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 That the Act of Annexation be repealed and 4.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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
admonish one another Rom. 15 13. Presse or urge a thing upon the minde of another so instruct them aright as children are instructed this sayeth they must often be together for this end 9. They must teach and admonish one another in psalms and hymnes and spirituall songs Col 3 16. can this be done unlesse they assemble together 7. They must be kinde or profitable one to another Ephes. 4. last this sayeth they must not be strangers to other 8. They must serve one another in love Gal. 5. 13. that is they should spend themselves for one another for their spirituall advantage that in love should they not then assemble together 9. They must receive one another Rom. 15 7. that is receive with affection imbrace one another And must they then scarre at the company of one another And not rather receive other into their intimate fellowship 10. They must be subject one to another Ephes. 5 21. 1 Pet. 5 5. every one ready to give to take reproofs to from another to do service to other as called thereto this sayeth they must not live as strangers to other 11. They must confesse their sinnes to one another and pray for another Iam. 5 16. 12. They must ministere their gifts to one another 1 Pet. 4 v. 10. Obj. It will be objected that this is sedition opposeing of established lawes made for the good of the common wealth against such conventicles therefore such controvâ—…ers cannot be justified Ans. It is not for fear of any disturbance to the peace of the common wealth that such Acts are made for a few women who in all likelihood are able to do little that way may not meet together 2. The heathens did pretend this when they made lawes against the meetings of the primitive Christians And therefore their meetings were called Factions And conventicles And yet the primitive Christians did not forsake the assembling of themselves together notwithstanding of all these edicts albeit that severall times they were put to suffer upon that account seâ—… this fully made out by the learned Mr Stilling fleet in his Origines sacrâ—… Lib. 2 cap. 9. Pag. 316. c. And who then will condemne these Zealous Christians now for so doing SECTION XIX The unlawfulnesse of compeering before the high Commission Court demonstrated TO the end that the forementioned persecution of the saints servants of God might be the better carryed on There is a high commission court erected consisting of the two arch prelats some other prelats of some noble men some Magistrats of brughs some souldiers others And this number or any five of them a prelate being alwayes one of the five have power granted to them from the King who appoynteth them by vertue of his prerogative royall supremacy over all persons in all causes ecclesiastiek as was shown above Sect. 12. To suspend deprive excommunicate as also to punish by fineing consineing committing incarcerating all keepers of conventicles all Ministers who contrare to the lawes acts of Parliament councell remaine or introduce themselves upon the exercise of the function of the Ministery in those parishes bounds inhibited by those acts all preachers who come from England Irland without sufficient testimonialls or leave of the Bishops of their dioceses all such persons who keep meetings fasts at the administration of the sacrament of the Lord's supper which are not approven by authority All who speak preach write or printe to the scandall reproach detriment of the Estate or government of the Church Kingdom as it is now established All who contemne molest injure ministers who are orderly setled All who do not ordinarily attend divine worship administration of the word sacraments performed in their respective parishes by ministers legally authorized for taking the cure of these parishes All such who without any lawfull calling as bussy bodies goe about houses places for corrupting disaffecting people from their alleagiance respect obedience to the lawes And generally without any prejudice to the particulars specified all who expresse their dissaâ—…sfaction to his Maj. authority by contraveening the acts of Parliament Councell in relation to Church affaires etc. This court appeareth terrible unto the godly for the persecution of whom of none else no not the most flagitious prophane it is erected seemeth to be as a new court of inquisition But that which is more lamentable is this That there lyeth hid here a dreadfull snare for tender consciences For it is such a court as tender hearted Christians cannot but scruple to acknowledge or compeer before without a declinature the giving in of which would be accounted laese Majesty therefore in such a case such as resolved to keep a good conscience in this day of tryall defection saw a necessity of withdrawing of not compeering at their summonds even though they might have pleaded them selves innocent of any crime laid to their charge Now if any would desire to know the reasons why such a court cannot in conscience be owned acknowledged or submitted unto as a lawfull judicature let him consider these particulars lay them together he shall see clear reason for either declineing or withdrawing 1. This is a judicature meddling with censures purely ecclesiastick such as suspension deposition of Ministers excommunication both of Ministers people therefore must be acknowledged to be a Church judicature Now there is no warrand for any such Church judicature in all the new testament nor is there any precedent of the like to be found in the Gospell Christians must acknowledge no Church judicature but what hath a speciall warrand from Christ's law testament 2. This is a Church judicature having its rise power commission only from the King the King granteth this power to this Commission authorizeth this court by vertue of his royall prerogative over all persons and in all causes as well ecclesiasticke as civil So that none can acknowledge this court but withall they must acknowledge the Kings prerogative royall supremacy in all causes over all persons particularly they must acknowledge that pure proper church power doth properly reside in the person of the supreme Magistrat that he hath proper power to suspend depose ministers also to excommunicate so hath power to Commiâ—…sionat any of his subjects he thinketh good for that effect But what presbyterian yea what sound protestant who is not devoted to Erasius's Antichristian notions will or can acknowledge this 3. In this judicature civil persons as such viz. the Chancellour Thesaâ—…rer duk Hammilton Marquis of Montrose Earles Lords others who are no Church officers have power in Church matters viz to suspend depose excommunicate But this is against all the Discipline lawes of Christ's house for Christ will have the affaires of his house governed by
officers of his owne appoyntment Who then can acknowledge such a court not with all consent unto this intolerable incroachment upon the privileges of Christ his crowne justling of our Lord out of his rights is not this the fountaine of all disorder confusion tending in end to the utter overthrow of all Church discipline to to the totall overturning of the Established order of Christ's house can any acknowledge such a court seing such sad consequences will follow thereupon 4. In this judicature ecclesiasticke persons have power of civill matters civill punishments for the court hath power to fine coâ—…fine committ and incâ—…rcerat for contraveening the Acts of Parliament But that Church officers should medle with civill matters is diametrically opposite unto Christ's word Mat. 20 25. Luk. 22 25. where he forbiddeth all the exercise of any such power as was exercised by Kings and civill powers on earth saying the princes of the gentiles exercise dominion and they that are great exercise authority but it shall not be so among you so that the very exercise of the power is prohibited if any should think that he meaneth only the â—…anny abuse of the power because he useth the compound words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luk doth sufficiently take away this objection when he useth the simple words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the scope of the place cleareth it also for the question unto which Christ returneth this answere is concerning primacy power and not concerning the abuse of the power So then whoever do acknowledge this court do approve in so far of this contradiction to Christ's command 5. The acknowging of this court would be upon the matter a justifying of all the Acts of persecution exercised against the worthles of old for avouching the Kingly office power of Christ declineing the civill courts in Church matters so a condemning of the Zeal of those worthies who hazarded life all which was dear to them in giving testimony against the incroachments made upon the crown and privileges of Christ as King But certanely a Christian tender of the glory of God of his cause which hath been is hated persecuted by his enemies would scarre at this 6. Particularly the acknowleding of this court would be a condemning