because when she was present as Act 1. Parl. 2. of Queen Mary both she the Governour are mentioned thus The which day the Queen's grace with advice of the Lord Governour three Estates of Par. moreover it is not usuall to have any Acts running in the name of a Commissioner For where a Commissioner is present the King is supposed to be present therefore to this day all the Acts of Parl. made were a commissioner is present except such as are wholly concerning the King himself Run in the name of our soveraigne Lord with advice consent of his Estates of Parl. but where neither King nor Commissioner is present then the Acts run thus The Estates of Parl. enact c. So that this Stilus curiae being punctually observed to this day consirmeth the observation concerning the fore mentioned parl viz. That they were holden without King or Queen when neither King nor Queen is mentioned in the Acts. 3. Is it not strange how they could annull the parl 1648. among the rest seing the Acts of that parl were more homogenious with their own Acts then the Acts of the rest For the Acts of designe carryed on by that parl were no such injurious violation of his Maj. power authority nor were they Acts of rebellion as they suppose the Acts of the other parl to have been So that the ground upon which they rescinde the rest of these Parl. will not warrand them to rescinde this so it is not upon the ground of their Acts that they rescinde these parl Because then they would not have rescinded this parl 1648. What grounds then they will seek out next who can tell For all the grounds which they have hitherto to given whether from their Acts deeds oâ—… from informalities through the want of the presence of the King or his Commissioner are declared null of no effect by themselves 4. It is yet more strange how they could annul the Parl. 16â—…8 When all the members of that parl some of whom no doubt were members of this did Iun. 10. declare and testify their resolution and obligation to acknowledge that Parliamentre have been a free and lawfull Parliament likeas they did oblige themselves upon their honours and credit and as they desired to be to be holden true lovers of their countrey and of the religion lawes libertâ—…es thereof efauldly faithfully to the uttermost of their power to joyn and concurre with their persones and estates every one according to their severall stations and callings in the maintenance of the freedome and lawfulnesse of that Parliament and they ordained that that Act should be subscribed by all the members of Parliament present and absent and by all noblemen Barons and all other subjects inhabitants of the Kingdome in their thires and brughs 5. It is yet more strange that this Parliament had so far forgot it self as to reckon up the Parliament 1648. among the rest in the Act rescissory when in their 9. Act they had acknowledged it to have been a Parliament for there when they are approveing the Engadgment the all onely bussinesse which that Parliament 1648. was carrying on they stile them the estates of Parliament of this kingdome which is a title agrying to none but to lawfull Parliaments Thus it is clear that there is no ground warranding a consent unto these Acts rescissory but good ground to scruple at that oath the taking whereof would have imported a consenting unto the annuling of these Parliaments considering 6. How King Charles the first in the large treaty in his answer to the first demand sayeth that at the humble desire of his subjects he did call conveen a Parliament to beholden at Edinburgh Iun. 2. 1640. so that this Parliament was lawfully convocated acknowledged to have been so by King Charles the first himself Thirdly nor is there ground for assenting consenting unto the anulling of those Acts done and concluded in these Parliaments for 1. They are Acts made by Parliaments lawfully conveened 2. They are Acts not repugnant to the word of God but Acts made for the carrying on advanceing of the work of reformation except those made by the Parliament 1648 which every one according to his place power is sworne to maintaine promove this the very vieuing of them will evince how ever that whole work be now branded as rebellion sedition So that none could swear that oath as now tendered by Acts explained but withall he must condemne the whole work of reformation all Acts made for establishing of the same in doctrine worshipe discipline governement 3. did not King Charles 1 in the large treaty give this answere unto the first demand That for as much as the King's Maj. at the humble desire of his subjects did call and conveen a Parliament to be holden at Edenbrugh Iun. 2. 1640. wherein certaine Acts were made which Acts his Maj. for the peace and good of this kingdome is pleased to publish in his own name with consent of the Estates and therefore commands that the said Acts bearing date â—…un 27. 1640. be published with the Acts to be made in the next session of the same Parliament and that all the saids Acts as well of the precedent as of the next Session to be holden have in all time coming the strength of lawes and to be universally received and obeyed by all the subjects of the kingdome of Scotland His Maj. doth in the word of a king promise the publishing of the saids acts in such sort as is above specified And more over at that next Session of Parliament Anno 1641. when himself was present all those Acts were approved ratifyed fully did not King Charles 2 before at his coronation ratify approve the Covenant all Acts made in order to the carrying on of the ends of the Covenant So that now they are full compleat lawes wanting nothing even of formality which can be desired seing he hath ratified approved them all 5. Are there not many of these Acts made by those Parliaments very much for the glory of God the good of the countrey did not themselves see this when for shames cause they were forced to make some Acts of the same nature for curbing of vice since they would not be said to renew them so that it were hard to put Christians to condemne those Acts laudable lawes 6. Is it not strange how they could condemne make null void all the Acts done by the committees Parliaments after 1648. seing by this meanes they shall condemne all the applications which were made unto his Maj. while he was in Holland also they shall condemne the Kingdomes receiving of him yea their crowning of him both as null as done by a Non-Parliament And thus they will have the King no crowned King of Scotland how deep this may draw let lawyers judge It was
had to write so I know not except he did build upon that which Iohannes Major sayeth But from the instruction of the Scots in the faith to conclude that the Church after it was gathered had no other for me of governement will not stand with reason for be it as they speak that by the travelle of some pions monks the Scots were first converted unto Christ it cannot be said that the Church was ruled by monks seing long after those times it was not permitted to monks to medle with the maters of the Church nor were they reckoned among the Clergy thus he To which it is easily answered 1. That the sole word of a late Historian of an Excommunicated forsworne Prelate speaking in his own cause will have lesse weight with every rationall man then the Testimony of so many famous eminent Historyographers known through the world 2. All the Prelat's logick will not conclude from these words of Boetius that there was Episcopall governement among the Culdees if Boetius himself may be heard whom all are bound to beleeve better then this Prelate who reasoneth according to his skill for he lib. 7. c. 28. sayeth erat Palladius primus omnium c. i. e. Palladius was the first of all who did bear holy Magistracy among the Scots being made Bishop by the great Pope thus he affirmeth clearly that Palladius was the first who had Episcopall Power or exercised a Magistraticall domineering power in Church maters 3. Could Buchanan a man many stages beyond the Arch-prelate know no reason or ground for what he said but what this Archprelat could perceave who had no will to open his Eyes 4. As this Archprelat doeth wrong his own credite as an Historian when without warrant he contradicteth so many famous Historians so doeth he discover much weakness in reasoning for to say that the monks did not governe the Church befor Palladius landed in Scotland because after Palladius came they were putt out of all accompt got not liberty to do so is such a ridiculous consequence as can hardly be paralleled as if one should reason now say the Church of Scotland was not governed by Ministers befor the year 1661. becaus after Bishops got all the power into their hands the Ministers had no power of governement in the Church Much more might be said here against the reasoning of this late Historian were it sitt to insist upon every such frivolous argument of his So then from these forocited Historians from Baronius in his Annal it appeareth that the Church of Scotland was severall hundereths of years without a domineering Prelate after this time that this Palladius came she was still in a decaying condition through the increase of popery which at length did overspread the whole land in which Romish darkness she did ly untill about the year 1494. About which time the Lord began to visite that poor Church with his salvation to cause some light of the Gospel to break up in severall places of the land but no sooner did the light appear but as soon did those Antichristian Prelats vassals of the Pope begin to rage to raise persecution against the young professors of the truth followers of the lamb so with fire faggot they sought to destroy all who prosessed the true Religion untill about the year 1550. when notwithstanding of all this rage cruelty of the Beast his followers the knowledge of the trueth did spread through the land a farther worke of Reformation began to he caryed on by worthies whom the Lord raised up such as famous Mr Knox others who were singularly owned of God in that work Though Mr Spotiswood according to his usuall maner of mistaking the works of God of venting his enmity to piety purity is pleased in the 60. page of his history to say that this Reformation was violent disorderly And albert at that time the Queen was endevouring by all means possible to keep up the Idolatry of Rome to suppresse the Reformed Religion so powerfully did the Lord in his goodness assist these worthves that in the year 1560. there was a large Confession of Faith drawn up at the command of the Parlament which did conveen that year in which Confession all the Popish errours were renounced after it was exhibited to the Parliament there read when it was read the Prelats who were there present had not one word to speak against it which when the Earle of Marshall did perceave he said Seing the Bishops who by their learning can for the zeal they should have to the truth would gain say if they knew any things repugnant say nothing against the said Confession I cannot but thinke that it is the very truth of God Thus this Confession was openly avowed professed by this Parliament as is clear by the act 6. parl 1. King Ja. 6. Au. 1567. act 86. par 6. An. 1579. where these words are found in both acts and decerns declairs that all sundry who either gainesayeth the word of the Evangell receaved approved as the heads of the Confession of faith professed in parliament of befor in the year of God 1560. At this Parliament there are severall acts made against popery as against the Masse against the Popes authority jurisdiction for such as were for the Reformation or the Congregation as they were then called did supplicate that they would condemne the Antichristian doctrine would restore the Discipline of the ancient Church discharge the popes jurisdiction accordingly as was said there is an act made ordaining that the Bishop of Rome called the Pope have no jurisdiction nor authority within the Realme in any time coming and that no Bishop or other prelate of the Realme use any jurisdiction in time coming by the said Bishop of Romes authority under the pain c. which was afterwards ratified by severall acts in the dayes of King James And thus by act of Parliament the Reformed Religion is established the church governement by Prelats is virtually discharged because Prelats then had no power but what they had from Rome when the current is cut off at the head it must needs cease in the streams But this will be the more clear if we consider how the Reformers were dealing for the establishment of Discipline together with the Doctrine knowing that the doctrine would not be long keeped pure if the Popish discipline governement were still retained upon this the great council giveth a charge dated April 29 1560. requiring commanding them in the name of the Eternall God as they would answer in his presence to committ to writing in a book deliver their judgements touching the Reformation of Religion which heretofore in this Realme as in others hath been utterly corrupted According unto which charge the first Booke of Discipline as it was called in which book the governement
passi non aliud perfugium haâ—…bant quam ut Aâ—…licorum libidâ—…i se dederâ—…nt he sayeth The Bishops were so hard put to it that they had no other refuge but thus to satisfie the Court give away their revenues to their lusts Anno 1590. The Generall Assembly doeth abrogate the power of Commissioners devolveth the work on Presbytâ—…ries Anno 1591. The Recantation of Mr Patrick Adamson is presented unto the Assembly where among other things he confessed he had eâ—…red in thinking the governement of the Church was like other civil governements in labouring to have the Church in maters Ecclesiastick subject to the Kings lawes And with all he confesseth that the Earle of Arran had a minde to have burnt the Registers of the Assembly Anno 1584. that at Falkland before they were delivered to his Maj. a Bishop Mr Henry Hammilton took out some leaves which spoke against the Governement by Bishops that he had consented thereunto Anno 1592. in May the Generall Assembly doth meet resolveth on some propoâ—…itions to be presented to the ensuing Parliament As 1. That the Acts of Parliament made Anno 1584. against the discipline liberty authority of the Church be annulled 2. That the Discipline of the Church be raâ—…isied 3. That the Act of Annexation be repealed and 4. That the Abbots Pâ—…iors other Prelats bearing the titles of Church-men giving voice in Parl. in name of the Church without her consent be discharged to vote any more When the parliament conveeneth in June The liberties of the Church are ratified all her Courts Generall provinciall and presbiteriall Assemblies Church Sessionâ—… the Juâ—…sdiction Discipline thero â—…s declared to be just good godly in it self in all time coming not â—…anding of whatsoever sâ—…atutes acts canons â—…vilier municipâ—…ll lawes made in the contrare All acts fomerly made for establishing the Popes authority are abolished It is likeways declared that the 129. act Anno 1584. anent the Kings Supremacy against declining of the King his Councill in Church maters shall be no wayes prejudâ—…iall nor derâ—…gate any thing to the previledge that God hath given to the sâ—…rituall office-bearers in the kâ—…k concerning heads of Religion maters of heresy Excommunication collation or deprivation of Ministers or any such like 〈◊〉 â—…all censures specially grounded having warrant of the word of God Item they abrogate annull that act of parl 1584. which did grant Commission to Bishops other Iudges constitute iâ—… Ecclesiasticaell causes to receive his Highness presentations to benefices to give collation there upon to put order to all causes Ecclesiasticall And they ordaine that all presentations to Benefices be directed to the particular Presbiteries in all time coming with full power to give Collation thereupon to putt order to all maters causes Ecclesiasticall within their bounds according to the Discipline of the Kirk Thus did the Lord cary on his work unto this period notwithstanding of much opposition which was made thereunto by men of corrupt principles wicked lives who loved not to part with the Church rents the sweet morsell which they desired alwayes to enjoy now is the Churâ—…h there become a shineing Church being reformed both in Doctrine in Discipline now is she become a pleasant vineyaird well dressed hedged about defended from the wilde boars of the forrest King Iames himself was convinced of this when he gave this reason to an English divine why that Church was not troubled with heresie viz because if it spring up in a parish there is an Eldership there to take notice of it suppresse it if it be too strong for theÌ„ the psesbitery is ready to crush it if the presbitery cannot provide against the obstinate heshall finde moe witty he ads in the Synod if he be not convinced there the Generall Assembly will not spare him yea seldome or never did any errour trouble all those Courts for usually it was crushed by presbiteries except what some Bishops did maintaine And thus that Church was indeed as an army with banners terrible to the adversaries of the truth Then were there endevours to have a through worke of Reformation caried on the iniquities of the land were searched out corruptions in Ministers other ranks of people were taken notice of effectuall courses were laid down for preventing such abuses in time coming Publick Fasts were indicted keeped whole eight dayes together And thus the Lord created upon every dwelling place of Mount Zion upon her Assemblies a cloud smoak by day the shineing of a flaming fire by night for upon all the glory was a defence Isai. 4. 5. But this faire Summer Suneshine did not long last The infinitely wise God saw it sitt to bring that Church unto a wilderness againe to cause her meet with a dark dreadfull long lasting winter night Satan stirreth up Papists upon the one hand who saw that if this hedg of discipline were keeped up they could not enjoy the liberty peace they desired prophane politicians Courteours upon the other hand who saw that by this Discipline their licentiousnes would be curbed to bestirre themselves against this established discipline And accordingly they use their power with the King at length prevaile to get him to oppose the discipline to prosecute that designe piece piece till at length Prelats were established in all their power as the following discourse will clearly evince When Anno 1596. the Popish Lords who had conspired with Spaine against the countrey and had been upon that acount banished viz Huntly Arrol Angus were called home the Church saw Religion in danger ordained that particular flocks should be advertised hereof indicted a Fast appointed that some out of each Presbitery should concurre with the Presbitery of Edenburgh in considering of the most expedient way for securing of Religion and now because the Church would not consent unto the Kings calling home those popish Lords he is stirred up by his popish Courteours against the Church incroacheth dayly more more upon her liberties For Mr D. Black minister at St Andr. is cited before the Councill for some alledged expressions in his sermon The ministry seeing that the spirituall Governement of the house of God was intended to be quite subverted thought it best that he give in a Declinatour there in shew that though he was able to defend all that he spoke yet seing his answering to that accusation before them might import a prejudice to the liberties of the Church be taken for an acknowledgement of his Maj jurisdiction in maters meerly spirituall he was constrained to decline that Judicatorie 1. because the Lord Jesus had given to him his word for a Rule so he could not fall under any civill law but in so farr as he should be found after triall to have passed from his Instructions which triall belongeth
Maj. in his letter viz that there should be constant moderators in presbyteries chosen that where the bishops did reside they should moderate both in Synods presbyteries is concluded some cautions added but to no purpose for there was a clause annexed which did cast all loose viz that if either upon his Maj. advyce proposition to the assembly or upon their own supplication the Generall assembly were moved to grant a relaxation of any of the Caveats that then their promise should make no derogation to their liberty Synods presbyteries refused to owne this Act but at length were charged to obey under the paine of treason Anno 1608. There was another Assembly at Lithgow July 26. but did no good thereafter there were some conferences at Falkland Sterlin but to no purpose the intended businesse was still carried on Anno 1610. Juny 6. There is a meeting at Glasgow unto which resorteth all the constant Maderators who had their hundreth pounds per annum and they bring with them other two ministers such as they liked whom the king desired by his letters The king had three Commissioners there The Earle of Dumber was sent thither with a strong guard to affright the ministers so as severall ministers coming out of the west with a purpose to protest were forced to returne back againe There was also money brought thither to hire votes Mr Spotiswood sayeth it was to pay the constant Moderators their due But Mr Lawder in Coberspath was no moderator yet he came to the Earle complained that though he travailed furdest and had least to live upon though his vote was as good as the best yet he was neglected to whom the Earle replyed that he was too late in coming asking his purse-master what was left he findeth there was nothing but seventeen Shillings Sterlin to give him Come sayeth Mr Lawder let me have it it will help to bear my charges homeward And the Non-liquets got nothing At this corrupt meeting it is concluded 1. That the indiction of all Generall Assemblies belonged to the king by the prerogative of his Crowne without his license all such meetings were unlawfull 2. That Synods should be moderated by the Prelats or some appointed by them 3. No excommunication or absolution without the Bishops approbation direction who is answerable to God to his Maj. for his proceedings 4. All presentations must be directed to the Prelats 5. That he with some associated should silence depose ministers 6 That every minister at his entry should swear obedience to his Maj. to his ordinary as it was ordained Anno 1571. 7. If any minister absente himself from the Bishops visitation he shall be suspended if he amend not deposed 8. That the exercises or quondam presbyteries should be moderated by the bishops or whom they will appoint And 9. That no minister speak against any of the foresaid acts in publick nor dispute about the equality or inequality of ministers This yeer also was the High Commission instituted proclamed by a Herald giving power to the Archbishops to depose excommunicat imprison fine confine for causes Ecclesiastick whether in Doctrine or manners whether in Noblemen ministers or common people When the meeting at Glasgow is dissolved Mr Spotiswood of Glasgow Mr Lamb of Brichen Mr Hamilton of Galloway go to London there are consecrated the 21 of Octob. when they returne they consecrate the rest then all of them domineer over the people over the faithfull ministers Anno 1612. a Parliament conveened which ratified all the acts of that meeting at Glasgow inserted in their Registers the oath which every minister at his admission was to swear thus I A B. admitted to the Kirk of D. testify declare in my conscience that the right excellent right High mighty Prince Iames the sixth by the grace of God King of Scotland c. is the onely lawfull supreme Governour of this Realme as well in matters Spiritual Ecclesiastick as in things temporall that no forraigne Prince State nor Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preheminence or authority Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall within Realme And therefore I utterly renunce forsake all forraigne Jurisdiction Power Superiorities authorities promise that from this forth I shall will bear faith true allaidgeance to his Highnesse his aires lawfull successours And to my power shall assist defend all Jurisdictions Privileges Preheminences authority granted belonging to his Highnesse his aires lawfull successours or united annexed to his Royall Crown And furder I acknowledge confesse to have to holde the said Church possession of the same under God of his Maj. his Crown Royall of this Realme And for the saids possessions I do homage presently to his Highnesse in your presence to his Majesty his aires lawfull successours shall be true So help me God And also I A B. now admitted to the Church of C. promiseth sweareth to E. F. Bishop of that Dioecy obedience to his successours in all things lawfull So help me God Anno 1616. There was a meeting of the ministers at Aberdeen appointing that a book of Common Prayer be made that children should be confirmed by the bishops or visitors in their name But the year before this the former commission for the High commission was renewed instead of the two Courts in the two Provinces of Saint Andrews Glasgow there is one appointed consisting of 55 or 56. one of the Archbishops is sine quo non he other five may do all Such as refuse to compeer are sisted by force by the Sherifs other magistrats They meddle with blasphemie heresy schisme errour Idolatry simony lotry absence from the Liturgy on holy Dayes perjury incest adultery fornication rapes clandestine marriages stricking of clergy men speaking against their meetings They have power to excommunicat silence depose sine imprison confine as long as they please the Secret Councell must pursue the contumacious as rebells Anno 1617. A Parliament conveeneth at which the King himself is present maketh an act That whatsoever his Maj. should determine in the externall governement of the Church with the advyce of the archbishops Bishops a competent number of the ministry should have the strength of a law when the honest ministry hear of this see thereby a door opened for bringing in all the English-popish Ceremonies they give in a Protestation against the same which when the king heareth he causeth the Clerk passe by that act when he was to read all the rest And now the king is violent for the Ceremonies chideth the Archbishops for not receiving the five articles as he commanded the former year and they promise to do it if he would indict a Generall assembly And upon Mr Galleway's undertaking the king indicteth a meeting at St
of one though their own father before their tyrannicall Court Now is there a black cloud over the Church for many years piety is dayly decaying formality profanity increasing the godly are mourning lamenting the wicked rejoyceing But the Prelats have not yet ended their purpose For Anno 1633. when King Charles was present at a Parliament there is an Act carried through but not without some opposition made thereunto by some of the Nobles granting power to his Maj. to command what habits he pleaseth for all men in office whether in Church or State that as a priviledge annexed to the Crowne by this means a door was opened to bring in the Surplice the Corner cap other trash These worthies being traduced by the Prelats as contemners of authority sowers of sedition in Church State procure the kings displeasure by their freedome For the king did not onely chide them openly but with his own hand he wrote down their names as disloyall subjects which made these Nobles thinke of drawing up a supplication which being drawn up by William Haig his Maj. solicitour was committed to the trust of the Earle of Rothes Lord Loudoun to present it as they found conveniency but they perceiving that it would not be well accepted resolved to keep it up But at length some way or other a copy thereof cometh to the Bishops hands they deliver it unto the king withall complaine of those Noble-men as standing in the way of his subjects yeelding chearfull obedience And upon their importunat requeests there is a Commission granted to certaine persons as a committee to proceed against the Authors abettors of that supplication as guilty of sedition treason Whereupon William Haig fleeth all his goods are confiscat Some Noblemen are questioned the Lord Balmerino who had the supplication in his custody is imprisoned at length condemned to die but obtaineth pardon Now the prelats do reigne there being none who durst peep or move a wing against them The Achprelate of Saint Andrews was Chancellour other eight of the prelats were in great places being either Lords of the privy Councell or Lords of the Exchequer being thus lifted up in power honour they are puffed up with pride what durst they not attempt now thinke they Therefore they proceed to do more wickedness draw up a book of Canons which was printed approven by the Kings Maj. all were commanded to obey the Bishops in all points By this book that which remained of presbyterian governement is taken away Parochiall Sessions Classicall Presbyteries are accounted Conventicles Ruleing Elders Deacons are cast out of the Church all Ecclesiasticall causes are brought only to the Pelats tribunall So were they about the drawing up of a Liturgy a Book of Ordination against which before ever they were printed or seen all were discharged to speak under the pain of Excommunication And at length the book of Common Prayer is published imposed on the Church by the kings command as the onely forme of publick divine worship Every Parish is commanded to have two at least of these books under the paine of horning being punished as rebells And a strict command cometh forth enjoyning the same to be used from Pasch forward Anno 1637. But some of the Prelats as of Rose Dumblaine did anticipate the day made use of it in their Cathedralls Others of the Prelats propone the matter to their Synods but the Ministers replyed that such a change should not be made without a Nationall Assembly but it was answered that they were the Representatives of the Church However some prelats gave Ministers liberty to advise untill Octob. but through the furious importunity of some a letter is procured from his Maj. commanding the useing of the Liturgy with all expedition in the Churches of Edinburgh The Ministers being called to see what they would do such as refused are presently suspended SECTION II. The way how the Lord brought down these Prelats the History continued IT was sad lamentable to see what a face the Church of Scotland had now No hedge of Discipline to keep the vineyaird from foxes wilde boars all the Discipline which was was tyrannie over consciences over mens persons estates profanitie was not curbed but encouraged Prelats themselves being chief in all those crying abhominations as will be cleared ere long yea that poor Church was now posteing fast to Rome The Prelats their underlings beside the points of Arminianisme which were accounted speciall pieces of their qualification did avow openly severall points of Popery so that it was taught publickly in the chief Citie That the Pope was not Antichrist And thus all things were growing worse the worship corrupted like to be corrupted more the mindes of people were filled with feares that God would depairt leave that Church altogether so thattheir case looked most deplorable desperat like But asoftentimes the Church people of God have found him who was the hope ofIsrael the Saviour thereof in times of trouble a ready help in time of need so did the poor Church of Scotland finde it now by experience that whē the storme was sorest it was neerest an end that this was as the darke houre before the dawning of the day for now the Lord awaketh as one after wine looketh through the cloud with Compassion on a long tossed sorely afflicted Church which had groaned under oppression of cruell task-masters till they could do no more sheweth that his hand was not shortened that it could not save but that he was the hearer of prayer that now his appointed time was come to take vengeance on his adversaries even the vengeance of his Temple And as ordinariely the Lords great works appear to carnall reason to be despicable at the beginning so the Lord began this great change alteration of affaires in that poor Church in a way that seemed not to promise much yet such a way it was as the hand of God was to be seen in it and seen carrying of it on wonderfully as shall appear In obedience to his Maj. last letter which commanded the reading of the liturgie in all haste the Bishop of Edenburgh the first sabbath day thereafter resolved to do it when he beginneth there ariseth a tumult among the people begun by some women which encreased so as that the prelate when he came out of the Church did hardly escape in the rest of the Churches of Edenburgh the reading was stopped Immediatly after dinner the Secret Counsell did meet resolve to search out the authors of this tumult commanded the use of the service book all to speake reverently of the Bishops but notwithstanding of this the people rage more then ever against the Prelats after the afternoons sermon they set upon the Prelate with stones forced him to
nor dissolved formerly without their own consent lest this might be a preparative for times to come they resolved to emitt a Declaration for their exoneration caused insert it in the Registers ad futuram rei memoriam And withall they send some of their number unto his Maj. with grievances appoint others to attend his Maj. answer at Edenburgh then they dissolve having first published an Infirmation to the Estates of England concerning the present state of affairs But these Commissioners after they had endevoured to give his Maj. satisfaction in all points according to their Instructions at severall times from the 20 of Febr. unto the 23 of March 1640. were detained afterward the Lord Loudoun is put into the Toure of London other three are put under a restrant contrary to the Law of Nations A new warr is intended The Castle of Edenburgh is fortified with a hundreth strangers moe much Ammunition The Commissioners of the Parliament seeing this hearing of an army leavyed in England under the conduct of the Earle of Northumberland how the Deputy of Irland with the Nobles there in Parliament had offered a great summe of money what stir the prelats of England were making at Court what offers they were making to carry on this new warr which they so far owned as to call it Ballum Episcopale they resolve to put the land into a new posture of defence and emit a Declaration for satisfaction of their friends in England which was so satisfactory as that many of the lower House of Parliament then sitting declared that they saw no cause of a warr against Scotland therefore would grant no subsidy But this parliament is dissolved Scottish ships are intercepted their goods taken away the Seamen imprisoned miserably handled all Sea-ports closed up with Frigots the Kings army advanceth both by sea land the Castle of Edenburgh oppresseth the town killeth many with shote Now at the time appointed Jun. 11. the parliament conveeneth leavieth an army for a new Expedition in defence of the land cleareth the equity of the same in a Declaration shewing 1 how they were necessitated thereunto being not able to live without traffique justice to mantaine an army on the borders 2. That the warr was onely Defensive the King being stirred up by their adversaries to breake the Articles of Pacification to imprison their Commissioners to call Parliaments in England Irland for subsidies for the warr to take their ships imprison their sea-men to give Commission to the Governour of the Castle of Edenburgh to kill all he could when they resolved onely to defend themselves to seek a firme sure peace then to lay down armes after security had for their Religion liberties 3. That they were called by the same divine Providence by which they had been directed hitherto 4. That they looked upon none as their enemies but a Canterburian Faction made up of Atheists Papists Arminians Prelats the seducers of the King 5. That their end was not to wrong his Maj. nor to enrich themselves but Gods glory the firm peace of both nations the true honour of the King that the enemies of both Kingdomes might be punished So do they emit another paper for the satisfaction of the good people of England clearing their true Intentions And so do advance with their Army in to England take New Castle before they would advance toward York where the maine body of the Kings Army did lye they supplicat his maj at length to consider their greevances particularly to ratifie the last Parliament that the Scott in England and Irland might be set at liberty and not forced to take unlawfull oaths that the Incendiaries might be punished according to justice the Scottish ships restored and every thing removed which hindereth free commerce and tradeing between the two Nations Many of the English Nobility the City of London petition for a Parliament they and others advise his Maj. to desist from the warr At length the King is moved to thoughts of peace chooseth eight English Earles eight Lords to meet with such as Scotland should make choise of to conclude all matters of difference This Conference did begin at Rippon was concluded at Westminster the substance of which shall be mentioned presently when it shall be shown how these Acts were all ratified approved by the King himself his Parliament of Scotland Anno 1641. When the Parliament in Jun. Anno 1640 had conveened at the time appointed at the last Session all the Acts of the former Assembly 1639. are ratifyed by their 4. Act. They also ratify the Covenant the Act of Councell beformentioned thereanent do insert the said Covenant with the assemblies explication in their Registers And rescinde all Acts Statutes made in favours of the prelats as Act. 23. Anno 1597. anent their voice in Parliament Act 2. Anno 1606. anent their restitution the act 8. Anno 1607. anent the Chapter of St Andrews act 6. 1609. anent their Commissariates the 1 Act 1612. ratifying the acts of the pretended assembly at Glasgow 1610. the 1. 2. Acts Anno 1617. anent the Election of Bishops restitution of Chapters the 1. act 1621. ratifying the Articles of the pretended assembly at Perth 1618. all others whatsoever made in their favours prejudiciall to the spirituall nature jurisdiction Discipline privileges of the Kirk or of the Generall provinciall presbyteriall assemblies or kirk Sessions after the enacting of many other profitable lawes they adjourne the Parliament unto the 19. of Novemb. next then unto the 14. of January 1641. then unto the 13. of April following then unto the 25. of May then unto the 15. of July at which time the King himself was present And in this Session of Parliament the Articles of the Treaty are ratifyed enacted ordained to have in all time comeing the fullforce strength of a true persect security Act of Parliament the King for himself his successours promised in verbo principis never to come in the contrary of that Statute Sanction or any thing there in contained By this Treaty these Articles were concluded 1. That for as much as the Kings Maj. did call conveen a Parliament to beholden at Edenburgh the 2. of Inn. 1640. wherin certaine acts were made aggreed upon which acts hiâ—… Maj. for the peace good of his kingdome is pleased to publish in his own name with consent of the Estates therefore commands that the said acts bearing date the 11. of Iuny 1640 be published with the acts to be made in the next Session of the same Parliament that all the said acts have in all time coming the strength of lawes 2. That the Castle of Edenburgh other strengths of the kingdome should according to their first foundation with
