as wee declared in our former Replye to which yee haue not sufficientlie answered Neyther was it necessarie for removing of anie just Feares that his sacred Majestie should disallowe that Service-Booke as yee requyre but it was sufficient to discharge it in manner foresayde 3. Yee doe conclude your Answere vnto our thirde Replye with an vncouth and incredible Position whereof yee bring no proofe at all but onelie this bare Assertion Who-so-ever professe them-selues to bee perfectlie satisfied with the PROCLAMATION doe proclayme in the eares of all the Kingdome that they are better pleased with the Service-Booke and Canons than with the Religion as it hath beene professed in this Land since the Reformation This your Thesis is so evidentlie weake that we neede no more for the over-throwe there-of but to oppose there-vnto this our playne and vndenyable Antithesis Who professe them-selues to bee perfectlie satisfied with that PROCLAMATION where-by the Service-Booke is discharged the Religion professed in this Land since the Reformation is established doe proclayme in the eares of all the Kingdome that they are better pleased with the Religion professed in this Land since the Reformation than with the Service-Booke and Canons THE IV. DVPLY YEE alleadged a before and now agayne doe affirme that wee haue mistaken your Interpretation of the Olde Covenant as if it had beene given out Judiciallie by you and as if yee had intended to enforce it vpon others To free your selues of this imputation yee sayde in your first Answere that yee intended onlie To make knowne your owne meaning according to the mynde of our reformers and in charitie to recommend it to others Hence wee inferred in our REPLYE that yee ought not to obtrude your Interpretation vpon vs nor molest anie man for not receaving the same To this now yee say in your second Answere Altho you neyther vse threatnings nor obtrude your Interpretation vpon vs yet wee must pardon you if yee match vs not with the greatest part of this Kingdome in whose name by all fayre meanes yee recommend it to vs. Truelie Brethren wee are not offended with you for preferring the judgement of so manie to our judgement who are but few in number neyther neede yee to craue pardon of vs for this But concerning these fayre meanes and that force of reason whereby yee say yee recommend your Interpretation of the Olde Covenant to vs pardon vs if the experience wee haue both of your wrytings and proceedinges make vs to oppose this your assertion For in your wrytings wee expected indeede but haue not found that force of reason whereof yee speake and as for the proceedinges of those who haue subscrybed your Covenant wee of all men haue least reason to belieue that they vse no threatninges seeing wee heare daylie so much their threatnings agaynst our selues 2. Where-as for clearing of that which yee sayde before concerning the mynde of our Reformers yee affirme that The authoritatiue judgement of our Reformers is evident not onlie by the Confession of Fayth ratified in Parliament but also by the bookes of Discipline Acts of Generall Assemblies and by their owne writs First wee marvell how yee can say that the private writings of Master Knox and others who with him were instruments of that great worke of Reformation haue publicke authoritie to obliedge the Subjectes of this Kingdome The legislatiue and obligatorie power of the Church is onlie in Synods or conventions of Bishops and Presbyters and not in particular persons expressing their myndes apart Next this Church in the former age by abrogating the office of Superintendents established in the first booke of Discipline hath declared that the statutes ordinances contayned in those bookes are not of an authoritie perpetuallie obligatorie but may bee altered or abrogated by the Church according to the exigencie of tyme. The same lykewyse is manifest by the abrogation of summarie excommunication which this Church did abolish altho it was established in Generall Assemblies wherein Master Knox and other Reformers were present Wee neede not to insist much in this seeing so manie of you who are Subscribents mis-regarde the ordinances of our Reformers praefixed to the PSALME BOOKE concerning the office of Superintendentes or Bishopes Funerall Sermones and set formes of Prayer which they appoynted to bee publicklie read in the Church Hence the Reader may perceaue that ye haue no warrand for your Interpretation of the Olde Covenant from the authoritatiue and obligatorie judgement of the Reformers seeing yee can not ground it vpon the Confession of Fayth ratified in Parliament As for those other Meanes mentioned by vs to wit Scripture Antiquie and consent of the Reformed Churches that they truelie make for