of worthy precious Mr Rutherfoord Mr Dickson who declined the High commission and refused to passe from their declinature on any termes wherein they were singularly eminently owned of God approved by his testimony to their spirits And what tender Christian could do this 7. The acknowledging of this court is a clear breach of the first article of the league covenant in severall particulars as 1. the acknowledging of this court is an overturning of all the principles of Presbytâ—…rian Government so contrary to that oath whereby every one is sincerely really and constantly through the grace of God to endeavoure the preservation of the reformed religion of the Church of Scotland in doctrine worshipe discipline and government And that because 1. It is contrary to the principles of presbyterian Government to have Church power derived in whole or in part from any prince or potent at upon earth but only from Iesus Christ the sole King head of his Church 2. It is contrary to the principles of presbyterian government to have Church censures dispensed by any except Church officers 3. It is contrary to the principles of presbyterian government to have Church officers medling with civill affairs 4. It it contrary to the principles of presbyterian government to have any other Church judicatories then such as are allowed by the Gospell 5. It is contrary to the principles of presbyterian government to have Church power civill power confounded in-distinct 2. The acknowledging of this judicature would be a condemning of the work of reformation in part for this is one piece of the doctrine of the Church of Scotland one piece of the reformation viz. That Church officers should not meddle with civill power or places this was much looked to at the begining of the late work of reformation condemned both by Church and state Anno 1638 1639 1640. And therefore tender Christians could not do this sinne against God 8. The acknowledging of this judicature is a breach of the second article of the same league Covenant Upon this account that it is an acknowledging of the power of prelats in the highest degree of that power which ever they had in Scotland And next upon this account that it is an approving of that which is contrary to sound doctrine the power of godlinesse so a partaking of other mens sinnes a runing the hazard of receiving of their plagues expresly contrary to that article 9. As to the civill part of this court for it is a monster of judicatories viz. two distinct bodies under one head The acknowledging of it would be a crossing of the third article of the league Covenant upon a two fold account 1. In that it is a wronging of the rights privileges of Parliaments â—…o owne a judicature not approved established by any Act of Parliament old or late 2. In that it is a wronging of the liberties of the Kingdome to consent unto an arbitrary power assumed by the prince over them contrary to the fundamentall lawes of the land in setting up what judicatories he pleaseth without consent of Parliament without whose speciall warrant authority the meanest fixed court cannot be erected 10. It is a court unamimously condemned by the Church of Scotland in their assembly 1638. Act Sâ—…ss 14. upon very pregnant considerable grounds for they found that it had been erecâ—…d without the consent or procurement of the Kâ—…rk or consenâ—… the â—…states of Parliament That it did subvert the jurisdiction and ordinary judicatories assemblies of the Kirk sessions presbyteries provinciall and nationall assemblies That it was not regulated by lawes civill or ecclesiasticall but at the descretion and arbitrement of the câ—…mmissioners That it gave to ecclesiasticall persons the power of both tâ—… swords and to persons merely civill the power of the keyes and Kirk censures and therefore did prohibite the use and practice of it as being a court unlawfull in it self and prejudiciall to the liberties of Christ's Kirk and Kingdome and the King's honour in maintaining the Established lawes and judicatories of the Kirk Now how could any true member officer of the Church of Scotland acknowledge this judicature so unanimously dis-allowed condemned by that Church 11. The acknowledging of this court would be a clear breach of the nationall covenant as sworne subscribed Annâ—… 1638 1639. for in that covenant the land was sworne to resist all corruptions according to their vocation to the uttermost of that power which God had put into their hands all the
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
them concerning the day which was the second not the fifth that so such as would meet the second day being so few might easily be moved to dissolve before the rest came who would intend onely to keep the fifth day But the honest party perceiving how their liberties were now in danger did resolve to meet at Aberdeen accordingly there cometh from parts neerby some against the second of July unto whom Lawreston his Maj. Commissioner presented a letter from the Councell desired an answer They replyed that they behooved first to constitute themselves after he had withdrawn they choosed a moderator Clerk then read the letter wherein there were two things desired first that they would dissolve the meeting next that they would appoint no other day untill his Maj. were advertised As to the first they answered that they were ready to dissolve the meeting there being so few present To the next they answered that if Lawreston as his Maj. Commissioner would name a day they would aggree thereto if not they behooved to preserve their liberty so seeing Lawreston refused they appointed the next Assembly to be at Aberdeen the last Tuysday of Sept. advertised Presbiteries therof When Lawreston seeth this he protesteth against them as no lawfull Generall Assembly giveth his reasons which were answered they protest to the contrary thereupon by a messenger of armes he chargeth them to depairt under the paine of treason because as he alledged he had discharged them the night before by open proclamation at the mercat Crosse to conveen under the paine of treason he causeth denounce them rebells Whereupon in Septr Mr Welsh Mr Forbes were imprisoned by the Councill in Blackenesse in Octr. others were incarcerat In the mean time there is a Declaration dated at Hampton Court Septr 26. indicting an Assembly at Dundy the last Tuysday of July next Now the imprisoned ministers petitioned that the triall of that Generall Assembly might be referred to the indicted assembly at Dundee but are not heard And therefore when they are sisted before the Councill Octr 24. seeing that certainly the Assembly would be condemned they give in this Declinature following please your Lo The approbation or disallowance of a Generall assembly hath been should be a matter spirituall alwayes cognosced judged by the Church as Judges Competent within this Realme seing we are called before your Lo to hear see it found declared that we have contemptuously seditiously conveened assembled our selves in a Generall assembly at Aberdeen the first Tuysday of July last the said assembly to be declared unlawfull as an more length is contained in the summonds executed against us We in consideration of the premisses other reasons to be given in by us have just cause to decline your Lo. judgement as no wayes competent in the Cause above specified by these presents we simpliciter decline the same seing we are most willing to submit our selves unto the triall of a Ge nerall Assembly which is onely the Judge competent When the King heareth of this Declinature he lent down directions to the Councell to proceed against them according to the lawes sent down the Earle of Dumbar for that effect Whereupon six of them viz Mrs Iohn Forbes Iohn Welch Andrew Duncan Iohn Sharp Robert Dury Alexander Strachan are endited of high treason upon the act of Parliament 1584. sisted before an Assise at Lithgow and what by illegall procedures threatenings with fair promises used by the Earle of Dumber unto the Assisers some of whom were his own near kinssolk particularly by assurances that the king would not take their life they are declared guiltie of treason by nine of the fifteen Assisers so sent back to their prisons Then doth the king send for Mrs Andro Melvin Iames Melvin Iames Balfour William Watson William Scot Iohn Carmichel Adam Colt detaineth them long at London seeking to intangle them with questions at length Mr Andro Melvin is imprisoned in the Tower till the Duke of Bulloigne three years thereafter procureth liberty to him to go with him Mr Iames Melvin dieth at Berwick the rest are confined to severall places of the countrey While these ministers are at London the king signifieth his minde that the six condemned ministers should be banished out of his Dominions the other eight should be consined as followeth Viz Mr Farme in Bute Mr Monro in Kâ—…ntire Mr Youngson in Arran Mr Irvine in Orkney Mr VVilliam Forbes in Yetland Mr Gray in Caitnesse Mr English in Southerland Mr Rosse in Lewes In this same year Anno 1606. there is a parliament conveened in July which acknowledgeth his Maj. soveraigne authority princely power royall prerogative priviledge of the Crowne over all Estates persons causes