Ingenuity for to him All things might be lawful but were not expedient was a Rule but their Reasons might restrain these learned men and they are five in number 1. They had by subscribing the 39. Articles testified their approbation of that government 2. Received orders from their hands 3. Petitioned the continuance thereof 4. Htld their Livelyhood under such titles and in the exercise of that Government or some part thereof 5. Had sworn as Members of such societies to preserve the immunities liberties and profits of the same Vnto all which I shall say very briefly 1 It is worth their enquity whether they subscribed the 39. Articles judiciously and judicially and so gave their approbation to this Government we grant that in the 39. Articles commonly published there is one viz. the 36. which relateth to the Book of Consecration of Bishops and Arch-bishops c. But that it affirmeth that Book to contain in it nothing contrary to the Word of God I find not in either the Latine or English Copy of these Articles which I have seen these learned men sure read these Articles with the Parliaments Remonstrance before mentioned and so misread them both but suppose the Article had so affirmed it had laid no bar to the alteration or extirpation of this Government for it might be as indeed all our Stattues do suggest a meer Political Civil constitution and so though an Adiaphoron not contrary any more than consonant to the Word of God and alterable at the pleasure of Englands Parliaments and then Sir with whatever judgment these Gentlemen subscribed this Article I am sure there is not much in pleading it as a Bar to the duty enjoyned by Parliament Yet I must confess I am not satisfied that the Books of ordering Priests and Deacons and Consecration of Bishops and Archbishops did contain in them nothing contrary to the Word of God for I not believe nor is it evident to me by Holy Scripture or ancient Authors that from the Apostles times there hath been these orders of Ministers in Christs Church Bishops Priests and Deacons for I find no Priests in the new Testament and conceive Presbyters and Bishops to be no more than different denominations of the same order and make not different orders any more than Pastours Teachers Stewards Angels Stars and the like and if there were these orders yet it is I think contrary to the Word of God to add a fourth Arch-bishops and if they be not an order how come they to have the same consecration with Bishops a contended for order of the Ministry and how come Bishops to swear unto them obedience neither the one nor the other is common to a gradual preheminence the Speaker of the Parliament or Lord Chief Justice hath no such like Solemnity I question whether the word will allow an Ordination to some part of the Ministry and give Authority to apply one Sacrament or Seal of the Covenant and not the other nor am I clear the Deacons Office doth at all consist in Ministry of Word and Baptism and assistance at the Communion the Scripture specially points them to the poor and to serve Tables I question whether mute service in a publick solemn Assembly be not contrary to the Word of God where all as well prayer as preaching ought to tend to Edification I question whether a Magisterial and Authoritative giving the Holy Ghost peculiar to Christ who did it in reality be not contrary to the Word of God or according to the words of the Article Superstitious and ungodly And whether Ministers swearing Caronical obedience to the Bishop or Bishops to the Arch-bishops be not plainly Papal and ungodly If these learned men considered and were convinced of the consonancy of these and the like things with the Word I hope they subscribed this Article judiciously yet I must enquire how judicially I imagine the Satute of Queen Elizabeth will nos be produced as their warrant for subscription to this Article for the Articles thereby enjoyned 13. Eliz. 13. do only concern the confession of the true Christian Faith and Doctrine of the Sacraments and this particle only is exclusive to Discipline and Government which by the whole current of our Laws are concluded to be Political in their nature only Ecclesiastical ratione objecti at the pleasure of the Magistrate and therefore could not be made an Article of the true Christian Faith I hope such as leave this Article out of their Creed shall not be shut out of the Christian Church Now Sir were there any force in this exception to the Covenant I would advise that subscription to be taken into second thoughts yet it is as ponderous as the next They received Orders from their hands and should ill requite them for laying their hands on them to lay to their hands to root them up and cannot tell for what That they should root them up who had laid their hands on them was not required they might continue Men Ministers it is like better Christians and more painful Preachers when they were not Bishops I hope Prelates and Prelacy were not inseparable that the one must be ruined in the removal of the other and our question is of the thing not person in which degradation was the worst they could do them who had they been affected with the dream of Richard Havering Arch-bishop of Dublin The Annals of Ireland in Cambd. Britan pag. 169. That a certain Monster heavier than the whole World stood eminently aloft upon his breast from the weight whereof he chose rather to be delivered than alone to have all the goods of the World when he waked he thought this was nothing but the Bishoprick of Dublin and so forthwith renounced it Or had they enjoyed the Spirit of Antoninus Elected Arch-bishop of Florence who refused on fear of hazarding his salvation to accept it and when thundred into it by the counsel of his friends frowns of the Magistrates and the Popes Bull kept only eight persons no stately furniture in his house no Coach and Horses and kept his usual method of devotion in his Family saying They should do him a special favour to thrust him fram his Bishoprick wherein he continued with very great Regret They would acknowledge a kindness done unto them and yet were it an unkindness these Gentlemen were acquitted from the ingratitude they have petitioned their continuance and were not able to withstand the pleasure of their Superiors on whose pleasure their whole enjoyments did depend nor had they been without Parallel if not a plea of Justice For the Arch-Bishops and Bishops of England Rochester excepted in the time of Henry the eighth had voluntarily without the command of the King or Parliament sworn to root up the Pope the Apex of this Episcopacy from whom they had received their Palls Properties Power Foxe his Acts and Monuments p. 564. 565 566 567. I had almost said Papacy Their third Reason I pass as an