vs and agaynst you the vnpartiall Reader may perceaue by these our Disputes Whether or not Episcopacie and Pearth Articles bee abjured in the Late Covenant 3. As for the second Miss-taking mentioned by you in your Answere wee did showe in our Replye that in your Covenant Pearth Articles and Episcopacie are abjured And for proving of this wee asked of you what yee meaned by the recoverie and libertie of the Gospell as it was established and professed before the fore-sayde Novations and what is that period of tyme to which your wordes there haue reference that is Whether it bee that period of tyme when the Service-Booke and Booke of Canons were vrged vpon you or if it bee the tyme when Pearth Articles and Episcopacie were receaved in this Church But truelie your Answere to this is no-wayes satisfactorie nor hath so much as a showe of satisfaction For yee are afrayd to expresse that period of tyme lest yee bee forced to graunt that which wee before objected And yet your speach bewrayeth you For seeing yee answere onelie to that which wee sayde concerning the last of these two periods wee collect that by the recoverie of the libertie and puritie of the Gospell as it was established before the fore-sayd Novations yee meane the reducing of the Policie of this Church vnto that estate in which it was before Pearth Articles and Episcopacie were established And hence wee inferre as wee did before that in that part of your Covenant yee condemne and abjure Pearth Articles and Episcopacie as contrarie to the Puritie and Libertie of the GOSPELL 4. Yee seeme to answere that in that part of your Covenant yee condemne not PEARTH Articles and Episcopacie but those Abuses and Corruptions which haue accompanied them such as the Superstitious observing of dayes cessation from worke on those dayes Feasting Guysing and the grosse abuses which haue entered in the Sacrament vpon kneeling before the Elementes and that in respect of these Abuses wee who allow Pearth Articles and Episcopacie may sweare without prejudice of our cause to recover the Puritie and Libertie of the Gospell as it was established and professed before these Novations 5. But first let anie indifferent or vnpartiall man who knoweth the state of our CHVRCH judge whether or not it bee
vs agayne with the saying of King JAMES forceth vs to manifest his meaning by his owne wordes perhaps contrarie to your wish or expectation That most wyse and religious King neare the beginning of his Booke coÌ„cerning the Powder Treason wryteth expresselie that such a rysing vp of the bodie pro aris focis pro patre patriae ought to be according to everie ones calling and facultie Which wordes at least doe import that the moving of the Politicke bodie in whole or in part ought not to bee agaynst the will and direction of the head This is cleare by that which the same King hath written in his Booke entituled The true Law of free Monarchies where by manie strong Arguments hee doeth at length demonstrate that in a free Monarchie such hee proveth this his Ancient Kingdome of Scotland to bee the Subjects for no occasion or pretext what-so-ever may take Armes without power from the King and much lesse agaynst him whether hee bee a good King or an oppressour whether godlie or vngodlie altho the People haue might and strength humane And comprehendeth the summe of all his discourse concerning this matter in these words following Shortlie then to take vp in two or three sentences grounded vpon all these Argmentes out of the law of GOD the duetie alleadgeance of the people to their lawfull King their obedience I say ought to bee to him as to GOD'S Lievtenant in Earth obeying his commands in all things except directlie agaynst GOD as the commands of GODS minister acknowledging him a judge set by GOD over them having power to judge them but to bee judged onlie by GOD whom to onlie hee must giue count of his judgement Fearing him as their judge loving him as their Father praying for him as their Protectour for his continuance if hee bee good for his amendement if hee be wicked following and obeying his lawfull commands eschewing and fleeing his furie in his vnlawfull without resistance but by fobbes and teares to GOD according to that sentence vsed in the primitiue Church in the tyme of the persecution Pâ—eces lachryma sunt armae Ecclesiae that is Prayers and Teares are the armes of the Church 3. Ye tolde vs before and now againe doe repeat it that the first part of the Act of Parliament 1585 is relatiue to another Act in Queene Maries tyme forbidding Bands of Manrent Wee knew that sufficientlie before yee tolde it and passed by that part of your Answere as not pertinent for our Argument so that yee needed not now agayne to put vs in mynde of it But wee