promiseth to maintaine the same with their lives lands goods restoreth the bishops to their ancient accustomed honour dignities Prerogatives Previleges livings lands teinds rents thirds estates rescindeth the act of annexation Unto this Parliament the Commissioners from Synods presbiteries gave in a protestation desiring them to keep within their due bounds reserve unto the Lord that glory which he will communicate neither to man nor angel viz to prescribe from his holy mountaine a lively patterne according to which his own tabernacle should be framed that they would not bring into the kirke of God the Ordinance of man which hath been found the ground of much evill of that Antichristian Hierarchie That they would not build Iericho againe contrare to their oath subscription nor suffer that Estate of Bishops to arise which they offered to prove to be against the word of God the ancient Fathers Canons of the Church the moderne most learned godly Divines the Doctrine Constitution of the Church of Scotland the lawes of the Realme the well honour of the kings Maj. the peace quyetness of the realme the well of all every one of the subjects and then In the name of the Church in generall of their presbyteries in their own name of all other pastors for discharging of their duety consciences they did protest against bishopry bishops against the Erection Confirmation or Ratification thereof requireing the famine to be Registrated This protestation was subscribed by many ministers among others by Mr Adam Banatine Mr Iohn Abernethy Mr VVilliam Couper who afterward became bishops themselves When prelats are thus advanced to their civill dignities there are wayes essayed for advancing them in their spirituall power and this same year there is an assembly indicted at Lithgow the 10 of December but onely some presbyteries in whom the king confided most were advertised hereof the businesse was carried so closely that the moderator of the last assembly knew nothing of it Here after some debate the overture propounded by his
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
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
informed wrote unto the Duke of Lennox marquis of Hamilton the Earle of Morton to know if his Maj. would accept of a supplication sent one unto them to be presented by them but the king would not look upon it at length he is moved to send the marquis of Hamilton down toward Scotland to labour by all means to setle peace But in the mean time there is a ship sent from London with Amunition unto the Castle of Edenburgh which because not usuall was taken notic of the Covenanters fearing the worst resolved to watch the Castle that none of it should be taken in When Hamilton cometh down the Covenanters petition for a free Generall Assembly a lawfull Parliament He replyeth that he was not able to grant either unlesse they would render back their subscribed Covenant but this they could not do without open perjury So that he resolveth to returne but first July 4 he published a Declaration against which contrary to their resolution for they were made to beleeve it was some other thing then indeed it was they drew up a Protestation hearing that the Councell had approved of the said proclamation they prepare a supplication but the Councell did not suffer the Act to be recorded but did tear it in Pieces thereafter Hamilton the most part of the Councell declared solemnely that the act of the Councell was no approbation of the same but a warrant to the Clerk to cause publish it When the Marquis of Hamilton was going back to London againe he promiseth to procure a warrant from his Maj. for a Generall assembly before the 22 of Septr otherways they should have free liberty to appoint one themselves And when according to his promise he returneth againe he bringeth a proclamation with him tacitely condemning all the proceedings of the Covenanters marring the freedome of an Assembly and therefore the Covenanters were constrained to make use of a Protestation against it Sept 22. On the same day also did the Councell publish his Maj. Indictment of an Assembly to be holden at Glasgow Nov. 21. of a Parliament to be holden at Edenburgh the 15 of May thereafter Anno 1639. As also a new engine is used for disappointing the Covenanters in their explicatory addition viz. The Councell at the Kings command subscribe the Nationall Covenant the bond for his Maj. preservation appoint Commissioners to see it done through the Kingdome but withall there is a clause added viz. We subscribe the Confession of faith of according to the date tenour Anno 1580. 1590. as it was then professed within this Kingdome supposing but by a grosse mistake that at that time Prelacy Ceremonies were then professed But the Prelats fearing this would not abide the triall desired the Councell to signe a writing obligeing themselves to defend Episcopacy Sâ—…o shew that Episcopacy is not abjured by the Covenant bâ—… 〈◊〉 deâ—…e was not granted At the day appointed the Assembly at Glasgow is opened up notwithstanding of some indirect meanes used by the Prelats to hinder it The Prelats being summoned compeer not but decline the Judicatory Within some dayes the Marquis of Hamilton being the Kings Commissioner offers to dissolve the Assembly chargeth them to depart so removeth himself but though this was very astonishing yet they did resolve to hold the Court of Christ in so doing 〈◊〉 obey God â—…ather then man then did take into consideration the grounds of the Declinature which may be seen atlength in printed papers in Mr Spangs Historia Motuâ—… c. Upon the 29 of Nov. his Maj. Commissioner published a Proclamation commanding their dissolution against which there is a Protestation drawn up answering what was allaidged in the Proclamation The assembly do proceed after some search finde that all these Meetings of ministers which had brought in these Innovations that had troubled the Church so much were no lawfull Generall Assemblies by sundry reasons confirmed by the Registers of the Assembly by the books of presbiteries by the Kings Maj. own letters by the testimony of diverse old Reverend ministers verifying the same iâ—… the face of the Assembly and so declared that these meetings at Lithgow 1606 1608 at Glasgow 1610 at Aberdeen 1616 at St Andrews 1617 at Perth 1608. were from the beginning unfree unlawfull null Assemblies The reasons are more fully to be seen in the printed Records of the Assembly Likewise they condemne the book of Commâ—…n prayer because deâ—…ysed brought in by the pretended Pâ—…ts without direction from the Church and pressâ—…d on Ministers without warrant from the Church because 〈◊〉 contained a Popish frame forme of divine service many Popish errours ceremonies the seeds of manifold grosse Superstition Idolatry so repugnant to the Doctrine Discipline order of the Church to the Confession of faith constitutions of Generall Assemblies acts of Parliament establishing the true Religion So do they condemne the book of Canons as devised by prelats without warrant direction from the Generall Assembly to establishâ—…â—…nicall power in their own persons over the worshipe of God mens consciences liberties goods to overthrow the whole Discipline governement of the Church by Geneâ—…ll provinciall Assemblies by preâ—…biteries Sessions 〈◊〉 contrary to the Confessâ—… of faith the established goâ—…nement the Book of Discipline the acts Constituâ—…ons of the Church So they condemne the Book of Consc â—…tion Ordination as being inâ—…ced without waâ—… civill or Ecclesiastick establiâ—…hing offâ—…es in Godâ—… house without warrant of hiâ—… word as 〈◊〉 to the Discipline Constitutions of the Church as impeding the entry of fit â—…orthy men to the ministry the discharge of their duety â—…er their entry They condemne the High Commâ—… as â—…cted without the conseur of Church or State as subverting the ordinary Church Iudicatories as arbitraâ—…y not regulated â—…y lawes civil or Ecclesiastick as giving to Church men the power of both swords to persons meerly civill the power of the Keyes so as unlawfull in it self prejudiciall to the â—…ties of Christs Church Kingdome the Kings honour in â—…taining the established lawes Iudicatoâ—…ies of the Church â—…o do they shew declare that the five Articles or ceremoniesâ—…cluded â—…cluded at Perth of which mention was made before were â—…jured by the Nat. Covenant as may be seen at length in their 17. Act. As also they declare act 16. That Episcopacy â—…s abjured by the Confession of faith or Nationall Covenant Anno 1580. which shall be more fully cleared afterward So â—…ving examined discussed the severall processes given in aâ—…inst the pretended prelats They depose Excommunicaâ—… Mrs Spotâ—…swood of St Andrews Lindsay of Glasgow â—…dsay oâ—… â—…enburgh Sidserfe of Galloway Maxwell of Rosse 〈◊〉 of Brichen for breach of the Cautions aggreed on in the Assembly 1600. for receiving Consecration to
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