Subsectio quarta The Master Scholars and other Officers and Members of the University of Oxford in their Apology for not taking the Covenant urge their Reasons against the same as unlawful not in the matter it self simply considered but by accident in respect of some circumstances attending themselves and discapacitating them unto the Act and they offer their exceptions unto the Articles severally and distinctly Unto the first Article they except against the Preservation of the Reformed Religion of the Church of Scotland in Doctrine Oxford Reasons Sect. 3. pag. 4. and Worship Discipline and Government and then against the Reformation of England in those particulars Unto the first they tell us 1 Except They are not satisfied how they can in judgment swear to endeavour to preserve the Religion of another Kingdom To which I answer in General it is but reason they suspend the Act untill they can swear in judgment though such as have rashly in ignorance prophaned the Oath by swearing it must in sence of its Sacred Obligation inform their judgments that they may performe it and not cast it off but what hindreth their judgment in this required Act They urge four obstructive reasons As First As it did not conc rn them to have very much 1 Reason of this exception so they profess they had very little understanding thereof In which reason it is to be noted 1. They had some understanding of the Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government of the Church of Scotland and that little might so farre enlighten their judgment as lawfully to swear the preservation thereof I presume many Citizens have little and but general notion of the Liberties they swear to preserve yet are judged to swear in judgment 2. I wonder an Vniversity and Protestant Vniversity conversing in all Books and I must imagine meeting with the two Books of the Discipline of the Church of Scotland their Confession of Faith and Form of Worship entertaining Schoolmen and Bishops thence fled by reason of the same and openly oppugning and disputing against the same should profess they had thereof little understanding but it may be they minded not to study these things 3. Some understanding in the Religion of another Kingdom was necessary to them as Christians and Protestants by vertue of the Communion of the Church and some as an Vniversity and Protestant School of Learning where the true Religion of the Reformed Churches was to be defended duobts dissolved and errors oppugned and contradicted and some was necessary to them as Subjects required to swear the preservation thereof for the injunction could not but provoke an enquiry after the matter to be preserved I wonder therefore how these men could profess it did not concern them to have much who if I mistake not ought to know as much as all the Nation besides but from what they know they adde the next Reason viz. In three of the four specified particulars viz. Worship 2 Reason of this exception Discipline and Government it is much worse and in the fourth that of Doctrine not at all better than our own to be reformed I wonder Sir what account of the Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government of the Church of Scotland was by the occurrences of those unhappy times brought unto the knowledge of the University of Oxford I hope they were more wise and just than to take it from Mr. John Maxwel pretended Bishop of Ross a man excommunicated by the Church and censured by the State of that Kingdom a professed Enemy and enraged Delinquent cursing his very Judges whom I find about that time at Oxford writing his Issachars Burden a most railing reproachful discovery of the Discipline of the Church of Scotland and the rather for that the heat of expectation and ostentation of many in reference to that book was cooled by a providential fire which seiz'd on the Printing-House and burned the Copies ready to be published the next day as Mr. Baylie in his Vindication of the Government of that Church which these Gentlmen might have met with doth testifie Yet Sir had these men of reading regarded what more sober and impartial men have said and written they would have had another Character of this Church I may not mind them of the Apology to the Doctors of Oxford in the time of King James preferring the Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government of Scotland before that of England or of their Philadelphian purity Bright man on Apocalyps 3. who did not only keep the Doctrine of Salvation pure and free from corruption but doth also deliver it in writing and exercise in practice that sincere manner of government whereby men are made pertakers of Salvation mentioned by Mr. Brightman our Countreyman they will possibly tell us these were Seperatists to whom Scotland is no friend or Puritans Yet methinks * Magnum hoc Dei munus quod una religionem puram 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doctrinae viz. retinendae vinculum in Scotiam intulistis Sic obsecro obtesto haec duo simul rebinet ut uno amisso alterum diu permanere non posse semper memineritis Beza Epist 79. Beza may call for a little audience and respect from this Learned Assembly and he told us long since This is the great gift of God that you have brought into Scotland together pure Religion and good order which is the bond to hold fast the Doctrine and I heartily pray and beseech you for Gods sake hold fast these two together and alwayes remember that if one be lost the other cannot long remain And no less venerable I presume is the Corpus Confession the Harmony of Confessions of all the reformed Churches and yet therein they have an account of the Church of Scotland which might render it more acceptable and worthy to be preserved For thus it is reported by the Collector who much rejoyced in the providence that brought their Confession into his hand * Est illud ecclesiae Scoticanae privilegium rarum prae multis in quo etiam Nomen apud exteros suit celebre quod circiter aut nos plus minus 54. sine Schismate nedum Haeresi unitatem cum puritate doctrinae prevaverit retinuerit hujus unitatis adminiculum ex Dei misericordia maximum fuit quod paulatim cum doctrina Christi Apostolorum Disciplina sicut ex verbo Dei praescripta est una suit recepta quam proxime fieri potuit secundum eam totum ecclesiae regimen fuit administratum Dâ—t Dominus Deus pro immensa sua bonitate Regiae Majestati omnibusque Ecclesiarum gubernatoribus ut ex Dei verbo illam unitatem Doctrinae puritatem perpetuo conservat Corpus Confess p. 6. It is the rare priviledge of the Church of Scotlaod before many in which respect her name is famous even among strangers that about the space of fifty and four years without Schisme yea or Heresie she hath holden fast unity with
the Preachers defended even in the University from censure for them nay these were Printed in several Books of the same Authors licensed and allowed by the Archbishop and his Chaplains and many of them asserted in the visitation Articles of some Bishops and yet were not established in the Church of England As in Doctrine so in worship many corruptions were innovated and exercised As Bowing at the Name of Jesus The turning Communion-Tables into Altars or Altarwise and Railing them in furnishing them with Candlesticks and Tapers Tying the Gospel the blessing and other parts of the publick service to that place enclosed and bowing to these Altars The making Crucifixes and Canopies pictures of God Christ the Holy Ghost Virgin Mary and other Saints in our Church-windows Consecration of Churches Fonts Bells and the like All which and many such were first innovated to the Chappel at Lambeth and ferried over to White-hall and so transmitted to all Cathedral and almost all Parish Churches and yet were not established by Law though enforced by the corruption of Discipline in the Visitation Articles of Bishop Wren Bishop Mountague Bishop Peircy Bishop Lindsey and Bishop Skinner and others in their several Diocesses and by the silencing suspension excommunication and imprisonment and High Commission vexation of Mr. Chauncey Vicar and Mr. Parker an Inhabitant of Ware Mr. Burros of Colchester and many others Nor was Government any more pure if we consider how it was exercised in the High Commission and Star-Chamber with all rigor cruelty and injustice and in Visitations Citations Probate of VVills Letters of Administration and Excommunication in the name and under the Seal of the Bishops themselves never authorized thereunto All which were evidently needful to be reformed as