may justlie challenge you for not answering that which wee objected concerning the second part of that Act for it reacheth farther than that Act made in Queene Maries tyme and of new statuteth and ordaineth That in tyme comming no Leagues or Bands bee made amongst his Majesties Subjects of anie degree vpon what-so-ever colour or pretence without his Highnesse or his successoures privitie and consent had and obtayned thereto vnder the payne to be holden execute as movers of sedition and unquyetnesse c. Wherevnto also is consonant the 131 Act made in the 8 Parliament of King James the sixt Anno 1584 where it is statuted and ordayned by the King and his three estates that none of his Highnesse Subjectes of what-so-ever qualitie estate or function they bee of spirituall or temporall presume or take vpon hand to convocate conveane or assemble themselues together for holding of Councells Conventions or Assemblies to treate consult and determinate in anie matter of Estate Civill or Ecclesiasticall except in the ordinarie judgements without his Majesties speciall commandement or expresse licence had and obtayned to that effect vnder the paynes ordayned by the Lawes and Acts of Parliament agaynst such as vnlawfullie convocate the Kings Liedges And where-as yee finde fault that wee dispute from the Act of Parliament and that wee doe preciselie adheare to the letter of the Law wee pray you to consider that the nature of this question leadeth vs to the Act of Parliament Beside it seemeth strange that yee should challenge vs in this kynde since for justifying of your vnion as yee call it yee haue amassed a great number of Acts of Parliament and inserted them in the booke of your Covenant Wee omit the missapplying of these Acts which were made agaynst Poperie and not agaynst all these thinges which yee doe now resist as Popish Neyther can wee perceaue how these Acts of Parlament adduced by you to justifie your vnion proue that poynt More-over some of these Acts cited by you as namelie the 114 Act made in Parliament Anno 1592 in so farre as it is agaynst Episcopall Government and all other of that sort are expreslie rescinded by a posterior Act made in Parliament Anno 1612. How could yee in a legall Dispute for justifying your vnion produce rescinded Acts as if they were standing Lawes and passe by the posterior Acts which are yet Lawes standing in vigour whereby these other Acts are rescinded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Constitutiones tempore posteriores potiores sunt his quae ipsas praecesserunt ff de constitutionibus Principum L. 4. 4. Wee doe adheare in our former Replye not onlie to the letter but also according to our conception without prejudice of better information to the verie reason and lyfe of the Law The sentence cited by you to wit Salus Reipub. suprema lex esto or the safetie of the Common-Wealth should bee the chiefe Law serveth for a good direction to Rulers in making or changing of Lawes or in judging according to them whence in the Lawes of the 12 Tables these wordes are applyed to this purpose This is observed by King James of blessed Memorie in his often mentioned booke of the true Law of free Monarchies For albeit sayeth hee that I haue at leÌ„gth proved that the King is aboue the Law as both the author and giver of streÌ„gth thereto yet a good King will not onlie delyte to rule his Subjects by the Law but even will conforme himselfe in his owne actions therevnto alwayes keeping that grouÌ„d that the health of the CoÌ„mon-Wealth be his chiefe Law And where he seeth the Law doubt some or rigorous hee may interpret or mittigate the same lest otherwyse summum jus bee summa injuria But this sentence doeth no wayes warrand Subjectes to refuse obedience to standing Lawes agaynst the will of the Supreame Law-giver who is a speaking Law For this were to open a doore to all confusion which would not prooue the safetie but the ruine of the Common-Wealth As for that which yee sayde before of the Generall Band and Confession of Fayth and which heere agayne yee doe alleadge for your Covenant wee haue signified our opinion thereof in our preceeding DVPLYE The responses and verdicts of Juris-Consults concerning your Covenant are not knowne to vs nor yet the reasons inducements which moved them to giue out their