alone nor all of them together are the full and compleat ground but this That it is a meeting called together by the civill Magistrat assumeing to himself power to cast downe the established government of the Church the primitive governement to settle what kinde of government he thinketh fit as best complying with his own his subjects humors who accordingly hath razed to the fundation presbyterian government unto which both he all the lands were sworne and is setting up prelatical government against which he all the lands have sworne of which these three particulars mentioned are so many evidences And that they are so cannot be denyed for 1. Whatever truth be in this assertion That ecclesiasticke judicatories have a divine warrand for chooseing their own moderator This is clear undenyable that while presbyteriall governement was in its integrity vigour the assemblies of the Church nationall provinciall presbyteriall had this privilege to elect their own moderator when ever prelats began to rise get entrance in that Church this incroachment among other shee did suffer at their hands for they knew that Invasio perpetuae dictaturae would be via ad Imperium Constant moderators would usher the way for domineering prelats as was showne Sect. 1. And therefore this is a clear evidence of the change of the government from presbyteriall to prelaticall furder though that which Zepperus sayeth viz Presides ecclesiastici c. that is the moderators or presidents of the ancient councells were some time named by the emperour be true yet it will be a mere non sequitur to conclude thence as this author doth viz That it is lawfull for the Christian Magistrat upon whom the externall ordering of all the judicatories in his dominions depends to nominat out of a meeting of ministers conveened by him one of the number to order the actions of the meeting and by his authority to controle the unruly not only as being a concludeing of a generall from a particular but as being a putting into the conclusion what is not in the premisses a mixing of heterogeneous things together What he meaneth by this externall ordering of judicatories who can tell unlesse it be all that power which ordinarily is exerced by a moderator will he say that the Magistrat ought to choose all the moderators Hath the supreme Magistrat any more interest in those meetings or hath he so much as he hath in civill meetings doth he appoynt all the mouthes of these meetings But have not Church judicatories within themselves power for their own externall ordering who then ordered the Synod at Ierusalem Act. 15. To say the Magistrat was not then Christian therefore it did not belong unto him is enough to prove that it doth not belong to him as a Magistrat But there is enough said to this here which is but barely asserted by him without proof And. 2. As to the next what ever be asserted concerning that which Mr Baxter Mr Vines as he reporteth of them say viz. That for peace presbyters may suspend the exercise of there just authority and resolve to give to one person of their number a negative voice though many moe divines with greater reason think that seing God hath given them no power whereof they may denude themselves when they think fit suspend the exercise of at the node of any other It cannot be lawfull for them to give that negative voice unto any yet this is undenyable that there never was any such thing claimed by nor granted to any all the time that that Church enjoyed presbyterian government it is as undenyable that so soon as prelates gote up unto their chaires they challenged that negative voice to themselves as their due took it whether presbyters would or not so have the prelats done to day therefore this concession of these eminent men were it never so true as it is denyed by many is nothing to the poynt for by this one particular it is as clear as the noonday that the government is altered from presbyterian to Episcopal therefore though it be true that the personall fault of another cannot be a good ground for brethrens withdrawing from their duty yet when by their concurrence to consult alone when by God's law they have equall authority with any that sitteth there they shall consent unto that change of government it becometh sin not duty for now all presbyterian government is overturned they see prelats set up as before so that if they concurre they cannot avoide sin To say as he doth a little before pag. 8. that it might be permitted to them if they intrested for it to ease their consciences by signifying their scruples so be they would do it with that inossensive modesty humility and respect unto the supreme authority to the lawes of the land is to please the simple that beleeve every thing with a faire word for it behoved to be done with such in-offensive modesty humility as no body should either hear or know of it otherwise they might be sure it would be accounted disrespect unto the supreme authority to the lawes of the land they might expect presently to be attached processed Lastly as to the 3 particular whether the opinion of Mr Vines Mr Baxter Blondell if he speak truth in denying the divine right of ruleing elders be assented unto or rather the contrary opinion which is owned by so many Churches professours particularly by the Church of Scotland from the begining yet this is clear that that Church had still such officers so long as she was governed Communi consilio presbyteroruns by presbyteries no sooner did prelats usurpe the place but they shouldered these officers to the door and therefore this is another palpable evidence that the nature of these meetings is changed from presbyterian to Episcopall so that to concurre by meeting with the prelats at their dioecesian meetings must be an approving of prelacy this cannot be done without perjurie But he objecteth pag. 12. Thus Our worthy ancestours choosed rather to câ—…curie with such meetings then to desert them Ans The case then now differeth farr for then these judicatories were standing when the prelats were brought in upon them Ministers were then bound to keep possession of their rights so long as they could by meeting in the judicatories there being no restraint laid upon them by law from speaking their minde freely protesting as they saw occasion as is now when such actings are declared treasonable seditious they were in a capacity to do something for vindicating of Church privileges at least for exonering their owne consciences Yea for curbing in a great part the prelats power Whence it was that neither the Prelats nor the Estate did ever command Ministers to attend those meetings but rather wished with all their heart that they had forborne to come but
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
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
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
bloody emissaries Moreover he alloweth to privat persones liberty to deny subsidies and tribute to the prince when he imployeth it to the destruction of the common wealth and is not this a clear resistance a taking of the sword out of his hand But what shall a nation do that cannot get pay holden from a plundering army of enemies so cannot get them disbanded but take up armes force then to it This is but resistence the other is resistence Majus minus non variant speciem yea it is a question if it be lawfull to deny to the King any of his tribute though it be clear enough that it is lawfull for a nation to defend themselves against the King's unjust illegall commissions The same Doct. in conscience satified Sect. 5. confesseth that Salus Populâ—… est supremâ—… Lex and if so some meanes must needs be allowed unto the people to preserve their own saiftie when it is in hazard to recover it when almost lost by the invasion tyranny of governours who instead of levelling all to that end which should be before their eyes are taking courses tending to the destruction of the people To come with an army of armed enemies against a common wealth is no sit mean to preserve that common wealth but to common sense speaketh out an intention to destroy the same therefore Scotland can not be condemned for preserving it self in such a case 3. Iohn Bodin de republ lib. 2. c. 5. granteth That if a King turntyrant he may lawfully at his subjects requâ—…est be invaded resisted condemned or slaine by a forraigne prince proveth it at large from severall exemples And if a forraigne prince may do this why may not the subjects themselves do it if they be able if the subjects may petition for this help why may they not forbear to trouble strangers if they be able to do it themselves a forraigne prince hath no more superiority nor right over their prince for that effect then they havethemselves yea not so much And elsewhere in that book viz lib. 1. c. 10 lib. 5. c. 5. he alloweth subjects to resist to depose Kings in some cases which is more then Scotland doth desire 4. Arnisaeus de author prinp c. 2 n 10. granteth that if the prince proceed extrajudicialiter without order of law by violence every private man hath power to resist much more then may the body representative of a land resist when he cometh against them with fire sword which is the most extrajudiciall acting imaginable So c. 16. n. 4. he granteth that limited princes may be resisted such an one is alwayes was the King of Scotland for they never knew an absolute prince as is clear from what hath been already said 5. So Grotius who de Iure belli paâ—…is lib. 1. c. 4. n. 1 2 3 4 5. denyeth that the warr of subjects against superiours is lawfull would prove it by the law of nature the Mosaicall law the Gospell by the practice of the primitive christians and n. 