having been so publickly exercised and potently defended and might well enforce a covenanted endeavor to reform Religion in the Kingdom of England I well know Sir that the change of Religion makes a great sound in the world especially if established I cannot be insensible of the noise made by it against our first Reformation and must expect the Eccho to follow all after acts and degrees thereof for all changes are scandalous and many very dangerous If therefore these Masters and Scholars of Oxford could rationally conceive the Covenant to bind them to endeavor a change of Religion in the substance matter and essential parts and form thereof then I must confess their exception is very important for we cannot deny that our Bishops Martyrs and Learned Divines have by Suffering and Writing testified it to have been agreeable to the Word of God And that to resolve that into the power and pleasure of a Parliament who may direct and authorize the profession but not prescribe the matter or form were to make it a Parliamentary Religion and the change thereof must needs condemn our Laws and the punishment of Papists not joyning with us as unjust and so justifie Papist and Separatist the one in his recusancy and the other in his separation But Sir when I consider the Religion of Scotland to be preserved as the concomitant and provocation the VVord of God to be the Rule and the best reformed Churches professing the same substantial Religion though differing in administration and order propounded as the pattern I see not how right reason can render any such sence of it and the rather for that Reformation not alteration of Religion is the formal act which presupposeth the continuation of the subject about which it is conversant But Sir if they as they needs must by Religion understand the order and annexed Ceremonies appendant to Religion whether established as was the Cross in Baptism holinesse of dayes and order of the Liturgy and the like or only exercised and enforced by Prelates power and countenance as the corruptions before mentioned then we must say their exception is of no weight not the reason any thing worth for this change can be no such scandal as is conceived for we deny them to have been testified by our Bishops Martyrs and learned men by any Sufferings or Writings untill of late by the persons and such like before mentioned as agreeable to the Word of God and must put them to the proof of it we think we are able to produce Tindal Latimer Hooper Ridley Farrar and many other Martyrs by laying down their Bishopricks and other contests and sufferings to have testified against them and Mr. Cartwright Baines and many Devonshire Cornwal and Lincolnshire Ministers and others ever since the Reformation by Writing Petition Remonstrance Apology and Sufferings to have testified against not only the corruptions exercised against which our Jewel Fulk Whitaker Archbishop Parker Dr. Ward Dr. Brownrigge Dr. Bancroft and all sound and learned Divines not devoted to return to Rome have written but even the very Order and Ceremonies established as being not agreeable to the Word of God And if these learned Gentlemen had pleased to observe the Visitation and high Commission proceedings they might have found Prynn Burton Bastwick Layton Workman Langley Hind Nichols Ball and many others known learned men who were silenced suspended imprisoned stigmatized and in much Sufferings testified these appendants to our Religion whether established or exercised to be no way agreeable to the Word of God and I know not whom they can ment on as a Martyr for them unless it be Lawde the late Archbishop the grand Innovator of our Church 2. If therefore our Religion be by Papists or Prelates reproached as a Parliamentary Religion we will rejoyce in our reproach and bless God we had a Parliament that had zeal to improve their power about those things that were properly subject thereunto 3. Nor can this Reformation justifie the recusancy of the Papists because these things never became a Reason for their recusancy further than they occasioned their obduracy by assuring their hopes of Englands return to them Nor the Separation of the Separatists for that the corruptions established were never made such essential parts of worship as to make a sufficient ground for separation Witness Cartwrights defence of the Church service The Masters and Scholars of Oxford cannot have been so little observant as not to know that the sober zealous Non-conformists who groaned under the burden of these corruptions and for this Reformation were grieved by and greatly contended against the * Mr. Geree his Vindiciae ecclesiae Anglicanae shewing necessity of reformation not Separation And Mr. Balls two Books against Mr. Cann Separation as that which was without sufficient ground yet like Jesus Christ their Master kept Communion with a Church whose Doctrine and Worship was very much in need of Reformation and taught men so to do granting There was something in the Doctrine and Worship of the Church of England not agreeable to the Word of God and yet not enough to lay a ground for separation 4. Much less doth this endeavor judge the Law against and punishment of Papists as unjust which
Throne of Christ as things tending towards Superstition and Schisme and the worst things in the Church of Scotland which called for Reformation rather than Preservation Lastly the Hazard of their estates doth seem indeed to be their great stumbling block in their way to the Covenant All Clerks are by the Lawes yet in force required to give their assent unto what by this Covenant is required to be reformed and that on pain of losing their Benefice Which Sir we shall admit though it would admit a dispute in reference to many if not all the particulars mentioned yet how should this demurre to the taking of the Covenant Because the Law requires our assent it will not therefore follow they need not reformation nor it is not lawful for us to endeavour their reformation Many men have assented to the Law who could never give the assent required by the Law and by suffering shewed that the Law is their burden binding them to suffer whilst it requireth what they in truth and good Conscience cannot yield But must good men continue under this burden and take no care to ease themselves Is it a sin for men to covenant in their places to endeavour the removal of a burdensom Law Or might not the Reformation covenanted be so endeavoured Nay Sir on the consideration of the whole Reason can such endeavour be any wrong to mens consciences reputation or estate and then there is no strength in this 2d Reason of Oxford against the covenanting such an endeavour But we proceed to their 3d. Reason of this Exception The third Reason on which the Masters 3d. Reason of this exception Scholars c. of Oxford stand dissatisfied concerning the Covenant or Reformation of England in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government is indeed the most weighty and considerable if but clearly proved and it is Their manifest danger of perjury the Covenant in this point seeming directly contrary to the former Solemn Protestation I presume they mean that of May 5. 