was petended the true cause was that which made him so famous even his zeal activity for the work of God in his generation for what ever else they had to lay to his charge if he had either opposed the work of God or done as litle for it as many other of the Nobles his life would not have been taken now more then the life of others it is true other things were sought to colour this bussinesse and failing one another failing that a third but in end ther is a comprehensive generall set downe as the ground of the sentence to this purpose That he had been an enemy to the king his interest these 23 yeers or more by past which in effect is as much as to say he had been an active friend for the interest of Christ. But because generalls cannot well be proved they condescended on severall particular actings of his in carrying on in his place station the work of reformation when all these failed they fix upon his complyance with the Englishes after they had subdued the land in battell and forced the king out of his dominions had garrisoned the whole land used it almost as a conquest by sitting in their parliament when chosen by some shire and when the rest of the shires of the land had sent their commissioners thither This his complyance with them at that time by sitting in their judicatories and there concurring with his advice counsel for the good of the land that was now under their feet is the only particular ground upon which his sentence is founded and the particular speciall cause pretended for which he was condemned to lose his head as a traitour to have his head put up on tâ—…e top of the tolbooth as an eminent traitour A sentence which question lesse at first veiu may make all men of understanding astonished to wonder how ever it could have entered into the minde of the parliament of Scotland to sentence unto death such a peer of the land such an usefull member of the Kingdome an ornament upon such a ground and for such a cause But if these foure particulars be considered the matter will yet appear more wonderfull 1. The matter of complyance with the Englishes at that time was so farr from being accounted treasonable that severall of the lawyers among whom was one Sr Iohn Fletcher who was now advanced to be his Maj. advocat did accuse this worthy Nobleman of treason did swear subscribe an oath to be faithfull unto the governement as it was then established without King house of Lords Now if there had been treason really in this deed either by the civill law or by the municipall lawes of the land would not the lawyers have perceived it whose dayly work study the lawes are 2. If this had been the deed of this nobleman alone the mater had been lesse to have been wondered at but it being such a deed whereof few of the nobles of Scotland were altogether free yea whereof many of the members of Parliament his judges were guilty the matter is beyond a parallel It is hard to make secios criminis sit as judges condemne the accused reason would require that the table should be purged Is it not strange for a Parliament to condemne one for such a fault for which many of their own members might with as much justice equity be condemned and is it not strange how they being by their own confession traitours in the heighest degree could fitt judge others It is true it will be replyed That his Maj. might pardon whom he pleased But then it will aboundantly appear that not this But something else was the cause of this worthy nobleman's death Whatever may be said in poynt of law yet it will be a disput in poynt of conscience If kings may pardon such crimes as do deserve death by the law of God or if such crimes which kings may pardon of their own accord according to their own good pleasure do before the Lord deserve death 3. If the Parliament had thought this particular worthy to bear so much stresse why would they have spent so much of their time in searching for other grounds to goe upon 〈◊〉 why did they not make use of this at the first but it is like this had never once been mentioned if they had been able to fasten treason upon any other of his actions this makes it so much the more to be wondered at that they would condemne such a noble man for such a particular which they would never once havâ—… named if they could have done their intended work otherwayes 4. Is it not strange that of all the complyers of Scotland there was not one except this nobleman impannelled upon this account let be put to death yea is it not strange that those noble Men were never once questioned who being desired by Generall Monck when he was entering England with his army to rancounter Lambert did abjure king Charles his interest this Nobleman must die Yea is it not yet more strange that one William Purves who by complying had occasioned almost ruine to many noblemen brughs and gentlemâ—…n should have been absolved by act of Parliament as might be cleared if there were a table of the unprinted acts set down after their acts as is done alwayes in other Parliaments and yet this nobleman must be sentenced to death for complying for the good of the countrey But to speak unto the bussinesse in poynr of law let these foure or five Particular quaere's be considered and then any shall be able to perceive the iniquity of this sentence 1. By what act of Parliament is such a deed as this condemned as treasonable By what municipall law can any member of the Kingdome be challenged upon the account of treason for treating with a conquerour for life liberty for sitting in his councells for the good of the countrey after that he with the rest of the body of the land had foughten in the defence of King countrey till no more could be done after the whole land had been overcome at severall battels and wholly overrun had acted nothing for the advantage of the enemy disadvantage of the king countrey before the victory obtained but in all poynts had carryed as became a loyall subject contributing all the help by armes counsell which was required what act of parliament declareth such a deed as this treasonable such a subject to deserve death as a traitour 2. Was there ever such a Practique in Scotland since ever there was a king in it Severall times was the kingdome of Scotland overrun by the kingdome of England particularly in the dayes of Baliol at that time King Edward caused the Nobles of Scotland swear all aidgeance unto him But when Bruce came to be King was there any of the Nobles questioned for treason upon that account
it may not be a supersede as to an Act a ground of exemption to the subject from the rigour thereof till the law be revived by a posteriour act which was never yet done lawyers may judge But which is more there is an Act of Parl. Anno 1592. declareing that that former Act shall no wayes be prejudiciall nor derogat any thing to the privilege that God hath given to the spirituall office bearers of the church concerning heads of religion matters of heresy excommunication collation or deprivation of ministers or any such like essentiall censures specially grounded have and warrand of the word of God And which is more considerable The parliament 1648. did disclaime any such power of judging in church matters took it for an unjust challenge charge to say that they took an antecedent judgment in maters of religion for in their letter to the presbyteries of Scotland being their Act 16. May 11. 1648. they have these words Neither can it be with any truth or justice in any sort alleidged that we have in the least measure wronged or violated the true privileges or liberties of the church or any way taken upon us the determination or decision of any matters of faith or church discipline though we be unjustly charged with taking an antecedent judgment in matters of religion By which every one may see that the parliament did looke upon themselves as an incompetent judge in matters of faith or religion Primo instanti or antecedently unto the decision determination of the church And now let lawyers judge whether when the parliament the supreme judicature of that land doth declare themselves incompetent judges in matters of religion The Privy Councell which is a judicature inferiour to the parliament by the fundamentall lawes of that land having its originall power antiquity from the Kings Maj. the estates of parliament so is subordinat there to ought to be countable to censureable by them according to the 12 Act of Parl. 2. King Iames 4. See for this Act 27. Parl 2. of King Charl I. 1640. may become judges thereof whether seing by confession of Parliament they can be no lesse incompetent judges then the parliament it self it can be truely treasonable to decline them Though it were granted that that Act of Parliament 1584. were no way weakened by the other Act 1592. which yet is expressely explicatory thereof yet it could no wayes be treasonable in him to decline the councell as an incompetent judge to him in that case because the Act 1584. is to be understod in such cases only in which they are propper judges But it will be replyed that the Act maketh them judges competent to all persones spirituall or tempâ—…rall in all matters wherin they or any of them shall be apprehended summoned or charged Answ. True the act speaks so in the generall yet it is well known that notwithstanding thereof any of his majesties subjects might decline them when cited for causes the cognition whereof did popperly belong to another distinct judicature such as the court of exchequer or the Lords of the Session so that this all is to be restricted to such causes as do belong to them And under it causes purely ecclesiastike cannot be understood because of that which the Parliament Anno 1648. said Parliaments know best what causes belong to their cognition what doth not belong to a Parliament will never belong to the Privy Councell If it be replyed againe that the meaning of the Parliament 1584. was to give the councell power in church matters because this act was devised of purpose to hinder ministers to protest against the King his counsell as they had done before Ans. that is true But that will say nothing now when the Parliament 1648. hath declined to be judges in such matters and Parliaments can best expound their own lawes and acts can best explaine the extent of their own power and consequently can best declare what causes these are of which the Privie Councell is competent judge what not when they declare that themselves are not competent judges in matters of doctrine religion they do more then sufficiently declare that the Privie Councell is not a competent judge in those matters But for all this this worthy man must die he dieth a martyr for the truth against the Erastian abomination SECTION VI. The sufferings of some other Ministers related AMong other acts of the Committy of Estates there was a proclamation which they caused be read at all the church doores of the Kingdome upon the Lord's day in which they discharged ministers to speak or preach any thing against them or their proceedings this was to command them to handle the word of the Lord deceitfully to become false prophets to preach smooth things and to prophecy deceits wherby the malicious ill affected people who did not love their ministers were encouraged to give in delations of such such things as they thought good to allaidge against them as uttered in their sermones bring in any prophane persones they pleased for witnesses By which meanes some though many were in no hazard thinking it commendable prudence to be silent at such a time were brought to trouble both by the Committe of Estates by the Parliament being imprisoned or confined and other wayes hardly used though litle of what was allaidged could be proved against them More over ther was one minister who after the Parliament had annulled the covenant passed many other acts against the work of reformation thought himself bound in conscience to give faithfull free warning to shew the greatnesse of the sin of backslideing defection from the cause and truth of God to protest publikely in a Ministeriall way for his own exoneration after the example of Samuel at the comandement of God against the course of defection carryed on all acts made in prejudice of the covenanted worke of reformation for which cause he was summoned before the Parliament and at length condemned of treason sedition onely upon that acount therafter was banished out of all his Maj. dominions And if any say that ministers should have been silent not meddled with state affairs let the answers which famous doct Voet giveth in his Politia Eccles. pag. 982. 983. c. be considered which are these 1. It is the duty of Ministers to give faithfull warning unto people Ezek. 3 17 22. 2. This was not to meddle with the politie but with the abuse of it by men in power 3. Rulers no lesse then others must be touched when they provoke God to wrath by their carriage 1 Thes. 5 11. Iam. 5 20. 1 Sam. 15 14. Isa. 58. 1. 4. Then they should never speake to a hundered places of scripture which do speake so directly against Magistrats abuseing their power See what he sayeth furder to this purpose there in answering therest of the
now presbyterian government is quite overturned all presbyterian assemblies are discharged under the highest paine after prelats are advanced never till then there cometh forth a new order for new meetings upon new principles meetings otherwise constituted then formerly in a word such meetings as did but serve to approve of confirme prelats in their place power therefore all were commanded by the Estate to concur with the prelats in their meetings under a penalty So that it is but a meer falshood to say that the meetings then now are of the same constitution nothing altered for then they were hedges standing in the prelats way though much weakened by reason of the civill power opposeing but now they are props to support strengthen the hands of the prelats as being wholly ruled guided by them By what is said it is hoped that tender Christians will see that there was no small ground of scrupleing at these meeting that they will be loth rashly to condemne such as feared to transgresse in the least resolved rather to suffer then to sin seing it is now beyond controversie that their concurring in those meetings had been upon the matter a consenting unto an approving of prelaticall government upon which account alone the faithfull servants of Christ did refuise to concurre SECTION IX The reasons why Ministers refuised to seek presentations collations cleared defended THus the Lord was pleased to keep his servants out of this snare which the prelats had caused plet for their consciences but there are others stronger following The Parl. in their second session An. 1662 made an act ordaineing all Ministers who had entered to the cure of any parish within brugh or land in or since the year of God 1649. to have no right unto nor uplist the rents of their respective benefices modified stipends manse or gleib for this instant year 1662. nor for any year following unlesse they should obtaine a presentation from the lawful patroâ—… and have collation from the Bishop of the dioecy where he liveth before the 20 of Sepr next for understanding of this It would be considered That before the year 1649. the Church was groaning under that sore oppression of laick patrons having power to presente Ministers unto benefices and then the Parliament was pleased to discharge all presentations of Kirks patronages whether belonging to the King or to any laick patron upon good weighty grounds as the narrative of their 39 act March 9. 1649. sheweth in these words The Estates of parliament being sensible of the great obligation that lyeth upon them by the nationall Covenant by the solemne league covenant by many deliverances mercies from God by the late solemne engadgment unto ties To preserve the doctrine and maintaine and vindicate the liberties of the Kirk of Scotland and to advance the work of reformation therein to the utmost of their power considering that patronages and presentations of Kirks is an evill and bondage under which the Lords people and Ministers of this land have long groaned and that it hath no warrand in God's word but is founded only on the commonlaw and is a custome popish and brought into the Kirk in time of ignorance and superstition and that the same is contrary to the second book of discipline in which upon solide and good ground it is reckoned among abuses that are desired to be reformed and unto severall acts of the generall assembly and that it is prejudiciall to the liberty of the people and planting of Kirks and unto the free calling and entering of Ministers unto their charge And after this Ministers entered by the call of the people of whom they were to have charge Now this Parliament will have this piece of reformation undone the Church brought back unto her old state of bondage so will have Ministers to seek for these presentations thereafter to go to the Bishop for his license approbation to officiat exerce the Ministeriall function But the faithfull zealous servants of Christ had not freedome nor liberty to do either of these therefore resolved to suffer rather then to sin They had not freedome to go to seek a presentation for these reasons 1. Because they saw no warrand for such a way of entering into the Ministery allowed of Christ or his apostles nor practised many hundereds of years thereafter and therefore toapprove of such a way had been a sin 2. The Church had been long groaning under that oppression bondage was desireous to be rid thereof at the very beginning but could never obtaine it untill An 1649 Now if they had obeyed this act submitted unto this oppression they had consented unto the spoileing of the Church of her privileges and had condemned that worthy renowned Parliament who were graciously moved of God to take off this Yoke off her necke 3. They should in so far have consented unto the defection now carryed on for this was a piece thereof The restoreing of the Church unto her rights privileges was a part of the work of reformation yea no small part thereof when this privilege is taken away the work of reformation is in so far overturned therefore such as would have sought presentations should have made defection themselves have consented unto approved of the Parliament in carrying on the worke of defection in so far 4. By the 36 act of the first Session of this Parliament It is ordained that the person to be presented shall in presence of the patron or his atturney and of the sheriffe of the shire Stewart of the Stewartry or heretable baily or commissar of the bounds of it be in the countrey and of the Magistrats of the brughs within the brugh before the granting and their accepting of the presentation Take and subscribe the oath of alleagiance otherwise his presentation is null and void of it self Now as shall be showne hereafter no man could with a saife conscience take that oath as it was tendred by this Parliament 5. They should have thereby condemned the manner of Elections by the people consequently themselves as being hitherto intruders because entering into the Ministery without a lawfull call viz without the presentation of the patron But it will be objected That all the ministers of Scotland who entered before the year 1649. should by this meanes be condemned as intruders entering without a lawfull call Ans Though patronages cannot but be condemned as sinfull tending to ruine the Church to defraude her of much advantage beside the spoiling robeing her of her privileges liberties which are purchased to her by the blood of Christ because the patron who sometime may be a prophane person a persecuter either hath not understanding to discerne the spirits or will not make choise of the best most able minister Yet such as entered that way before the
this Kingdome to have the sole choice appoyntment of the officers of state privy councellours the Lords of the Session That the power of calling holding and dissolving of Parliaments all conventions meetings of the estates doth solely reside in the Kings Maj. his haires successours that as no Parliament can be lawfully keeped without speciall warrand presence of the Kings Maj. or his commissioner so no Acts nor statutes to be past in any Parliament can be binding on the people or have the authority force of lawes without the speciall approbation of his Maj or his commissioner interponed thereto at the making thereof that the power of armes making of peace warre making of treatjes leagues with forraigne princes or states or at home by the subjects among themselves doth propperly reside in the Kings Maj. his heirs successours is their undowbted right theirs alone that it is higâ—… treason in the subjects of this Kingdome or any number of them upon what soever ground to rise or continue in armes to maintaine any forts garisons or strengths to make peace or warre or to make any treaties or leagues with forraigners or among themselves without his Maj. authority first interponed thereto That it is unlawfull to the subjects of whatsoever quality or function to convocat convcen or assemble themselves for holding of Councells conventions assemblies to treat consult determine in any matters of state civill or ecclesiasticke except in the ordinary judgments or to make leagues or bonds upon whatsoever colour or pretence without his Maj. speciall consent approbation had thereunto That the league covenant and all treaties following there upon Acts or deeds that do or may relate thereunto are not obligatory that none of his Maj. subjects should presume upon any pretext of any authority whatsoever to require the renewing or swearing of the said league Covenant or of any other Covenants or publick oaths concerning the government of the Church Kingdome and that none offer to renew or swear the same without his Maj. speciall warrand and approbation This acknowledgment doth sufficiently clear what that supremacy in civil matters is which they grant unto the King as his due which by this oath they would have all to acknowledge also So that there is no great difficulty to clear the grounds ofscrupleing at this oath even upon this account to shew that such as have refuised the same cannot be accounted disloyall for all indifferent persones will see that there both was and is good ground to scruple at this oath thuâ—… sensed by this act if they shall consider these ten Particulars following 1. The Parliaments of Scotland from the beginning have been partakers fellowshareis of supremacy with the King the Kings of Scotland never were the sole subjects thereof as appeareth by their appending of their own seal with distinct from the King 's great seal in treaties with forraigne princes in some important acts sentences at home of which there is one instance yet on recoâ—…d in the acts of Parliament viz act 112. Parl. 14. King â—…am 3. 2. The Parliaments of Scotland have had the power of setling the governement for they did willingly sweaâ—… to Fergus and his posterity and when he died left two young sones â—…erlegus Mainus both unfit for governement they resolved upon a new course That neither a childe should governe nor yet their oath which they made to Fergus be brocken which was this That when the Kings children were young at their fathers decease some other of the posterity of â—…ergus fit for governing should be chosen who should rule the Kingdom all his dayes which law continued 1025. years untill the reigne of Kenneth the 3. and accordingly when Fergusius died they choosed Ferâ—…haris when â—…erlegus came to age he desired to be put in possession of the Kingdome but it was refuâ—…sed so long as Feritharis lived And when Cotbâ—…edus died they passed by his sone Câ—…tbred made choice of Dardaâ—…us the grand childe of Metellan thus did they alwayes unto the dayes of Kenneth the 3. Epropinquis sayeth Buchanan in vita 〈◊〉 Regum defunctorum non proximos sed maxime idoneos modo a Fergusio primo Scotorumrege essent oriundi eligere consueverant And who but they did condescend to that law at length that the Kings eldest son should be called prince should succeed if the son died before the father then the grand childe should succeed unto the grand father that if the King died leaving a young childe to be heire of the crowne a regent should be chose to mannage the affairs of the Kingdome dureing his minority till he were 14. years of age at which time he might choise his curatours was there ever any such thing concluded without the Parliaments consent 3. The Parliaments of Scotland have had a great share of the legislative power Therefore the lawes are stiled the acts of Parliament not the acts of the King they are said to be enacted by the Estates of Parliament So do the many explicatory acts witnesse that they share in the supreme power of interpreting the lawes of the land which demonstrateth their legislative power and both these are no small part of supremacy 4. In the time of Finnanus the 10 King there was a law made Ne quidreges quod majoris esset momenti nisi de publici coucilij authoritate juberent that Kings should command nothing in matters of any moment but according to the authority and command of Parliament And so when Milcolumbus the 92. King was giving away for peace with England Northum Berland the Estates were against it denying jus esse regi quicquam de sinibus regni detrahere nisi omnibus ordinibus consentientibus That the King had any power to give away any part of his dominions without the consent of all the Estates of Parliament 5. The Parliaments of Scotland have regulated the actions of princes have censured punished them for enormities let the lives of Thereus Durstus Ethus Luctatus Mogaldus Conarus Constantin Ferchardus 1. Ferchardus 2. Eugenius Donaldus 8. Culenus others recorded by Buchanan in his chronicles be seen considered the power of the Parliaments of Scotland over their princes will casily appear So at that Parliament in which King Iames the 6. was created King the Earle of Murray setled in the regency it was debated what course should be taken with the Queen concerning whose accesse unto her husbands death there were such shreud toakens And some voted that justice should be executed upon her and others that she should only be keeped in prisone see Buchan lib. 19. 6. The Parliaments of Scotland have had expresse power in some cases to withstand resist even by armes the King if he should break treaties of peace made concluded by him them with forraigne princes
states as is yet to be seen extant in the records of their old treaties of peace with England and France 7. The Estates of Scotland wrote unto the Queen An. 1559. Oct. 23. thus Ex literis tuis ac mandatis c. Buch lib. 16. that is By your letters mandats sent us by a herald we understand how obstinatly you are set against piety towards God and the publick good of our nation the common liberty of all But that we may according to our duty defend all these We in â—…e name of our Kings do suspend prohibite all that publicke admininistration titles and superiorites which you take upon you being certanely persuaded that those things which you â—…ow do are contrary to that constant good will which Kings have carryed towards the welfare of this Kingdome And as you do 〈◊〉 loâ—…k upon us as lawfull subjects of this Kingdome and as a laâ—…full Parliament So nor do we look upon you as regent or as exerâ—…ing any publick Magistracy Especially seing your pâ—…wer if there be any such committed unto you is upon good weigâ—…ty reasons suspended by us in the name of the Kings of this realme So Anno 1567. they put the queen regent mother to King Iames from her regency which deed of theirs is fully vindicated by the earle of Morâ—…on in his discourse to the Queen of England a part whereof out of Buch Lib. 20. because usefull both for clearing of this particular some others before mentioned shall be here transcribed Primum Factum ipsum c. As for the deed it self of punishing Kings or queens The ancient custome of our predecessours will not suffer it to be accounted new for it were not necessary to enumerat how many Kings have been punished by death â—…onds exile by our nobles far lesse were it necessary to confirme this deed of ours by forraigne examples seing there are so many so obvious in ancient histories But now the nation of the Scots have been a free nation from the begining have made Kings to themselves upon these conditions that when necessity required they might dethrone them of which there are many footsteps remaineing fresh unto this day for in the isles about in many places of the continent in which the old language lawes had any abode this custome is followed in the chooseing of their governours to this day And the ceremonies used at the coronation of Kings do clearly demonstrat that the government is nothing else but a mutuall stipulation betuixt King subjects as also the constant tenor of the ancient law by which Kings were inaugurated which remaineth unchanged in the least to this day yea while so many of our Kings have been banished imprisoned or more severely punished there was never one motion made of relaxing the rigour of the law what wonder seing it was not of the nature of those lawes that change with tht time but of those which are fixed in the heart of man by nature consented unto by all nations which being subject to no other lawes do command rule all so that whether we will or not they are before our eyes what ever we be doing stick in our heart This law did our predecessours follow being alwayes armed against violence ready to suppresse tyrants But that I may passe in silence the famous cities of Athens Lacedaemon Rome Venice which keeped this law so long as they keeped their liberty Yea even then when Rome was under tyrants if any good man became emperour he did account it his glory to acknowledg himself inferiour to the people subject to the lawes for when Trajanus gave a sword according to the custome unto the praefectus urbis he said use it for me or against me as I shall deserve and Theodosius a good emperour in these worst times would leave this noble saying among the lawes that he confessed he was under the lawes Neither was this law unknown to barbarous nations as all histories testify But lest I should be thought to gather together examples now out of use I shall onely make mention of two later the one is of Christieris the King of the Dennes who for his intollerable cruelty was put from the Kingdome he all his posterity which is a sadder punishment then ever was inflicted by any of our progenitours what did the mother of Charles the 5 that made her deserve perpetuall imprisonment now what did we but following the examples of so many nations Kingdomes suppresse tyranny which swelled above all law not indeed so severely as our predecessours did in like cases for had we followed their example we had been farr from not onely the fear of danger but also here calumnies Thus he much more is added to this purpose there More over this same Queen regent was told by the Earle of Ruthven that same night that David Rizio was killed as Buch reporteth lib. 17. That the government of the Kings of Scotland was alwayes very lawfull that it was exerted not after the lisst pleasure of any one man but according to the lawes by the consent of the nobles and if any King did otherwayes he suffered accordingly and now Scottish men are not so farr degenerated from the institutions of their predecessours as to suffer the tyranny and slavery of one who is a stranger and whom they look not upon as deserving any honest service 8. Yea in the 8 Parliament of King Iames 6. Act. 2. the honour authority of the Supreme court of Parliament continowed past all memory of men is ratified there it is said That by the court of Parliament under God the Kingdome hath been upholden rebellious and traiterous subjects punished the good and faithfull preserved and maintained and the lawes and acts of Parliament by which all good men are governed are made and established and therefore they statute and ordaine that none take up on hand to impugne the dignity and authority of the estates or to seek or procure the innavation or diminution of their power or authority under the paine of treason It is true that in the preceeding Act they confirme the Kings Royall power and authority over all estates as well spiritual as temporal And therefore their maintaining of the power and privilege of Parliaments is the more remarkable And by the two Acts compared togetheâ—… it is aboundantly clear that the authority mentioned in the first Act of that Parliament which is granted to the king is not over the Estates of Parliament but over private persones whether civill or ecclesiastick And so it is but a granting of him to be singulis major which will easily be granted And this will be more clear if it be considered what occasioned that Act at that time As was shown above in the first Section the Lord was stirring up his servants to act something for the setling of the government of the Church which occasioned the