declaration in your favoures as yee alleadge Of OBEDIENCE due by Subjects to AVTHORITIE 5. The poynt touching Royall Authoritie is not so full of thornes and rockes as yee giue out if men would bee pleased vnpartiallie to holde the playne and patent way layde before vs by holie Scripture and by Orthodoxe Antiquitie and by manie Eminent Divynes in the reformed Church and learned Politickes which wee shall heere make manifest after the vindication of those three famous Theologues Whitaker Bilson and Rivet whom yee would haue the Reader to esteeme favourers of your opinion 6. Doctor Whitakers wordes agaynst William Raynold translated into English out of the Latine Edition at Oppenheme Anno 1612. Pag. 51. are these Hee relateth the tumults and troubles which were raysed for Religion in Germanie France and Boheme as if that one thing were sufficient to condemne them because once they did oppose themselues and resisted the violence offered to GOD'S Trueth and to themselues Where-as notwithstanding Fayth Oath and publicke Edicts and finallie the Lawes themselues gaue them warrand to doe the same I will not say more of this matter which is nowayes pertinent to the present purpose especiallie seeing not onlie their just Apologie but also the Edicts of the Princes themselues haue liberated them from the cryme of rebellion By these words of Doctor Whitaker which yee haue cited the Reader may easilie perceaue that hee doeth nowayes mayntayne or allowe taking of Armes by Subjects without warrand of the publicke Lawes and approbation of the Prince but excuseth what was done in those warres by the allowance of the Lawes and Edicts of Princes 7. So also Doctor Bilson in his Booke entituled The true difference betwixt Christian Subjection and vnchristian Rebellion printed at Oxford Anno 1585 Pag. 382. in the wordes cited by you declareth evidentlie that hee speaketh of such Republickes States as haue defences warranded by fundamentall Covenant in that Governement But what is that Doctors mynde concerning the duetie of Subjects in a free and absolute Monarchie is evident by his owne words in that same booke Pag. 380 where disputing agaynst a Jesuit hee sayeth Warre for the Catholicke Religion is both lawfull and honourable you say you must adde of the Subjectes agaynst their Prince or else you range cleane besides our question Wee stryue not what causes may leade Christian Princes to make Warre on their Neyghboures but whether it bee lawfull or tollerable for the Subject to beare Armes agaynst his naturall and absolute Prince You proue which is nothing to our purpose But Sir in this enterpryze the person must bee respected as well as the cause Bee the cause never so just if the person bee not authorized by GOD to draw the Sword they bee no just nor lawfull Warres Private men may not venter on Warres vnlesse they bee directly warranded by him that hath the Sword from GOD. And agayne in that same booke Pag. 502 Our Saviour for teaching his that they should bee brought before Kings and Rulers and put to death and hated of all men for His Name sake addeth not as you would haue it and hee that first rebelleth but hee that endureth to the ende shall bee saved and agayne Not with violence restrayne them but in patience possesse your owne soules This is the way for all Christian Subjects to conquer Tyrants and this is the remedie provyded in the New Testament agaynst all persecutions not to resist powers which GOD hath ordayned lest wee bee damned but with all meeknesse to suffer that wee may bee crowned And Pag. 513. hee showeth that manifolde formes of Common-Wealthes make diverse men speake diverslie of the Magistrates sword And Pag. 518. hee pleadeth that the Subjects in England haue not that lawfull warrand to draw the sword without consent of their Prince as the Germanes haue without consent of the Emperour and this discourse hee prosecuteth in some following pages 8. The same is the meaning of Doctor Rivet as wee take it in his Commentarie vpon the PSALME 68 where he distinguisheth betweene an absolute Principalitie and such a Principalitie as is onlie Conditionall Pactionall Conventionall Of this second sort are to bee vnderstood his words of just and necessarie defence But of the absolute Principalitie speaking in that same place hee recommendeth to Subjects rather suffering of Martyrdome And this to bee his meaning appeareth more clearlie by his last declaration concerning this question in his late Treatise entituled Jesuita Vapulans where beeing pressed by an adversarie hee handleth this question of purpose In the meane tyme wee wonder verie much that yee haue not directlie answered to these remarkeable wordes of Doctor Rivet alleadged by vs in our Replye wherein hee playnlie averreth that the doctrine of Buchanane Knox and Goodman concerning Subjects resisting their lawfull Princes is not approved by anie sound Protestant Wee expected from you a full and particular Answere and now agayne we would gladlie heare whether yee approue the judgement of Rivet concerning that doctrine of these wryters or not 9. Thus having vindicated these three divynes which yee alleadge for you wee come now to those Testimonies which wee promised for clearing of the playnnesse of the way touching Authoritie First it is evident by holie Scripture that it is vnlawfull for Subjects in a Monarchicall estate such as is this Kingdome of Scotland to take Armes for Religion or for anie other pretence without warrand and power from the Prince and Supreame Magistrate For the Scripture teacheth vs that the SWORD belongeth onlie to the KING and to them who are sent by him ROM 13. 