1641. which they had sworn neither for hope or fear or other respect ever to relinquish or the Oath of Supremacy which according to the Laws of this Realm and the Statutes of this University they had sworn Unto this Reason I easily grant that contradictory Oaths do run the soul on manifest perjury and if the first were lawful the last must needs be sinful neither to be sworn at first nor obliging at last if it be sworn 2. But the contradiction must be manifest and clear not seeming and conjectural which may spring by passion and prejudice to the fancy of such as are willing to suppose it as all things look yellow to Jaundies eyes and is not in reality such to impartial Readers It seems this contradiction between this Covenant and those Oaths was to the men of Oxford but seeming though to their best understandings in their then capacity I presume and it must pass into a certainty before it discharge the bond to such as are under it though seeming so to be might suspend the act of them to whom it so seemed 3. But let us see wherein seems this contradiction It is well if it amount not to as much as the Scotch Notions before specified which seemed to tend to Superstition and Schisme First then of the contradiction to their protestation which I imagine can be no other but that of May 5. 1641. and so far as it concernes Religion runneth thus I A. B. do in the presence of Almighty God vow and protest to maintain and defend as farre as lawfully I may with my life power and estate the true Reformed Protestant Religion expressed in the doctrine of the Church of England against all Popery and Popish Innovations within this Realm contrary to the same Doctrine The Solemn League and Covenant in the Article under consideration runneth thus That we shall sincerely really and constantly through the grace of God endeavor in our several places and callings the Reformation of Religion in the Kingdom of England in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government according to the Word of God and example of the best reformed Churches Contraria contrariis juxta opposita magis elucescunt Let any impartial eye reade these two Oaths thus opposed and shew me wherein seeme the contradiction to lie They may indeed seem different in their sound and manner of expression but Oxford well knoweth that all diversa are not opposita all difference amounts not to a contradiction diversa opposita aeque dissentanea sunt sed non aeque dissentiunt they differ indeed but not with the same difference I wish that on second thoughts they will please to tell us whether the difference be Re or Ratione only the same thing being protested in the first though not in the same words and after the manner which was covenanted in the last But they specifie the contradiction viz. The Doctrine they vowed to maintain by the name of the true Protestant Religion expressed in the Doctrine of the Church of England they took to be the same now to be reformed and altered But Sir were they not in taking it so to be much mistaken The Covenant binds to Reforme Doctrine in the Kingdom of England was there no such Doctrine openly divulged in the Court Sermons and Printed books of Mountague Reive Heylen Dowe Cozens Pocklington and others before mentioned In Mountague Apello ad Caesarem originum Ecclesiasticorum 2 parts Anti-diatribae Pocklingtons Sunday no Sabbath Altare Christianum Heylens Coal from the Altar History of the Sabbath Sales his introduction to a devout life Shelfords five Treatises Dowe against Mr. Burton Cozens his houres of Prayer and many other licensed books publickly sold in the Kingdom and in the Visitation Articles of Bishop Mountague Bishop Peirce and Bishop Wren on which many good men were vexed which was distinct and different if I may not say expresly contrary to the Protestant Religion expressed in the Doctrine of the Church of England And did not these need Reformation And is it not the duty of every good Subject and Protestant in maintenance of this Religion to endeavor a Reformation alteration and total expunction of such Doctrine and so to Covenant And then Sir where is the contradiction In this sense the Protestation and Covenant do plainly coincidere and agree in one and the same thing But Sir let us allow them their sence That the Doctrine protested to be maintained is the same covenanted to be reformed Are Maintenance and Reformation incompetible is there not a possbility of some adjuncts unto the substance of the Doctrine of the Church of England expressing the true Reformed Protestant Religion and seperable without the destruction thereof Or may not the Doctrine of the Church of England be reformed as to the scant general dubious and difficult manner of expression and yet the matter thereof be maintained and defended Are those Articles which concern the Government of the Church and Consecration of the Bishops
of God in the sense there intended is at this time encreased To which Sir I should have then answered 1. Answer Their ability to say it is of little moment nor could we well judge it for whether they were under any natural wilfull violent or judicial incapacity is not our part to determine Others were able to say it and if these reverend Fathers and Students did know it though they were not able to say it it was for us sufficient And therefore may I be bold further to enquire 2. Whether they were able to read the whole Sentence expressing the sense Of the enemies of God whose rage power and presumption was at this time encreased here intended and calling to mind the treacherous and bloody plots conspiracies attempts and practices of the enemies of God against the true Religion and Professors thereof in all places especially in these three Kingdoms ever sinte the Reformation of Religion and how much their rage power and presumption are of late and at this time encreased whereof the deplorable estate of the Church and Kingdom of Ireland the distressed estate of the Church and Kingdom of England and the dangerous estate of the Church and Kingdom of Scotland are present and publick testimonies Are not these full expressions of the sense in which the enemies of God whose raâ—â— power and presumption were encreased are to be understood And is it rational or religious to enquire after and suspend a duty on jealousie of a sense intended when we have the sense plainly expressed Is not this repugnant to the end of Speech the Interpreter of the mind 3. Were the Masters Scholars and other Members and Officers of the University of Oxford such strangers in the Protestant Israel as not to know the Papists and Popishly affected were enemies of God against true Religion and the Professors thereof in all places Or so unacquainted at home as not to know their plots conspiracies attempts and practices were especially against these three Kingdoms the most publick and potent professors of true Religion ever since the Reformation Had they no notion of the Rebellions against King Edward the sixth Of the Treasons Plots Conspiracies Roaring Bulls and Raging Spanish Armado against Queen Elizabeth Of the Gunpowder-Treason and other plots against King James Of the Colledge of Propagators of the Catholick cause erected in Rome under the Government of Cardinal Barbarin and designed against these Kingdoms Or of the grand Plot agitated by Con or Cuneus the Popes Nuncio in England discovered by Andreas ab Habernefield first to Sir William Boswel His Majesties Resident in Flanders and by him unto Laud late Archbishop of Canterbury and since fully cleared and laid open by Mr. William Prynn in his Romes Master-piece published in 1643. four years before their reasons and might have been profitable to their eye-sight 4. Did not this learned University judge it to be an high encrease of their Rage Power and Presumption to distribute their Jesuits into such several Orders as should be capable in any place or profession to propagate their plots To press upon the late King and Archbishop for a publick profession of union with Rome To boast openly of Englands returning to Popery To tender a Cardinals Hat to the late Archbishop