displeasure of many at court when Ministers were freely rebuking sin in about the court they were accounted railers traitours And being accused of treason before the King his Councill They declined them as incompetent Judges Upon this account in this houre of darknesse by the meanes of the Earle of Arran This Parliament is suddenly called wherby there were two Parliaments in one year 1584. the one meeting May 22. the other which is called the ninth Parliament as the former was called the eight Agust 22. which granteth this supremacy to the King over persones ecclesiastick for formalities sake civil therefore in the end of that act it is declared to be treason to decline his Maj. or his Council in any case So then the question was not betwixt the King the Parliament But betwixt the King or his Councel the Church in spirituall matters It is true also that in the 1. Act of Parliament 18. Anno 1606. His Maj. soveraigne authority Princely power Royall prerogative and privilege of his Crowne over all Estates persones and causes whatsoever is acknowledged But this act is of the same nature with the former no prerogative over above the Estates of Parliament is acknowledged here to belong properly to the Crown And moreover these words are but faire flourishes parliamentary complements Finally the prerogative here spoken of is founded upon personal qualifications where with they say he was endued far beyond his predecessours such as extraordinary graces most rare and excellent vertues singular judgment for sight Princely wisdome the like these may be wanting in one possessing the crowne therefore it could not be the minde of the Parliament to give a supremacy founded upon such qualifications to these who had not those qualifications so they could not annex it unto the Crowne 9. Together with these particulars let this be considered That in 3 Article of the league Covenant they did all swear Sincerly really and constantly in their severall vocations to endeavour the preservation of the rights and privileges of the Parliaments And then it shall appear that there was good ground of scrupleing at that oath which as explained by their acts tendeth to the overturning of those rights privileges For none who desired to make conscience of the oath of the Covenant might swear an oath so apparently opposite thereunto It is true those questions concerning the power of Princes Parliaments are dark ticklish Ministers not being lawyers by profession can not be supposed to be well acquanted with the lawes constitutions of the realme or with the nature extent of the same in all points Yet it concerneth them to see to this that they run not themselves upon the rocks of contradictory oaths And having sworne to endeavour in their places callings the preservation of the rights privileges of Parl. it concerneth them all not alitle to search so far into the rights privileges of Parl. as that they may know when an oath is tendered unto them which crosseth the same being once engadged in an oath in a matter not sinfull not to change or to swear that which destroyeth contradicteth the former oath But leaving those things not laying more weight on them then they will bear other particulars more weighty pressing must be spoken to therefore let it be considered 10. What dreadfull consequences will follow upon the taking of this oath thus explained as to its civil part by the forementioned act concerning the prerogative other acts now to be mentioned as 1. A condemning of the convention of Estates Anno 1643. conform to the Act 6. of this Parliament 2. A condemning of the Parliaments Anno 1640 1641 1644 1645 1646 1647 1648. conforme to their Act 15. as also the committees Parliaments thereafter Anno 1649 1650 1651. conforme to their Act 9. 3. A condemning of all the Acts made by these Parliaments conforme to their Act 3. 4. A condemning of all the meetings Councells Conventions of the subjects at the beginning of the late work of Reformation conforme to their 4 Act. 5. A condemning of the League Covenant conforme to their Act 7. 6. A condemning of Scotlands joyning with helping of England in the day of their straite conforme to their Act 7. 7. A condemning of the renueing of the Nationall Covenant Anno 1638 1639. conforme to the last words of the 11 Act. 8. A condemning of the Generall Assembly 1638 severall others thereafter conforme to their 4 Act. 9. A condemning of Scotlands riseing in armes in their own defence against the Popish Prelaticall malignant Party conforme to their 5 Act. 10. A condemning of their seizing upon forts castles in their own defence conforme to the said 5 Act. Was there not then cause to scruple at the taking of this oath which would have imported a condemning of all those things sure there was as shall be showne in speaking to each of the particulars mentioned Now it is clear that the taking of this oath would have imported a condemning of all these particulars from this That the Parliament doth condemne all these mentioned particulars as the acts specified do clear because done without his Maj consent which ought say they to have been had by vertue of his prerogative royall and supremacy the perogative doth explaine his supremacy in things civill as shall be showne more fully hereafter But to come to the particulars first There was no ground for condemning that convention of Estates 1643. notwithstanding that the Kings consent was not had therto 1. Because in poynt of conscience the Estates of the land being essentially judges are bound when the publict affaires of the Kingdom do require to conveen consult thereanent when Religion lawes liberties are in hazard when the necessitie is such as will admit of no delay pure legall formalities of state must be dispensed with when they cannot be gotten followed as in this case it was clear The true protestant religion his Maj. honour the peace of the Kingdomes were in hazard by papists their adherents in armes in England Irland The King refuised to call a Parliament at that time though he was oftin requeested there unto In this case what could the states of the Land do who were bound by the lawes of God of nature of nations to see to the preservation of the Kingdom to their own interests to religion that should be dearâ—… to them then any thingâ—… else were bound by the law of God to judge governe the land but obey God disâ—…ense with state formalities according to the many examples of the Estates of Scotland before who did conveen in Parliament whether the King would or not as that Parliament which did imprison donald the 70. King the Parliament at Scone which summoned King Culenus before them that Parliament which
deprived the Queen mother of her regency But to avoid tediousnesse let Buchanans Chronicle be perused many such like Parliaments shall be seen 2. Who was it who summoned all those Parliaments which conveened for the election of new Kings of viceroyes as that which did choose Notatus the brother not Ruther the son of Dornadilla the 4. King that which did choise Even brother to Durstus not Durstus his sonne that which made Dardan King not Corbred's son being under age that which make Teâ—…rasell brother to Conarus King and not Eâ—…hodius son to Canorus and many moeâ—… Yea Buchanan no stanger to the constitution of the scottish Kingdome sheweth in his book de jure regni apud Scotos that the Parliaments of Scotland were summoned not only without the consent of their Kings but against the same What ground was there then for condemning of this convention at this nick of time when matters were in such hazard Especially 4. Seing the very next Parliament which conveened Anno 1644. by vertue of the last act of the Parliament Anno 1641. at which the King himself was present did ratisie approve that convention upon these grounds as their 5. act beareth Considering that the Lords of his Maj. privy councell and Commissioners for conserving the articles of the treaty having according to their interests and trusts committed to them by his Maj. and Estates of Parliament used all meanes by supplications remonstrances and sending of commissioners for secureing the peace of this Kingdome and removing the unhappy diseractions betwixt his Maj. and his subjects in England in such away as might serve most for his Maj. honour and good of both kingdomes and their humble and dutifull endeavours for so good ends having proven so ineffectuall their offer of mediation and intercession being refuised by his Maj. And thereby finding the weight and difficulty of affaires and the charge lying on them to be greater then they could bear did therefore in the Moneth of May 1643. meet to gether with the commissioners for common burdens that by ioynt advice Some resolution might be taken there in and in respecâ—… of the danger imminent to the true protestant religion his Maj honour and peace of these kingdomes by the multitude of Papists and their adherents in armes in England and Irland and of many other important and publike affaires which could not admit delay and did require the advice of the representative body of the kingdome appoynted and indicted a meeting his Maj. having formerly refuised their humble desires for a Parliament Secondly there was no ground for anâ—…ulling those Parliaments mentioned in the act rescissory and act 9. 1. Because in both those acts there is no mention made of any informality which might justly either in law or conscience render these Parliaments null Only there is mention made of their acts deeds but these cannot in any manner of way annull their constitution for a Parliament may be a Parliament legally conveened though it should astablish iniquitie by a law if the ground which they have laid down in these two acts 15 9. forannulling of these Parliaments hold good indifferent men will soon see that they have anulled their own constitution declared themselves no Parliament for if their acts were compared with the acts of these Parliaments which they have annulled examined either by the rule of God's word which all Christian commonwealths Parliaments should stir their course by or by the fundamental lawes of the land they would be found more worthy to be condemned Sure succeeding ages need take no more but the ground which themselves have laid downe here whereupon to declare this Parliament null But 2. These Parliaments were all legally conveened called for the King called the Parliament 1639 sent the Earle of Traquare as his commissioner thither which was adjourned to Anno 1640. then after some time it was adjourned to Anno 1641. at this Session of Parliament the King himself was present so owned them as a lawfull Parliament being called by his command continued hither till ratifyed all their Acts among which this was one viz Act. 17. Anno 1640. That every third year once at least there should be a full free Parliament that the time place should be appoynted by his Maj. or his commissioner for the time the Estates of Parliament before the end and elâ—…sing of every Parliament According to which Act King Parliament did appoint the next Parliament to meet Iun 1644. this Parliament is continued till Ian. 1645. thence till March thence till Iuly 1645. from thence it is adjourned to November 1646. then till March 1647. at the close of this last Session of Parliament conforme to the forsaid Act 1640. They appoynted the next meeting of Parliament to be Anno 1648. This Parliament adjourned to March 1650. but with all they give power to their committy or the quorum thereof to call the Parl. sooner if they saw necessity accordingly it is convocated An. 1649. at the time appointed it meeteth An 1650. so adjourned to times convenient So that there is no informality here at all discernable If it be said that neither the King nor his commissioner was present at those Parl. so this informality annulled all Ans. 1. The want of this formality cannot be the cause of annulling these Parl. or Sessions of Parl. because they annull the very Session of Parliament 164â—… at which King Charles himself was present 2. There is no law making the presence of the King or his Commissioner essential to every Parliament far lesse to every Session of a Parliament 3. There have been many Parliaments holden in Scotland without either king or Commissioner as in the dayes of King Iames 2. Anno 1437 1438 1440. where there is no mention made of the King in the Acts as there is at the next Parliament 1443. but only of the three Estates of Parliament concluding and ordaining So Anno 1560. there is a Parliament holden at Edenburgh by the three Estates without either King or Queen an Act thereof ratified first Parliament King Iames 6. Act 2. So Anno 1567. the Parliament is keeped by the Regent the three Estates without the Queen who then did Reigne as the Acts of Parliament 1581. King Iames 6. shew for there these words are to be found in the first Act thereof And especially the Act made in the Reigne of the Queen his dearest mother in the Parliament holden at Edinburgh the 19 of April Anno 1567. 〈◊〉 Wherby it is aboundantly clear that she was then governing when this Parl. did sit yet the Parliament was keeped without her as the Acts shew So in the dayes of Queen Mary the Acts of Parl. run in the name of the Lord Governour three Estates of Parl. this Governour was not representing the Queen as her Commissioner
never yet heard of that a King was crowned in Scotland but by a lawfull Parliament whose deed was valide if this deed of that Parliament was not valid let wise men conjecture what the consequences will be It is true they except in their Act 9. All such Acts as were passed in any meeting of Parliament or committee of Estates authorized by his Maj. presence But his Maj. presence will not make every company of men a Parliament yea his being present with them at any of their Sessions sayeth he owned them as a lawfull Parliament 2. How ever all these Acts which concerne himself seing he was not present at their making are null 3. How cometâ—… it to passe that the Kings presence Anno 1641. did not availe to keep that session of Parliament from a stroke with the rest And furder it appeareth that they annull the Parliament 1650 1651. altogether because if that had been a Parliament it had been the first Parliament of King Charles 2 so the Parliament 1661. had been his second Parliament But the Parliament 1661. is called his first Parliament therefore there was never a lawfull Parliament before in his reigne thus by their principles he hath never been crowned in Scotland as yet What a Premunire they fall into here let lawyers judge Fourthly There was as little reason to condemne these meetings counsels conventions of the subjects at the begining of the late work Because those meetings were necessary for the defence of Religion against the bloody Prelates who were seeking the overthrow destruction of all 2. Nor is there any Act condemning such which can with any colour be allaiged except the Act of that Parliament 1584. wherein things were carryed on by a strong faction in great haste for they had five Sessions in three dayes with great secrecy for the Lords of the articles were sworne to secrecy the dooresâ—… were keeped closse all the time of Parliament See laborious Mr Petree his History pag. 442 and the Act of this Parliament did mainely strick against the assemblies of the Church for that was the thing designed 3. What ever can be made out of this Act against civill meetings it will not stricke against those meetings because the Parliament 1640 in their Act 29. hath showne the true meaning thereof to be otherwise saying It cannot be extended against any councells conventions assemblies committees or meetings made holden keeped by the subjects for mantenance and preservation of the kings Maj. Religion lawes and liberties of the kingdome or for the publick good either of Church or state this Act was approved by the large treaty againe by the next Session of Parl. An. 1641. where the King himself was present 4. The secret councell which then was did approve of these conventions or tables as they were called so did his Maj. commissioner thereafter So then these meetings might be warrantably keeped for God's glory the removeing of the just grievances of the subject being no wayes prohibited by the municipall lawes which onely disallow such conventions as are for disturbance of the peace or usurpation against authority neither of which can be allaiged here for no invasion violence offer of wrong by word or deed to any person no not even to these against whom they had justly complained followed thereupon And those meetings were onely to consult upon the most fit humble way of supplicating his Maj. for the most convenient propositions to be presented to his Maj. to the Parliament to the assembly all which are most compatible with the loyalty duty of good subjects do no wayes encroach upon authority seing they assumed not any judiciall determination in any matter of state civill or ecclesiasticall but by voluntary instructions and opinions every one to another in a common cause of religion did resolve what might be most conduceable to their lawfull and just ends To use the words of the protestation Decemb. 18. 1638. Fiftly Nor is there just warrand ground upon this account to annull the League Covenant Because 1. It was against no municipall law for as to that 12 Act of the Parl. 10 of King Iam. 6. Anno 1585. it is so explained by the 29 Act of Parl. 1640. as that it cannot be extended to any bands leagues made for the preservation of the Kings Maj. Religion lawes liberties of the Kingdome or for the publick good either of Church or state and this may be furder cleared by vieuing the 43 Act of Queen Mary which the forecited Act of King Iames 6. relateth unto ratifieth for that Act is to be understood of particular leagues or bonds of man-rent as they called it or maintenance respectivè that by privat persones in brugh land therefore cannot be understood of leagues or bonds made by the body of the land in their representatives in Parliament which hath so much power in making of leagues that without their consent the King cannot make a league as is clear by a league which King Robert 2. consented unto betwixt Scotland France England which was annulled because it wanted the Parliaments consent for sayeth Buch in the end of his 9 book neque enim ipse pacem vel inductas facere poterat nisi ex sententiâ publici conventus nec firmas polliceâ—… sine publico decreto He could neither make nor promise truce or peace without the Parliaments consent in the Parliament 10. King Iam. 6. Anno 1585. among the unprinted Acts there is one containing the assent of the Parliament for concludeing of a league with the Queen of England 2. The Parliaments of Scotland have made leagues with forraigne Princes without the Kings consent as that Parliament which deposed the Queen Mother from her regency did enter in a league with the Queen of England 3. All leagues bondes made by the Parliament were ratified by this King by his solemne oath both before at his coronation and therefore none in conscience could condemne these bonds or take an oath importing the same What is more allaidged against the league covenant shall be fully examined hereafter Sect. 2â—… Sextly Nor was there just cause upon this account to condemne Scotland for aideing assisting of England in their straite extreame danger Because 1. It is a most ordinary thing for one nation to send help relief unto another thus the french the Englishes helped the Hollanders The king of Britaine offered to helpe the Rotchell the Palatinat 2. It was against a common enemy a popish prelaticall malignant faction seeking the ruine of religion lawes liberties in Scotland as well as in Engl. By the light of nature a common fear uniteth even these who are furthest divided so while Scotland fought for England they fought for themselves their own saiftie what ever law will warrand nations now to joyn together against the Turk will
Prins Soveraigne power of Parliaments c. Where the matter is fully cleared both in poynt of law conscience which was published by order of Parliament and a book intituled de jure Magistratus insubditos Trochreg's commentary on the Ephesians where he will finde this question prudently judiciously and satisfactorily handled from pag. 911. to 925. Thus in some measure is this Ninth particular cleared the Iawfulnesse of Scotland's defensive warre clearly showne hereby the unlawfulnesse of swearing any oath which might have imported a condemning of that warre is also demonstrated By what hath been said to this Ninth particular the Tenth last is likewise cleared viz. The lawfulnesse of Scotland their seizing upon the Castles within themselves For if it be lawfull for a land to defend themselves to use resistence by armes in their own necessary defence It is also lawfull for them to seize upon such castles strengths as may prove a fit necessary meane of defence It is lawfull to possesse these keep them out against the enemies of the countrey who if they had them would make use of them for the destruction of the land for the subversion of Religion Lives liberties What ever law will allow of self defence will also allow the use of all fit meanes for that end For the end includeth the meanes leading to the end Moreover these Castles Fortifications were originally appointed for the saifty security of the Kingdome of none else therefore at the learge treaty it is concluded in answer to the second demand That the Castle of Edinburgh and other strengths of the Kingdome should with the advice of the Estates of the Parliament according to their first fundation be fournished and used for defence and security of the Kingdom So that hereby the King approved of all which was done in this businesse before acknowledged that according to their first fundation they were for the Kingdom 's advantage It is true these Castles were annexed to the Crown Parl. 11. Act 41. King Iames 11. but that was done to guaird against the poverty of the real me for all that the King might not give them away in fee or heritage nor in franck tenement without the advice deliverance decreet of the whole Parliament And for great soon reasonable causes of the realme otherwise any alienation or disposition was to be of no avail And it was enacted that the Kings of Scotland should be sworne at their coronation to keep his statute in all points Act 9. Parl. 9. king Iam. 6. sayeth that These Castles are for the welfare of the realme as well as for his Maj. behoofe so Act. 125. Parl. 7. K. Iam. 6. The Castles are called the keyes of the realme So though the King hath the custody command of them yet it is alwayes in order to the right end that is for the saifty good of the countrey if he should make use of them for the ruine destruction of the countrey they should be abused might lawfully be taken out of his hand converted to the right use as when a father turning mad will kill his children with a sword the children may lawfully take the sword from him with which he was bound to defend them against the common enemy make use of it in their own defence Castles fortifications are not the King's patrimony but belong to him as King Governour of the land so that he is to make no use of them but for the countreyes good he cannot dispone sell them as he may do other things that belong to his patrimony Therefore Scotl. cannot be blamed for seizing on these for their own saifty seing this is their native end the only thing they were ordained for Nor can any be blamed for refuseing that oath which would have imported a condemning of this lawfull necessary deed Thus reader thou hast shortly laid before thee a hint of what clear grounds there were of stumbling at the taking of this oath as to the very civil part thereof seing this civil supremacy is must be the same with his perogative his prerogative is such as hath been showne A difference betuixt the supremacy the prerogative is not imaginable unlesse it be this that the supremacy is more comprehensive taketh in all the prerogative something more yea by some posteriour acts they are made of one the same latitude as in the act for the national Synod the setling of the external government of the church is said to belong to his Maj. as an inherent right of the crown how by vertue of his prerogative royall and supreme authority so that his prerogative royall supreme authority are made one if they be one as to ecclesiastical matters much more must they be one the same as to civill matters more clearly in the King's commission for the heigh commission where it is said His Maj. by vertue of his royall prerogative in all causes and over all persons etc so that any may see that his supremacy over all causes is one the same thing with his prerogative Moreover this is certane that who soever do acknowledge recognosce the King 's power supremacy in all causes and over all persons do acknowledge recognosce all that which they say agreeth to him as King and who soever do acknowledge recognosce this do acknowledge recognosce his royall prerogatives for his royall prerogatives are such things as agree to him as King because they are annexed to the crown as they say It is true in their 11 act of parl the acknowledgment of his Maj. prerogative is mentioned beside the oath of alleagiance But that will nor make them to differ so far yea the acknowledgment of his Maj. prerogative is but explicatory of a part of that supremacy mentioned in the oath of alleagiance So that his prerogative over parliaments over their actions over all other subjects is but a part of that supremacy which they say he hath over all persons in all causes So in the oath for asserting his majesties prerogative defensive armes the Kingdomes entering in a league with England all their proceedings in the work of reformation are condemned this cannot be denyed though there be an expresse oath afterward conceived of purpose for that end viz the declaration set forth â—…ept 2. 1662. SECTION XII The meaning of the oath of Alleagiance as to its ecclesiastick part opened some reasons why upon that account it could not be taken THe civil part of this oath of alleagiance being thus spoken to in the next place the ecclesiastick part must be handled when this is but explained reasons without much difficulty will appear why as to that part of it it could not then nor as yet can in conscience be subscribed unto In this part as in the other the sense
scruple now at the taking of that oath let wise men judge Next as to the rise of this power over the Church the occasion of this oath in Scotland seing it may sufficiently be gathered from the short historical narration of the government of the Church set down Sect. 1. a short recapitulation will be sufficient here In the confession of faith which was ratified approved by the Parliament Anno 1560. againe ratified insert in the records Anno 1567 cap. 25. the power in Church matters which is there given unto the civil Magistrat is in these words That to them chiefly and most principally appertaineth the conservation purgation of religion and they are appoynted for the maintenance of the true religion and for suppressing of idolaâ—…ry and superstition in that same Parl. An. 1567 Act 2. there is an act which was made Anno 1560. ratified ordaineing that the â—…ishop of Rome called the Pope have no jurisdiction or authority within this realme and that none of his Maj. subjects suite or desire title or right of the said Bishop of Rome or his sect to any thing within his realme under the paine of banishment c. and that no Bishop use any jurisdiction in time coming by the said Bishop of Romes authority under the paine forsaid whereby the Popes authority was quite rejected not only in civil matters but in Church matters yet there is no expresse word of the Kings being invested with any such power Anno 1568. There was one Thomas Bassenden Printer in Edinburgh who did printe a book intituled the fall of the Roman Church and in that book the King was called the supreme head of the Church This gave great offence moved the generall assembly to cause call in these books to delete that title of the Kings But all this did not preserve the Church from incroachments for when Montgom pretended Archb. of Glasgow was proceeded against the king summoned the whole synod of Lothian before him afterward when this same Mr Montgomery was summoned before the Nationall Assembly there came a Messinger of armes from his Maj. to discharge the Assembly under the paine of rebellion of puting of them to the horne to proceed any furder whereupon the assembly did complaine of this incroachment April 27 Anno 1580. as such the like whereof had never been made before But this availed not for Mr Balcanquell Mr Dury were summoned before the Councell for some freedome which they had used in preaching Of this the Assembly did complaine againe which occasioned a conference betwixt the King some Ministers the result whereof was That in all time coming the tryal of Ministers doctrine should be referred to Church Iudicatories as the only competent Iudge But this was soon forgotten for Anno 1581. Mr Balcanquell was againe accused the privileges of the Church were incroached upon which did put the Church to supplicat Anno 1582. complaine that His Maj. by advice of some consellours was about to take the spirituall Power authority upon himself propperly belonging unto Christ as the King head of his church of the ministery the execution thereof unto such as bear office in ecclesiasticall government so that in his person some men presse to erect a new Popedome as if his Maj. could not be full King head of the commonwealth unlesse the spirituall as well as the temporall power should be put into his hand unlesse Christ be bereft of his authority the two jurisdictions confounded which God hath divided which tendeth directly to the wrecke of all true relig it their next assembly there was an article drawn up to be presented unto his Maj. to this affect That seing the jurisdiction of the Church was granted by God the Father through our Mediator JESUS CHRIST given to those only who by preaching overseeing bear office within the same to be exercised not by the injunctions of men but by the only rule of God's Word That an Act of Parliament concerning the liberty jurisdiction of the Church be so plainely declared that hereafter none other under whatsoever pretence have any colour to ascribe or take upon them any part thereof in placeing or displaceing of Ministers of God's Word in spirituall livings or offices without the Churches admission or in stopping the mouthes of preachers or taking upon them the judgment or tryall of doctrine or of hindering or disannulling the censures of the Church or exeeming any offendour there from By the endeavours of these faithfull worthies any may see what a Spirit was stirring then when the King would assume to himself spirituall power authority so rob Christ of that which belongeth to him as King head of the Church make himself a Pope the fountaine of all power jurisdiction both civill ecclesiastick challenge power to give commission for deposeing ordaineing of Ministers hinder free preaching to try censure doctrine to anull all Church censures as he pleased This was the Spirit that was then stirring at court this is the supremacy to the life this was it which court parasites said did belong unto the crown let the Church say do to the contrary what she could Hence a little after this Mr Melvin was accused for his sermon after he had declined the King his Councell as incompetent judges in that cause was forced to withdraw to Berwick for fear of his life Anno 1584. The Parliament which was suddainely convocated did put the copestone upon this bussinesse gave the King in forme what he had assumed to himself formerly upon the matter in their very first Act give him Royal power and authority over all Estates as well spiritual as temporal within the realme And Statute and ordaine that he and his heires or successours be themselves and their Councels in all time coming judges competent to all persones of whatsoever Estate degree function 〈◊〉 condition they be of spiritual or temporal in all matters that none decline their judgement in the premisses under the paine of treason From this supremacy flowed the impowering of Bishops with Church jurisdiction as commissioners from the King so that when the King wrote unto a Prelat he stilled him Our beloved Clerck Commissioner in Ecclesiastical causes So that by this supremacy the power of Church jurisdiction was made propper to the King the exercise thereof was committed by him to whom he would After this blast was something blown over Anno 1592. Papists others at court stirr up his Maj. against the government of the Church so that when the commissioners of the Generall Assembly had met had sent some of their number to shew the King what offence was taken at his calling home the Popish Lords he was offended asked how they durst meet without his warrâ—…nd But Mr Andrew Melvin answered That there were two Kings two
Kingdomes in Scotland that Christ was a King the Church his Kingdome that he himself was a subject unto Christ a member of his Church neither head nor King thereof that the spirituall office bearers to whom he had committed the government of his Church had power warrant to conveen But the King went on told the Ministers thereafter That there should be no agreement betwixt him them untill the marches of their jurisdiction were rid that they might not speak in pulpit of the affaires of the Estate or Councell that no Generall Assembly should meet without his special command that Church judicatures should meddle with fornication luch like scandalls but not with causes whereupon his lawes do strick shortly thereafter Mr Blake was summoned did decline his declinature was owned by severall hundereds of Ministers when King Iames saw this he laboured to ensnare the Ministery therefore invented the bond which was mentioned Sect. 1. Pag. 27. whereby any may see what was intended designed But when he is in possession of the crown of England then the poor Church findeth his hand heavier then formerly for Anno 1606. Six Ministers were convicted of treason condemned for declineing the councell as an incompetent judge in matters ecclesiastick all by vertue of the Act of Parl. 1584. And the Parliament which did meet that yeer 1606. to make all sure did acknowledge his Maj. soveraigne authority princely power royall perogative privilege of his crown over all Estates persons and causes whatsoever and ratifieth approveth and perpetually confirmeth the same at absolutely amply and freely in all respects and considerations as ever his 〈◊〉 or any of his royall progenitoure Kings of Scotland in any time by gone possessed used and exercised Thus was the copestone of this supremacy put on againe And at that pretended assembly at Glasgow Aâ—…no 1610. it was acknowledged that The indiction of the Generall Assembly did appertaine unto his Maj. by the prerogative of his royall crown And it was ordained that the oath which is set down before pag. 37. be sworne by all ministers at their ordination the Parliament which conveened Anno 1612. ratified all this And finally Anno 1633. in the 1 Parl. of King Charles Act 3. that Act which was made Anno 1606. was againe ratified this conclusion was drawne from it that he hath power to prescribe what apparell he thinketh fit for Kirk men which was done of purpose for this end that his Maj. might with greater facility get the use of the surplice by Ministers established by law and practised And now by all this any may see what is the nature of that supremacy which the higher powers have been all alongs grasping after which the faithfull servants of Christ have been withstanding according to their power But in the last place the sense meaning of this late Parliament which did tender the oath must be sought out of their acts actings out of some commissions granted by his Maj. thereby it shall be seen what ground there was of scrupling at the oath how the feares of such as did then scruple at the oath were not groundlesse seing the after actings of king Parliaâ—… have abundantly confirmed the apprehentions which such had of their giving to the King of his taking more power in Church matters then themselves would then acknowledge or confesse did belong to him Now for clearing what power was then is now assumed by given to the King in Church matters these particulars may be noticed 1. When these Six or Seven Ministers who were cited before the Parliament had offored a sense in which they would willingly have taken the oath they could not be heard though they granted unto him in their sâ—…nse offered as much power in Church matters as the word of God the confessions of faith both of the Church of Scotland of other reformed Churches did allow for they did grant that his soveraignity did retch ecclesiastik causes objectively though in its own nature it was alwayes civill extrinsick But this did not satisfie therefore it was evident enough that they did intend some other thing by that oath then every one could well see 2. In the 4. Act of their first session it is made a part of the Kings prerogative That none of his heighnesse subjects of whatsoever quality state or function presume to convocat conveen or assemble themselves for holding of councells to treat consult determine in any matter of state civil or ecclesiastick except in ordinary judgments without his Maj. speciall command of expresse license had obtained thereto under the paines c. By which it is apparent that they will have no Church judicatories without his command or license otherwise his prerogative is violated so it is a piece of his perogative supremacy to have all these assemblies depending â—…o upon him as civill meetings do that is that they shall be null without his expresse consent and command for this part of the act is in every word conforme relative to that black act Anno 1584. viz act 3. parl 8. King Iam. 6 by which all Church judicatories which had been set up conforme to the second book of discipline viz sessions presbyteries synods were discharged 3. In the 16 Act of the first session concerning religion and Church government they say That as to the government of the Church his Maj. will make it his care to setle secure the same in such a frame as shall be most agreeable to the word of God most suiteable to monarchicall governement most complying with the publicke peace quyet of the Kingdome in the meane time his Maj. with advice consent foresaid doth allow the present administration by sessions presbyteries Synods So that by this act it is clear that they think that there is no particular forme of Church government sâ—…t down in the word 2. That every nation is left at liberty in this to choose what forme they will as most suitâ—…ing to civil government complying with the people temper 3. That he is judge of what forme of government is most agreeable to the word of God 4. That this governement must be some other government then that which is by Sessions Presbyteries and Synods which is but allowed in the interim 4. There is a commission or act from his Maj. for a Nationall Synod ratified by Parliament in their second Session which is worth the noticeing the Act is thus worded For as much as the ordering disposall of the externall government of the Churh the nomination of the persones by whose advice matters relating to the famine are to be setled doth belong to his Maj. as an inherent right of the Crown by vertue of his prerogative Royall supreme authority in causes Ecclesiastick And in prosecution of this trust his Maj. considering how