1. PET. 2.13.14 That wee ought to keepe the King's commandement and that in regarde of the Oath of GOD ECCLES 8.2 And that wee should bee subject not onlie for wrath but also for conscience sake because the Powers that bee are ordayned of GOD Who-so-ever there-fore sayeth S. PAVL resisteth the Power resisteth the ordinance of GOD And they that resist shall receaue to themselues damnation ROM 13. In the wordes of the Apostle S. PAVL there is a remarkable opposition betwixt Subjection and Resistance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 implying that all militarie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether Defensiue or Offensiue if it bee agaynst the Superiour Power which GOD hath set over vs is forbidden In lyke manner we reade MATTHEW 26.52 that all they that take the Sword shall perish with the Sword Now certayne it is that in a Free Monarchie Subjects haue not the Sword from GOD except by the hand of the King to whom onlie GOD hath immediatelie given it And therefore who-so-ever taketh the Sword without his warrand hath just reason to feare the foresayde warning of our Saviour Manie other places of Scripture might bee adduced to this purpose which for brevitie wee omit and doe proceede in the next rowme to some testimonies of ancient Fathers other wryters 10. Tertullian in his Apologeticke Chap. 30. and 33. and 37.
telleth vs that the ancient Christians in his tyme altho having an heathen and persecuting Emperour did honour him as chosen of GOD and second from GOD and first after GOD and did choose rather to suffer than to make resistance by force of Armes altho they lacked not number and strength to doe it 11. The lyke example haue we in that renowned Thebaean Legiō of 6666 Christian Souldioures called Agaunenses from the place of their suffering who without making resistance as they had strength of hand to haue done suffered themselues rather to bee slayne for their Christian Profession by the Officers of Maximian the Emperour executors of his cruell commandement agaynst them This fell out in the 18 yeare of Diocletian as Ado Viennensis wryteth in his Chronicle which was the yeare of GOD 297 as Cardinall Baronius reckoneth in his Annalls And of that their Christian cowrage and pious resolution Venantius Fortunatus an ancient Bishop of Poictiers hath left vnto vs these Encomiasticke lynes in the second Booke of his Poëms Biblioth Patr. Tom. 8. Edit 4. Pag. 781. Queis positis gladiis sunt arma è dogmate Pauli Nomine pro CHRISTI dulcius esse mori Pectore belligero poterant qui vincere ferro Invitant jugulis vulnera chara suis 12. Gregorie Nazianzen in his first Oration speaking of the Persecution by Julian the Apostate when the Christians were moe in number and stronger in might of hand to haue made open resistance if they had in their consciences found it agreeable to their Christian Profession declareth playnlie that they had no other remedie agaynst that Persecution but patient suffering for CHRIST with gloriation in CHRIST 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 13. S. Ambrose having receaved imperiall commandement to deliver the sacred Houses or Churches to bee possessed by the Arians declareth what hee thought convenient to bee done in such a case to wit neyther to obey in that which hee could not performe with a good conscience nor yet to resist by force of Armes His wordes to the people CONCIONE 1. contra AVXENTIVM are these Why then are yee troubled I shall never willinglie leaue you If I bee compelled I can not gayn-stand I may bee sorie I may weepe I may sigh Agaynst Armes Souldiours the Goathes also my Teares are Armes For such are the Guardes of a Priest Other-wayes I neyther ought nor may resist And in the second Booke of his Epistles and 14 Epistle to his Sister Marcellina speaking of that same purpose hee sayeth I shall not fortifie my selfe with a multitude of people about mee Wee beseech O EMPEROVR we fight not I may not deliver the Church but I ought not make resistance 14. Such also was the doctrine and practise of manie other great Lightes which shyned in the dayes of Julian the Apostate and in the dayes of the Arrian Emperoures and Gothicke Arrian Kinges 15. S. Augustine wryting of a lawfull Warre acknowledgeth that onlie to bee lawfull which hath authoritie