To poison our Fountains the Universities and our very people with Arminian and Popish doctrines publickly preached and printed and Popish pictures publickly sold and bound up with our Testaments and Bibles To provoke the High-Commission cruelties and Puritans discontents To plot a plain Popish service-Service-book with very little variation oâ— from the mass-Mass-book and procure it to be by force and violence imposed on the Church and Kingdom of Scotland to the raising Mutinies and stirring up the Bellum Episcopale with pretence to yoke them and intention to destroy the King and Protestant cause To rebell openly in Ireland and with rage and cruelty to murder and massacre the Protestants To divide between King and Parliament in England and possess themselves of his Majesties Garrisons and Armies as under their command To abet advise and effect the most barbarous murther of his late Majesty and our since confusions All which and many the like to have been the atchievements and accomplishments of these enemies of God to true Religion He that is in any measure observant of our affairs can run and read And are not these expressions of rage power and presumption let right reason judge 2. Oxford Reasons second exception They cannot truly affirm that they had used or given consent to any supplication or remonstrance to the purposes therein expressed To this Sir consider That although they cannot affirm it yet others can do it in truth and with joy 2. What are the purposes therein expressed not as before intended shall we judge it from the Preface It is the glory of God and the advancement of the Kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ the honor and happiness of the Kings Majesty and His Posterity the publick liberty peace and safety of the Kingdoms wherein every ones private condition is included For the End is the Argument which is urged to enforce the constancy to the Covenant and in Article the sixth it is expressed to be the glory of God good of the Kingdoms and the honour of the King and these are the onely purposes expressed in these particular acts propounded for the production of them and shall we be so uncharitable as to think the Gentlemen of Oxford to have been so void of piety towards God love to their Country or loyalty toward their King as not to have used or given consent to Supplication or Remonstrance to these purposes therein expressed Must we think them so speechless as not to pray to God nor speak to men for the effecting of these purposes expressed No! I will rather presume them modest and not willing to publish their piety and zeal to good purposes or passionately prejudiced against some one expedient propounded to the effecting of these purposes expressed and thereby acted to confound the purpose and pursuing meanes But 3. Had not the University of Oxford Representees in Parliament If they did not sit were they violently excluded Or did they give their No to the Supplications or Remonstrances to the purposes expressed in the Covenant and if they did were not these Supplications and Remonstrances carried by the Majority of Votes And is not the Negative so swallowed therein that all persons and bodies corporate through the Nation did thereunto consent When we finde Oxford excepted we will say they could not truly affirme they gave consent But 3dly Oxford Reasons third exception they did not conceive the entring into such a League and Covenant to be a lawful proper and probable means to preserve our selves and our Religion from ruine and destruction To this Sir we must enquire into the conceipt of these Gentlemen and desire to know whether it relate unto the quality of the Covenant or the act
that thereof they were still perswaded Sir what effect had been wrought on their consciences I cannot tell I will hope they were not seared or shut up by a resolution of non-perswasion to the contrary yet had I been amongst them with submission I must have expostulated with them and enquire Whether they had not subscribed to the use of the Common Prayer and form in the said Book prescribed in publick prayer Enjoyned to be subscribed by every Minister before he be ordained in Canons of 1603. Ca. 36. and NONE OTHER Did none of these Masters publickly pray in St Maryes in Oxford and other Churches before and after their Sermons Were not such prayers publick prayer Did they at such times use the Common Prayer If not did not their consciences mind them of their subscribed promise solemnly made in entring on so holy a calling Are not NONE OTHER words as fully exclusive of their own forms extemporary or premeditate as can be expressed Admit we this Common Prayer to be lawful yea necessary is not this exclusive subscription a plain limitation of the Spirit rejection of the gift of prayer and robbing the Church of Ministerial parts unto prayer as well as preaching to the edification thereof Did Christ when he prescribed the most perfect prayer tye his Disciples to use that and None other Can any rationally-religious man subscribe this promise and approve it to be agreeable to the VVord of God and stand perswaded it is not contrary thereunto Secondly Is it agreeable to the Word of God to affix a sentence of mans conception and framing to divine service and denominate it a Sentence of Scripture In the Rubrick of the Common Prayer the Priest is appointed to read one of these sentences of Scripture which follow The very first of which is At what time soever a sinner repenteth him of his sin from the bottom of his heart I will put all his wickednesse out of my remembrance saith the Lord the which is referred in the Margine as are the following sentences to their places unto Ezek. 18.21 As is Dr. Boyes in his Exposition of the Liturgy p. 1. 22 to say nothing of the effect though accidental of this supposed Scripture how many have been deceived really believing it to be a Sentence of Scripture when it is not found in all the Bible Methinks these men should have observed how our late Masters had corrected this gross and obvious fault in the Scotch Liturgy before they had thus confidently told the world They were perswaded there is nothing in the worship of England which is not agreeable to the VVord of God Thirdly In the VVorship of England much of Canonical Scripture is omitted and never to be read a fault complained of by the first Compilers of the Common-Prayer-Book and much of the Ap crypha Vide. The Preface of it vain false and ridiculous is appointed to be publickly read the great Bible-Translation of the Psalms is thrust out The titles of the Psalmes Psa 72. Psa 14. Psa 105.28 and a most corrupt Translation of them omitting some whole sentences adding whole verses and falsly translating many places and Texts is affixed unto the Common-Prayer-Book and made part of it Some part of Scripture is dignified above other parts thereof the Gospel must be honoured with the standing up of the people the Epistle no way different in the matter Christ crucified but only in the name and manner of Revelation from the Gospel is slighted Will the Gentlemen of Oxford say this is agreeable to the VVord of God They must prove it for we shall not believe them and the rather for that this gross abuse is palliated by this false profession in the Preface to this Book That nothing is ordained to be read but the pure VVord of God the holy Scriptures or that which is evidently grounded thereupon Vide. The Anatomy of the service-Service-book p. 18. and the rather for that we find the common-prayer-Common-Prayer-Book condemned in respect of these particulars by Dr. Spark no mean Son of the Church Fourthly Will these Masters and