own phancies as to be in paine untill he were delivered of this birth not considering the unseasonablenesse thereof at such a time There is a season a time for every purpose under heaven sayeth the wise preacher Eccles. 3 1. a wise mans heart discerneth both time judgment Ecc. 8 5. But it seemeth he hath been so desirous that the world should see this monstruous birth that 〈◊〉 he wanted a time he would take the most unfit season imaginable for it For it is hardly imaginable that he could have chosen a more unfit time for publishing this his notion Because though his notion in thâ—…si were unquestionably true as it is not yet in hypothesi it could not now be yeelded the Kingdomes being tyed to one of these formes by the oath of God the solemne League Covenant so not at liberty to choose what forme they please His principles will not suffer him to say that Presbyterian governement is utterly unlawfull that Episcopall governement is necessary his learning will soon discover a validity in a Covenant about things not sinfull though not absolutely necessary his piety will grant that conscience should be made of such oathes And now when the Kingdomes were under the oath of God to set up a government most agreable to the Word of God And to endeavour the extirpation of Prelacy could there be a more unseasonable time for venting this his notion touching the indifferencie lawfulnesse of either Presbyterian or Prelaticall For suppone his notion were a truth of what use could it be now when the Churches hands were bound up by a solemne vow Covenant from following their liberty Sure his disputing so much for the liberty of the Church in such a case at this time sayeth that in his judgment the oath of God is of no value otherwise at least he would have casten in this clause of exception some where so have stated the question as a case in Utopia if so be it was as a fire within him that could not be keeped in And now indifferent readers may judge whether intentio operit I shall not say operantis was union peace edification To teach people to break Covenant with God to null their oaths vowes is no way to the good edification of the Church Such an union by perjury will be nothing else but a sinfull conspiracy Peace in such away will be but dreadfull security when the judgments of God are at hand And such edification is nothing but destruction But it seemeth his silence in the matter of the Covenant all alongs sayeth that in his judgment the obligation of the Covenant is null so this weapon-salve of his must be strong that will eat thorow the bones of a Covenant but because it is so dangerous destructive unto the substantials vitals of Religion it is the lesse to be valued whatever vertue he allaigeth it hath for cureing wounds in the flesh Did he think that tender Christians would get the Gordian knot of a Covenant oath vow so easily cut as to think themselves at liberty to choose what forme of governement they pleased Or if he did not presuppose this of what use did he think his book would be Though it were to be wished that this learned man had imployed his talent more for him who gave it Yet seing he would not forbear the publishing of his notions conceptions he might have spoken his minde concerning the obligation of the solemne League Covenant For so long as that Covenant standeth in force his notion will evanish as a cloud without raine But we must end this digression in which we have insisted the longer because it is one of the maine grounds upon which the complyers of this age do walke goe on that we may hasten to some other particular SECTION XIIII Such reasons or objections as are allaidged for taking against refuseing of the oath of alleagiance as it is called Answered BEfore any other particular be entered upon or this concerning the oath which is called though falsly the oath of alleagiance passed from there are some few objections which would seem to militate against the refuseing to swear subscribe the oath as it was tendered which must be rolled out of the way And these are either such as concerne the civill part so seem to weaken the grounds of scrupling at the oath upon that account which were laid downe Sect. 10 11 or such as concerne the Ecclesiastick part so seem to weaken the grounds of scrupleing at the taking of the oath upon that account which were mentioned prosecuted Sect. 12 13. First then as to the civill part it will be objected 1. That there was no ground of scrupleing at taking of the oath upon that account Because it was but the acknowledging of that very power which did properly belong to him before which former Parliaments had recognosced as his due viz. the 18. Parliament of King Iames the V I. which did acknowledge his Soveraigne Autherity Princely Power Royall Prerogative Privilege of his Crown over all Estates persons causes whatsomever Ans. This Objection was sufficiently obviated above Pag. 126. where it was showne that these were but Parliamentary flourishes complements grounded upon personall qualifications And indeed the act seemeth to raise this structure upon his Maj. being put in possession as the righteous inheritour of the famous renowned Kingdomes of England France Irland which far surpasse the wealth power force of the dominons of his progenitours Kings of Scotland thereby having a greater increase of care burden with all upon his extraordinary graces most rare excellent vertues where with he was endued for the discharge of that trust Now any man of understanding may see that the increase of his extensive power authority or of personall qualifications is no sufficient ground for the increase of his intensive power or for the enlargeing of the privileges of the crowne Moreover it is said expresly in the act that they ratifie approve perpetually confirme the same as absolutely amply freely in all respects considerations as ever his Maj. or any of his royall progenitours Kings of Scotland in any time by gone possessed used exercised the same Whence it appeareth that they gave no new power only they did recognosce what he his progenitours had before Now as was showne above neither he nor any of his progenitours had such a supremacy over parliaments as is now allaidged to belong unto the crown For as to that first act parl 8. Anno 1584. it was showne above Pag. 125. how notwithstanding of the supremacy there granted unto the King the privileges of Parliament remaine intire as they had been continued past all memory of man without any alteration or diminution whatsomever And after this Anno 1587. in the 11. Parl. act 33. the ancient order dignity
integrity of the parliament is restored particularly act 40. the King doth faithfully promise to do or command nothing which may directly or indirectly prejudge the liberty of free voteing of the Estates of Parliament But 2. It will be objected That all this supremacy was acknowledged by the Parliament 21. Anno 1612. when the Acts of the Assembly at Glasgow Anno 1610. were ratified among which this was one that Ministers should swear the same oath which was tendered by this Parliament which is there set down Ans. It is true it was appoynted by that pretended Assembly that Ministers at their entry or admission to the Kirk should Testify declare that the King was the only supreme Governour of the realme as well in matters Spirituall Ecclesiasticall as in things temporall c. And it is true this Parliament did ratify approve this deed so that it had the force of a law But 1. There is a great difference betwixt such a civill sanction as this is an other Act of Parliament other Acts stand in force untill they be repealed but when the Church constitution which is the ground Basis of the civill sanction ceaseth the sanction ceaseth the Act perishâ—… without any formall repeall The Act ratifying approveing the deed of a Church judicature standeth in force no longer then the deed of the Church judicature standeth in force the deed of a Church judicature may be altered without any respect had unto the civill sanction or notwithstanding that the civill sanction is not formally removed because the civill sanction did follow depend upon the Church Act the Church Act doth not depend upon the civill sanction 2. It is not incumbent unto a Church judicature to determine the limites of the King 's civill supremacy far lesse to determine the same in the first place this pretended Assembly was more anxious about the King 's Ecclesiastick supremacy then the civill it was his supremacy in Church matters which was here intended by them approved by the Parliament And therefore it is added And that no forraigne Prince State nor Potentat hath or ought to have any jurisdiction power superiority preheminence or authority Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall 3. What ever civill supremacy may be supposed to be here included there is no supremacy over Parliaments acknowledged But any civill power that is here recognosced as his due is in opposition to forraigne Princes States or Potentats not to Parliaments within the Kingdom If it be said that the oath tendered by this Parliament Anno 1661. being every way correspondent unto that oath which is recorded Parliament 21. Anno 1612. can import a recognosceing of no more civill power then that Anno 1612. therefore might lawfully have been sworne It is replyed That the oath Anno 1661. is more expresse for civill power supremacy then that An. 1612. But if there had been no more then the words of the oath Anno 1661. there had not been very great ground of scrupleing at the taking thereof upon the account of the civil part for it is not the words of the oath that ground that scruple upon that account so much as the glosse put upon the words by their other acts particularly by the act for acknowledging his Maj. prerogatives which as a commentary explaineth what they meane by his being supreme governour over states civil in all causes civil Now the like of this was not done by the parliament Anno 1612. Or any other before or since that time till this parliament Anno 1661. which hereby hath put another glosse upon the civil part of the oath then ever was done before But. 3. It will be objected May not Parliaments give more civil power unto the King then he had before so enlarge even intensivè the privileges prerogatives of the crown so denude themselves of that in whole or in part which did formerly appertaine unto them And when the Parliament hath done this annexed such such power unto the crowne can it be unlawfull for privat subjects to acknowledge that the King hath indeed so much power Ans. in poynt of law it will be a very great question whether Parliaments who are but trustees intrusted by the people whose commissioners they are virtually if not expresly bound to maintaine their rights privileges may betray their trust give away the iust ancient privileges of Parliament there with the just ancient liberties of the people It will be agreat question if they at their own hand may alter the foundamentall lawes of the land without the consent of these whose commissioners they are And it will be a greater question in law if this Parliament might have sold or given away the privileges of Parliament liberties of the people seing so much in poynt of law may be objected against its being a free Parliament if the want of freedome of election in shires brughs if prelimitation if the election of such as were not capable by the foundamentall constitution of Parliaments practice of the Kingdome other informalities of that kinde may have any place or weight in the anulling of Parliaments But. 2. In poynt of conscience it is clear that Parliaments may not now give away according to their pleasure dispone of the rights privileges of Parliament for in the third article of the league covenant all the people of the land Parliaments among the rest are sworne to maintaine in their severall places capacities so Parliaments in their Parliamentary capacitie the rights privileges of Parliament 3. Though the Parliament not with standing of the bonde of the covenant should denude themselves of their privileges yet now seing every particular member of the Kingdome is sworne according to his place station to maintaine the rights privileges of Parliament they may not assent unto such a deed of the Parliament by their oath subscription approve of such a wrong for that is the least that private persons who desire to minde make conscience of the oath of God can do at such a time viz. to refuse to give an expresse clear positive assent unto such a wrong done to the rights privileges of Parliament contrary to the covenant But 4. All this is to little or no purpose for there is not the least syllabe in all the Acts of this Parliament which doth import any new deed of gift but all alongs they speak of these prerogatives as formerly inherent in the crown yea as essentiall to it hence it is that they condemne the actings of the Parliaments Kingdome of Scotland these many years by gone because done in such away as was an actuall insolent as they say incroachment invasion upon the privileges prerogatives of the crowne Obj. 4. The acknowledging of the prerogative is distinct from the oath of allegiance therefore seing they were
because of the palpable breach of a Covenant Or such a peace as is very consistent with the curse vengeance of God pursueing the quarrell of a broken Covenent But whoever he be he tryeth his skill strength in pulling down both the solemne league Covenant with which he both beginneth endeth the nationall Covenant which he fighteth against on the bye his strength in this matter must be tryed In dealing with the Solemue league covenant he layeth downe three maine grounds The first is this pag. 22. That an oath howsoever in it self lawfull yet the case may be such that by something following after it may cease to binde yea the case may be such that it can not lawfully be keeped It will not be necessary to examine this at any length as it is here set down but it will be sufficient to examine it in so far as it maketh for the purpose in hand that will be by examineing Whether the cases wherein he alledgeth this holdeth good will suite the Covenant now under consideration He mentioneth three cases The first is this When the matter of an oath is such as doth belong unto a superiour to determine in then the oath of the inferiour ceaseth to â—…blige when the superiour consenteth not to what is sworne This is both agreeable to reason because no deed of the inferiour can prejudge the right of the superiour also sound divines do acknowledge this upon the common equitie of that law Numb 30 4. Unto which these things may be replyed 1. Whether the relation betwixt subjects Magistrats be so strait as is the relation betwixt parents Children betwixt huâ—…band wife may be some what questioned as to the matter in hand the one being naturall the other but politicall the one such as cannot be changed at will the other such as may A man may Choose to live under what Magistrat he will but a woman cannot cast off her parents her husband when she will take others therefore there may be a greater latitude allowed in the one case then in the other whether Magistrats subjects come within the compasse of that text Numb 30 May be questioned also seing there is nothing in the text hinting at this Yea though Moses be speaking to the heads of the tribes concerning the Children of Israel yet he maketh no mention of this case nor of any other except of two viz. a woman under a husband a woman not sorisfamiliat though analogies may be allowed in some cases yet there ought to be a clear ground out of the word for such analogies as will founde an argument against the obligeing force of oaths such analogies as will warrand consciences in this case had need to be very clear undoubted 2. Though this analogie were ganted yet this case will speak nothing to the poynt in hand unlesse it were proved that there were no civil Magistrats in Scotland beside the King that all Even the Estates of Parliament convâ—…ened in Parliament were subjects nothing else but subjects so though the Parliament all the land at the command of the Parliament should take an oath it should not binde if the King dissented therefrom But there is enough said above to show that supreme soveragnitie did never so reside in the Kings of Scotland as that Parliaments even in their Parliamentary capacity were no sharers thereof And this one thing is enough to disprove this phancy viz. That the legislative power which is an eminent part of severaignitie did alwayes in paâ—…t at least belong unto the Parliament of Scotland for they statute ordaine together with their soveraigne Lord therefore they are called the Acts of Parliament Yea without a Parliament the King can make no lawes yea nor can he make a law without all the Estates of Parliament But of the power of the Parliaments of Scotland in making lawes yea over the King himself enough hath been said therefore this case doth not concerne the matter in hand 3. Let this be given though it cannot be granted Yet this case will not help his cause because it can hold good in no other things but such in which the inferiour is subordinat to the superiour is by the law of God subject unto him as the doughter in the matter of her marriage or the like is subjected unto her parents the married wife in the disposall of domestick goods affaires is subjected unto her husband but in matters of religion in morall duties no wife is so subjected unto her husband nor doughter unto her parents as that they can loose the obligation of their vowes promises Yea in this case it will be easily ganted that inferiours may vow Covenant not only without but even against the command of superiours for it is alwayes better to obey God then men Now it hath been showne above that these Covenants are about morall duties matters of religion wherein inferiours are not to waite upon their superiours But must advance whether they will or not But to this he replyeth Pag. â—…3 That such as plead the obligation of the Covenant in the matter of Episcopacy must suppone that it is indifferent or not unlawfull for if by God's word 〈◊〉 be found unlawfull then whether there had been a Covenant against it or not it cannot be allowed It is Answered 1. It will not be a fit place here to lanch forth into the disput concerning Episcopacy more is already said against it by many famous worthie divines then is or in haste will be Answered as for what this Author is pleased to say for it against presbyterie else where in his pamphlet it is but that which hath been said said over againe by others before him who knew to put their arguments in a better dresse then he doth is sufficiently answered by others but if he had brought any new arguments forth to the field it had then been fit to have taken some notice of them But 2 whereas he thinketh that such as plead the Covenant obligation must suppon that Episcopacy is a thing indifferent that presbytery is nothing else he runeth alone without the company of any casuist or divine for all do grant that an oath may be de re lâ—…cita possibili concerning a matter lawfull and possible and particularly that it may bâ—… about a matter morally good that in things morally good an oath hath an obligeing force ad quae praestanda sayeth D Sander sâ—…n de jur prâ—…m obl pâ—…ael 3. § 6 vel injurati tenemur jurati multo tenemur magis accedente sciliceâ—… ei quaepraefuit ex praecepto nova obligatione ex jureâ—…urando i e. for the doing of those things which we are bound to do though not under an oath being under an oath we are much more bound for to the former obligation ariseing from the command there
prael 4. § 6. It is required that there be a clear intimation of this dissent for it is not enough for the father to say he is not well pleased with such a vow but he must openly contradict the same in refuseing he must refuse it in taking it away he must quite take it away as if he had said he must constantly in very deed refuse prohibite the same by his full power and authority 2. Doct. Sanders ubi supra prael 4. § 5. sayeth that a tacite consent will suffice that is to say sayeth he When he who sweareth may in probability presume that the superiour would not refuse it his consent were asked Now had not Scotland this tacite consent when some yeers before the King had ratified Acts of Parliament discharging Church governement by prelats yea more they had a formall expresse consent having an Act of Parliament made by King Parliament against the prelats unto the thing which they did then vow promise 3. This dissent must be presently testified in the very day he heareth thereof if one day passe the oath is ratified for sayeth the forcited Doct. Sanders ubi supra he who signifieth his dissent too late may be thought for some space of time to have consented Now this proclamation was not before the 9. of Octob. 4. This dissent must be constant as sayeth the forecited author for if at any time thereafter he yeeld the oath standeth in force for his former dissenting did not make the oath no oath nor loosed its obligation But only hindered the execution so now the impediment being removed the oath should be followed forth what is promised therein should be performed And the Covenanters have this to say That the King gave his after consent unto the oath when he said in his soliloquies That good men should least offend God him in keeping of it But to put this out of all doubt The King who now is as was showne above did solemnely owne this Covenant approve of all that was done in carrying on the ends of it promised that he would look upon the friends of the Covenant as his only friends the enemies thereof as his enemies And now quod semel placuit amplius displicere non debet that which once pleased cannot againe displease him But to this the author replyeth thus It would be considered if it was the Lord's minde in that law That if Children or wiver having vowed should by some meanes drive their parents or husbands out of the house and bargane with them either to ratify their vowes or never to enjoy these comforts that then the consent so obtained should be irrevocable Ans. 1. He can be in no worse case as to this matter of giving hiâ—… consent then he would be as to his swearing of an oath Now it is granted by Casuists that an oath unto which a man is forced doth binde if the matter be lawfull otherwise all oaths might be evited by alledging that force constâ—…ined to it Even the oath of alleagiance might be questionâ—… upon this account For it hath a penalty annexed to it so the swearers thereof may pretend that they were forced thereunto by the penalty Was noâ—… Zedekiâ—…h's oath to Nebuchadnezzer forced Doct. Saâ—…d his determination in this may satisfie He â—…bi supra Prâ—…l 4 § 5. sayeth 2. If the matter required by force or sad fear be not unlawfull nor injurious to any but only some what disadvantagious to the sâ—…er as if one travailing should fall among robers that with drawne swords would threâ—…ten his life unlesseâ—…e would promise them such a summe of money with an oath In this case it is lawfull both to promise the money to confirme the promise with an oath 3. I say such an oath doth oblige And he giveth these reasons why the oath obligeth 1. Because â—…e sweareth a thing lawfull possible 2. He did choose that which seemed best for that instant 3. What is promised for a certane end should be performed when the end is attained Yea which is more an oath into which one is cheated in which there is lesse reall will then in an extorted oath obligeth as that to the â—…ibeonites So then if an oath into which one is forced doth oblige much more will a consent to an oath stand though extoâ—…ted by fear especially seing the text maketh no such exception But 2. how can he say that such as were for the Covenant did deprive the King of all his worldly comforts seing it was conscience to that Covenant that moved Scotland to call home the King after that the Covenant breakers had taken away his fathers life had banished himself And how can this shamelesse man say as he doth pag. 24. That the Covenant was contrived carryed on as if the designe had been laid to extirpat episcopacy whether the King would consent 〈◊〉 not or whatever course should be taken to force his consent vi armis When he cannot but know that before ever there was a word of this league Covenant of which he is now speak ing prelacy was rooted out of Scotland But he will reply That Scotia d did suspend this King from the exercise of his royall power until he consented which was an unparallel'd way of usage from subjects to their soveraigne Ans. This Gentleman would speak sparingly lest he run himself into a premunire for the Estates of Scotland did nothing but what the lawes of the land allowed them to do There was an act of Parl. Parl. 1. Act. 8. K. Iam 6. enjoyning the King at his coronation to sweare to maintaine the true religion of Christ Iesus to rule the people according to thâ—… loveable lawes coâ—…stitutions received in this reaâ—…me to procure to the uttermost of his power to the Kâ—…K Christian people true perfect peace And this oath King Charles the first did swear what wrong did the Estates of Scotl. when they caused King Charles the II. sweare the same It is true that both the nationall solemne league Covenant were tendered to him also But what was there in either of those different from this oath all the question is about Episcopacy was not Episcopacy abolished fully by act of Parliament by an act of Parliament ratified opproved by King Charles the first himself being personally present Anno 1641 so was not this a received an approved law as full formall as ever any law made by any Parliament in Scotland was And what wrong was it then to put this King to sweare to rule them by their owne approved allowed lawes By this it may be seen that Reverend learned Mr Crofton the authors of the Covenanters plea are mistaken through misinformation when indirecly at least they alledge or take it for granted that the Scots dealt uncivilly disloyally with their prince in this businesse the reader must be intreated
Scotland in this is consonant to the profession of the Parliament Anno 1648. which did Act most for the King his interest preferring it to the interest of Christ who in their declaration Aprile 29. insert in their Registres Act 17. say That they resolve not to put in his Maj. hands or any others whatsoever any such power whereby the forsaid ends of the Covenant or any of them may be obstructed or opposed Religion or Presbyterian government endangered But on the contrary before any agreement or condition be made with his Maj. having found his late concessions offers concerning religion not satisfactory that he give assurance by his solemne oath under his hand seal that he shall for himself his Successours give his Royall assent agree to such act or acts of Parliament or bills as shall be presented to him by his Parliaments of both or either Kingdoms respectivè for enjoyning the League Covenant fully establishing presbyteriall government directory of worship confession of faith in all his Maj. Dominions And that his Maj. shall never make any opposition to any of these nor endeavour any change thereof What this Author sayeth more in the three last Pages of his pamphlet is but partly a repetition of what he said before so is answered partly obviated by the preceeding discourse SECTION XXIII The nationall Covenant vindicated from the exceptions of the author of the seasonable case caet HIs plea against the Solemne league Covenant being thus examined In the next place his exceptions against the nationall Covenant pag. 30 31. c. must be considered This Covenant is not abjured in the declaration simply in it self but as it was sworne explained in the year 1638. thereafter And so the maine ground whereupon this Covenant is cast off is because of that explication which was then added in which therewas mention made of some things which were referred unto the Generall assembly in these words forbearing the practice of all novations already introduced in the matters of the worshipe of God or approbation of the corruptions of the publick governement of the kirk or civil places or power of kirkmen till they be tryed allowed in free generall assemblies in parliaments And then after the generall assembly had examined these particulars explained the true sense meaning of the Covenant this conclusion was added The article of this Covenant which was at the first subscription referred to the determination of the generall Assembly being determined And thereby the five Articles of Perth the government of the Kirk by Bishops the civill place power of Kirk-men upon the reasons grounds contained in the Acts of the generall Assembly declared to be unlawfull within this Kirk we subscribe according to the determination foresaid Theforesaid pleader for Eaal when he is produceing his grounds against the validity of this oath pitcheth only upon one of these three particulars mentioned viz. the government of the Church by Bishops in reference to this he attempteth two things in his confused discourse 1. He would if he could prove that by this oath as it was at first conceived Anno 1580. 1581 renewed Anno 1590. the governement of the Church by Bishops was not abjured And 2. That the Assembly Anno 1638. did wrong in giving such a glosse sense as they did But he must be followed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lest any thing should escape first what he bringeth to prove that Prelacy was not abjured by this Covenant must be examined He sayeth That if the Ministers who reasoned with the Doctors of Abâ—…rdeen be to be beleeved they were the prime promotters of the Covenant carryed with them the sense of the body of the Covenanters they who subscribed that Covenant knight with great liberty voice in an Assembly concerning Episcopacy without prejudice notwithstanding their â—…ath upon this ground would perswade the Doctors to subscribe the Covenant because in so doing they should not be taken as abjureing Episcopacy as the Doctors thought And he referreth his reader unto their answer unto the 4. 10. demands Unto which it is Ans. 1. That this is but the old answere brought on the field againe for it was alledged by the Prelats in a pamphlet â—…n 1638. emitted under the name of his Maj. commissioner as most if not all which he here alledgeth is borrowed out of that pamphlet what answers were then given may now suffice Viz. That these Ministers who reasoned with the Doctors of Aberdeen denyed indeed that Episcopacy was expresly specifically abjured in the later part of the Covenant which was the addition containeing the application unto the present times But did never say that it was not abjured in the negative confession or nationall Covenant Now it was about that application addition that the debate arose betwixt these Ministers the Doctors The Doctors never refused to subscribe the negative confession as it was called or the Covenant drawne up Anno 1580 1581. for when the privy Councell did emit a declaration enjoyning all to take the Covenant as it was taken Anno 1580 1581 1590 1591. as others did not so neither would they have scrupled at the same But they alwayes refused to subscribe to that part which was added and one of the grounds why they did scruple at the subscribeing of that was this They thought that by that addition they should be bound expresly directly specifically to abjure Episcopacy the ceremonies of Perth which as they sayd they could not in conscience do Because then they should not have liberty to vote freely according to their judgments Concerning those things in the Generall Assembly And unto this the Ministers answered that the words of that addition were purposely so contrived as none might scruple upon that account And indeed as to Prelacy the words run thus that they should forbear the approbation of the corruptions of the publick Government of the Kirk And the reason was because there were severall honest well minded people in the land who could not distinctly clearly see that the ceremonies the Government of the Church by prelats were directly contrary to the confession of faith abjured therein But were waiting for light in those matters from the ensueing Generall assembly who they knew could give most clearnesse in the matter of fact And could best show what was the Government of the Church at that time when the nationall Covenant was first subscribed And also what was the meaning of the reformers as to severall particulars in that Covenant So then though it be true that by taking of the oath or swearing that additionall explication Anno 1638 No man was bound up from reasoning debateing nor from free voteing in the matter of prelacy in the nationall Assembly Yet it will not follow that prelacy was not abjured by the negative confession or nationall
should have some choise brethren added without whose counsell he should do nothing under the paine of deposition That his doctrine should be examined by the meeting if it were sound unsound he should lose his place That his power should only be the power of order not of jurisdiction That withall he should have inspâ—…ction over moe parishes that every Minister who was to enter should have his approbation the approbation of those Ministers who were to be joyned with him c. But when the assembly did meet in May thereafter these were not assented unto But it was only concluded That the bishop being a pastour as other ordinary Ministers should be tryed by the presbytery Synod in matter of doctrine conversation And be subject unto the Generall assemblies when the commissioners who were sent from his Maj. did hear of this they dissented protested that nothing concluded should stand in force seing thâ—…y had passed from the Articles And this occasioned a â—…w conference where that was concluded which this author mentioneth withall they did proceed to set down the order of the presbyteries Now lest any should stumble at this change in the Assembly let it be considered That two yeers before this there was a strange change at court for Arran ruled all nobles were banished ministers were forced to flee others imprisoned then the Prelats got up their heads Montgomerie was made Bishop of Glasgow one Mr Adamsone made Bishop of Saint Andrews And Ministers were compelled to promise under their subscription obedience unto them to consent unto many other acts of iniquity under the paine of banishment confinement imprisonmâ—…nt deposition sequestration of stipends this course continued till near the end of the year 1585. When the exiled nobles returned though a new Parliament was called the King would not repeale any act which was made in prejudice of the Church the yeer before Yet at length he professed some desires to have the Church settled called for that conference at Halirudhouse Now what wonder was it that when all was overturned Prelats established by Parl. in their full power that the Church should take little ere she wanted all should condescend to some things of purpose to get the power of prelats hemmed in hopeing when this furious tempest was fully blowne over that she should be in a better capacity to promove her work And withall it may be seen that she holdeth as much as she can mindeth the work of the presbyteries notwithstanding of the lawes of thâ—… land as yet unrepealed standing against her So that hence it appeareth that they never once thought of retracting the act at Dundee as he would make his reader beleeve And it would be considered likewise that at this Assembly there were severall of these Ministers present who Anno 1584. had subscribed unto the prelats And further it is considerable That for as great a length as they went Yet Sess. 6. They declared that there were only these Church officers Pastors Doctors Elders Deacons And that the name Bishop should not be taken as in the time of popery but is a name common to all pastours and Sess. 10. 11. They declared that by a Bishop they meane only such as the Apostle doth describe The last thing which he sayeth is this No Assembly can puâ—… an obligation upon persons who have taken an oath personally to accept of the sense which they put upon it It is true the assembly at Glasgow could declare their sense of the oath taken by themselves but could not impose their sense upon the takers of the oath before that sense not havâ—…g been given to the takers of the oath by the imposers of the same â—…e takers of the oath not having impowered these commissioners at Glasgow to declare their sense of that oath they had taken So then whatever was done 〈◊〉 Glasgow after the Covenant was taken by the body of the land could not oblige all the takers of it to owne their declaration of the sense of the Covenant which was not at first imposeing the oath declared unto them To let passe his bitter reflâ—…ctions not worth the transcribeing upon that venerable assembly at Glasgow 1638. The like where of would make him all his fraternity to tremble Ans. 1. The Assembly at Glasgow did impose no sense of theirs upon any man either who took the Covenant before or thereafter only because to them as the representative of the Church the publick judiciall interpretation of the Covenant or confession of â—…aith did properly belong they made search after the true sense meaning of the oath did declare make it appear to all by undenyable arguments as hath been showne that they had found out the true sense meaning thereof what was the sense of the Church of Scotland when it was first imposed And was there any wrong here 2. Such as had renewed that Covenant at that time had taken it with the explicatory addition did swear to forbear the approbation of Church Government by prelats untill the Generall Assembly should try whether that Government was abjured by the Covenant or not And was not that a sufficient impowering of the Assembly to declare the true sense thereof But what would this author gather from all thiâ—… He concludeth that Whatever the Assembly at Glasgow did after the Covenant was taken by the body of the land could not oblige all the takers thereof to owne their declaration of the sense of the Covenanâ—… Ans. Though their deed could not oblige the body of the land to owne their sense yet the Covenant it self did oblige them the body of the land did then see themselves obliged by the declaration of the true sense of the Covenant which they gave And what necessity was there for more The Assembly never offered to give a sense of their own which had not been heard of before For that had been intolerable but according to their place duty they for the good of theland satisfaction of the Covenanters search out of the â—…hentick records of the Church what was the sense meaning of the Church at that time when the Covenant was first taken which every privat person could not be so able to do which necessity did require to be done because of severall doubts which were raised there about He addeth the body of the land hath not indeed abjured Episcopacy by that nationall Covenant Neither the Covenant nor added interpretation doth import any such thing Ans. This is a strange thing how can this be seing the body of the people of the land took that Covenant by which when first taken by the body of the land prelacy was abjured It is true some who took the Covenant then being unclear in a matter of fact which had been done some fifty or sixty yeers before in trying searching out of which there