〈◊〉 denyeth this not only to private subjects but also to inferiour Magistrats all which to examine is not the work presently intended only it is worth the noticeing that even he is forced to grant many things which serve abundantly to justify the practice of Scotland for ibid. n. 7. He granteth the law of not resisting doth not binde when the danger is most weighty certaine doth prove it thus because the lawes of God in some cases admit the exception of extreme necessity as the law of the sabbath further addeth that this law about resistence hath its â—…ise from their will who did first associat themselves in a society created governours over themselves for if they were asked whether they would acknowledg these conditions that they should die rather then resist in any case they would not grant it unlesse in this case when resistence would wrong the common wealth occasion the killing of many innocents He furder proveth it from that passage which was cited out of Barclaius yea he dar not condemne any no not the lesser part of the people who rise in armes in extreme necessity far lesse would he condemne the body of a land useing this last remedie in the extremity of hazard danger furder he proveth this from David who took armed men 1. Sam. 22 2. 23 13. to resist the violence of Saul after he had learned for certanety that he was seeking his life and from the Maccabces whom as he thinketh nothing else can defend but the great imminent danger in which they were And furder n. 8. he granteth that such princes may not only be resisted but also punished by death who are not absolute And it hath been showne that the Kings of Scotland have been obnoxious unto their Parliaments yet they desire not so much as is here granted Moreover n. 10. he assenteth to Barclaius saying as hath been cited that if a King alienate his Kingdome he loseth it but furder he addeth if â—…e prince but attempt to do so and to subject it to another he may be resisted and also n. 11. he assenteth to Barclaius saying as hath been cited that the King doth lose his power when he seeketh the destruction of his subjects And againe he sayeth N. 13. If the king hath one part of the supremacy the senat another then the king may be resisted when he incroacheth upon the senat that notwithstanding that it were granted the King onely had power of war for that is to be understood onely of warre with forraigners Thus he doth abundantly justify the late defensive warre of Scotland against their prince who was incroaching upon the liberties of Parliament people These particulars seriously pondered will do much to cleare their innocency unto the world to vindicat their cause and practice from the many foule calumnies aspersions which the Dâ—…gs of the generation did cast upon them of purpose to foment the discord betwixt the king his faithfull loyall subjects And though by what is said conceded by their adversaries the clearnesse equity of their cause appeareth both in poynt of law conscience yet for furder clearing of the same these few following particulars may have some weight 1. There is great difference to be put betwixt actuall disobeying of rebelling against violently with force of armes resisting the lawfull Magistrat doing his duty commanding just things warranded by the lawes of God the land And disobeying his unjust Acts resisting his violent tyrannicall oppressing plundering spoiling killing armies The former is a resisting of the very ordinance of God forbidden Rom. 13. where the Apostle is speaking of the civill Magistrat doing his duty in his place as God's deputy exerceing the duties of his calling executing his office But in the other case the Magistrat is out of his function
calling for God giveth no command to do evill nor to tyrannize He is not God's vicegerent when he playeth the tyrant therefore he may be resisted opposed without any violence done to the office or ordinance of God As the King's messinger may be resisted withstood when he crosseth his commission warrand without any wrong done to the office or to the King Every disobedience in things sinfull is not a resisting of the ordinance of God The office may be owned the person in the office honoured esteemed as he ought when yet his unjust violence may be resisted his sinfull commands disobeyed for it is onely powers that are ordained of God that must not be resisted tyrants or Magistrats turning tyrants and exerceing tyranny cannot be called the ordinance of God though the office abstracted from the tyranny be the ordinance of God And there is no hazard of damnation for refuseing to obey unjust lawes but rather hazard of damnation in willingly following after the command And so there is no danger in resisting such Acts of tyranny for tyrants exerceing tyranny are no terrour to evil doers But on the contrary they are a terrour to good works therefore that place Rom. 13. cannot be understood of tyrants It is a true a worthy saying of famous Mr Knox in his history of Soâ—…land Lib. 2. pag. 141. There is a great difference betwixt the authority which is Gods ordinance the persons of those who are placed in authority The authority God's ordinance can never do wrong but the corrupt person placed in authority may offend So that the King as king is one thing the king Acting tyranny is another thing They plead not for rebelling against the office or resisting that which is God's ordinance They did never intend to destroy Magistracy or to lessen the Kings Maj. just power lawfull authority or to wrong the office in the least And therefore all the arguments of their adversaries taken from Rom 13. or the like places which speak against withstanding opposeing of the office divine appoyntment of God are of no force against them their cause Tyranny is one thing the office of the King is another thing And what arguments speak well against resisting the office or the person duely legally dischargeing the duties belonging to that office will not conclude against resisting of tyranny So that all the arguments taken from Numb 16. Exod. 22 28. Eccles. 10 20. 8 2 3 4 Prov. 17 26. And the like places do not speak home to their case 2. There is also a great difference betwixt riseing up in armes without any just lawfull ground or for trissles or matters of small moment as for the exacting of some more tribute then is due by the law or the like riseing up in armes in extreme necessity when religion lawes lives liberties all that was dear to them as men as christians were in hazard and this was their case for the king came with an army upon them blocked them up both by sea land thus with forraigners was seeking to subdue them so to overturne religion lawes liberties all was not this extream necessity What more imminent danger could be expected then an army of bloody papists bent to prosecute their bloody designes coming with fire sword encouraged by a commission from the king so approaching their very borders Was there not then a necessity an extreme inevitable necessity to rise up in armes for the saiftie of religion lawes lives liberties when all was thus in most imminent danger Should the Parliament the whole body of the land give up unto the lust of these bloody irish popish prelaticall malignant enemies their own lives the lives of their wives children their liberties as men as christians Should they sell religion the land their soulls their consciences unto those men because for sooth they had a commission from the King there is no reason in the world for this Therefore seing there is nothing more dear to people then their religion their lives their liberties a warre raised in the defence of these cannot be accounted a warre raised upon trissles or sedition faction or mutiny but a necessary defensive warre not raised upon privat injuries discontents But upon matters of the greatest importance necessity viz to prevent the extirpation of religion the subversion of lawes liberties the destruction of lives all Cicero de officis lib. 2. can tell us that omnium societatum nulla est gratior mella carior quam ea quae cum republica est nui cuique nosirum cari sunt parentes cariliberi propiâ—…qui familiares sed omnes omnium caritates patria una complex a est pro qua quis bonus dubitat mortem oppetere si ei sit profuturus 3. There is also a difference betuixt a war raised of purpose to force the supreme Magistrat to be of the same religion with the subject or else to dethrone him and a war raised to defend that religion which both Magistrat subject owneth Betuixt a war raised in defence of that religion which hath never been established by the lawes of the land and a war raised in defence of that religion which is publickly owned by the lawes of the land which King subject both are sworne to maintaine which by the lawes becometh a civill right a part of the civill liberty of the subject Whatever may by said against a war raised in the former case yet in this last case a war defensive is most warrantable and this was the very case of Scotland for they were seeking to defend the religion which was established by the lawes of the land which popish prelaticall malignants were seeking to overturn So that any argument which adversaries can bring from the practice of the primitive christians will conclude nothing against them because the true religion was not then established by law the emperours had never consented therunto but it was otherwise in Scotland as hath been abundantly shown Sect. 1. 2. 4. There is also a difference betuixt a violent laying of hands upon the person of the King of purpose to destroy cut him off or to denude him of his just power privilege that in cold blood too by privat persons for some personall injuries This they abhore ever have abhored and betuixt a sinlesse self defence when unjustly assaulted by armies sent by the King to destroy cut them off In pleading for a sinlesse self defence they do not plead for an illegall taking away of the life of a King Their raising of forces in their own sinlesse self defence cannot be condemned there being an actuall invasion made upon their lives liberties which made their war to be tutela vitae proxima the last refuge for the life the only remedie