Scholars stand perswaded that the extraordinary Solemn Worship appointed by the Common-Prayer-Book unto holy dayes and their Eves is agreeable to the Word of God wherein every particular holy-day hath its distinct and particular Collects Epistles and Gospels as its Solemn Service appointed not to insist on the supposed influence of that reputed sanctity on the Six or Seaven days following directing the same service to be impertinently continued as in the Feast of the Nativity Easter Whitsuntide Ascension and others nor the unwaerrantable preheminence given to some parts of Scripture above others or the irrational denomination of some Prophetical and Historical portions of Scripture Epistles all which are well urged by many Non-conformists I would enquire what part of Sacred Writ stamps Sanctity on Wednesday and Friday more than the other four dayes of the week and sets them into a parity with Sunday to retain their Dialect that the same more Solemn service shall be read on those dayes as on that day By what Scripture-waâ—â— mediate or immediate are other dayes besides the Lords day made holy or sanctified in honour of the Saints so as in their nature to interdict mens labour in their lawful calling engage men to the exercises of Religion as oft as they return and become Subjects of that Solemn Service which may not on other dayes be offered unto God Is not a Religious owning and observation of some time as not appointed by the God of our time whose sole Prerogative it is to make it Solemn and Holy time to be Religiously employed a plain and formal Superstition repugnant to Gospel-Rules Gal. 4.10 Coloss 2.16 I am not ignorant that some holy-dayes have been of ancient and universal observation in the Church and have laid claim to Apostolical tradition and occasioned much controversie in the Church but I stand unsatisfied in their institution I deny not the just authority of the Church or Christian Magistrate over our time but I think there is a vast difference between time as the subject and as the adjunct of Religion God only can make it the first humane authority may appoint holy Fasting and holy Feasting those transient acts of Worship dependant on and subservient unto Gods dispensations of providence to his people and so may determine the second time like the dayes of Purim as a necessary adjunct to those acts of Worship but to make holy-dayes Subjects of Solemn Sacred service I have not seen any Commission that doth authorize the Church thereunto Eminent Saints call for the esteem of the Church but the keeping of them in a Calendar and appointing them their several holy-dayes sets them a pitch too high and shews the Church partial respecters of persons having some in admiration and slighting others no less deserving or subjects here unto an intolerable burden by necessitating every day to be Holy The Nativity Circumcission Passion
in Baptism Surplice in divine service supposed to be established Or those since pressed as the Bowing at the Name of Jesus Turning Tables into Altars and Bowing to them and placing on them Candlesticks and Tapers The Consecration of Churches and the like though I should which I confess I cannot admit what is pretended in the Preface to the common-prayer-Common-Prayer-Book that they are apt to stirre up the dull mind of man to the remembrance of his duty to God by some notable and special signification whereby he might be edified yet I must enquire by what authority are they appointed the highest pretended is the Church and I see no Commission the Church hath to appoint such things If I mistake not the power of the Church is declarative executive and Ministerial not judicial and magisterial She may publish the matter and prescribe the Order of Gods Worship but not constitute or ordain new matter though never so much tending to edification against which she is expresly barr'd by the 2d Commandment And if she hath power to continue our Ceremonies because significant why or how shall those be excluded which are more antient and significant Such as were the baptizing for the Dead putting Cream and Honey into the mouth of the baptized insufflation and spitting at the Devil and the World and coming to baptism in a white Garment which was left behind and profitably produced as a pledge against Elpidophorus when Apostatized from the Faith in which he had been baptized and many such like Tertul Coron mil. pa. 449. Contra Marcion lib. 7. p. 155. which Tertullian mentioneth as used in the Church in the Year of our Lord 62. in the times of the Apostles than which the use of the Cross cannot be more ancient nor is it indeed so ancient If then the Church have not a power to ordain them on what basis do all our Ceremonies stand save that prophane Maxime No Ceremonies no Bishop Before it be determined that these Ceremonies are agreeable to the Word of God I wish it may be determined whether the appointment and Religious exercise of matter significant and so in it self tending to edification not instituted by Jesus Christ be not the very formality of Superstition Seventhly and Lastly Is it agreeable to the Word of God in ordination to divide the work of the Ministry and give authority to apply one of the Sacraments and not the other to baptize but not administer the Lords Supper otherwise than as Assistant to him who hath ministerial power of consecration as it is done in the Ordering of Deacons Again is it agreeable to the Word to denominate Gospel Ministers Priests which properly relate to a Sacrifice and Altar If so why did our late Masters altar the Title into Presbyters in the Scotch Liturgy It is agreeable to the Word that the Ministers of Jesus Christ swear or Solemnly promise obedience unto their fellow Ministers under the notion of an ordinary and Cheif Minister It is reason they keep order and be subject to the Assembly but parity of Office and Authority admits not of obedience Is it agreeable to the Word that Bishops sweare or Solemnly promise obedience unto the Archbishops If so why not Archbishops to Cardinals or Patriarchs and they to the Pope Is it because the Sea bounds our Papacy Is it in the forme of ordination agreeable to the Word that the Bishop ordaining do Magisterially repeat the words of Jesus Christ who had a power and did effect it viz. Receive thou the Holy Ghost Whose sins thou dost forgive they are forgiven and whose sins thou dost retain they are retained as actually giving the Holy Ghost as a qualification for that Office and after this to give authority of administration with a Take thou authority to preach the Word of God and to minister the Holy Sacraments Is it agreeable to the Word of God by a special Solemn and Religious act to Consecrate unto a degree convenient and only necessary for the method and Order of an Assembly as if it were and indeed however others think by reason of the variation of the word I believe it was intended to be an actual Ordination to a distinct Office of Ministry in the Church like the Cheif Priest-hood among the Jews I am at a loss in Civil or Religious Policy to finde a warrant for so Sacred a forme in an advancement to a degree yet I will not deny the formalities of the Chaire Is it agreeable to the Word of God that excommunication the last and greatest of Censures do proceed without admonition and be inflicted ipso facto before obstinacy the proper and only ground of it be detected much lesse convicted and that so dreadful a Censure be denounced on the non-observance of Rites and Ceremonies declared indifferent and other light and frivolous occasions nay on the very discharge of duty As suppose an exercise in a Market-Town Canons