The grounds ends of this undertaking SECTION 1. Pag. 5. Sheweth When the Christian religion began first in Scotland That Palladius was the first prelate in Scotland No prelats among the Culdees How when reformation from popery began Superintendents no prelats Nationall Assemblies from the beginning of the reformation How the Tulchan Bishops came in over the Church her belly The Church wrestleth till these be put away presbyterian Government be setled in all her judicatories Anno 1592. The King thereafter incroacheth upon the privileges of the Church Prevaileth with some of the Ministers who betray the Church yeeld to Parliament-Bishops hinder the Church from enjoying her privileges liberties in her free Assemblies The faithfull Zealous are persecuted Parliaments carry on the King's designe with violence Corrupt Assemblies are convocated to further his Maj. designe to give Church power unto these Parliamentary Prelats Parliaments ratifie all The Church protesteth striveth against all this what she can The prelats being now inthroned tyrannize over oppresse the faithfull laboure to have ceremonies imposed upon the Church with force acts made in Parliament for bringing in the surplice Corner cap unto which some worthy nobles could not assent Anno 1633. Who are therefore accounted rebels traitours And Balmerino is condemned The prelats rage without all law draw up a service book book of canans c. SECT 2. Pag. 44. Sheweth How the use of the service book was hindered in Edenburgh Ministers people from all parts of the Kingdome petitioned against it The King favoureth not the petitioners They not withstanding continue in petitioning against the service book high Commission prelats c. Renew the nationall Covenant thorow the whole land The King intendeth a war An Assembly is indicted at Glasgow Nov. 21. And opened up This Assembly condemneth anulleth severall pretended Assemblies the book of common prayer the book of canons the book of consecration ordination the high commission court the ceremonies excommunicateth some deposeth all the prelats War is prepared against them They defend themselves A pacification is concluded another Assembly promised a Parliament thereafter The Assembly is opened up The Parliament is convocated but quickly adjourned Commissioners are sent to London imprisoned A new war is raised by the King Scotland prepareth for defence A new pacification The Parliament meeteth ratifieth all which the Covenanters had done Those acts are againe ratified The Parl. of Engl. beginneth a work of reformation entereth into a Covenant with Scotland the two nations joyntly proceed in the begun work of reformation A party in England strengthen themselves alter the judicatures take away the King's life Scotland bringeth home the prince who sweareth the Covenants is overcome by the Englishes in battell keeped in bondage ten yeers till the exiled King returned Anno 1660. SECT 3. Pag. 69. Sheweth Why these Ministers others who met Agust 23. 1660 were incarcerated what their supplication was And how unjustly they suffered upon that account SECT 4. Pag. 77. Sheweth What were the grounds upon which the Marquise of Argilâ—… suffered how insufficient in poynt of law from severall considerations SECT 5. Pag. 83. Sheweth What were the grounds upon which the life of precious Mr Guthry was taken how insufficient Either in law or conscience SECT 6. Pag. 86. Sheweth Upon what account other Ministers were persecuted And how unjustly Some banished for righteousnesse sake some indictâ causâ An extract of the sentence was refused to thosâ—… to all others SECT 7. Pag. 88. Sheweth The grounds why conscientious Ministers could not observe the anniversary day SECT 8. Pag. 91. Sheweth The reasons why Ministers could not observe the prelatâ—… meetings The author of the seasonable case c. Answered SECT 9. Pag. 101. Sheweth The reasons why ministers could not seek presentations from patrons nor collations from prelats The author of the seasonable case answered SECT 10. Pag. 114. Sheweth The true sense of the oath of alleagiance which was tendered Anno 1661. c. Compared with the former how it holdeth forth a great civil supremacie in the King cleared by the act 11 parl 1661. Which at least is much to be questioned from nine severall grounds And cannot lawfully be acknowledged because of ten dreadfull consequences which shall necessarily follow thereupon The former proceedings of the Church state of Scotland vindicated cleared SECT 11. Pag. 140. Sheweth The lawfulnesse of Scotlands defensive war first from the former practices of Scotland other Kingdomes King Iames King Charles confessions of adversaries next from a true clearing of the state of that war in Six Particulars which obviat all the objections of adversaries And lastly from lawyers adversaries the law of nature the law of nations the law of God sound reason SECT 12. Pag. 169. Sheweth What is the meaning of the oath of alleagiance as to its Ecclesiasticall part What way the King's supremacy over Church persons in Church causes began was carryed on in England How the same was advanced to a great height in Scotland What sense this King the late Parliament did put upon the oath of alleagianee by their Acts Actings How it were sinfull to acknowledge by taking the oath That so much Church power belongeth unto the civil Magistrate cleared by Nineteen particulars SECT 13. Pag. 200. Sheweth The groundlesnesse of Mr Stilling fleet 's notion concerning the divine right of formes of Church governement by making it appear how he overturneth his owne grounds how he misstateth the question the practice of the Apostles ground a jus divinum here Christ's institution the institution of the Apostles is for a particular species Christ's faithfulnesse in his office speaketh much for this The hazard is great in leaving the species undetermined The confession of the faith of severall Churches for a Species How he misseth his pretended end arme And how unseasonable his book is at this time uselesse so long as the league Covenant standeth in force though his notion were true in thesi SECT 14. Pag. 254. Sheweth How weak the Reasons are which plead for the taking of the oath of alleagiance by answereing Sixteen of them SECT 15. Pag. 270 Sheweth How unlawfull it is to owne acknowledge the curats foâ—… lawfull Ministers by fourteen reasons Foure objections answered SECT 16. Pag. 298. Sheweth That it is lawfull for Ministers banished from their owne flocks by a sentence of the civil Magistrate to preach in publick or private as God calleth by Eight reasons Thrâ—… objections are answered SECT 17. Pag 305. Sheweth That it is lawfull for Ministers though censured by the pretended prelate to preach as God giveth a call whether in publick or in private by Six reasons Foure objections are answered SECT 18. Pag. 310. Sheweth That it is lawfull for people to meet together for hearing honest Ministers preach publickly or privately And for other Christian duties notwithstanding of Acts made against it by severall reasons One objection answered SECT 19. Pag. 316. Sheweth How unlawfull it is to acknowledge the high commission court by compeering before it by Eleven reasons Foure or five objections are answered SECT 20. Pag. 327. Sheweth How dreadfull a sin it is to abjure the Covenant a sin aggravated by twelue particulars SECT 21. Pag. 347. Sheweth What judgements perjury hath brought on in all ages out of history sacred prophane SECT 22. Pag. 359. Sheweth The lawfulnesse binding force of the solemne league Covenant notwithstanding of all which the author of the seasonable case c. hath said against it SECT 23. Pag. 391. Sheweth The lawfulnesse of the nationall Covenant as it was sworne subscribed Anno 1638 1639 c. Notwithstanding of all which the author of the seasonable case c. Hath said to the contrary The CONCLUSION Pag. 416. Sheweth What the now afflicted Church of Scotland expecteth from strangers what use they should make of this sad dispensation c. FINIS Whence may not men destruction feare Who with deceitfull hearts do sweare This age wherein we live is void of faith For writes are signed twelue witnesses before The notar writt'th both time place what more Yet come'th a man of words who all deny'th King's words have weight great respect More then all oaths which men exact
noble just much owned honoured of God There is the greater ground of hope that God will helpe such as shall undertake the defence thereof the cavils of men who may be looked upon as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in most of these particulars are tâ—…e lesse to be feared But Christian reader what entertainment so ever it shall have with these who have out lived their zeale integrity have shamefully declined in the day of tryall And have betrayed the cause interest of Christ therefore shall looke upon themselves as not a little concerned herein pinched hereby being unwilling to have their evils ript up laid open to the view of the world Let it have a Christian entertâ—…inment with thee though it come late to thy hands through the injurie of the times let it not be the lesse welcome If the Lord shall be pleased to blesse it it may be of use for thy strengthning in this growing storme upon severall accounts grounds whereof I hint but a few 1. By what is said here thou mayest see that the cause thou sufferest for is the good old cause That same Spirit which acted the Prelats other enemies of the Church of Scotland from the beginning is now raging in her present enemies The same designe is hath been endeavoured driven on all a longs How various so ever the pretexts colours have been under which they have sought to cover themselves the covering hath proved too narrow for them first prelacy then popery was intend first last It is the same cause in the defence of which Christs worthies of old did act suffer so long as they could stand in the defence whereof they were not afrayed to beare the displeasure of King court to hazard life liberty all which waâ—… dear unto them If then the same Spirit doth act worke in the enemies of the Church now which did act worke in their predecessours of old pray thou that the same Spirit of God may act thee all the faithfull of the land which did appeare in the worthy valiant Champions of old whether thou be called to act or suffer for his sake 2. Thou mayest know from what is here related that the cause for which thou art now suffering was brought very low before these times And that the adversaries thereof have often got up to a great height yet the good cause hath got above them And how Acts of Parliament one after another all the devices of the adversary to seale the grave And to make it sure could not keep this cause of Christ from a glorious resurrection Many a time have they afflicted me from my youth might the Church of Scotland then have said many a time have they afflicted me from my youth yet have they not prevailed against me The plowers plowed upon my back made long their furrowes The Lord is righteous he hath cut asunder the coards of the wicked And shall it not yet hold true that all they who hate Zion shall be confounded turned back be made as the grasse upon the house topes which withereth be fore it be grown up There is no cause of despondency of spirit or of giving over the cause as lost there is hope in Israel concerning this matter his people may still hope trust in his name who hath wrought salvation of old He who did put that wicked party to shame confusion of face in former times made the name of Prelats to stink their posterity to be as cursed vagabonds wandering up down bearing the marks of god's displeasure still liveth reigneth doth no more approve of the Ungodly of this generation Nor of their more then barbarous carriage who have laboured to out strip their predecessours in perfidious treachery Then he did them who of old did set themselves against the Lord his Christ yea much lesse It is true the men of this generation think they have pins for stopping of such holes which their predecessours could not stop but he who sitteth in the heavens doth laugh at them hath them in derision He seeth that their day is coming It is easie with him to cause the sword which they have drawn to slay such as are of upright conversation enter into their own hearts to break the bowes which they have bent to cast down the poor needy Our God liveth reigneth shall reigne let Kings of clay rage as they will Therefore cast not away your confidence which hath a great recompence of reward for yee have need of patience that after ye have done the will of God ye may receâ—…ve the promise For yet a little while he that shall come will come will not tarry 3. Thou mayestsee that this cause work against which the wicked have conspired set themselves hath been signally owned approved of by the Lord for which he hath fought 〈◊〉 his right hand done valiantly whereby he hath got himself a name among the nations And who knoweth what God will yet doe for his great name which in this day of rebuke blasphemy is greatly reproached Hath he begun will he not finish his worke It is true the provocations of his people doe keep them long in the wildernes yet he who hath frequently wrought for his names sake that it should not be blasphemed amongst the heathen will still be tender of the same sith at this day there is much blasphemy belched forth by persons of all ranks against the great glorious works of God as much if not more then at any time or in any age wherein hath been lesse light The people of God need not be hopelesse much lesse conclude That God who is jealous of his own glory will not give it to another will suffer it now to be given to the devil on whom his work is fathered But rather will certanely be avenged on those prodigiously unparallelably impious sacrilegious persons How dreadfull a thing is it to say that Christ casteth out devils by Beelzebub the prince of devils 4. Thou mayest see clearly that the cause for which thou dost now suffer is the cause of Christ His enemies would pul the crown from off his head the scepter out of his hand by this meanes make him no King in over his Church consequently no mediatour For as mediatour he is a King in over his Kingdome that is his Church in which he dwelleth over which he ruleth with his scepter of righteousnesse They will not have his Kingdome a free Kingdome consequently they will not have him a free King They will not allow to him the liberty of appoynting or instituteing his own officers or to rule his Kingdome by his owne lawes courts ordinances censures Nor will they suffer Church-administrations to be performed in his name authority as in
professeth repentance with such solemne obtestations as affected the whole Assembly Upon this the sentence is delayed the presbitery of Glasgow is appointed to advertise the provinciall Synod of Lothian who were ordained to excommunicate him in case he relapsed And as they feared so he returned to his vomit with violence intended to enter the pulpit when the presbitery according to the appointment of the Generall Assembly were beginning a processe against him the Laird of Minto provost of the Town presented a warrant from his Maj. to stay the processe when they were going on he pulleth forth Mr. Iohn Howeson minister at Cambuslang Moderator imprisoned him in the Tolbooth But for all this Mr. Montgomery is excommunicated by Mr. Iohn Davidson the same was intimated in all the Churches The council declareth the sentence null against this the Ministers of Edenburgh give open testimonies in their preaching for this cause they are commanded to remove out of the Town within the space of twenty fowre houres At this time there was an Assembly sitting at Edenburgh who send some of their number with a supplication to his Majesty wherein they shew That indeed he was the Head of the Commonwealth but onely a member of the Church as a châ—…f member he should have the chief care thereof but now it was not so thâ—…r decrees are resâ—…inded they are forced by his servants Ministers are drawâ—…e out of pulpits that he was playing the pope usurping both the swords and when they come present it unto the Council the Earle of Arran cryeth out if there were any that durst subscribe the same where upon Mr. Andro Melvin answereth we dare taking a penne out of the clerks hand sayeth to his brethren who were commissionated with him comeforward so he they did subscribe the same This storme is not yet blowne over for the next year 1583. Mr. Andro Melvin is summoned before the Council for saying in his preaching That ministers should presente to princes the example of their predecessours as Daniel did the exemple of Nebuchadnâ—…zar to Belteshar But now if any should hold forth what evill King James the third got by a company of flatterers it would be presently said that he had gone from his text must be accused of treasone But when he compeareth he declineth their judgement affâ—…ming that what was spoken in pulpit ought first to be tried by the presbytery that they could not in primâ instantià medle therewith But they proceed though they could get nothing proven for his declining he is commanded to the Castle of Edenburgh then to Blackness but being advertised of his danger by his friends he retireth unto Berwick Annâ—… 1584. the storme groweth to a height for in May there is a parliament suddainly conveened which dischargeth all Church judicatories giveth the King power over all causes civil and ecclesiastick dischargeth all declining of the King his Council in any mater civil or ecclesiastick under the paine of treason also all Ministers to meddle in sermons with the affairs of his Highness his Estate see act 129 130 131 134. of the 8. parl of King James sixt when Mr David Lindsay Minister at Leith was sent by his brâ—…thren to intreatâ—…the King to paâ—…e no act in prejudice of the Church he is committed to Blackness there detained prisoner 47. weeks And Mrs Andro Polwart Patrick Galloway Iames Carmichel are denounced rebels are forced to flee into England So are the Ministers of Edinburgh forced to retire leaving an Apology behinde them But for all this when the acts of this Parliament were publishing Mr Robert Pont protested taking Instruments that the Church should not be obliged to yeeld obedience thereunto being denounced rebell he fleth into England Now is Mr Montgomery established Bishop of Glasgow one Mr Adamson as naughty vicious as any is setled in St Andrews no sooner get they up their head but as soon they execute their tyranny rage against the rest of the Ministry compelling them to promise obedience to them as their ordinaries under the paine of banishment confinement imprisonement deposition sequestration of their stipends Whereupon many in this day of trial did faint subscribe thinking it a sufficient salvo to adde according to the Word of God but afterward mourned for it Now none durst pray for the Ministers who had fled under the paine of treason so dark a day was this But neer the end of the next year there is a change as Court the Ministers returne a Parliament is called at Lithgow but nothing is done in favours oâ—… the Church At length 1586. the King was desirous to have some setling in the Church appointeth a Conference in February at Halyâ—…od house where some articles were drawne up referred to the General Assembly As 1. That the Bishop should have a care of one flock 2. That some Ministers should be added to him without whose counsell he should do nothing 3. His doctrine should be examined by the meeting 4. His power should be of Order not of Jurisdiction 5. Beside his own Church he might have the inspection of moe when the Assembly meeteth in May they could not assent to all these articles yet at length seeing they could not have all which they desired they accorde to this that both Bishops and Commissioners should be subject to the triall of the Generall Assembly that where they did reside they should moderate provinciall Synods Presbyteries in the meane time the order of the Presbyteries was sett down they proceed to examine the processe of Mr Adamson who had declined the provincial Synod of St Andrews he submitteth And the next year Anno 1587. Mr Montgomery resigned his place so was absolved from the sentence of Excommunication by the Assembly When the Parliament doth conveen this year Anno 1587. there are some Prelats who would sit there in name of the Church but when the Church perceived this Mrs David Lindsay Robert Pont were sent to desire that they might be removed as having no authority from the Church the most of them no function in it at all The prelats finding themselves now in a staggering condition thought it was their best to ingratiate themselves in his Majesties favour thereby secure themselves in their places therefore condiscended unto the Act of Annexation of all the Temporalites of benefices unto the Crown which was a dilapidating of the Church rents It is true Spotiswood putteth another face upon this busines in his History but the man could change with the times speake another thing in his English History then he durst speak in his Latine refutation for there he sayeth In summâ Ecclesiasticorum persidià proximis Comitâ—…is Anno 1587. transacta decreto ordinum actibus intervenientibus insinuata Nam Episcopi durissima quaeque à fratrâ—…bus
onely to the prophets 2. The libertie of the Church and Discipline presently exercised was confirmed by diverse acts of Parliament and the office-bearers were now in peaceable Possession thereof And this he did and a Copy hereof was sent through the Presbiteries to see if they would owne the same and in testimonie of their chearfull hearty owning therof it was subscribed by three or fowre hundereth Ministers This displeased the King so that he by open proclamation commanded the Commissioners of the Church to depart out of Edenburgh within twenty fowr houres under the paine of rebellion but notwithstanding of this they resolve to stay to see that the Church priviledges should not be wronged send some of their number to speake to his Mâ—…j unto whom he answered that if Mr. Black would passe from his Declinature or if they would declare that the Declinature was not a generall but onely a particular one used in Mr. Blacks case alone as being a cause of slander pertaining to the judgement of the Church he would passe from the pursuite of Mr. Black But after consultation the Comissioners resolved to adhere unto the Declinature unlesse his Maj. would passe from the processe remitt the same unto the Church Judicatory would make an act of Councill declareing that no minister should be charged for his preaching c. Whereupon the King charged the Commissioners of new to depart caused cite Mr. Black unto the last of November withall dischargeth all Barons Gentlemen others to meet with ministers in their Church assemblies without his licence When the day of Mr Blacks compearance cometh the Commissioners presente a supplication desiring them to remitt the question unto the Judge competent but the Councill goeth on therefore they protest that the processe in hand whatsoever followed thereupon should not prejudge the liberty of the Church in maters of Doctrine Afterward the King sendeth unto the Commissioners shewing he would be content with Mr. Blacks simple declaration of the truth But worthy Mr. Bruce answered That if the mater did touch Mr Black alone they were content but the liberty of Christs Kingdome had received such a wound by the Proclamations published the last Satterday that day by the usurpation of the Council that if Mr Blacks life the life of twenty others had been taken it had not grieved the hearts of the godly so much that either these things behoved to be retreated or they would oppose so long as they had breath Then the King condiscended to publish by a Declaration that he would not diminish any lawfull power or liberty which they or their Assemblies had either by the Word of God or lawes of the land that the proclamation discharging Barons others to meet with ministers was onely meaned of their meeting in armes that the Interloquâ—…tor of the Council should not be used against Mr Black or any other minister untill a lawfull General Assembly providing that Mr Black would declare in his presence the truth of the points libelled before some ministers But afternoon the Kings minde was found changed because Mr Black would not acknowledge an offence he is condemned by the Council his punishment is remitted to the King till his pleasure were known he is confined Then there is a bond devised to be subscribed by all the ministers under the paine of the lose of their stipends The tenor wherof followeth Wee the Pastors ministers of Gods word undersubscribing humbly acknowledging our duty to God obedience to the King our Souveraigne Lord whom for conscience cause we ought to obey Confesse that his Grace is soveraigne Judge to us each one of us in all causes of sedition treason other criminal civill maters to all our speaches which may import the saids crimes albeit uttered by any of us publickly in the pulpits which God forbid or in any other place that the said pulpits nor any other place whatsoever hath not that priviledge immunity to be occasion or pretence to any of us of declining of his Maj judgement in any of the saids civill or criminall causes intended against us in any time coming but rather that our offence is the greater incase which God forbid any of us commit such crimes in the saids pulpits before the people where the word of Gods truth salvation should be preached by us to our flocks In witness wherof of the humble acknowledgement of our duty in the premisses we have subscribed these presents with our hands are content that the famine be registrat in the books of secret Councell in futuram rei memoriam But faithfull ministers refused upon all hazards to subscribe the same seeing that it was a crossing of their Declinatour contrarie to the acts of the Generall Assembly to the acts of Parliament made in favours of the Church yea to the word of God because by this bond they should have acknowledged the King to be both supreme onely Judge over ministers in all causes so to have power of Judging deposing them yea of judging trying their preaching if it be but coloured with treason sedition of schisme in the Church which is sedition and seeing thereby they should be bound up from faithfull dealing in the name of the Lord because they saw it was devysed of purpose as a snare to their consciences After this Anno 1596. the king driveth on his designe indicteth an Assembly at perth formeth 55 problemes by which the Discipline of the Church formerly established was questioned to be there debatéd these problems with the following Historie at more length are to be seen in the Historie penned by Reverend laborious Mr Petry therefore a short relation shall suffice here being perswaded by his Courtiours that he should never gaine his purpose till first he took some course to breake the Union of the Church he prevaileth with Mr Patrik Galloway Mr Iames Nicolson who had been chief a little before in advising Mr Black to decline causeth Sr Patrick Murray deal with the ministers of the North to subscribe the bond to choose such such persons to the meeting at Perth and when the time of meeting cometh these Commissioners from the North were seen going in companies to the king Mr Nicolson was with the king till mid-night They were for all this two dayes in debating whether they were a lawfull Generall Assembly but honest men protested against it The meeting at length condiscendeth to these particulars 1. That no minister should reprove his maiesties lawes acts or ordinances untill such time as first he had by advyce of Presbitery Synod or Assembly complained or sought remedy of the same 2. That none should be named in pulpit except the fault were notour by the persons being fugitive convicted by ane Assise Excommunicated contumacious after citation or lawfull
Andrews Nov. 25. 1617. At this assembly no more could be gotten yeelded to but private Communion that ministers should give the Elements in the Lords supper out of their own hands to each Communicant But all this did not satisfy his Maj. therefore he wrote sharpe letters to the Archbishops commanded them to preach on Christ-masse day to celebrat the Lord's supper with all the solemnities Anno 1618 there is another meeting called at Perth August 25 unto which the king sent seven Noblemen fifteen Barons Gentlemen Spotiswood took upon him to moderate read the kings minacing letter named a Committee for the articls nothing regarding the liberty of the assembly to gratify the king The honest party offered reasons both for a delay against the Ceremonies but all in vaine Spotiswood told them that he would send all the names of such as refused unto the King asked the votes of many who had no Commission so obtained what the desired for all accorded unto the five articles viz kneeling at the Communion private Communion private Baptisme observation of Holy dayes Confirmation of children except one Nobleman one Doctor 45. ministers But when the honest party looked back to the many informalities at this meeting 1. No lawfull premunition but onely 20 dayes by which meanes many were absent 2. No liberty to choose a moderator 3. No free disputing or voteing but members overawed 4. The assembly prelimited by the votes of the articles 5. Such as wanted Commissions did vote others who had Commissions were not suffered to vote c. they looked upon it as no lawfull Generall assembly published their reasons in print After the dissolving of this meeting Spotiswood to make all sure ratifieth all these things in the High Commission though he others had said that if they would give way to the passing of the act to humore his Maj. no man should be compelled to obey yet now by the power of their High Commission they force many to obey under the paine of deposition imprisonement confinement so they rage without all law But at length Anno 1621. there is a parliament conveened unto which the Honest ministers give in a supplication for safe liberty to enjoy the true Religion as Reformed in Doctrine Saoraments discipline openly professed sworn practised by Prince Pastor people of all ranks without Innovations and that they would not suffer the faithfull honest ministers to be smitten the stocks to be committed to wolves blinde guides But Iuly 24. they were all discharged forth of the towne by open proclamation The presenter of the petition Mr Andrew Duncane minister ar Crail was incarcerated When the ministers remove conforme to the proclamation they leave in write behinde them strong reasons why the Parliament should not ratify the acts of the pretented assembly at Perth shew both the nullity of the assembly in point of formality the illegality of any such Ratification as being against severall acts of Parliament his Maj. proclamation published printed the Nationall Covenant upon severall other grounds As also they leave a most Christian faithfull admonition to the well affected Nobility Barons burgeses members of Parliament unto constancy faithfulnesse Yea moreover in case all this should not prevaile they leave a Protestation in write but the minister who had it to present gote not accesse so was forced to affix Copies thereof upon publick places of the towne But notwithstanding of all this there is a fixed resolution to have these articles ratified which made some honest members with draw severall informalities are used contrary to the usuall freedome of Parliament much pains taken to gaine some after the report was made to go that the Parliament would not rise for severall dayes to come which made severall members the more secure Saterday the 4 of August was pitched upon as the fittest time for closeing of the business all the articles are put together the question stated Aggree or Disaggree what by one way another the acts are ratified But observable it was how the Lord did give his Protestation against this ratification from heaven though Spotiswood blasphemously paralleleth it unto the Lords shewing of himself at the giving of the Law for at the very instant when the kings Commissioner arose to touch this act with the Scepter there came in at the windowes a great lightening after that another greater then a third most terrible Immediatly there followed an extraordinary darknesse astonishing all The lightenings were seconded with three terrible claps of thunder then their came an extradinary great showre of haile after all this such a terrible showre of raine that made the streets to run like rivers by which meanes the parliament was constrained to stay within doores an howr an half went home thereafter without their robes Upon the 20 of August when these acts were published at the Crosse the minister who was intrusted with the Protestation affixed a copy thereof upon the Church door another upon the Crosse a third upon the Palace gate of Haliroodhouse took Instruments in these words Here in the name of the brethren of the ministry professing the Religion as it hath been practised in our Church since the Reformation of the same I protest against all these things that have been concluded in prejudice of our privileges since the first Reformation thereof adhere to my former Protestation made fixed on the Tolbooth door other places to all the Protestations made in favours of the Church in the time of the preceeding Parliaments And God from heaven did declare his dissent for dureing the time of the reading of these acts there was nothing but thunder fire lightenings raine And thereafter the Lord made the whole countrey feel the weight of his anger for the cornes did rott through excessive raines waters became so great that they sweeped away in severall places cornes cattell houses plenishing people all The great bridge of Perth where these acts were first concluded was taken away never repaired to this day yea the whole towne almost drowned many of the Sea-townes which favoured the Articles received great dammage by Sea And there followed three years dearth famine Epidemick diseases wherof many died Thus did the Lord plead from heaven his controversy testify his displeasure against those courses But notwithstanding of all this the Prelats having now all power in their hands prosecute their worke tyrannize over all ranks so as the inhabitants were more affrayed of crossing their commands then the commands of the king himself for they banished out of their bounds such gentlemen as they pleased imprisoned what magistrates they thought fit upon any light occasion were it but the hearing of their own old minister after he had been silenced by the bishop or the not sisting
