sedes the obligation of all others, whensoever
they stand in competition with it.--_Hobbes' de Cive_;
_Leviathan_.

"8. The doctrine of the gospel concerning patient
suffering of injuries is not inconsistent with violent
resisting of the higher powers in case of persecution
for religion.--_Lex Rex_; _Julian Apostate_; _Apolog.
Relat._

"9. There lies no obligation upon Christians to passive
obedience, when the prince commands anything against
the laws of our country; and the primitive Christians
chose rather to die than resist, because Christianity
was not settled by the laws of the Empire.--_Julian
Apostate._

"10. Possession and strength give a right to govern,
and success in a cause, or enterprise, proclaims it to
be lawful and just; to pursue it is to comply with the
will of God, because it is to follow the conduct of His
providence.--_Hobbes_; _Owen's Sermon before the
Regicides, Jan. 31, 1648_; _Baxter_; _Jenkin's
Petition, Oct. 1651_.

"11. In the state of nature there is no difference
between good and evil, right and wrong; the state of
nature is the state of war, in which every man hath a
right to all things.

"12. The foundation of civil authority is this natural
right, which is not given, but left to the supreme
magistrate upon men's entering into societies; and not
only a foreign invader, but a domestic rebel, puts
himself again into a state of nature to be proceeded
against, not as a subject, but an enemy, and
consequently acquires by his rebellion the same right
over the life of his prince, as the prince for the most
heinous crimes has over the life of his own subjects.

"13. Every man, after his entering into a society,
retains a right of defending himself against force, and
cannot transfer that right to the commonwealth when he
consents to that union whereby a commonwealth is made;
and in case a great many men together have already
resisted the commonwealth, for which every one of them
expecteth death, they have liberty then to join
together to assist and defend one another. This bearing
of arms subsequent to the first breach of their duty,
though it be to maintain what they have done, is no new
unjust act, and if it be only to defend their persons,
is not unjust at all