of 1603. Can. 72. or a Fast kept in the Parish Church on the occasion of some special exigency of that Parish or by a Minister in a private family whose domestick concernments may call for the house and family to mourn apart and intreat the assistance of their special particular friends in prayer and yet in all these cases it is directed in the Canons made by the Convocation in London of which the Bishop of London sate President Anno 1603. Sir these things and such like in the Worship Discipline and Government of the Church of England are obvious and have been often urged as needing Reformation and as Reasons Apologizing for the Non-subscription of the Sober Learned and Pious Non-conformists ever since the Reformation as by Mr. Thomas Cartwright the Ministers of Devonshire and Cornwal the Ministers within the Diocess of Lincolne and many others whose Printed Books could not but have been seen by at least some of the Masters and Scholars of Oxford and might have convinced their judgments that they had done amiss by their personal subscription to approve that all things in the four specified particulars were agreeable to the Word of God Sixthly Their confidence that all things in these four specified particulars are agreeable to the Word of God and need no Reformation may well engage them to conclude that they are much better than those of Scotland which they wear to swear to preserve For the Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government in the Church of Scotland differeth in all the particulars mentioned and so must needs be dissonant if these be AGREEABLE TO THE WORD OF GOD Yet Sir methinks the good grounds on which they thought so might for their clearer Apology and satisfaction of other souls called to swear the same Covenant have been specified and declared the rather for that they seemed to be in a strait when they pointed unto the accounting of Bishops Antichristian and indifferent Ceremonies unlawful the making their Discipline the mark of a true Church and the setting up thereof the erecting of the
in the story forbids instances hoping general hints may answer the learned and sober 3. Nor am I convinced that it was in His power by the equity of the Law Numb 32. they mean 30.2 to annull and make void the Covenant for admitting the equity of that Law by Analogy to reach us I hope no adult child shall on observation of irregularities in the Government of a Family be barred from vowing in his place and calling to his power and capacity sincerely really and constantly to endeavor the Reformation thereof viz. Quenquam qui gaudet usu rationis ita plene sub alterius potestate esse quin ut sit quantum ad aliqua saltem sui juris is Dr. Sanderson's Rule though the effect may yet the lawful endeavour cannot be out of the childs reach De Turam if the child or wife swear nothing but positive duty or what is within their power and so limit their vow I hope the Superiours interdiction will favour more of passionate mistake than strength to avoid the vow Yet I must confess I am not clear that the equity of that Law will reach our case I was ever willing to yield His Majesty the Reverence due to a Political Parent but in this case of conscience wherein He is abstracted from and opposed unto the Parliament I find a defect which makes me fear the simile will not square and though I can own Him as a Parent to be by Him corrected and disposed yet methinks the Parental power is placed in others at least conjunct with Him viz. the Parliament I am sure Legislation is Paternal power and Execution more proper to the other Parent and that the Lords and Commons have a share if not the greatest share in Legislation no true Englishman nay no ordinary Polititian can or will deny when I observe the King sworn to Rule according to the Laws quas populas clegerit which the people shall choose and the Writ for their Election to require that they be furnished and have plenam sufficientem potestatem pro se communitate c. ad faciendum consentiendum his quae tunc ibidem de communi in consilidicti Regni nostri contigerint ordinari ita quod pro defectu potestatis hujusmodi c. dicta negotia infecta non remaneant Paternal Authority power to consent and make Laws in the great Affairs of the Kingdom as the Family and when I observe Polititians and Lawyers even English-men generally to conclude the forma informans form animating the Law to be the consent or choice of the people whence Marius Salamonius that great Lawyer defining the Law saith it is Expressa Civium Conventio and makes this the Reason of their obligation Ligatur populus legibus suis De principatu lib. 1. p. 35 36. Instin Cod. 1. Tit. 17. Lex 8. quasi pactis conventis quae verae sunt leges whence Theodosius the Emperour writing to the Senate of Rome doth declare consensus universorum to be the formality of those Laws that he would establish to which our Hollingshead and Sir Thomas Smith before mentioned doth fully assent and concur as likewise Fortescue who makes the King to be as the Minister in Marriage who may establish and declare it but the consent of parties gives it being and the common Dialect of our own Statutes being the Assent of the Lords and Commons and Authority of Parliament wich no less frequency than the Assent of the King and that the contriving debating fully forming by frequent reading serious consideration and full disputes is the peculiar work of the two Houses whilst a Ministerial Declaration though in a Dialect and form of Majesty is the proper and only work of a King though I deny not a Parental power and Prerogative to the King I cannot but judge it more than probable that the proper Paternal power is in the Parliament or at the least in the three Estates and then Sir we are under this unhappy question Whether to obey father or mother when they falling out command different nay contrary things this I confess is not more the distraction than the confusion of the Family yet certainly in such an unhappy chance prudent and rational children must and will cleave to the principal legislative party who hath a confessed authority and power to extend or restrain augment or diminish the Prerogative and Ministerial power of the other bound to act according to their appointments Sir Dr. Gaudens Appeal to the Oxford Reasons hath led me to this Discourse and unwilling distinction but my prayer is and hence-forward shall be that England may honour father and mother and know no difference for the Case is now altered and this Argument is of no force as I thought I had sufficiently hinted in my last for His late Majesty forbade the Act but never assumed an Authority to void the Obligation and His most Sacred Majesty by His own subjection to it Declaration for it and Oath to endeavour the Establishment thereof hath as is before noted made it valid and I hope such as call Him Father will weigh the equity of this Law Numb 30.2 and not only acknowledge their brethren bound by it but themselves become subject to the same bond which had before a lawful and sufficient but now hath a compleat and perfect Auhority 4. 4. The gesture in making the Covenant vindicated The fourth and last particular in the manner of making the Solemn League and Covenant is The action or gesture of the body used in the swearing thereof to declare the assent of the minde by which prophane spirits do endeavour to reproach it for that it was not sworn after the ordinary manner used among us by laying the hand on the Bible but by lifting up the hand towards heaven Amongst those who have of late appeared against the Covenant I find none speaking against this gesture League Illegal p. 21. save only Dr. Featlies ghost who like it self more scurrilously than seriously pretends to Answer one Text of Scripture which he supposeth to be the only one for defence of this gesture Rev. 10.15 The Angel lifted up his hand and sware c. Unto which he saith That might be a fit gesture for an Angel menacing a fatal doom to the world which yet may not be thought so fit a gesture for men entring into an holy League for the preservation of two Kingdoms If they can as the Angel stand upon the earth and the sea at the same time let them imitate the Angels in lifting up their hands when they make their Covenant Howsoever I think it a fitter gesture in taking this Oath than after the usual manner to lay the hand on the Bible for this Oath and Covenant hath no ground or foundation at all in that Book and the lifting up of the hand very well expresseth the purport of the Covenant which is a lifting up their hands against the Lords Anointed and his