souldeours away captives keepeth them in bondage full ten years Under which oppression they lay groaning wishing for a day of delivery At length after ten years exile the Lord returned their prince without stroake of sword and setled him upon his throne which occasioned great acclamations of joy through the whole land seing that now the yoke of the oppressour was brocken and the Lord had restored to them in a wonderfull unexpected maner their law full judges and governours Now were people filled with hops of good and desirable dayes both for Church and State But alace how suddainly are all their hopes turned into fears and their joy into mourning how are their faces filled with confusion because of the sad disappointment which now they did meet with Their yoke beginneth now to be wreathed more straitly about their necks then ever their bondage and oppression in conscience groweth they see with their eyes the glorious worke of Reformation which had been wonderfully carried on by the mighty power of the most High cemented with the bloud of his Saints who spared not their lives in the defence maintenance of that cause both against malignants Sectaries razed to the very foundation the carved worke thereof brocken down with axes hammers at once and all things growing dayly worse worse Some particulars where of though the calling to minde making mention of such sad doolfull things will occasion fresh sorrow grief to the people of God as the purpose in hand will suffer shall be mentioned in the following Sections SECTION III. The grounds of the sufferings of such as were incarcerated by the Committy of Estates the 23 Day of Agust 1660. discovered AFter God had broken the yoke of the oppressours had restored their own governous it might have been expected that justice should have flowed down as a river and when the committe of Estates which had been nominated Anno 1651. Were commanded by his Maj. to sit order the affaires of the Kingdome untill the ensueing Parliament should meet every one might have been in expectation of some good following their governement But alas their little finger becometh heavier then the loyns of the former oppressours A litle taste of which there is given on the very first day of their sitting downe for upon the 23. Day of August 1660. While there were some faithfull Zealous servants of Christ to the number of Ten Ministers with one Gentleman met in a private house where they resolved to meet that they might give the lesse offence for the drawing up of a supplication unto his Maj. wherein after their congratulating his Maj. returne they in all humility presse exhort him in the fear of the Lord to minde his oaths unto covenants with God a very necessary seasonable work The committee of Estates sent thither some of their number to apprehend those persones to take them to the castle of Edenburgh where they abode for the space of some weeks were afterward except Mr Guthry confined to their chambers in the towne for some considerable time This was a terrible alarme unto the hearts of the godly presaging sad doolfull dayes to follow when at the very first there is so much cruelty exerced against these faithfull zealous servants of Christ who were evidenceing their love respect unto their Prince in mindeing him of his vowes which he had made unto the most high of his duty which he did owe unto God who had so wonderfully delivered him for which no colourable pretence could be allaidged save one of those Either that their meeting was not warranted by the lawes of the land or that they were about a sinfull work The first could not be allaidged with any colour of law because there was no standing law then in force against such meetings for whatever law ther was of that nature before was made null void by posterior acts of Parliament which posterior acts were not as yet resciâ—…ded and further what great wrong was it for so many ministers to meet together in a privat chamber for such an end when as many moe prophane persones will be suffered to meet dayly to drink debauch and what could these worthies have suspected now seing the like liberty was enjoyed while the land was under the feet of oppressours might not they in reason have expected as good quarters at the hands of their own governoursas they gote from stangers enemies But it is like the work they were about gave offence it is true they were pleased to brande it with the names of treason sedition but whether it was so or not the reader will be better able to judge when he hath pondered considered the true copy of their supplication which is here following Most gratious dreed soveraigne We your Maj. most humble subjects considering the duty which as Christians we owe to our Lord Iesus Christ who is king of kings Lord of Lords and which as subjects we owe unto your Maj. as our native lawfull king under him We do hold ourselves bound to tender unto your Maj. this most humble addresse supplication How hatefull the actings of the late usurped powers in offering violence to the Parl. of Engl in their unchristian barbarous murthering of your royall father in their insolent changeing of the ancient civill goverment of the kingdome of Engl. and by armed violence unjustly secluding your Maj. there from In their most unjust invadeing of the kingdome of Scotland inthralling of the same in subjection to themselves and beyond all their impious incroaching on the kingdome of Iesus Christ the liberties thereof and in promoteing establishing a vast tolleration in things religious throughout those nations unto the perverting of the precious truthes of the Gospell defaceing of the ordinances of Iesus Christ opening a wide door to all sorts of evill heresy schisme imprety prophanenesse How abhominable these things were to us the Lord who searcheth the heart tryeth the reâ—…es doth know against which we gave many publike testimonies before the world to witnesse our abhorrence thereof And the same Lord knoweth that as we did earnestly pray for breath after his appearing to witnesse against those so saveing that Christian pity and compassion we owe to the persones of men though our very enemies we rejoyce in his putting down of them that did set up themselves in staineing the pride of their glory in breaking the yoke of their power from off the necke of these Kingdomes We hold our selves also bound thankfully to acknowledge the Lord's signall preserving of your Maj. person in the middest of many fold dangers designes threatening the same these years past And that after long Exile from your own house people he hath been pleased to bring you back to the same And when the foundations of the ancient civill goverment were overthrown againe
And seing ther can no instance be produced out of the History of Scotland since ever it was a Kingdome that any subject noble Man or other was accused of high treason for such a cause surely this noble Mans case was unparalleled 3. Is not this strange considering what the principle of Royallists is They say that Conquest giveth a just tittle to a crown So sayeth D. Ferne Aâ—…nisaeus Maxwell in his Sacro Sancta Regum Majestas Cap. 17. And by this principle Cromwell was the lawfull supreme Governour of the Kingdome of Scotland and had just tittle right to the Crowne thereof having now conquered the same if this principle of theirs be true which is much questioned by their opposites no complyance with him could by any law in the World be treason against any Prince whatsomever for obedience unto concurrence with a lawful supreme Magistrat can be treason against no man living How then could this noble Man be challenged upon the account of treason for complyance Let all the Royalists answer this without contradicting themselves if they can 4. Is there any lawyer who can produce such a definition of treason against a Prince or a supreme Magistrat out of the civil law as will condemne the deed of this worthy noble Man make complyance with a conquerour for the good saifty of the countrey after all meanes of defence are broken lost an act of treason And since the civil law can condemne no such deed as treasonable the sentence given out against his noble Man must be without all warrand of law 5. Are there not many countreyes Kingdomes cities that have been overrun by their enemies have had their own lawfull Governours put from them so have been forced to live under the feet of strangers hath it not been usuall for them to comply with such as had the present power in their hand for their own saifty the good of the place And was it ever yet heard that such were accused condemned of â—…reason against their own lawful Governours thrust from them sore against their wills for any such complyance And is it not wonderful that this eminent noble Man should become a preparative unto all the World So then to put a close to this let an appeal be made to all Governours of Commonwealths Statesmen Lawyers Casuists Politicians Canonists Quodlibâ—…tists yea Royalists if they will speak consonantly to their own principles their answer interloquutour be had in point of law unto this question Whether or not when a land is overcome in battel once againe a thrid time a fourth time so aâ—… they are forced to lie under the feet of the conquerour and expect his mercy their own supreme Magistrat is forced to flee away for his life without all hope of returning so they left without all goverment but what they have from the conquerour when it might have been expected that he would have ruled them disposed of them jure conquestus as conquered according to his own pleasure yet he did admit such as they thought sit to choise to sit in his supreme Councel for giving their advice for regulating the affaires of that Kingdom common wealth which is now conquered subdued Can it be treason in any when chosen by the countrey to sit in these Councells advise what they think best for the good of the countrey Or can they or any of them be challenged or accused condemned as guilty of heigh treason when providence bringeth back the prince after ten yeers absence for acting so under the conquerour for the good of the land to prevent its utter ruine destruction And if the answer shall as certainly it will be negative then it is beyond all question that the sentence execution of this worthy noble Man upon this sole account shall be matter of astonishment to all that hear of it know the cause thereof Thus a great prince falleth within five dayes therafter a great prophet falleth as shall be shown in the next section SECTION V. The groundes of the suffering of Mr Iames Guthry Minister at Sterlin who was executed the first Day of Iune 1661. examined AFter the parliament is assembled Mr Iames Guthry minister at Sterlin who was one of those ministers who were incarcerated for the cause above mentioned Sect. 3. who after some weeks imprisonement in the castle of Edenburgh was carryed thence imprisoned in Dundee from thence is sent for by the parliament impannalled before them being accused of high treason He was a man who had been honoured of God to be zealous singularly faithfull in carrying on the work of reformation had carryed himself streightly under all changes revolutions because he had been such an eminent one he must live no longer for he is condemned to die most basely handled as if he had been a notorious thief oâ—… malefactor he is hanged afterward his head is stuck up upon one of the ports of the city of Edinbrugh where it abideth unto this day preaching the shamefull defection of these who dealt thus with him calling to all who goe out in at the gate of the city to remember their covenant with God for which he died a martyr But it is like many will think it behoved to be some great crime for which this eminent servant of the Lord was thus handled but what if it be no such crime yea what if it was a duty for which he was thus put to suffer Reader thou shall hear ir then thou mayest judge Some ten years before he was challenged by the King his councell for a doctrinall thesis which he had maintained spoken to in sermon because he found them incompetent judges in matters purely ecclesiasticall such as is the examination and censureing of doctrinall poynts primo instanti he did decline them upon that account This is his crime for this he is condemned as guilty of high treason this will be the more wonderfull if thou consider how as thou hast heard many worthy precious servants of christ did decline the King his councell in the dayes of King Iames such as Mr Baleanqual Mr Melvin Mr Blake Mr Welch Mr Forbes others as incompetent judges in causes meerly ecclesiasticke and yet ther was never one of them put to death It is true there was an act of Parliament Anno 1584. dischargeing such declinatures under the paine of treason but the very next year Anâ—…o 1585. King Iames himself did emit a declaration shewing that he for his pairt should never that his posterity ought never to cite summond or apprehend any paster for matters of doctrine in religion salvation heresies or true interpretation of scripture but avoucheth it to be a mater meerly ecclesiasticall altogether impertinent to his calling Which though not equivalent to an Act of parliament yet whether
Edinburgh who were to communicat it unto the rest of Presbyteries of the Kingdom a gracious letter as it was called wherin he promised to owne to countenance the government of the Church as it was established by law wherby many took him to meane Presbyterian government But others feared a designe to overturne Presbyterian government to introduce Prelacy as afterward it came to passe when the Parliament did rescinde all acts statutes made in favours of Presbyterian government did devolve the power of setling the government of the Church upon his Maj. they did by their Act. 16. allow the present administration by Sessions Presbyteries Synods for a time But at length Mr IamesSharpe a man who had formerly been intrusted by severall of the Ministry confided in as one who would prove most faithfull unto the Presbyterian interest but now had betrayed his most intimat brethren laid down a course for overturning his mother Church therby declared that he was a most unnaturall childe of that Church other three Ministers with him went up to London wâ—… first being made ordained Deacons after that Presbyters they are consecrated Bishops upon the day of 1661. with all there is a proclamation from his Maj. of the date at Whitehall the 6 of September Anno 1661. declareing His Royall pleasure to be for restoreing of the government the Church by Archbishops Bishops as it was exercised in the year 1637. that he had nominated presented persones to the severall Bishopricks of the Kingdome of Scotland of whom some have been lately consecrated invested with the same dignities Church power authority which was formely competent to the Archbishops and Bishops in the Reignes of his Royall grand Father and Father of blessed memory and that the allowance of Presbyteriall government is now of itself void and expired as being only for a time c. And so the jurisdiction and exercise of Church government should be ordered in there spective Synods Presbyteries and Sessions by the appointment authority of the Archbishops and Bishops according to their privilege practice In obedience to which proclamation The Privy Councell Ian. 9. 1662. did make publick intimation thereof discharge all ecclesiasticall meetings in Synods presbyteries sessions untill they be authorized ordered by the Archbishops Bishops upon their entry unto the government of their respective seas which is to be done speedily Wherupon at the time of the meeting of the provinciall Synods noblemen others were sent to raise them by force But therafter when these foure returne from London consecrat the rest there were acts made in the second session of Parliament viz. Anno 1662. redintegrating them to the exercise of their episcopall function to all their privileges dignities jurisdictions possessions due formerly belonging thereunto as also there is an act ordaincing all ministers to repaire unto the diocesian assembly concur in all the acts of Church discipline as they should be therunto required by the Archbishops or Bishop of the diocese under the paine of being suspended from their office benifice till the next diocesian meeting for the first fault if they amended not to be deprived the Church to be declared vacand But notwithstanding of this act all such ministers as resolved to keep a good conscience did forbear to goe unto these meetings or unto the other meetings which they call exercises in which meetings the prelate such as he named did not only preside but ruled as they pleased Not only because the privileges of the judicatories were encroached upon wronged by the Prelate presideing at his own hand without the consent of the rest contrary to the constant practice of that Church because a constituent member of these judicatures viz the ruleing elder was excluded contrare to the principles of presbyterian government the practice of that Church from the begining the practice of all other reformed churches of the primitive Church contrary to the judgment of many eminent divines both there and abroad who have clearly made it to appear out of the scriptures that Christ hath instituted such officers and these should have more weight then those three mentioned by the author of the Seasonable case pag. 11. as of another judgment But also because these meetings now differ from the meetings judicatories which the Church had before not only in name they being now called doâ—…sian meetings not Synods Presbiteries but also in thing The former judicatories are razed overturned these new meetings are erected upon a new Basis the Kings power perogative to setle what forme of Church government he thinketh best they are now authorized ordered by the prelates so they are pieces partes of the prelaticall government therefore they are distinct from what they were before So that no minister that made conscience of his covenant vow for presbyterian goverment against prelaticall could with peace freedome keep or countenance these meetings It is replyed by the prelates procurator the new casuist in his pamphlet called the seasonable case etc. pag. 12. That the meetings now before are of the same constitution nothing altered nor any more holding of Bishops now when the Kings Maj. hath taken off the restraint which for a time he putt on then if he had not at all restrained them But this is no satisfactory answere his meet deny all will not availe much with indifferent men of understanding for the difference is clear because 1. formerly Church judicatories had power within themselves to nominat appoynt their own moderator now it is not so 2. Formerly Church judicatories Church power did flow from the Lord Iesus Christ immediatly as being the only head of his Church now they flow from another fountaine viz the King as the fountaine of all Church power therefore is the goverment called his majesties governement ecclesiasticall in the Act of councell Iuly 10. 1663. the prelats in the discharge of their office are said to do service to his Maj. in the Church in the act of councell Ian. 9. 1662. 3. Formerly Church judicatories did meddle with every scandal now they must meddle with no more then the prelat pleaseth 4. Formerly presbyters had power to voyce to determine by their decisive suffrage now they are but the prelates counsellours of whose counsell advice he maketh what use he thinketh fitt 5. Formerly there was none in those judicatories who had a negative voyce now the Bishop hath it the rest are but cyphres 6. Formerly in these judicatories ther were ruleing elders but now that constituent member is not admitted which particular alone will sufficiently evidence that the face frame of the judicature is altered And since it is so any man of understanding may easily perceive such a difference as maketh those meetings now to depend upon
year 1662. or in time comeing as having no right thereto and that they do not acknowledge them for their lawfull pastours in repaireing to their sermones under the paine of being punished as frequenters of private conventicles meetings commanding chargeing the saids Ministers to remove themselves their families out of their parishes betuixt the first day of Novemb. thereafter not to reside within the bounds of their respective presbyteries This was very sad threatening no lesse then ruine to Ministers and their poor families to be put from their houses in the middest of winter to seek new places of abode not having the small stipend which was due to them allowed for to transport their families with all or to provide themselves in necessaries But yet they resolved to cast themselves on Gods providence trusting in his word accounting it better to suffer affliction with the people of God to enjoy peace of conscience then to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season and accordingly did remove themselves By which meanes there were some hundereds of parishes left destitute the shepherds were scattered up down the land seeking a sheltering place for themselves It was a sad lamentable sight to see the sad farewell betwixt the loving pastor his beloved floke the teares the cryes and the bitter groanes that were there Now were the breasts pulled from the mouthes of the young infants the table was drawne the people were made to wander up downe the mountaines seeking the word of the Lord could not finde it they had silent Sabbaths empty pulpites some countrey sides were hereby laid utterly desolate And what could these faithfull Ministers do in this case but sigh groan to God seeing they could not in conscience yeeld obedience unto these commands therefore they resolved to be subject for conscience sake and to submit unto the punishment of banishment out of the bounds of the presbytery where they lived which was afterward made more sad for they were commanded to remove Twenty miles from their own parish Church Six miles from a a cathedrall three or foure miles from a brugh Now judge o reader whether this cruelty would not have more beseemed Turks how little cause there was for all this severity rigour to Ministers who had been endeavouring with some measure of faithfulnesse On their part fruitfulnesse through the Lor'ds blessing on their labours to enlarge the Kingdome of Iesus Christ to build up poor souls in their most holy faith because they would not give obedience unto such Acts as were but snares for the conscience to which obedience could not be yeelded without sin SECTION X. The oath of Alleagiance explained as to its civil part some reasons Against the taking thereof even upon that account adduced The act rescissory his Maj. prerogative canvassed AFter that there were some other Ministers whom the forementioned Acts did not reach removed out of some of the chief cities Brevi manu without any processe There are some wayes devised how moe of these might be removed with some colour or pretext therefore some Six or Seven were called before the Parliament at their second session and because they refused to take the oath which was tendered they were sentenced with banishment by act of Parliament ordained to remove off the Kingdome so soon as his Maj. commissioner should signify his minde the reanent But this sentence was not put in execution possibly because they saw an inconsistencie betuixt this deed an Act which they had made the former year in their first session By which all such as refuised to take that oath were to be uncapable of any publicke trust to be looked upon as persones disaffected to his Maj authority government this was all But in Decemb. 1662. The privy councell called some other Ministers before them tendered the oath unto them because of their refuiseing of the same they banished them out of all his Maj. dominions then gave them a bond to subscribe wherein they did binde themselves to remove out of all his Maj. dominions within a moneth not to returne under the paine of death otherwayes they would commit them to close imprisonment there keep them untill they had occasion to send them elswhere Whereupon these Ministers saw a necessity of subscribeing that bond of banishment Though it was very hard to binde themselves to remove within so short a time that in the midst of winter But strange it is that when the King himself by his oath at his coronation is bound to rule the land by the lawes and constitutions received therein This his councell which by the fundamentall lawes of the land as appeareth by the 12 Act of the 2 parliam of King Iames 4. whereby they are first established is to give his highness a true and essauld counsell in all matters concerning his Maj. and his realnie and to be responsall and accusable to the King and his estates of their counsell so is a judicatory subordinat unto the Parliament accountable to censur able by them would banish such as the lawes of the land did not account worthy of banishment whether they would do right if they should punish with death such a fault as by the Established lawes of the land deserved only to be punished by a fine or a summe of money let lawyers judge whether this be not an arbitrary illegall power which they have assumed any that considereth what is said the act 27. of the 2. Parliam of Char. 1. may judge possibly it was for this cause that they resuised to give an extract of their sentence although it was humbly craved But to clear what good grounds there were yet are for refuiseing to take that oath Let first the oath it self be considered compared with the former oath of alleagiance The oath now tendered is thus worded in the acts of this Parliament severall times I for testification of my faithfull obedience to my most gracious redoubted soveraigne Charles King of Great-Britaine france Irland c. affirme testify declare by this my solemne oath That I acknowledge my said soveraigne only supreme governour of this Kingdom over all persones in all causes that no forraigne prince power or state or person civill or â—…elesiasticke hath any jurisdiction power or superiority over the same and therefore do utterly reâ—…nce all forâ—…aigne power jurisdictions authorities shall at my out most power defend assist maintaine his Maj. jurisdiction foâ—…elaid against all deadly shall never decline his Maj. power jurisdiction as I shall answer to God This is the oath which they call the oath of alleagiance but is indeed very far different therefrom as will easily appear to any who will compare the same with that oath of alleagiance which King Iames treateth of in his dialogue
warrand Scotland their joyning with England against the common enemy Yea nature hath taught heathens to prevent their own ruine destruction by joyneing their forces with other nieghbours against one who designed nothing but the promoteing of his Empire Thus the Romans warred against Philip left Greece being subdued he should make warre against them Thus the Lacedamoniam warred against the Olyâ—…hii diverse other instances might be given 3. Scotland England used to joyne together before to enter in a league with other princes for the defence of the protestant religion as Anno 1586. againe 1587. 1588. they draw up a league among themselves But it will be replyed that this was with the consent of the supreme Magistrat Ans. True but the want of this consent will not make such aideing and supplying unlawfull so long as the law of nature is to the fore obligeing every man to defend his neighbour and are not Scotland England near nieghbours being in one Island under one King Neither did they waite for the consent of Scotlands supreme Magistrat when they helped them first against the French next against a faction of papists within their own bosome and therefore Scotland should not now waite for the consent of England's King when they were to help them against a popish and prelaticall faction Nor needed Scotland waite for the consent of their own supreme Magistrat because as the law of nature doth oblige every one to defend himself by force of armes against an army of bloody enemies though the King should not consent as shall be showne hereafter so the law of nature will warrand any to defend their brother though the King should not consent especially seing therby they are but defending themselves against such an enemy as would next fall on them 4. The law of God will warrand this communion of saints Prov. 24 11 12. the commendable practice of those who helped David 1. Chron 12 18. 1. Sam. 22 2. Seventhly nor was there ground for condemning the lands renewing of the nationall Covenant Anno 1638. 1639. Because 1. There is no absolute necessitie for asking obtaineing the Kings consent to the same as if a Kingdom once sworne obliged in covenant with God might not renew the same obligation as oft as they thought fit There is no such necessity of having his Maj. expresse consent approbation either to the first making or to the renewing of the same with God as shall be more fully showne hereafter There is no law of God for this 2. Nor is there any municipall law inhibiteing the renewing of that covenant Yea that warrand by which all the land took it at the first viz the King 's his councell's command to Ministers to put their parishoners to take it severall acts of Generall Assemblies stand still in force accordingly in each universitie the Covenant was renewed yearly 3. Moreover the Generall Assembly Anno 1639. enjoyned by ecclesiastical authority the subscription of the same the Assembly presented a supplication unto the privie Councell desireing their ordinance for the subscription of the same by all the subjects of the Kingdome this was granted Agust 30. Anno 1640. the parliament by their act 5. did ratifie the act of the Generall Assembly their supplication the act of Councill thereupon which act of Parliament was approved by the King in the large treaty thereafter by his personall presence at the next session of Parliament where all was ratified So that this deed of renewing the Nationall Covenant wanted nothing either in poynt of law or conscience to make it lawfull therefore it had been unlawfull to have taken such an oath as would have imported the condemning of that deed Eightly nor was there ground for condemning the Church Assemblies at which the King's commissioner was not present or which wanted his speciall approbation 1. Because there is no warrand in the word of God clearing this necessity but much to the contrary 2 No munipiall law of the land is against such meetings because the act 1584. Was taken away rescinded anno 1592. since that time there is no lawanulling all Assemblies which want his Maj. approbation consent 3. It was never either the profession or the practice of that Church as is clear by what is said Sect. 1. It will be a fitter place to speak to this when the ecclesiasticke part of the oath is spoken to which shall be done Sect. 12. SECTION XI The former purpose further prosecuted the lawfulness of Scotlands defensive warre demonstrated THere are other two Particulars or rather one for they are much to one purpose which virtually would have been condemned by the taking of this oath thus explained as to its civill part viz Scotland their riseing in armes in their owne defence against the King's armies of papists malignants their seizing on the castles which within their owne bosome were threatening their ruine when garisoned with adversaries These must now be spoken to and so Ninthly There is no ground to condemne that defensive warre Though much hath been said by court parasites others who were ambitious of gaine preferment to exaggerat aggraige that supposed crime thereby to make them their cause odious to all the World yet rationall indifferent persones will after serious pondering of a few particulars forbear to passe any rash sentence Much hath been already said in the defence of that bussinesse by the author of Lex Rex more then ever could or will be answered And therefore that book behoved to be answered by a fiery fagot by Mr Prins soveraigne power of Parliaments c. a book published by authority of Parliament never answered to this day And therefore there will not be a necessity of insisting much on it here only a short hint at some particulars will suffice 1. In point of conscience it will be hard to prove that the power of warre resideth only in the King that he only beareth the sword For 1. Rom. 13. The sword is given to all Magistrats for the Apostle there speaketh of heigher powers indefinitely in the plurall number without specifying any kinde it is certaine Rome had not two or moâ—… Kings at once And if the Apostle had intended only Nero he would have designed him in the singular number He speaketh of powers that are of God are ordained of God this agreeth to Inferiour Magistrats who are God's Deputies judge for him as well as others 2 Chron 19 v. 6 7. Deut. 1 v. 16. Numb 11 16 17. He speaketh of Rulers this name agreeth to inferiour Magistrats as may be seen Exod. 18 v. 21 22 25 26. 16 22. 34 31. 2 King 10 1. 1 Chron. 12 v. 14. 26 32. He speaketh of such as must not be resisted but subjected unto Peter sheweth who these are 1 Peter 2 v. 13 14. even
other reason then if he keep the conditions on which he was created emperour By the lawes themselves it is provided that the superiour Magistrat shall not infringe the right of the inferiour and if the supriour Magistrat exceed the limits of his power and command that which is wicked not onely we need not obey him but if he offer force we may resist him Upon these grounds did those worthies resolve to defend themselves by armes 2. Next they have the exemple precedent of the protestants in France who in the reigne of Francis 2. Anno 1559. being oppressed with the Guisian faction assembled themselves consulted lawyers divines concerning resisting of the king in that case it was resolved That they might lawfully oppose themselves against the governement which the house of Guise had usurped when needfull take armes to repulse their violence If the princes who in this case are borne magistrats or some one of them would undertake it being ordered by the states of the realme or by the sounder part thereof See Gen. history of France pag. 682. 683. So Anno 1614. The prince of Condee with other princes Peers dukes noblemen officers of the crown conveening at Meziers wrote to the Queen compleaning of diverse grievances wrongs sought remedy redresse by the assembly of the three estates protesting that they desired nothing but peace and the good of the realme that they would attempte nothing to the contrary unlesse by the rash resolution of their enemies who covered themselves with the cloak of state under the Queen regents authority they should be provoked to repell the injuries done unto the King state by a naturall just and necessary defence see the continuation of the life of Lewis the 13. pag. 59. c. So in the reigne of Charles 9 when all Acts of pacification were broken after many fruitlesse petitions and vaine promises they take up armes whereupon a bloody civill warre ensued when this King contrary to his oath An. 1572. caused that massacre at Paris the protestants in Languedoc Rochel other parts took up armes in their own defence So when Henry the 3 came to the crown the protestants saw a necessity of standing to their defence being assaulted they manfully defended themselves againe when the peace which was now concluded was broken by the instigation of the Catholick Leaguers The King of Navarre the Prince of Condee the Marshall of Montmorancy others resolved to defend themselves whereupon followed a sixt civill warre which ended in a new peace Anno 1580. So in the reigne of Lewis his son when the Queen mother who was then regent would give no redresse unto the protestants just grievances The prince of Condee divers others raised forces in their owne defence the duke of Rhoan other protestants did joyne with them A peace was concluded Anno 1616. but the very next year the prince of Condee is seized upon whereupon the princes meeting at Soyssons resolved to defend themselves by warre which continued Anno 1621 1622. at last a peace was concluded but it lasted not long by cardinal Richelien's meanes 3. They have in the third place the practice of the Netherlands mentioned in the Generall history of the Netherlands Lib. 9 p. 369 c. who being oppressed in bodies states by the duk of Alva the Spanyards tyranny their consciences tyrannized over by the spanish inquisition introduced of purpose to extirpat religion after serious deliberation consultation with lawyers divines learned men of all sorts did unanimously conclude to enter into a solemne covenant to defend religion lives liberties by force of armes and Anno 1572. the Prince of Orange his confederats published a protestation shewing the grounds of their riseing up in armes viz. for zeal to the countrey for the glory of God because of the inhumanities and oppressions and more then barbarous and insupportable tyranny and incroachments upon their privileges liberties and freedâ—…mes 4. They have the practice of the Waldenses in Piemont Anno 1558 1561. who being persecuted by the Lords of Trinity other Popish soveraignes assembled solemnely together to consult how they might prevent danger after long prayer calling upon God they concluded to enter into a solemne mutuall Covenant for defence of themselves their Religion did so with successe obtaining many notable victories against their persecutors See Fox Acts Mon. Vol. 2. pag. 208 209. So Anno 1571. Nov. 11. There is a league made for mutuall assistance of each other in times of persecution a copy whereof is to be seen in Mr Morland's History of Piemond pag. 252 253. 5. They have the practice of the people of Arragon mentioned by Blanca in his Comment pag. 661 652. An. 1286. in the dayes of Alphonso 3. who when there fell out a contest betwixt him the Parliament through the evill counsell of his courteours resolved to associat themselves together to raise forces it being lawfull for the common cause of liberty to contend not only with words but with armes and their suprarbiense forum or Iustitia Aragoniae which was erected of purpose to with stand the tyranny of Kings had power to resist their King with force of armes So Anno 1283. they tell Pedro 3. their King that if he would not containe himself within the Limites of the lawes they would pursue him by armes 6. They have the practice of other Spainyards as may be seen in the generall History of Spaine lib. 13 14 15. who rose in armes severall times against Pedro the I. King of Castile 7. They have the practice of the Hungarians Anno. 1608. in the dayes of Mathias for when he denyed free exercise of Religion unto the Protestants of Austria they took up armes in their own defence assembling at Horne sent a protestation unto the Estates of Hungary requireing assistance conforme to the offensive defensive League See Grimstons Imp. Hist. pag. 730. c. 8. They have the practice of the Polonians who oftintimes levied warre against their Kings as Grimstone in his Hist. Imp. Chytraeus in Chron. Sax. shew 9. They have the practice of the Danes riseing in armes against Christierne the 2. who Anno 1524. was solemnely deposed as may be seen in Chytraeus Chron. Sax. lib. 10. 10. They have the practice of the Sweds riseing up in armes against Christierne the I. for breach of his Covenant made at his coronation this was about the year 1499. See Chythraeus ubi supra 11. They have the practice of the Helvetians first three of their Cantons viz. The Suitians Vrjaus Vndervaldians Anno 1260. levied warre against their oppressing Nobles did prosecute the same twelve years Anno 1308. They joyne in Covenant to defend themselves against the House of Austria defended themselves most resolutely against the hudge armies of their adversaries upon the 16 of Nov. 1315.