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
fit necessary it is for the honour service of almighty God the good quyet of the Church the better government thereof in unity order That there be a National Synod Assembly duely constitut within this kingdome Hath therefore appoynted declared by these presents appoynts declares That there shall be a National Synod of the Church of Scotland And that this Synod for the lawfull members thereof shall consist be constituted of the Archbishops of St Andrews Glasgow the remanent Bishops of these two Provinces of all Deanes of cathedrall Churches Archdeacons of all the moderators of meetings for exercise allowed by the Bishops of the respective dioeceses of one Presbyter or Minister of each meeting to be chosen elected by the moderator plurality of the Presbyters of the same And of one or two from the University of St Andrews one from Glasgow one from the King's colledge one from Marshells colledge of Aberdeen one from Edinburgh And this Synod thus constitut is to meet at such times in such places as his Maj. by his proclamation shall appoynt And is to debate treat consider consult conclude determine upon such pious matters causes things concerning the doctrine worship discipline governement of this Church as his Maj. under his Royal hand shall deliver or cause be delivered to the Archbishop of St Andrews president of the said Nationall Assembly to be by him offered to their consideration The Estates of Parliament do humbly recognosce acknowledge his Maj. Royall power prerogative afore said with the piety justice prudence of his Maj. resolution therein Like as his Maj. with their advice consent doth hereby establish ratify confirme this constitution of a Nationall Assembly as the lawfull constitution of the Nationall Synods Assemblies of this Church His Maj. or his Commissioner without whose presence no Nationall Synod can be keeped being alwayes present declareth that no Act canon order or ordinance shall be owned as an ordinance of the Nationall Synod of the Church of Scotland so as to be of any effect force or validitie in law to be observed keeped by the Archbishops Bishops the inferiour Clergy all other persons within the realme as far as lawfully being members of this Nationall Church it doth concerne them but that which shall be considered consulted agreed upon by the president major part of the members above specified It is alwayes hereby provided that nothing be enacted or put in execution by authority of a Nationall Synod within this Kingdome which shall be contrary to his Maj. Royall prerogative or to the lawes of the Kingdom that no act matter or cause be debated consulted concluded upon but what shall be allowed approved confirmed by his Maj. or his Commissioner present at the said Nationall Synod In which Act these things are remarkable 1. That Church Assemblies may not meet without his warrand 2. The King or his Commissioner are essentiall constituent members thereof 3. That the King hath power to appoynt the very constituent members of the Synod 4. Ruleing elders are excluded out of Church judicatories 5 That the constant moderator hath a more then ordinary voice in the exercise for the member to be chosen there must be elected by him the major part of the rest 6. Nothing can be agreed upon without the consent of the Archbishop of St Andrews thus he hath a negative voice 7. Nothing must be debated either concerning doctrine worshipe discipline or government but what his Maj. pleaseth 8. Nothing must be concluded but what his Maj. or his commissioner doth approve confirme 9 All this is founded on his supremacy 10. And his supreme authority over all persones in all causes his prerogative royall are declared to be all one 5. There is another commission granted for the heigh commission a part whereof followeth Our Soveraigne Lord ordaines a commission to be passed exped under his Maj. great seall of the Kingdome of Scotland making mention That in consideration of the multiplicity weight of Church affaires of the Estate incumbent upon the Lords of privy councell so as they cannot attaine the due execution of the lawes to the effect that the disorders contempt of authority may be timeously suppressed His Maj. by vertue of his prerogative in all causes over all persons as well ecclesiastike as civill has given granted like as his Maj. by the tenor hereof giveth granteth full power commission to the Archbishop of St Andrews The Lord chancellour L. treasurer archbishop of Glasgow Duk Hamilton Marques of Monâ—…se c. or any five of them an Archbishop or Bishop being one of the number To summon and call before them all contemners of the discipline of the Church for that cause suspend deprive and excommunicat all keepers of conventicles c. to appoynt ministers to be censured by suspension and deposition and punished by fineing confineing and incarcerating them and all other persons who shell be found transgressours as aforesaid c. Out of this Act these things are remarkable 1. Here is a mixed court made up of Church men civill men 2. A court medling both with civil ecclesiastick punishments for they have power of deposeing excommunicating fineing and imprisoneing 3. A court founded upon his Maj. prerogative in all causes over all persons as wel ecclesiasticke as civil 4. An Archbishop or Bishop is sâ—…e quo non one of those with four others may do all themselves By what is said something of the meaning of this oath according to their sense who tender it may be discovered the bussinesse being so clear much time needeth not be spent in handling that long tedious controversie concerning the Magistrats power in Church matters Onely a hint at some few things as reasons why this oath thus tendered explained could not be taken will be sufficient 1. By this meanes they should upon the matter have affirmed that the King was head of the Church for it is clear that he assumeth to himself power of appoynting new officers in Christ's house new courts judicatures which Christ did never appoynt of committing Church power to whom he will of appoynting what forme of Government in the Church he thinketh fit modelling the constitution of Church idicatories appoynting who shall be members who not who members siue quibus non of limiting the bounds of their procedour by appoynting what they shall treat of what not of puting life in their canons constitutions c. Thus all Church power shall flow from him he shall become the head of the Church under Christ the same way that he is head of the commonwealth under God And indeed the prelate their creatures are not ashamed in their publick prayers to stile the King head of the Church Now could any faithfull
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
