' In the same discourse he makes it plain, that all are guilty of innocents murder who do not oppose it, from Jeremiah's words in his defence before the princes.----"Know ye for certain, if ye put me to death, ye shall surely bring innocent blood upon yourselves, and upon the city, and upon the inhabitants thereof:" Now, if the princes, and the whole people should have been guilty of the prophet's blood; how shall others be judged innocent before God, if they suffer the blood of innocents to be shed, when they may save it? (3.) _Ibid._ He argues from the distinction between the person placed in authority, and the ordinance of God, the one may be resisted, the other cannot. The plain words of the apostle makes the difference, 'The ordinance is of God, for preservation of mankind, punishment of vice, which is holy and constant: persons commonly are profane and unjust: he that resisteth the power there, is only meant of the just power wherewith God hath armed his magistrates, which whoso resists, resists God's ordinance; but if men, in the fear of God, oppose themselves to the fury of princes, they then resist not God, but the devil, who abuses the sword and authority of God: it is evident the people resisted Saul, when he had sworn Jonathan should die, whom they delivered: the Spirit of God accuses them not of any crime, but praises them, and condemns the king: this same Saul again commanded the priests of the Lord to be slain, his guard would not obey, but Doeg put the king's cruelty in execution; I will not ask, whether the king's servants, not obeying, resisted the ordinance of God; or whether Doeg's murdering gave obedience to just authority? The Spirit of God condemns that fact, Psal. lii. that God would not only punish the commander, but also the merciless executor; therefore they who gainstood his command, resisted not the ordinance of God. (4.) _Ibid._ He argues from examples, not only of resisting, but of punishing tyrants; chiefly the example of Uzziah is pertinent to this purpose, 2 Chron. xxvi. who after his usurping the priest's office, was put out of the temple.' When it was replied, that they were the priests that withstood the king, not simple people: he answered, 'The priests were subjects, as Abiathar was deposed by Solomon, &c. yet they made him go out of the temple for his leprosy, and the people put him from the kingdom.' It is noted also, that Mr. Knox, in that discourse, adduces examples of those, who use to be brought in as objections against defensive arms, even the primitive Christians, before that passage last cited: 'what precepts,' says he, 'the apostle gave, I will not affirm; but I find two things the faithful did; the one was, they assisted their preachers even against the rulers; the other was, they suppressed idolatry wheresoever God gave unto them force, asking no leave of the