obtained a great victory that same year they renewed their Covenant at Brunna in which Covenant the other Ten Cantons at severall times thereafter being oppressed by their Nobles did joyne at length by warre brought themselves into that state of liberty in which they are at this day See for all this Simlerus de Repub. Helvet 12. And lastly they have the practice of the Bohemians who in the Dayes of Wenceslaus Sigismond waged great warres under the conduct of valiant Zizca See Fox's acts monuments Vol. 1. And thereafter in the dayes of Ferdinand they resolved to fight couragiously against all their enemies how great so ever they were But in case some should be so bold as to condemne all those Acts as treacherous rebellious let it be considered 6. That some of those same practices are allowed and approved even by the Kings of Britaine for King Iames in his answer to cardinall perron justifyeth the protestants of France their taking up armes in their own defence Memorable is that speach which King Iames had in the Parliament house Anno 1609. a King sayeth he governing in a setled Kingdome â—…easeth to be a King degenerateth into a tyrant so soon as he leaveth to rule by his lawes much more when he begineth to invade his subjects persones rights liberties to set up an arbitrary power impose unlawfull taxes raise forces make warre upon his subjects whom he should protect rule in peace to pillage plunder waste spoile his Kingdom Imprison murder destroy his people in a hostile manner to capâ—…vat them to hâ—…e pleasure This is a sentence well worthy to come out of a Kings mouth to beâ—…ingraven upon the thrones of Kings princes and doth more then abundantly justify Scotland in their late defensive warre Moreover Queen Elizabeth King Iames both by the publick advice consent of their realmes did give publick aid assistance unto the protestants of France against their King to the Netherlands against the king of Spaine and to the protestants in Germany Bohemia against the Emperour entered into solemne leagues covenants with them if they had been traitours rebells that action of defence utterly unlawfull would those princes have joyned with them in this manner who can think this So did King Charles the first openly avow to aide the protestants in France at Ree Rotchell against their King who was come in armes against them the Germane Princes against the Emperour the Netherlands against the King of Spaine And entered into a solemne league with them for that end All which do aboundantly justify the Scottish defensive warres free Scotland from the aspersion of disloyalty rebellion But moreover 7. It is to be considered That King Charles I. himself hath fully freed them of all these aspersions in his publick Acts in his Parliaments declareing The Scots late taking up armes against him his Consellours in defence of their religion lawes privileges to be no treason nor rebellion them to be his true loyall subjects notwithstanding of all aspersions cast upon them by the Prelaticall Popish party because they had no evill nor disloyall intentions at all against his Maj. person crown dignity but only a care of their own preservation the redresse of these enoâ—…mities pressures grievances in Church state which threatened desolation to both See the acts of oblivion pacification Here is enough to stope the mouthes of all Calumniators to vindicate them to cleare the innocency of their cause before all the Woâ—…d And furder King Charles who now is did approve of the same in his declaration at Dumfermlâ—… which is cited Sect 2. 8. Some of their chief antagonists are forced through the clearnesse of truth to assert such things grant such particulars as will by clear undenyable consequence justify their taking up of armes resisting the armies of their King when they came against then to destroy Religion Lives Lawes Liberties Beside that all of them are forced to speak most in consequently unto their own principles by their concessions do overthrow their own grounds arguments as might easily be made to appear if to discourse at length of this subject were designed now As 1. Iohn Barclay Lib. 4. Cap. 16. he sayeth expresly That if a King will alionate and subjecte his Kingdom to another without his subjects their consent or be carryed with a hostile minde to the destruction of all his people his Kingdom is actually lost and the people may not only lawfully resist and disobey but also depose him This is more then the Scots could desire for they plead not for deposeing or dethroning of kings but only for resisting withstanding them when they carry a hostile minde against them whereof a strong army of strangers marching with armes to their borders after they were contrary to all law declared rebels is as evident a demonstration as can be are seeking the ruine destruction of their own subjects They plead only That in that case the people may are bound before God to defend themselves when their religion which ought to be dearer to them then any thing else is sought to be taken away or altered service books or masse books the like tyrannically obtruded upon them So Contra Monarch lib. 3. c. 8. He granteth that the people have right to defend themselves against great cruelty what greater cruelty could be expected by a nation from their King then to be blocked up by sea land threatened with utter ruine extiâ—…pation unlesse they would sell soull conscience all doth not this speak abundantly for the justifying of them 2. D. Fern. Part. 3. s. 5. acknowledgeth that personall defence is lawfull against the suddaine illegall assaules of the Kings messingers or of himself in so far as to ward off his blowes to held his hands and when the assault is inovitable Now if resistence be lawfull against suddaine assaults much more against premediated deliberated advised assaults If resistence of illegall assaults be lawfull then they cannot be condemned because the assaults of the King's forces were against all law reason for there is no law warranding the King or any other having a commission from him to force popery upon them by armes If resistence be lawfull against inevitable assaults then they are justified for how could they resist the assault of so many thousand armed men but with armed men Yea when he alloweth in such a case that hands may be laid upon the prince he more then justifieth them who never did intend harme to his Maj. person honour but wished sought the saifty preservation thereof by all meanes And againe when he would answere the argument taken from Elisha's resisting of the King he granteth that itis lawfull to resist the Kings cutthroats and what did Scotland more then resist his
shall beasts be in a better condition then man Shall a bull have liberty to defend it self with horns shall man have no liberty to defend himself against tyrants or souldeours in their name coming to kill plunder burn slay all Nature alloweth Vim vi repellere To resist violence with violence to all against all violence without exception Nature can put no difference betwixt violence offered by a Magistrat violence offered by another person Defensio vitae necessariae est a jure naturali profluit It is necessary by the law of nature that a Man defend his life And the reason is because God hath implanted in every Creature inclinations motions to preserve it self Each are bound to love themselves better then their neighbours for the love of themselves is the measure of that love which they owe to their neighbour The law of nature alloweth one rather to kill then to be killed to defend himself more then his neighbour Cicero Lib. 1. De Officiis sayeth Injustitiae duo genera sunt c. There are two kindes of wrongs one of these who do the wrong the other of those who when they may hold off the wrong do it not He who without cause feteth upon any being angry or some other way stirred up layeth violent hands upon his neighbour but he who doth not defend nor resist the injury when he may is as farr in the wrong as if he should desert his parents his friends his countrey And againe cum sint duo genera decertandi c. There are two kindes of contending one by argueing which is propper to men the other by force which is propper to beasts we must flee to this last when we cannot make use of the former againe in his Orat. pro Milone he sayeth Est haec non scripta c. This law is not a law written but a law borne with us we have not learned it nor acquired it ' nor read it but we have taken it drawne it extracted it from nature it self to which we are not taught but made we are not instructed but are endued with it that if our life be in hazard by snares by violence darts of thieves or enemies all honest wayes must be assayed to free our life So reason teacheth this to the learned necessity to the Barbarians custome to nations to beasts nature it self hath prescribed this that whatever way they can they should resist all violence save their lives Thus you see nature it self and such as spoke by the light of nature do warrand such a practice 4. By the law of nations the actions of some of which have been mentioned already he who desireth to see more may consult Prin's Appendix to his soveraigne power of Parliaments c. 5. By the law of God as we see by many examples 1. Of David who being but a privat man a subject now unjustly persecuted by Saul the King who was seeking his life is forced to defend himself with armes by taking to him first 600. men 1. Chron. 12. then a great host v. 22 36. this was warranted of God for the Spirit of God commendeth them for their valour v. 2 8 15 21. And the Spirit coming on Amâ—…sai v. 18. prompting him to speak what he spoke cleareth it also 2. of Elisha 2. King 6 32. He keepeth out the house against the King by force resisteth him who was coming to use unjust violence 3. Of the 80 Priests who resisted Uzziah 2. Chron. 26. 17. Those are called most valient men it is said they withstood Uzziah they thrust him out 4. Of the people their rescueing of Ionathan 1. Sam. 14. unjustly condemned to die They resisted the Kings act edict notwithstanding of his oath Yea they did swear the contradictorie of the Kings oath 5. Of Libnah revolting from Ichoraâ—… 2. Chron. 21 10. because he pressed them to idolatry as is probable from v. 13. so sayeth Lavater Zanchius Cornel a lap see for this also that noble commentator Trochreg on the Ephespag 923 6. of the city Abell resisting Ioab 2. Sam. 20. 7. of Elijah 2. King 1. killing many hundereds of the Kings men emissaries sent to apprehend him 8. By Christ bidding his disciples Luk. 22 36 37 38. Buy swords Nor is there any thing in scripture contrary to this for the passages of which the adversaries make use do either speak against opposeing of lawfull acts of just governours as Eccles. 8 2 3 4. Numb 16. Rom. 13. 1 Pet. 2 13 14. or against opposeing of inferiour Magistrats as well as others so serve not their purpose such as 1 Pet. 2 1 4. c. Rom. 13. Exod. 22 28. Iob 34 18. or speaketh not of a pure defensive warre but of seeking the utter destruction ruine of the supreme Magistrat as some of David's expressions which they make use of 6. By right reason for there is no striker obligation betuixt a prince his subjects then betuixt parents children yea not so stricke yet if the father become distracted rise up in a fury to kill his children the children may lawfull joyn together resist him binde his hands So may the wife resist the unjust violence of her unnaturall husband much more may subjects resist the unjust violence of their King 2. Otherwise a King who was an ordinance of God ordained for a rich blessing should become the greatest curse imaginable if actu primo he be invested of God with power to tyrannize the people be put out of all capacity to resist he should become the greatest of curses to a people 3. This should crosse the end for which people did set up a King over themselves it was to preserve them to keep them from wrongs not to put power in his hand to kill murther them as he pleaseth 4. This would put rationall creatures into a worse condition then the beasts are into for if their King will he may cut all their throats destroy all their liberties ravish all their wives doughters destroy all their lands livings that without any controle or the least resistence imaginable But who can beleeve this Yea put the case there were but three or foure Kings in all the world all the lives of the rest should be at their devotion so that if they in a fit of fury madnesse give out the word of command they may cause kill all without any resistence would not this reflect upon the wisdome godnesse of God if he ordered matters so but the absurditie of this is abundantly clear so that more needeth not be said He who desireth more satisfaction in this question may peruse Innius Brutus his vindiciae contra tyrannos Quest. 3. a book as yet unanswered by any and Lex rex which gote never another answer nor a fagot a quike way forsooth of dispatching an answer Mr
which the tenderers thereof do put upon it must be searched sought for out of their acts for though it could have been wished both reason religion would have required it that after the example of Abraham they had made the oath as plaine easie as might be so that the sense meaning of it had been obvious to all or had annexed such a glosse meaneing as the words in ordinary construction would bear tender Christians might saifly assent unto yet there was no such thing done yea not being desired to do it would they do it yea nor would they suffer any to enquire at them in what sense they would have the oath taken yea which is more they made an act dischargeing all to offer any sense of the oath under the paine of treason So that there is no way now left to finde out the meaning of the oath as to this part but by their acts actings which when considered together with some other things usefull in this bussinesse will help to cleare the true sense thereof Three things then must be spoken to 1. The rise progresse of this bussinesse which is imported by this part of the oath viz the Kings supremacy over persons ecclesiastick in ecclesiastick causes in England 2. The rise progresse of it in Scotland 3. Some acts deeds of the King Parliament who now tender it As to the first of these It is notour enough what King Henry the Eight did when upon some privat discontents he shook off the Pop's supremacy Anno 1530. for having caught the Clergy in a Premunire for countenanceing some way or other the Pop's legat he would not be satisfied with their payment of 100000. lib unlesse also they would acknowledge him for the supreme head of the Church on earth which after some debate in their Synod both in the upper lower house of convocation was condescended to in forme as followeth cujus c. of which Church viz the Church of England we recognosce his Maj. to be the singular protectour the only supreme Lord so far as Christ's lawes will permitt the supreme head This was subscribed unto by all put into their publicke acts or instruments presented to the King afterward Parl. 24. c. 12. upon this ground it was statuted ordained that all ecclesiasticall suites controversies should be determined within the Kingdom all appeals to Rome were prohibited and Parl. 25. c. 20. The manner of electing of Archbishops Bishops was altered that power given granted to the King and upon this same foundation Parl. 26. c. 1. it was declared that the King is supreme head of the Church of England that he should have all honours preheminences which were annexed unto that title after this there followed another act c. 3. for Tenths first fruits as appertaineing to that head-shipe supreme authority Hence also Anno 1532. The convocation submitting unto the King's Maj. promiseth in verbo sacerdotis That they would never from thence forth presume to attempt allaidge clame or put in ure enact promulge or execute any new canons constitutions ordinances provinciall or others or by whatsoever name they shall be called in the convocation unlesse the Kings most royall assent may to them be had to make promulge execute the same that his Maj. do give his most royall assent authority in that behalfe Which deed of theirs the Parliament did shortly thereafter ratifie in these termes That none of the said clergy from thence forth should presume to allaidge clame or put in ure any constitutions or ordinances provinciall or synodall or any other canons nor should enact promulge or execute any such canons constitutions or ordinances by whatsoever name or names they may be called in their convocations in time coming which alwayes shall be assembled by the Kings write unlesse the same clergy may have the kings most royall assent license to make promulge execute such canons constitutions ordinances provinicall synodall upon paine of evry one of the said clergy doing the contrary to this act thereof convicted to suffer imprisonment and make fine at the king's will 25. Parl. c. 19. So Parl. 35. c. 1. There was another oath devised ratified which was to be imposed upon the subject for the more clear asserting of the King's supremacy By these Particulars any may see that Peter Martyr had good ground to say as he doth on 1. Sam. 8. That King Henry took all that power to himself which the Pope challenged atque hoâ—… fortasse est quod Rex Angliae voluit se secundum Christum appellari caput ecclesiae putavit enim campâ—…testatem quam sibi Papa usur paverat suamesse in reguo suo ad se pertinere i. e he would there fore be called head of the Church next under Christ because he thought that all that power which the Pope did usurpe did belong to him within his own dominions and he had good ground to say that it was a proud title which gave much offence unto the godly Nor was it without reason that judicious Calvin did inveigh so much against that title in his commentary on Amos 7. saying qui juitio tantopere etc. i e. They who at the first did so much extoll Henry king of England were no doubt inconsider as men they gave unto him the supreme power over all and this did alwayes wound me They were blasphemous when they called him supreme head of the Church under Christ. So that Peter Heylyn must not be beleeved when he telleth the world in his discourse of the reformation of the Church of England pag. 13. That thâ—…se statuts which concerne the kings supremacy are not introductory of any new right that was not in the crown before but only declaratory of an old againe pag. 48. 49. That when the supremacy was recognized by the Clergy in their convocation to king Henry 8. It was only the restoreing of him to his propper and originall power invaded by the popes of these later ages for that title of supreme head not only seemed to have some what in it of an innovation as himself is forced to acknowledge in the following words but really had an innovation in it of no small consequence as shall appeare But this title of supreme head gave offence both at home abroad therefore Queen Elizabeth did change it into this of supreme governour over all persons as well in all causes ecclesiastick as civill in these tearms it was keeped is to this day But all this change did not much help the matter for many were offended even there at and what wonder seing it seemed to attribute to her Maj. no lesse spirituall jurisdiction power then what the former oath did importe Whereupon the Queen in the first year of her reigne after the Parliament had condescended on the forementioned oath published an
zealous Christian of servant of Christ consent unto this dreadfull incrouchment usurpation by subscribeing any oath which might import the same Who can but hear of it his heart not tremble Let all the arguments which the reformed divines make use of against the usurped headshipe of the Pope be considered they will with equall strength militat against this usurpation justifie the refuseing of this oath upon that account yea Arminius himself disp de pontif Rom. Thes 3. sayeth that the Church hath but one head otherwise she should be a monster 2. By this meanes they should upon the matter licke up popery which they have abjured againe againe for none will say that they have abjured such a piece of popery only as it was seated in the head of the man with the treeple crown that sitteth at Rome not simply in it self as a blasphemous tenent No reformed divine writeth against the Popes supremacy headshipe as a power usurped by him to the prejudice of some one prince or other but as a heigh insolent usurpation of that which belongeth unto him who is King of Kings Lord of Lords for this were not to speak against an incroachment made upon the privileges prerogatives of the King of his Church but against some civil wrongs done to a neighbour prince or state indeed the adversaries are not ashamed to say that the Pope in his usurpation of this Church jurisdiction wronged not Christ but more immediatly the King Princes unto whom that power did belong of right before therefore they say that King Henry 8. assumed but his own back againe that he neither took nor did the Parliament give him any new power which did not belong to him before So said Heylyn as was showne But if any should assent unto this they should consent only unto the change of the pope but not unto the change of the Popedome should shake off an ecclesiasticall Pope submit unto a civil Pope For Zepp◅rus speaketh with reason when he sayeth P◅lit Eccles. Lib. 3 c. 13. Quando tota Doctrinae cultus c i. e. When all the matter of Doctrine worship as also of the constitution of the Church is ordered according to the pleasure of the Prince alone the counsell advice of the ministers of the word of their synods being despised when such are declared rebels who will not assent unto all that which these polititians do when the whole Government of the Church is made over to them almost by an apostolick authority who only exerce an externall politicall power on the outward main Then doth themagistrat goe beyond his bounds the Popedomeis not taken away but changed yea made twofold worse yea the Arminians in their apologie do call this the very heart marrow of Popery which being granted all his other usurpations do necessarily follow 3 By this means they should grant that ministers is the very discharge of their ministeriall function are subordin◅ unto the supreme Magistat his power acting under him as his servants commissioners This is clear in the exercise of jurisdiction discipline The prelats are his Maj. Commissioners in matters of discipline they receive their commission from him to depose to silence to excommunicate so also they must Acte as his commissioners in lesser censures as in publick rebuking for sin the like seing both the keyes of doctrine discipline were given at once if the key of jurisdiction or discipline come from Christ mediatly from the King immediatly so must the key of doctrine for the scripture sheweth no distinction none may separat the keyes which Christ hath tyed together thus every minister must come forth preach exhort rebuke censure ex communicate not in the name of Christ immediatly but in the name of the King But to this they could not assent therefore they could not take the oath 4. By this meanes they should grant that the supreme Magistrat himself might immediatly in his own person rebuke publickly the scandalous debarr from the sacraments depose suspend excommunicate for what his commissioners do by vertue of a commission from him that he may do himself immediatly But this could no be yeelded to there being not the least warrand for it imaginable out of the word but much against it therefore none except an Erastian or Arminian will condemne such as refuse an oath which would import this see Voetius de politia ecclesi pag. 146. arg 12. 5. By this meanes they should have upon the matter opened a door unto the King 's bringing into the Church what popish rites externall superstitious ceremonies he pleaseth◅ By the act for the nationall Synod he hath as an inherent in the crown the ordering disposall of the externall government of the Church power to settle all things concerning doctrine worship discipline government by the advice of the nationall Synod which is but as his Councell so that the whole power of ordering setling the matter of the worship is in his own hand it was upon this ground that the former prelats did warrand their use of the ceremonies his supremacy was a basis unto this So said Camero in his prael Tom. 1. pag. 370. 371. Tom. 2. pag. 41. That in all things perteineing to externall order in religion Kings may command what they will pro authoritate And thus they should consent unto opening of a door unto all the trash of Rome the significāt ceremonies that are there for if the King have such power what ceremony may he not bring in who is there to controle him in any thing of that kinde who may ask whether lawfull or unlawfull seing no question he himself will call all that which he doth most lawfull he is not without the compasse of his power or authority or calling when he appoynteth the use of those ceremonies if he be thus rector Ecclesiae Now who can acknowledge that any such power doth belong unto the supreme Magistrat to institute any significant ceremony or part of God's worship this being the very sin of Ier◅oam 1. King 12 28 33. It was his fault to devise of his own heart those ceremonies of sacred signes places or persons times And therefore they could not take such an oath be guilt◅sse 6. By this meanes they should have granted that he had power to change the whole frame of religion so give way unto his bringing in the whole body of popery or what he would for by this oath he should have granted unto him the supreme power in matters concerning doctrine worshipe discipline government It was charged upon the Church of England by some adversaries that the great alteration of their religion that was made from popery to the truth back againe to popery so forth in the dayes of Henry 8. Edward
before what is the judgment of the Church of Scotland in this particular in their preface to the confession of faith 3. There is no expresse command either for seeking or having his expresse consent The reformers of the Church of Scotland never once thought of this but as oft as conveniently they might as necessity urged they keeped Assemblies not only without the consent of the supreme Magistrat but oftimes against their will thinking it their duty to Assemble for the relief of the Church ay untill some difficulty were laid in their way which they could not win over untill some phisicall restraint or some what equivalent were laid upon them 5. It would neither be fit nor saife for them to condemne the worthies who stood so zealously for the truth keeped that Assembly at Aberdeen which occasioned their banishment 2. That the power of convocating indicting of Synods Assemblies doth belong only unto the Magistrat The act for the National Synod doth abundantly cleare this But to assent to this were a palpable wronging of the Church which hath intrinsick power for this needeth not goe out of her self to seek it The Synod which did meet 〈◊〉 15 was not indicted by any civil Magistrat The Church should then be in an irremediable case when the civil Magistrat is an enemy but God hath provided meanes for the saifty preservation of his Church Even when the higher powers are but small friends unto her as oftimes it falleth out see the judicious learned doct Voet de Pol Eccles Pag. 184. Quaest 5. 3. That the power of delegating unto assemblies doth belong to him alone so as he may appoynt all the constituent members thereof according as he pleaseth as the Act for the nationall Synod sayeth he doth that by vertue of his supremacy But this were a grosse wronging robbing of Churches of their power privilege of delegating such as they think fit according to the Example of Antioch sending Paul Barnabas to that Synod Act 15. the practice of the Church in all ages see Voet ubi supra Pag. 187 Quaest. 7. 8. Yea if so the persones delegated should vote in his name not in the name of Christ or of the Church the meeting should not be a pure Church meeting but either wholly politicall or else politico-ecclesiasticall 4. That he might dissolve Church assemblies Synods when he pleaseth for the fore mentioned Act for the Nat. Synod warrandeth them to meet only at such times as he pleaseth But this were a great wrong done unto the Church privileges See Voet. ubi supra Pag. 190. Qâ—… 13. 14. Synods should be no helps unto the poor Church if they might sit no longeri what ever necessity might urge then his Maj thought good to suffer There is no warrand for any such dependence of Church judicatories upon the civil Magistrat's discretion If Christ hath allowed Synods to his Church for determineing in Church affaires he hath allowed them to sit untill they finish the bussinesse for which they did assemble Yea if they should yeeld to this they should condemne the assembly at Glasgow 1638. which did sit untill they had ended their bussinesse notwithstanding of a command to dissolve 5. That his presence or the presence of his commissioner is necessary unto each nationall assembly for the Act of Parliament ratifying the Act for the nationall Synod sayeth expresly that without the presence of the King or of his commissioner no nationall Synod can be keeped But 1. there is no law of God for this 2. The Synods in the primitive times were held without his presence 3. There were many generall assemblies held in Scotland without his presence 4. The Magistrat as such is no constituent member of the Synod therefore his presence is not necessarily requisite see Voet ubi supra Pag. 188. Quaest. 9. 5. If there be such a necessity for his presence at nationall Synods he must not be absent from lesser assemblies thus there shall be no Church judicature held without his presence which were most absurd See what the learned famous Voetius sayeth to this pol. Eccles. Part. 1. Pag. 199. 200. 6. That Ministers have no proper decisive fuffrage in Synods because the forecited Act sayeth That matters are to be setled only by their advice So that in their Synod they are only the King's counsellers conveened to advise consult a power only to advise is no decisive fuffrage so the Act concluded is the deed of the supreme Magistrat following their advice is not their deed Now this is most absurd destructive to all Synods of all their power thus it should be far worse with Synods now when Magistrats are Christians then when they were heathens Moreover there is no warrand for his having with the rest of 〈◊〉 the commissioners a voice in those Synods far lesse for his having the whole power It is clear that as a Magistat he can have no suffrage or voice in these Synods for then heathens who are no way qualified for such a bussinesse should have it likewise Yea if it were so all the determinations of Synods should be civil Acts no Church Acts being done by one who is no Church officer yea nor a Church member as such let be a Church judicature This was Episcopius the Arminian his judgment in disput de jure Magistratus circa sacra Thes. 16. viz. that he may convocat assemblies choose members prescribe lawes unto them the way of prâ—…cedour aske the suffrages either peremptorily enact or approve what is done that it may passe into a law see Voet. ubi supra pag. 191. Qâ—… 16. 7. That the judicatories of the Church be prelimited for nothing may be enacted by the nationall Synod which is contrary to his Maj. royal prerogative or to the lawes of the land so sayeth the Parliaments ratification of the Act for the nationall Synod But what if iniquity be established by a law what if Christ's royall prerogatives be taken from him given to the King shall the Church in her judicatories do nothing for the truth shall she give no testimony against these usurpations shall the lawes of the land the King's prerogatives be her Cynosura what use shall be made of the word of God then where is there any such caution or limitation given to the Church But enough of this 8. That Church judicatories may not so much as consult debate about any Act matter or cause but what shall be allowed approved by his Maj. or his commissioner for these are the very words of the Act of Parliament But who can assent unto this intolerable jncroachment destructive of all Church judicatures making them no judicatories at all but a company of men conveened for giving advice But where was there ever the like of this Church judicature The nameing of those things is sufficient to discover their vanity see
excellent Voâ—…t ubi suprâ—… Pag. 189. Quaest. 11. 9. That no Church canon or ordinance hath any effect force or validity but what shall be approved confirmed by him or his commissioner for so much doth the fore cited Act import now who but he who hath drunken in the opinions of Erastus Arminians will assent unto this It is true the canons ordinances of a Church judicatory cannot have the strength of a municipall law without the Magistrat's civill sanction But yet they may have the strength of Church Canons whether he approve of them or not as the Acts of the Councell at Ierusal Act 15. of all other Synods Assemblies which the Church had dureing the first three hundered yeers had Otherwise the Church should be in a hard case when the civill Magistrat did refuse his concurrence as hath been oft hinted in a better case under heathens then under Christian Magistrats Therefore this could not be assented unto 10. That all Church Canons are his proper Acts flow natively from him his power for the meeting is but for Counsell advice to him all which they say is without force unlesse he approve it as the Act sayeth so all their Acts Canons are his only not theirs But this could not be granted because 1. what ever he doth as supreme Governour or Magistrat is a civill Act no Church Act so no Church Canon 2. No Church Canon can be made by any but by Church Officers who are impowered by Iesus Christ for that effect but the Magistrat as such is no Church Officer 3. This power is without all warrand of Scripture therefore can not be acknowledged Thus you see what incroachments upon the Privileges of the Church the taking of this oath thus sensed by them carryeth along with it albeit there be some Erastians others who take these for no incroachments but trutâ—…es Yet reformed divines such as famous worthy Voetius Apollonius others have sufficiently manifested them to be grosle errours because the end designed in this undertaking is satisfaction to orthodox reformed sound divines with whose principles the present suffering Church of Scotland doth accord it is accounted sufficient only to mention those things which the taking of this oath as explained by their Acts deeds who tender it would clearly import an assenting unto But to proceed 15. By this oath They should grant that the Church is very imperfect so long as she wanteth a Christian Magistrat for she wanteth a chief Officer And hence it will follow that the Church in the dayes of the Apostles some hundereds of Years thereafter was imperfect as to its Constitution wanting this supreme Governour Otherwise they must say that Nero Caligula the rest of the Roman persecuting Emperours did sufficiently fill up this place And that the Apostles did upon the matter would not have refused plainely to have affirmed that these persecuting heathens were supreme Governours over all persones in all causes Civill Ecclesiastick But none of those can be affirmed with any probality or shew of reason 16. Yea by taking this oath They should grant that the Apostles primitive Church walked not regularly in the matter of governing the Church Because they acted with no such subordination unto the supreme Magistrat who then was they derived no power from him as their supreme Governour in causes Ecclesiastick To say that necessity did put them to this is but a poor defence for then out of necessity the primitive Church did rob the Magistrat of his power or else this power agreeth not to all Magistrats but only to Christian Magistrats it so it cannot be a power or Privilege annexed to the Crown And further it doth not agree to them as Christians nor yet as Magistrats otherwise it should agree to all Christians to all Magistrats which is false therefore i cannot agree to them as Christian Magistrats for as learned renowned Doct. Vâ—…us sayeth Polâ—…t Eccles. Pag. 137. Duo subjecta principia formalia quae non sunt unum auâ—… unâ—…a per se non possunt fundare effectum formalem per se unum sc. ex gr Homo unus si sit Consul Patâ—…r non poteâ—… dici habere potestatem consularem in cives qua Consul-paâ—…er nec potestatem patriam in sâ—…ium quâ Pater-consul 17. By taking of this oath They should yeeld unto the opening of a door unto the utter destruction overthrow of all Church judicatories for by their judgment who tender that oath the King is the fountaine of all Church power who ever executeth any Church power executeth it as his Commissioner he may imploy in this bussinesse whom he pleaseth by the Act for the heigh commission he imployeth civill persones who are no Church Officers in deposeing Ministers in excommunicating so he may imploy such persons alwayes only such for he is at liberty to imploy whom he will so at length he may put aside all Church Officers so lay aside all Church judicatures handle all Church bussinesse in civill courts But what Christian could yeeld to this See Voetius ubi supra Pag. 146 Arg. 11. 18. By this oath they should grant unto the Civill Magistrat power to erect new courts which have no warrand in the word such courts as the Church had not all the dayes of the Apostles nor many centuries of years thereafter for by vertue of his supremacy he erecteth this new court called a Heigh or Grand Commission wherein civill persons meddle with Church matters execute Church censures Church-men meddle with civill matters civill censures But to yeeld to this should be to destroy all Church power to condemne the Apostles for not leaving behinde them the example of such a court the primitive Church for not setting up such a court By Presbyterian principles no judicature must be acknowledged for a court of Christ but that which hath Christs warrand 19. By taking this oath They should yeeld unto the lawfulnesse of appealing from a Church judicature unto the civil Magistrat for it is lawfull to appeal from an inferiour judicature unto a superiour by the tenderers of the oath the supreme Magistrat is a superiour judicature It is lawfull to appeall from the Commissioners unto such as have given them that commission And Ministers in these judicatories are but his Commissioners But sound divines writting against Erastus the Arminiant will justify their refuseing to yeeld to this if they should have yeelded to this they should have condemned the Generall Assemblies that declared such as appealed from a Church judicature unto the King his Councell censurable with the sentence of excommunication And approved of such perverse troublers of the Church as took this corrupt course to keep themselves from censure Moreover there is no example of any such lawfull appellation for Paul's