from the Prince For it is much to bee regarded sayeth hee for what causes and by whose authoritie men vndertake Warres But that naturall order which is accommodated to the peace of mortall men requireth this That the authoritie and counsell of vndertaking Warre bee in the power of the Prince 16. The imperiall Lawes doe say the same ff Ad legem Juliam majestatis Leg. 3. Eadem lege tenetur qui injussu Principis bellum gesserit delectumve habuerit exercitum comparaverit Et Cod. vt armorum vsus inscio Principe interdictus sit Nulli prorsus nobis insciis atque inconsultis quorumlibet armorum movendorum copia tribuatur These are the words of the Emperoures Valentinian and Valens Et Cod. de re militari Leg. 13. Nemo miles Nemo miles vel sibi vacet vel aliena obsequia sine nutu principali peragere audeat c. 17. BODIN in his first Booke de Republica cap. 10. Num. 155 156. Pag. 244. Edit Latin 4. Vrsell Anno 1601. reckoneth among the proper rights of Majestie the right and power to make Warre and this hee showeth to appertayne in a free Monarchie to the Prince onelie 18. To this meaning sayeth Peter Martyr As concerning the efficient cause it is certayne that Warre may not bee made without the authoritie of the Prince For Paull sayeth that hee beareth the Sword therefore hee may giue it to whom hee willeth and may take it from whom hee willeth Loc. Com. Class 4. Cap. 16. § 2. And a little after to wit § 7. hee reciteth and commendeth a saying of Hostiensis to the same purpose 19. CALVIN in the fourth Booke of his INSTITVTION in the last Chapter of that Booke disputeth the Question at length and by manie strong Argumentes evinceth and concludeth that it is no-wayes lawfull for Subjectes to resist their Prince by force of Armes whether the Prince bee Godlie and just or vngodlie and vnjust in his conversation and commaundementes and that no-thing remayneth to Subjectes in such a case but to obey or suffer Where vnderstand that Fleeing is a sort of Suffering Neyther are his wordes subjoyned in the 31 Sect. to wit I speake allwayes of private men c. contrarie to this For first CALVIN in this Dispute indifferentlie vseth the names of private men and Subjectes And therefore in the 33 Sect. at the beginning of it hee tearmeth those of whose duetie hee disputeth Subjectes And in-deede who-so-ever is a Subject is also in respect of the supreame Ruler a private man Although Magistrates who are vnder the King bee publicke persons in respect of their inferioures yet being considered with relation to him that is Supreame 1. PET. 2.13 they are but private As in Dialecticke an intermediate genus altho in respect of the inferiour species it bee a genus yet in relation to the superiour genus it is but a species All POWER OF GOVERNING is so subjected to the supreame Power that what-so-ever is done agaynst the will of the supreame Ruler is destitute of that Power and consequentlie is to bee esteemed for a private act For as wee are taught by the Philosophers ORDER can not bee but with a reference to that which is first Hence KING IAMES in his Booke Of the true Law of free Monarchies PAG. 206. affirmeth that all the people are but private men the authoritie beeing allwayes with the Magistrate Secondlie this is manifest from the verie wordes of CALVIN in that same 31 Sect. for there hee excepteth none from the necessitie of obeying or suffering when Kinges command thinges vnjust but onelie popular Magistrates appoynted for restrayning the licentiousnesse of Kinges Nowe where such Magistrates are erected it is certayne that a King in such a Common-wealth hath not the supreame power For if hee had the supreame power none could force him since an Inferiour can not force his Superiour This can not bee done but onelie by him who is Superiour or at least aequall Thirdlie this is cleare
also by the examples adduced by CALVIN namelie the Lacedaemonian Ephori the Romane Tribunes and the Athenian Demarchi When the Ephori were set vp in Lacedaemon the Kinges of Lacedaemon were but Kinges in name and had not the Supreame power as it is confessed by the Learned So when the Tribunes had their full power in Rome the Supreame power was in the people and in lyke manner it was in Athens when the Demarchi had power Therefore from this no-thing can bee inferred for the lawfull resistance of Subjectes to a Monarch or King properlie so called Fourthlie CALVIN applying this to the Kingdomes that nowe are sayeth no more but that peradventure the three Estates assembled in Parliament haue that fame power which the fore-mentioned Ephori c. had Heere it is to bee marked that hee sayeth onelie peradventure it is so which can bee no warrand to a man's conscience in a matter of so great importance For hee that resisteth