Church The very transcription of this is a sufficient confutation Who can read it and not run and read a most malicious heart venting it self by a most weak head Sounds not this Argument like Dr. Featley Sure his Executor thought his name enough to make acceptable the dullest notions could drop from his own brain I shall desire it may be considered 1. No particular gesture is necessary and appointed of God to be used by men in making Oaths and Covenants and therefore men have chosen what gesture of the body to them seemed good to declare the assent of the mind as Abraham and Jacob the putting the hand under the hallow of the thigh our Countrey ordinarily useth the laying the hand on the Bible and kissing the Book but other Countreys the holding up of the right hand May not the Magistrate prescribing an Oath prescribe what gesture seems him good They must needs be eager bent who will fight with a shadow 2. Is the lifting up of the hand a gesture peculiar to an Angel only used in menacing and when he stands on sea and land at the same time Did this man never read nor hear it used in other places of Scripture and on other occasions or was it the vehemency or verity of the threatning and doom denounced which was witnessed by it What thinks he of Abraham in Gen. 14.22 I have lift up my hand to God I will not take any thing that is thine He was no Angel nor threatning any judgement nor did he stand on sea and land at the same time Or what thinks he of Ezek. 20.5 I lifted up my hand unto the seed of the House of Jacob God was not an Angel nor then menacing any fatal doom but promising the greatest blessings which Israel could enjoy If he had pleased to consult any Expositors on these or the like Texts he should find that the lifting up of the hand was the usual gesture in swearing any Oaths and Covenants He would make the World believe the Covenanters were in an hard strait to find an instance of this gesture in Scripture and therefore they flie to the Angel in the Revelation 3. Hath the Solemn League and Covenant no ground or foundation in Scripture Suppose the matter of it be no more than he here suggesteth viz. The preservation of two Nations hath this no ground in Scripture Did he never read therein of two Nations joyned in one Covenant for the good one of another But further hath the preservation of the true Reformed Religion and reformation according to the Word of God no foundation in Scripture are there no Historical Relations of Covenants of this matter hath the preservation of the Kings Honour and Happiness no ground or foundation in Scripture hath unity and uniformity in Religion no ground in Scripture and are not these the matter of the Covenant Can any thing but horrid impudence say It was not fit for them to lay their hands on the Bible for this Covenant hath no ground or foundation in that Book This Authour might have well forborne this charge who himself concedes that punctilio in the manner of making this Covenant which many and himself would deny to have ground in Scripture viz. the making it without the Kings consent For he grants that a Covenant to remove a scandal League Illegal p. 20. and fulfill the express command of God may be made not only without but against the consent of the Prince If this Covenant fall not under one of these nay both these qualifications I have lost my reason 4. With what face can this fury say the purport of this Covenant was the lifting up of their hands against the Lords Anointed and his Church whilst its professed inscription is A Solemn League and Covenant for Reformation and Defence of Religion the Honour and Happiness of the King Answerable whereunto are the grounds inducing to make it Having before our eyes the advancement of the Kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ the Honour and Happiness of the Kings Majesty and His Posterity and accordingly promiseth the preservation and reformation of Religion according to the Word of God and to preserve and defend the Kings Majesties Person and Authority that the world may bear witness with our consciences that we have no thoughts or intentions to diminish His Majesties just Power and Greatness Whatever may have been the practises of some wicked men who sware this Covenant it is as clear as the Sun That the lifting up of the hand for the good of the Church Honour and Safety of the Lords Anointed was the purport of the Covenant it self And the violent rejection of the Covenant as an Almanack out of date before the horrid violence done unto His late Majesty is a manifest testimony of it together with the protest of the covenanted Secluded Members of Parliament and of the Ministers of London against those perjurious proceedings As likewise the publick testimonies of the Ministers of the Gospel to the Solemn League and Covenant of almost all the Counties in England do declare it and the divastation and captivity of Scotland the Sequestrations Imprisonments and death of many in England and contests with all zeal faithfulness and constancy against all difficulties and dangers unto the very effecting of the Happy Return of His most Sacred Majesty and that in conscience of this very Covenant do loudly sound it through the world if the same malice do not deafen the ear in hearing the comment that darkned the eye in reading the Text. Now Sir I must tell him the lifting up of the hand might be a most proper gesture to the taking of this Covenant not only as a gesture usual in swearing and expedient because expeditious in an Oath universally sworn by whole Assemblies but as a sign of special suit and earnest supplication for divine grace and assistance Lam. 2.19 Of Solemn adoration and worship of God praising his goodness that had enclined the heart of the Governors of his people to bring them into such a Covenant Neh. 8.6 Or of joy and alacrity in so Sacred a Bond unto such absolute duties tending to the honour of God happiness of the King and safety of true Religion Ps 119.48 And in these respects it is a gesture no less suitable to men than Angels and the standing on earth not sea and earth at the same time performing a duty and promising things required in Scripture and praying mercies and blessings not menacing a fatal doom Yet I will not deny that it imprecated Gods direful judgements to fall on the heads of such as should violate this Solemn League and Covenant which our eyes have seen accomplished on such as slighted its obligation in the Civil part thereof And I cannot but tremble to think what must needs attend such as not only slight but set against and violently break through these holy bonds in that part which immediately concerneth God and true Religion whilst we see the