appeal unto Caesar was from a civill court from Festus was in a matter of life death from no Church judicatorie See Voetius ubs supra Pag. 197. Quaest. 24. SECTIO XIII The former purpose further prosecuted fleet 's notion examined THere is one reason more pleading against the taking of the oath as it is now glossed it is this 20. By taking of this oath they should assent unto that power which is given unto the King in the 16 Act of Parliament viz. a power to settle secure Church governement in such a frame as shall be most agreable suiteable unto Monarchicall Governement most complying with the publick peace quyet of the Kingdome And so grant 1. That there is not one forme or modell of Church governement set down in the word obliging Churches in all ages to follow the same 2. That the supreme Magistrat alone may appoynt what forme he thinketh good To speak to this head at length would take a long time in regard that one Mr Stilling fleet hath been at the paines to give the World a proof of his learning reading by engaging in this quarrell in pleading against the privilege prerogative of the Crown of Christ whom God hath made King in Zion who will reigne untill all his enemies be made his footstool He would without all doubt have had more peace when stepping into eternity if he had imployed his partes abilities for Christ his interests as King sole King in his Church Kingdom But yet though the nature of this discourse will not admit so long full an examination of the grounds whereupon this learned man walketh Some thing must be said in short so much the rather because through the injury of the times the labours of such as have fully solidly answered him cannot be gotten printed And therefore till providence so order matters as that both those severall other things against prelats may receive a free Imprimatur Take these few observations upon his whole book which he is pleased to call a weapon salve c. so far as concerneth the bussinesse in hand Obs. 1. He granteth pag. 154. That it is necessary there should be a forme of government in the Church by vertue not only of that law of nature which provideth for the preservation of societies but likewise by vertue of that divine law which takes care for the Churches preservation in peace and unity So then if there be such a divine law for a forme of Church Government iâ—… in the primitive times there was a forme of Church Government followed the poynt is gained by Mr Stillingfleet's own concessions for part 1. c. 1 § 3. He sayeth that there is not the same necessitie for a particular clear revelation in the alteration of a law unrepealed in some circumstances of it as there is for the establishing of a new law as to the former a different practice by persons guided by an infallible Spirit is sufficient which is the case as to the observation of the Lord's day under the Gospell for the fourth command standing in force as to the morality of it a different practice by the Apostles may be sufficient for the particular determination of the more rituall occasionall part of it Now there being a standing morall law for a forme of Church governement the practice of the Apostles who were guided by an infallible Spirit is sufficient for an alteration And so as their practice obligeth now to the observation of the first day Sabbath because of the standing force of the morall law for one day of Seven So their practice obligeth now unto that forme of Governement which they used because of the standing force of the law of God for a forme of Church Governement So that we need not enquire after a particular clear revelation in this case where there is but the alteration of a law unrepealed as to some particular circumstances And thus if the morality of the first day Sabbath stand the morality of the governement of the Church which the Apostles did set up will stand also Their practice altering the last day of Seven into the first will no more oblige then their altering of the ancient governement into a new one which was distinct from the former Obs. 2. Part. 2. c. 1. § 4 5 6. When he is about the stateing of the question he will have a nationall Church to be understood as a Church in which a forme of Government should be setled It is true a nationall society incorporated is a Church It is also true that the notion of a Church agreeth to other societies then nationall as himself sayes wherever the notion of a Church particular is to be found there must be a Governement in that Church so every society which may be called a Church should have a Governement in it But now the question is whether every such society as may be called a Church should have its own liberty to set up what forme of Government it thinketh best or only a nationall Church If only a nationall Church have that liberty then that liberty agreeth not to a nationall Church as it is a Church but under some other notion what is this other notion Is it because they are under one civil Governement But many nations may in some respect be under one civil Government in some respect there is hardly any one nation which in all its parts incorporations cities is governed after one the same manner But further what hath the Church to do with the civill lawes or civill way of Governement especially seing himself granteth that the Church is a quite distinct society from the civil state But next if every Church hath this liberty then in one the same nationall Church there may be many severall sorts of Governements this would occasion the greatest confusion in the world looketh no way like the ordinance of God which neither tendeth to union nor edification but to confusion distraction will make every parochial Church he cannot deny a parochiall Church to be a Church to have its own distinct forme of Government thus porachiall Churches should be like the Cantâ—…ns of Helvetia or distinct Kingdomes ruled by their own lawes after their owne manner If it be said that the unity peace of the nationall Church ought much more to be looked after then the peace unity of any one particular congregation Ans. will it thence follow that every particular congregation in a nationall Church should be Governed after one manner then it will follow also that all nationall Churches being members of the Church universall must be Governed after one the same manner for the peace unity of the Church universall is preferable unto the peace unity of a Nat. Church as the peace unity of a Nat. Church is preferable unto the peace unity of Particular
but the Church judicature also in so doing should acknowledge the validity of the sentence and consequently the lawfulnesse of the power from which it did slow But it will be objected 1. That that sentence cometh not from the Bishop alone but from a Synod whereof he is only the moderator Ans. Though the sentence be given out at the meeting of such as are underlings to complyers with him Yet the sentence is only his sentence this he is pleased to signifie unto all at their meeting left they should forget it so mistake him themselves both And he indeed maketh a fashion of asking their votes to the end they may be partakers of the guilt of the odium with himself But he acknowledgeth them to have no power unlesse it be to give their counsell advice But. 2. It hath been showne above that such meetings are no lawfull Church judicatures no presbyterian meetings but prelaticall conventions conventicles set up of purpose for his ends for the carrying on of his designes And their not compeering before these meetings sayeth they did not acknowledge them to be lawfull meetings therefore they cannot now acknowledge their sentence It will be objected 2. That though they ought not to be submitted unto as prelats or coâ—…rts of prelats Yet they ought to be submitted unto as the King's commissioners their sentence is in so far to be reverenced Ans. Whether they sit Act there as principall or as commissioners yet any such sentence proceeding from them is a non-habente poâ—…estatem from such as have no power For of themselves they have no such power they can have no such power from the King for nemo pâ—…test dare quod non habet the King can not give them the power which he hath not The King cannot depose a Minister immediatly It is true he may put a lawfull judicature to whom this power doth properly belong to do it or he may imprison or banish consequently put from the exercise in such a place but formally he cannot give out any Church censure of suspension or deposition against any Minister therefore he can commit no such power unto any man whether he be a civil man or a Church man And thus It is still clear that this sentence should not be submitted unto if it were no more but for this one cause because it should be an acknowledgeing of the Magistrat's power in the matter of Church censures which is an assertion unto which no sound reformed divine will assent It will be objected 3. That seing it is certane such shall be put from their Ministerie ere long however for if they submit not unto the sentence the civil Magistrat will either banish or imprisone or some other way put them from it whether they will or not were it not faifer then to prevent further suffering to themselves theirs by submitting in time Ans. It is true that in all probability the civill powers will not suffer such to preach long after such a sentence is dissobeyed But yet it is the duty of all so to carry themselves when suffering is at hand as that they may have most peace of conscience quietnesse under the crosse And it is certane they shall have far more peace who continue preaching as opportunity offereth notwithstanding of any such sentence untill some phisicall restraint or what is equivalent be laid upon them Then such as shall willingly submit unto an unlawfull sentence proceeding from an unlawfull judicature deriveing power from an empty fountaine thereby give offence great scandall both to good bad It will be Objected 4. That submission to judicaturies established by law is necessarie Either obedience active or passive is necessary otherwise there shall be no order Ans. Whatever may be said anent submission or non-submission unto the unjust sentences of lawfull judicatures Yet it will be clear that no submission should be yeelded unto the unjust sentences of unlawfull judicatures For the authors of the review examination of that book intituled Protesters no subverters and Presbytery no Papacy grant Pag. 96. This much saying we plead not for submission to officers judicatories not of Christ's own institution such as not only popes but prelates were no lawfull Church officers so that here their arguments conclude not taken from the practice of Ministers not submitting to the sentences of prelats in the Church So that then all the Church of Scotland as to this particular it seemeth was of one judgment and thought that Ministers should not submit unto prelats passing a sentence of suspension or deposition against them these prelats being no lawfull Church officers so it is clear that this non-submission in this case is no new thing in that Church but was the practice of severall worthy precious men before as the book before mentioned sheweth which instances are worth the noticeing now SECTION XVIII It is lawfull for the people to hear those suffering Ministers to meet for prayer other Christian exercises in private WHen the poor people cannot in conscience attend the ministry of such as are thrust in upon them against their will for the reasons already given their temptation groweth double upon them their trouble increaseth for now when they goe to hear such Ministers as they may lawfully hear either in publict or in private it is a cause sufficient for persecution yea or if they meet two or three together in any privat place for prayer conference or any other Christian exercise they are in hazard to be hailed to prison punished as keepers of conventicles Doubtlesse it cannot be very necessary to speak much for the justification defence of those who either have suffered or may hereafter suffer upon that account seing few who owne Christianity or know the sweet of Christian exercises and of Christian fellowshipe will condemne such as value the good advantage of their souls beyond their bodies yet lest some should be moved to think that at such a time such wayes should be forborn a little must be spoken to justify both those courses And first for their going to heare either in publick or privat such Ministers as are still lawfull Ministers what ever sentence hath passed against them have given a faithfull testimony unto the truth by adhereing to their principles notwithstanding of all the sufferings they do or can meet with much needeth not be said seing 1. They are so expresly often commanded to heare the word of truth to heare what is the minde of the Lord for by the Ministery of his servants doth God manifest his minde unto his people The priests lips should preserve knowledge and the people should seek the law at their mouth who are the messingers of the Lord of hosts It is their duty to waite at the posts of wisdomes doors this will be undenyable 2. There is an innate desire in the saints after the word
be taken for he said before that an oath hath no force in matters morally good and it is granted by all that an oath hath no force in matters sinfull for it cannot be vinculum iniquitatis here he sayeth a man may not sweare in things indifferent if they be such as come under the compasse of legislators and thus he doth much to banish all religious oaths out of the world 4. Will no oath binde which is against the lawes of the land then what if a man in straite for money shall borrow promise with an oath to give more annual-rent therefore then the law of the land will allow will not his oath binde him What if the law of the land be against the giving of any money unto robbers Shall not a man who is taken with robbers who to save his life promiseth with an oath to give them such a summe of money performe his oath merely because it is against the law of the Land But as to this controversie let the reader consult such casuists as have spoken of it whose names are set down by Timorcus in his Covenanters plea cap. 6. or if he please let him consult Doct Sanders who de jur pro. oblg. prael 4. § 17. proveth it lawfull enough whatever be said of this That which Doct. Saâ—…ders sayeth ubi supra Prael 3. § 9. may be noticed It may be sayeth he that some cases may be given in which an oath which seemeth contrary to some law of a community or calling though it ought not to have been taken yet being taken may oblige as for example in a law whereunto a penalty is annexed disjunctively in this case he thinketh the oath should be keeped the law should not be obeyed but the penalty should be payed this is enough for those who stand for the Cov. 5. If oaths made against the wholsome lawes of the common wealth binde not oaths made against the â—…unwholsome lawes of the common wealth will binde in that case without all doubt people are bound to stand to their oath resolve upon suffering before they yeeld obedience And whether any law made about prelacy be wholsome or unwholsome is sufficiently determined in the premisses by the grounds upon which the legislators did goe when they reseinded all acts made in favours of prelats their power 6. This oath even as to the 2. Article which â—…is most controverted was not against but conforme unto the wholesome lawes of the land for befor that the league cov was sworne there were standing lawes against prelacy acts ratified approved with all formalities published with all usuall solemnities according to the King 's own command warrand therefore this case doth not come home to the case in hand But he sayeth it is not materiall whether the lawes be made before or after the oath And that is a very strange thing for a law not yet made is no law an oatâ—… taken in a particular about which there is no law yet made can not be an oath against a wholesome law of the land And to ' say that a law made afterward may loose the obligation of an oath is a very ready way for opening the door to all perjury to cast all oaths loose for when once a man hath sworne to his own hurt would gladly be rid of his oath he hath no more to do but acquant his superiour he will make a law for the contrary so he is at liberty But will such sigleaves cover the nakednesse of perjurie Or will such shifts satisfy in the day of reckoning Dreame of those things who will God will not be mocked Doct. Sanders a better casuist then he ubi supra Prael 3. § 18. giveth a better resolution saying if after the oath the statute should be abrogated or antiquated the oath as to that statute ceaseth so that he is not bound by the oath to observe that law any more â—…lesse N. B. the very thing contained in the oath be sworne to expresly in that case though the statute be removed the obligation of the oath standeth fast And that is enough for the Covenanters 7. Though it were granted which will not be that inferiours could not take an oath in those matters that fall under the power of legislators to enact lawes about or if they did sweare were not obliged to performe what they swore yet if legislators themselves sweare that such a thing suppon it be but indifferent shall never be enacted in a law will not this oath binde those legislators What will this advocat invente in this case as an open door at which both King Parl may escape for both King Parl. in their kingly parliamentary capacity have abjured prelacy 8. Why may not inferiours sweare when they finde any law grievous burdensome to endeavour according to their place power to have such a law or Act altered why may not such an oath oblige This is not an oath properly against a law because here the dominion of superiours over inferiours is sufficiently reserved this cannot be condemned 9. He mistaketh that case of casuists quando res non permanet in eodem statu When he applyeth it to the purpose in hand for prelacy is the same now which it was when first abjured there is no conveniency or law fulnesse seen in it now which was not seen before Yea on the contrary it appeareth worse then ever So that if he would stand to that rule quando res non permanet in eodem statu when the state of the matter is changed Though they had sworn to maintaine prelacy as now they have abjured it their oath could not binde them now to owne it Because it appeareth now so deforme abhominable a monster a cockatrice seeking the ruine destruction of all which cometh with in its reach 10. what doth this author think of the oath made to the Gibeonites Was there not a change of the Estate of affaires there when within three dayes they were discovered to be lyars that they were not a people that dwelt a far off but such as did dwell among them yet the oath must stand valid firme Yea was there not an expresse prohibition to make any league with these Canaanits Exod. 23 32 33. 34 10. Deut. 7 2. 20 16. was not this a wholsome law And yet the oath must be keeped this law being a particular command so far only to binde the conscience as it might be obeyed without any breach of the morall law as in Rachab's case it is evident as sayeth Mr Iackson in his annotations on Ios. 9 18. How will this advocat reply to these things If he stand to his principles he must condemne Iosua for keeping that oath Moreover was not the oath of Zedekiah against the fundamentall lawes of the land seing it was tendered to him that the Kingdom might
Covenant And presbyterian Government was no way secured it not being once named but wrapped up in generall under the reformation in doctrine worship discipline Government unto which independents separatists might assent purposeing to preserve the same against the common enemy yea even such as entered into the Covenant could not agree in its sense as may be seen in the Parliament of England's baffling the Scottish Commissioner's declaration Anno 1647. other papers Ans. 1. To say that the Covenant was purposely framed in generall termes that severall parties might be fast united against prelacy is a base slanderous imputation But suteth him well who pleadeth for such a cause If the Covenant for the most part be thus conceived in generall ambiguous termes how cometh it to passe that he produceth not instances thereof no not so much as one Was it not as cleare as the sun shineth at noon day that the reformed government of the Church of Scotland at that time was presbyteriall And did not himself say a little before that at that time there was no such officers in the Church of Scotl. as are mentioned in the second article of the league Covenant And whereas he sayeth that severall sects did lurk under the lap thereof doth â—…he think this a cogent argument to prove it's ambiguity What sect is it which doth not plead scripture Shall scripture therefore be accounted ambiguous 〈◊〉 No not at all Let men of corrupt mindes principles wrest words in the Covenant as they please the Covenant to any who shall reade it is plaine clear enough he who will wink may wander at noon day let men imagine put what glosses they will on scripture It is plaine hath but one sense But what will all this make to the businesse Will the obligation of a Covenant in which some men think there lyeth some ambiguities be loosed upon that account This must be proved ere it be received off his hand as a truth neither he nor any of his party hath hit hertill attempted any such thing Lastly is there any ambiguity in the second article Yet sayeth he were it not better to lay aside when now it is disclamed by Kiâ—…g Parliament all persons of trust in the land a human for me which in respect of the composure of it is apt to be hath been is like to be a seminary of variety of parties worse evills then prelacy is imagined to be When he hath made it to appear that this composure is apt of its own nature to be such a seminary of worse evills then prelacy his advice may be taken to consideration but till then which will be ad Calendas gracas he must excuse the Covenanters for neither King nor Parliament though they had the pope with them can give a dispensation in a matter of an oath And King Parliament with all the persones of trust will have enough to do to hold the broad roll the curse off themselves their houses their posterity to keep themselves out of his hands Who will be a swift witnesse against false swearers though they undertake not to protect others from the wrath vengeance of God The last particular which he exaggerateth is the limited or conditionall preservation of the King's Maj. person authority viz. in the preservation defence of the true religion c. He enquireth whether this was right or not And if difference in religion loose a people from their duty to the King To which a short reply will suffice 1. Though it were granted that there were some thing wrong here this will not ground the non-obligation of the Covenant in other particulars what hath he gained then 2. What ever wrong may be in wording this article thus The blame is not be laid upon the first authors of this league Covenant For in the nationall Covenant which was subscribed at first by King Iames his houshold Anno 1580. And in obedience to an act of Councell together with an Act of the Generall Assembly by persons of all rankes Anno 1581. And againe subscribed by all sorts of persons Anno 1590. 1591. The Covenanters duety towards the King is so qualified in these words We protest promise with our hearts under the same oath hand write paines that we shall defend his person authority with our gear bodyes lives in the defence of Christ's evangell liberties of our contrey ministration of justice punishment of iniquity against all enemies within thâ—… realme or without So that if he annull the leagué Covenant upon this account he must much more annull the nationall Covenant whereof King Iames was the author For in that there is more addâ—…d to the qualification of their duty to the King viz. his minisiration of justice and punishment of juiquity So then this clause in the league being consonant unto that in the nationall Covenant needeth not be so much quarrelled at 3. It is like he is displeased with any such qualification but his reason is not very forceable viz. because it would insinuat that they were no otherwayes bound to defend him for it will only insinuat that the Covenanters are to preferre that which is of greater moment unto that which is of lesser concernment that they are to preferre the end unto the mean leading to the end That is when the King is in direct opposition unto the cause work of God it becometh them to preferre the interest of Christ before man's not to help the mighty against the Lord but the Lord against the mighty And when defending promoveing or any way advanceing the authority of the King shall directly tend to the ruine of the interest of Christ religion no Christian is bound to concurre And this was granted even by the Parliament Anno 1648. So that the question betwixt the Parliament the Church at that time was not whether religion the interests of Christ should be preferred to the interest of the King or not But whether the Engadgement which was then carryed on was not a preferring of Man's interests to Christ's for as to the thesâ—…s or major proposition it was granted by the Parliament viz. That Christ's interest should be sought before man's the King's interests only in a subordination to Christ's Thus they did professe openly their owneing of the Covenant their resolution to prosecute the ends of the covenant to seek to secure establish the King's interests only in subordination to the interests of Christ for in their letter to the presbyteries Printed in their records May. 11. They shew that they were resolved to proceed for the preservation defence of religion before all other worldly interests whatsoever to carry on sincerely really constantly the Covenant all the ends of it And againe in their answer to the supplications from Synods presbyteries Iun. 10. insert likewise in their
jurisdiction being exercised by Bishops or superintendenss or commissioners And these Though the assembly quarrelled them were reall Bishops And would the King by his oath abjure that Church Government which was not rejected by the Church till Iuly 12. 1580. And in the yeer 1581. Though the King Councell had presented the confession to the Assembly to be subscribed by them by the people in their parisâ—…es yet that very same yeer within six moneths thereafter there is an act of councell confirming expressly the agreement at Leth 1571. And this act of Councell the King did openly avow in the businesse of Montgomery Now it is not probable that the King Councell if they intended to abjure episcopacy by the confession would within six moneshs confirme that agreement at Leth. Ans. 1. It hath been shown but just now that severall yeers before the yeer 1580 The Generall assemblies of that Church were declareing themselves against prelats their power were acting so far as lay in their power and that was much considering what opposition they did meet with for presbyterian government 2. It is certaine that Church Government by prelats was never approved by any of the generall assemblies in those dayes 3. Though before the yeer 1580. The Assembly did not formally passe an act against Episcopacy Yet was it not equivalent when Anno 1577. 1578. The second book of discipline which overturneth the Government of the Church by Bishops was approved 4. This same act of the Generall Assembly at Dundee was before the subscribeing of the Covenant For it was in Iuly the Command for subscribeing of the Covenant came not forth till the 2 March thereafter that 2d of march was said to be Anno 1580. as well as Iuly before because at that time the denomination of the new yeer did not begin in Scotland untill the 25 of March so it is his mistake to think that the Covenant was enjoyned to be subscribed six moneths before the Act at Dundee 5. Whereas he sayes that An. 1580. there was no such thing in Scotland as government by presbyteries if he meane that that government was not setled thorow the whole Kingdom he speaks truth but nothing to the purpose but if he meane that in no part of the countrey there was any such government he is mistaken for at the assembly Anno 1578. there was mention made of presbyteries for amongst the articles which this assembly drew up to be subscribed by those prelats whom they had caused cite before them this was one viz the 6. that they should not Empire over elderships but be subject to them the 7. was that they should not usurpe the power of presbyteries So that there were presbyteries in the land at that time Yea the narrative of the 131. Act parl 8. King Jam. 6. Anno 1584. maketh mention of sindry formes of judgments jurisdictions as well in spirituall aâ—… temporall causes entered in practice and custome and that dureing 24. yeers by past those formes of judgments jurisdictions in spirituall causes were assemblies Synodall presbyteriall parochiall all which were discharged by that Act And hence it is clear that there were such judicatories in the land before the yeer 1580. Moreover at the Assembly 1579. there was a motion made about a generall order to be taken for erecting of presbyteries in places where publick exercise was used untill the policy of the Church were established by law it was answered that the exercise may be judged to be a presbytery So that the Kingdom at that time was not without presbyteries Yea their frequent nationall assemblies shew that the Church was governed presbyterially 6. This is certane That there was some government of the Church sworne to in that Covenant for there are these word in it That we joyne ourselves to this reformed kirk in doctrine faith religion and discipline promiseing and swearing by the great name of God that we shall continue in the doctrine and discipline of thiâ—… Kirk and defend the same according to our vocation and power all the dayes of ourlife Now all the difficulty is to know what this government was And it is certane That either it was the government by presbyteries or the government by prelats It could not be the government by prelats 1. because that was not the government discipline of the Kirk but the government discipline against which the Church had been striveing with all heâ—… might 2. It is not imaginable that the Ministery of the land would swear to defend the government of the Church by prelats all the dayes of their lives when they were usâ—…ing all meanes to have the Church free of that yoke 3. When the confession of faith was presented unto the gen assembly to be subscribed by them An. 1581. would they have assâ—…nted unto the same if thereby they had been bound to maintaine prelacy seing at their very last meeting they had made such an expresse Act against prelats 4. When the Laird of Caprinton his Maj. commissioner did presente unto the generall Assembly the confession of faith or nationall Covenant he presented withall from his Maj. a plot of the severall presbyteries to be erected in the Kingdome mentioning the presbyteriall meeting places designeing the severall parishes which should belong to such such presbyteries As also a letter from his Maj. to the noblemen gentlemen of the countrey for the erection of presbyteries consisting of Ministers elders for dissolution of prelacies may not any hence argue after the author's manner say is it any way probable that the King Councell if they intended to establish prelacy by the confession of faith would in that self same day which is a shorter timâ—… then halfe a yeer wherein â—…he confâ—…ssion was presented as subscribed by the King his houshold to be subscribed by the assemby presente such a plot for presbyteries thorow the whole Kingdom c Let this advocat answere this if he can It must then be an undoubted truth That the government sworne to in that nationall Covâ—…nant was presbyterian government 7. And whereas he sayeth the King within Six moneths thereafter did stand to the agreement at Leth avowed it in the businesse concerning Montgomery it will not say much if it be considered how at that time Aubignee grew great at couâ—…t as was shown above Sect 1. Obtained the superiority of Glasgow made a paction with Montgomery And when the Church judicatures were examineing the carriage of this Montgomery first last he stirred up the King against them what will all this say But that Kings had need of faithfull constant counsellours about them lest they be made to undoe their owne works in a short time There was many a change at court as contrary parties gote up so was the King sweyed He addeth That neither did tâ—…e assembly or any Minister speak of that deed of the
called God the King lately reprinted published by his Maj. royall proclaâ—…tion for the instruction of all his subjects in their duty alleagiance for thus is that oath worded I A. B. Do truely sincerely acknowledge professe tostifie declare in my conscience before God the world that our Soveraigne Lord King Iames is lawfull and â—…ightfull King of this realme of all other his Maj. dominions countreyes that the pope neither of himself nor by any authority by the Church see of Rome or by any other meanes with any other hath any power or authority to depose the King or to dispose of any of his Maj. dominions or Kingdomes or to authorize any forraigne prince to invade or annoy him or his countreyes or to discharge any of his subjects of their alleagiance obedience to his Maj. or to give license or leave to any of them to bear armes raise tumults or to offer any violence or hurt to his Maj. royall person state or government or to any of his Maj. subjects within his Maj. dominions Also I do swear from my heart that notwithstanding any declaration or sentence of excommunication or deprivation made or granted or to be made or granted by the pope or his successours or by any authority derived or pretended to be derived from him or his see against the said King his 〈◊〉 or successours or any absolution of the saids subjects from their obedience I will beâ—… faith true alleagiance to his Maj. his aires successours him them will defend to the uttermost of my power against all conspiracies attempts whatsoever which shall be made against his or their persones their crowne dignity by â—…easone or colour of any such sentence declaration or otherwise will do my best endeavour to disclose make known unto his Maj. his aires successours all treasons or treitours or conspiracies which I shall know or hear of to be against him or any of them And I do furder swear that I do from my heart abhoâ—…e detest abjure as impious hereticall this damnable doctrine position That princes which be excommunicated or deprived by the pope may be deposed or murdered by their subjects or any other whatsomever And I do beleeve in conscience am resolved That neither the Pope nor any person what somever hath power to absolve me of this oath or any part thereof which I acknowledge by good lawfull authority to be lawfully Ministered unto me And do reâ—…unce all pardons dispensations to the contray And all these things I do planely sincerely acknowledge swear according to these expresse words by me spoken according to the plaine common sense understanding of the same words without any equivocation or mentall evasion or secret reservation whatsoever And I do make this recognition acknowledgment heartily willingly truely upon the true faith of a Christian. So help me God This is the oath of alleagiance how far it differeth from the former which was lately tendered is easily discerned These few words in the short oath only supreme governour in this Kingdome over all persones in all causes containe the main difference betwixt the two the main grounds of scruple for they hold forth two things The King's supremacy in matters civill his supremacy in matters ecclesiasticke It is true Ministers ought both to be to carry duti fully as becometh subjects to refuise nothing lawfull which is required of subjects but oathes being matters about which much tendernesse carefulnesse ought to be used it becometh Ministers to look well to this not to engadge in any oath rashly Advisement deliberation is most requisite here especially in a time when snares abound when there is good ground to suppose that the oath is tendered of purpose to be a snare to the conscience The oath as to it is substance or maine thing intended which lyeth wrapped up in those few words last cited is not as is obvious to any so clear as oaths ought to be yea the imposers themselves will not deny this but are forced to acknowledge that as it is worded in respect of that part thereof which is onely scrupled at which containeth the substance maine thing intended it is at best ambiguous generall for this cause if there were no more every Christian ought to forbear to swear the same And that because every oath must be sworne in truth in judgment in righteousnesse Ier. 4 2. but an unclear ambiguous oath cannot be sworne in truth because it hath no truth in it for what is ambiguous is not true as doctor Sanderson sayeth de jur promis oblig prael 6. § 10. a preposition of an ambiguous indefinite sense before the matter be distinguished is not a true proposition yea nor a proposition at all for a proposition as its definition cleareth should signify either a truth or a falshood without any ambiguity And therefore this proposition that the King is onely supreme governous over all persones in all causes being ambiguous till it be clared by some distinctions cannot be sworne in truth because the truth thereof cannot be known Nor can it be sworne in righteousnesse because such as swear it cannot be sure but that in taking that oath they may be wronging others wronging Parliaments which is worse wronging the Lord Iesus Christ who is King head of his Church Nor can it be sworne in judgment because its meaning cannot be known But now seing the oath in respect of its substantiall part as it is now worded is ambiguous unclear reason would require that the tenderers thereof should explaine the meaning thereof make it as clear as may be But when this is refuised what can such do who are pressed to take that oath but refuise the same partly because of its ambiguity partly because by the sense which by their other Acts Actings they who tender it do put upon it it appeareth to to be most unlawful all divines casuists do grant that an oath must be taken in his sense meaning in whose favours for whose sake faifty it is conceived who tendereth it And therefore it is not only lawfull but necessary to enquire what sense the Acts Actings of the Parliament do put upon it And as to the civill part of the oath which here is to be examined no other explication needeth to be enquired after then what they give forth in their Acts on record all which to cite here at length would be tedious The citeing of the acknowledgement of his Maj. prorogative which is a part of the 11 Act Anno 1661. where the substance of many preceeding Acts is summed up will be a sufficient evidence and here it is declared That it is an inherent privilege of the crown an undowbted part of the royall prerogative of the Kings of