In this Chap. the Apostle speaketh to them all alongs in the plurall number Mr Stillingfleet who is no friend to the independent way will easily acknowledge that what is there said was spoken to the Church Governours So then Mr Stillingfleet must say that these Governours were Presbyters of that one Church ruleing it together communi corsilio And that they can not so well be understood of Bish. for one Church should have but one Bishop So then here is a place which cannot be understood alike of both but must of necessity be understood of a Presbytery of a Presbytery having full Episcopall power in the matter of jurisdiction what Mr Stilling fleet will reply to this can hardly be conjectured A second passage is Phil. 1 v. 1. where mention is made of Bishops Deacons now these Bishops could not be Bishops properly so called in opposition to as distinct from preaching Presbyters Because of such Bishops there can be but one in one Church at once therefore they behoved to be Presbyters endued with Episcopall power having the thing as well as the name Presbyters of that one Church So that this passage cannot be equally understood of both with any shew of reason A third passage is 1. Thes. 5 12 13 14. Where there are some mentioned who were labouring among the people were over them in the Lord these were to warne the unruly c. So that in this one Church there were severall Presbyters Presbyters endued with power of warning the unruly Mr Stillingfleet cannot imagine any colurable pretence whereby without much apparent incongruity this passage may be understood of either of the different formes And seing this ground faileth here we may for all which he hath said to the contrary arrive to such an absolute certainty of that course which the Apostles took in setling Churches So much for this observation 6. It may be observed That Presbyterians have more then the practice of the Apostles even their positive institutions in these few particulars 1. In ordaining instituting such such Officers as Pastours Doctors Elders Deacons as may be seen Rom. 12 v. 6 7 8 1 Cor. 12 28. Ephes. 4 v. 11 12. In all which places there is no mention made of a Bishop distinct from a preaching Presbyter If Mr Stillingfleet say according to his principles that there was no necessity of making mention of him particularly because he is no distinct officer from a Presbyter but only impowered by the rest as their Commissioner Beside what hath been replyd to this formerly this may be added here That if this be truth which Mr Stillingfleet affirmeth he hath wasted much paper and paines in vaine when he went about to prove that no certanety of the practice of the Apostles could be come at whether they did set up episcopall or Presbyterian Governement for these should not be two distinct Governments And he had a shorter cut for Answering all the places of scripture then the way was which he took Yea he might have spared his whole book given out this one Thesis for all viz Though Presbyterian Governement be Iuris Divini yet the Presbyters may lawfully intruste one of their number with some speciall piece of the exercise of jurisdiction ordination And then he might have had more to say upon the ground of prudence or the like for himself then now he hath But it is not good to be wise above what is written it is best wisdome prudence to follow the rule of the word But more over 2. They have the Apostles institutions concerning the qualifications of these officers as is to be seen in Paul's epistles to Timothy Titus 3. These officers are commanded to such such pieces of work Some to rule some to teach also some to take care of the poor 4. These officers are commanded to attend that work of theirs with all diligence in their own proper persons without rolling it over on others Rom. 12 6 7 8. The Minister is to waite on his Ministery he that teacheth on teaching he that giveth is to do it with simplicity he that ruleth is to rule with diligence 5. In matters of discipline juridiction they are commanded to Act joyntly for the officers of the Church of Corinth were appoynted to conveen together that they might deliver the incestuous person unto Satan 1 Cor. 5 4 5. So the brethen the officers of the Church of Thessalonica were exhorted to warne the unruly Now lay all these together Such such officers set to such such work appoynted to attend the same ordained to Act joyntly in matters of government there is a species of Government a species warranted by Divine institution viz by Apostolick commands for these positive commands are of a lasting nature till God repeale them againe Himself giveth some 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Marks whereby to know when positive lawes binde immutably the first whereof mentioned Part. 1. c 1. § 6. Part. 2. c. 2. § 2. Is usefull here viz. when the same reason of the command continueth still Now let Mr Stilling fleet show if he can what reason could plead for Ministers acting collegiatly in matters of discipline then which will not be of force now was there lesse of the spirit then nor is now Or was there fewer able fit men for to be Bishops then nor is now Or was there lesse care to have things done orderly exactly or shall we say that all these commands were for that age of the Church only If so there is an easie way found to cast all the commands injunctions of the Apostles though they were induced with the spirit Shall it be thought that the command given to the Church officers of Corinth to conveen to excommunicat did binde them only at that time if so there should be a wide door opened to much evil a way prepared for laying aside all the injunctions instructions of the Apostles as now uselesse as an almanack out of date Enough of this consideration Obs. 7. It would seem to be a great reflexion upon Iesus Christ who was faithfull to him that appoynted him that as a sonne so beyond Moses who was faithfull as a servant Heb. 3. 2 5 6. To say that he hath not appoynted a standing forme of Governement in his house Mr Stilling fleet replyeth Part 2. c. 4. § 1. 1. That then it must be made appear that the setling of this forme was a part of his mediatory work Ans. This may easily be made to appear for it did belong to his Kingly office so was a part of his mediatory work as well as his instituting of officers in his house as Mediator the Government is laid on his shoulders Isa. 9. 6. And all power in heaven earth was given to him Mat. 28 18. He addeth I grant he is King of the Church doth
tennent farmer the losse of such a proportion of their free moveables after payment of their rents due to their Master landlord 〈◊〉 â—…is maj Councell shall think fit Not exceeding a fourth part thereof And Every burges to lose the liberty of merchandizeing tradeing and all other privileges within brugh the fourth part of their moveables and such other corporall punishments as the Councell shall think sit And yet notwithstanding of this act faithfull honest Christians were constrained in conscience to withdraw could not yeeld obedience unto this act but resolved rather to suffer affliction what ever it might be then countenance such as had intruded themselves without a call had made such defection from the truth cause of God for this cause many have suffered many are put to suffer dayly whom no tender hearted Christian will or can condemne if these few particulars be considered 1. To yeeld obedience unto this act enjoyning them to hear such men alwayes to attend all the ordinary meetings for worship so to countenance them as lawfull pastours were to comply with the sinfull defection of the time as appeareth from these two particulars 1. It were a countenanceing of these men who have broken covenant overturned the whole work of reformation an approving of them in the same for themselves look on all such as obey that act as their friends the act it self sayeth that a chearfull concurrence countenance assistence given to such Ministers attending all the ordinary meetings for divine worship is an evidence of a due acknowledgment of hearty complyance with his Maj. Government ecclesiaesticall civill as now established by law within this Kingdom for in order to this last the act sayeth that this Maj. doth expect the former And experience proveth much of this to be true viz. that such as do countenance them after this manner do indeed approve of them by the contrary they look on others as disaffected persons so that obedience to the Act is the very badge of complyance And therefore upon that account cannot in conscience be yeelded for in such a case many things which otherwise might be lawfull or indifferent cannot be lawfully done as being most inexpedient what is not expedient in so far as not expedient is unlawfull unâ—…defying therefore must not be done as Pauâ—… sayeth 1 Cor. 10 v. 23. 2. It were some way also the acknowledging of the power authority of Prelats And so contrary to the league Covenant the reason is because these men come forth from the Prelat having no other call or warrant but what the Prelat giveth And so a receiving of them is a receiving of the Prelat as a refusâ—…ing to owne them will be accounted a slighting of the Prelat his power These things will be clearer if two things be considered 1. That now there is no door opened for getting any wrongs redressed corruptions in the ministery which creep in abound removed There is no accesse for grieved persons to presente their grievances Corruption defection is carryed on with such a heigh hand that there is no liberty once to speak or object against such such corruptious Yea all these corruptions are approved So that all possibility of getting any redresse made is away And in such a case as this when privat persons have not accesse to propound their objections against such or such a man's exerceing the ministeriall function or no hopes of getting a hearing But by the contrary such persons as they would objecte against would be the better liked And these things which they might objecte as hainous crimes would be accounted vertues matter of greater commendation what can they do else but withdraw not countenance such vitious naughty persons nor do any thing which may import a consenting unto or an approving of these grievous wrongs enormities Especially considering 2. How there is now no other way left for persons to exoner their consciences before God the world to declare their Non-conformity unto this wicked corrupt course of defection All other doors are barred by law so that now they must either give testimonie against this course of defection this way by refuseing to give obedience unto this Act to countenance these men whose chief qualification is perjurie as Ministers of the gospel or else they must be accounted consenters For how else shall their dissatisfaction be known There is no patent door now for any legall exoneration of their consciences by remonstrances protestations the Parliament haveing declared such Actions to be treasonable Yea there is not so much as liberty granted for petitioning or supplicating against any such abuse And of necessity they must some way or other give publicke testimony against these courses for they must not partake of other mens sinnes as are carryed on contrary to the word of God to the Covenant to their former resolutions And there is no other way so harmlesse Innocent as this though suffering should follow thereupon 2. By giving obedience unto this Act they should be in hazard not only of falling away unto a detestable neutrality indifferency in the matters of God but ere long they should be in hazard to fall away in heart affection from the cause of Christ from the work of reformation sworne unto and owned so much for there is no other way now apparent whereby the difference shall be keeped up betuixt such as honestly minde the covenanted work of reformation the corrupt prelaticall malignant party but this of refuseing to give obedience unto this Act. So that as it is already too too apparent that some who had no scruple to hear these men and withall thought to abide constant to the cause of God were ere long found to be deceived for piece piece the edge of their Zeal was blunted their affection to the work of God cooled they at length were brought to condemne it So dangerous a thing is it to suffer the standing difference to weare out of sight So that let a Man once beginne to countenance those men as lawfully called authorized Ministers by this meanes keep up no standing difference he shall ere he be aware slide into their campe side with them in all things Therefore it is best to keep up this distance standing difference by with drawing 3. By giving obedience unto this Act they should quite undoe betray their posterity For though now the honest party be not in a capacity to transmit the work of reformation unto their posterity in such a manner as were to be wished it being now defaced overturned by this course of defection which is so violently carryed on yet they may should do something for keeping fresh the memory of the good old cause that it be not buryâ—…d quite in oblivion this must be by keeping up some
the contrare Christ is so far from commanding his disâ—…ples others to follow their Ministery that he disswaddeth them there from not only else where calling them blinde Leaders of the blinde such as should be let alone â—…ed from as impostors Mat. 15 13 14. saying Iohn 10 4 5. that the sheep know the voyce of a lawfull shepherd but not the voice of a stranger Yea they will not follow a stranger but will â—…ee from him this is meaned of the Pharisees as any may see who will look back to the end of the Chapt. 9. but also in this same Chapt throughout shewing at great length how naughty perverse men they were denunceing many a heavy woe curse upon them at length he calleth them a generation of vipers serpents who could not escape the damnation of hell v. 33. all which is but small incouragement to his disciples hearers to follow them or attend their Ministery And it is observable how fitly many of the particulars for which here Christ denunceth a woe unto these pharisees do agree unto the persons concerning the hearing of whom the queston is As. 1. They shut up the Kingdom of heaven against men neither will goe in themselves nor suffer such as are entering to goâ—… in 2. They are at great paines to bring poor simple people over to their opinion make them proselyts when they are made such they make them the Children of hell with themselves 3. As the scribes Pharisees taught poople shiâ—…s to evade the bonds of oaths telling them that it was nothing to sweare by the alter or by the temple so do these excell in that art of teaching perjury looseing the knots of covenants oaths as is too well known 4. They are much taken up with punctilioes of formalities in causing people at tend all their nodes desires But as for the weightier matters of the law judgment mercy faith they caste these behinde their back 5. They declare themselves the children of them who killed the prophets are fast filling up the measure of their fathers But indeed 6. They are behinde the Pharisees in cleansing the out side of the cup platter in appearing like whited tombes for they have no shew of piety therefore are so much the more to be shunned may certanely unlesse they repent expect all the woes that here are denunced upon the scribes Pharisees 6. It would be considered for furder confirmation of the last particular That the maine thing which Christ is pressing upon his hearers here is that they would beware to follow the practices of these pharisees for all that heigh place which they took upon themselvs in the Church on the by as it were he speaketh anent their receiveing of their true doctrine by way of concession or of their doing observing whatsoever they delivered as sitting in Moses's seat whereof they were presently in possession by their usurpation while there were no other ordinarily occupying that seat at that time So that these things being considered it will appear that this place maketh no way for the attending the Ministery of such men there being no command here to heare the Pharisees at all let be to heare them alwayes constantly only a command there is to do observe what they from Moses law bad do observe which may import a hearing of them expounding the law of Moses while there were no other ordinary teachers of the law But if this place prove not which it will never do that the Ministery of these scribes was to be constantly attended it will speak nothing against these who could not obey that act It will be objected in the next place That refuseing to give obedience to this act will be separation from the Church ordinances which are not nor yet can be corrupted by the corruption of administrators Ans. For clearing of this let these things be considered 1. Corruptions in administrators are of two sorts some personall these alone it is true cannot defile the ordinances in their hands make them no ordinances others are to speak so Ministeriall or such as affect the office And these againe are either of smaller moment lesse dangerous or else such as cut the very throat of the office make one no officer without all question those corruptions that destroy the office in it's essentials make the man no Minister do corrupt the ordinances in his hands he who is no minister cannot baptize nor administrat the sacrament of the Lord's supper nor preach with authority as a Minister he can do no Ministeriall act it is past questioning that such may be shunned without all hazard of separation of this sort it may be some of those now spoken of are 2. When personall faults are very grosse palpable open avowed such may be shunned without any hazard of separation because that man's being an officer câ—…ram deo is much to be questioned there is great probability that ipso sacâ—…o in the court of God he hath forsaulted the same though such should be the corruption in a Church that notwithstand of all this he may be maintained But. 3. separation is one thing not-hearing such or such a man is a far other thing there may be many just grounds of exception against such or such a particular person why he should not be countenanced as a Minister or why people may refuse to countenance him without any hazard of separation or joyneing with separatists in their principles Every not-hearing is not separation a man may many a time be absent from hearing yet cannot be justly charged with separation Yea separation is one thing refuseing to attend the Ministerie of such or such a man is another thing A man may never hear such or such a man preach yet be no separatist from the Church wherein he liveth for he may joyne with the ordinances in another congregation so testifie that he hath no prejudice against the Ministerie not against the ordinances of Christ nor against the Church but only a prejudice against such or such a man in particular 4. So then so long as the refusers to obey that Act do not cast at the ordinances but are willing to run many miles to enjoy them though they should be inhumanely used by the way by souldiers led forth of purpose For that end Nor cast at the Church as no Church though they sadly feare that God shall be provoked by this dreadfull defection which is carryed on by these men their favourers to give her a bill of divorce Nor at the ministerie for they love these who stand by their principles dearly are most willing to hear them either in publick or in privat what ever inconvenience or suffering may follow thereupon 5. It is granted by all such as write against separatists that separation from a
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
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