his Superiour by force of Armes should not onelie thinke that peradventure hee hath power but should bee assuredlie perswaded that hee hath power so to doe When there is no more said but that peradventure such a thing is it may bee as reasonablie sayde Peradventure such a thing is not Neyther doeth hee giue this power even peradventure but to the the three Estates assembled in Parliament Hence the learned RIVET speaking of CALVIN his mynde in this place sayeth that hee giveth no power to people over Monarchs properlie so called The same also is observed concerning CALVIN his mynde by Albericus Gentilis in his third Royall Dispute 20. The same doctrine also is delivered by King JAMES of blessed Memorie in his Booke entituled The true Law of free Monarchies by Hugo Grotius in his first Booke de jure belli pacis CAP. 4. by Leonhartus Hutterus in his common places Loc. 32. CAP. 3. Iohannes Gerhardus in the 6 TOM of his common places in his Treatise de magistratu politico NVM 483. where hee discourseth accuratelie of this matter Zepperus in his 3 Booke de Politia Ecclesiastica in the last Section of the 13 Chapter PAG. 573. Edit Herborn 1595. Albericus Gentilis in his regall disputations disput 3. de vi civium in Regem semper injusta Iohn Bishop of Rochester in his worke written agaynst Bellarmine de potestate Papae in rebus temporalibus LIB 1. CAP. 8. CLASS 2. Where hee adduceth a clowde of manie moe Authors M. Antonius de Dominis in his Booke called Ostensio errorum Francisci Suarez CAP. 6. § 27. Ioannes Angelius Werdenhagen I. C. in his Politica generalis LIB 3. CAP. 10. QUEST 14. 21. By these Testimonies wee intende not to lay vpon you or anie of our Countrey-men anie imputation or to take vpon vs to giue sentence concerning their proceedinges but onlie beeing invited heereto by your last Answeres wee thought it our duetie to signifie to the Reader that manie Ancient and late Famous Wryters are not of that opinion eyther to thinke the question touching Authoritie so full of Rockes and Thornes as you call it or yet to favour such a defensiue taking of Armes as you thinke to bee alleadged by Whitaker Bilson and Rivet 22. Now to prosecute what remayneth of your Answere whereas yee say that when yee justifie your Covenants and Conventions yee meane not onlie the last and most remote endes but the nearest and immediate wee pray you tell vs what yee meane by the nearest and immediate ende if yee meane the object it selfe which the Schoole-men call finem intrinsecum proximum then the lawfulnesse and equitie of the matter vowed and promised in the Covenant is all one with the goodnesse of the ende of it Whence wee inferre that seeing the matter promised by you in this your Covenant to wit your Mutuall Defence agaynst all persons none excepted is in our judgement vnlawfull and forbidden by a lawfull Authoritie the ende of your Covenant is meerelie evill but if by the nearest ende yee meane any thing which is diverse from the object then wee still affirme agaynst the last part of your first Answere to our second DEMAND that Conventions and Covenants all other actions are to bee esteemed judged of first or principallie by the equitie of the object and then by the goodnesse of the ends of it whether they bee fines proximi or fines remoti 23. Wee doe not joyne with the Papistes blamers of our Reformation as yee seeme to beare vpon vs because they hate and oppugne our reformed Religion which wee loue and defende Neyther doe wee take vpon vs to censure the proceedinges of our Reformers but wee stryue by the grace of GOD so to carrie in our owne tyme and to walke wyselie in a perfect way as our adversaries the Papistes may get no advantage to pleade for their vnwarrantable doctrine and practises by anie pretence of our example THE III. DVPLY IN your third Answere passing lightlie from our REPLYE yee fall into some vnexpected digressions concerning the Service Booke and our thoughts thereof we esteeme it a matter beyond the compasse of humane judicatorie to sit vpon the thoughts of other men As for those outward expressions which yee alleadge vpon some of vs of not seeing erroures in that Booke or groaning for it yee shall vnderstand that such multiplicitie of Popish erroures as was alleadged by some of you to bee in that Booke was invisible to some of vs. Altho to enter in a particular examination or consideration of everie poynt and sentence in that Booke is not now tyme nor place Neyther did anie of vs professe groaning for that Booke in particular but for an vniformitie of Divyne Service throughout this Nationall Kirke and a more perfect forme than wee yet haue that the publicke Service were not permitted to the severall judgements and private choyse of everie Minister and Reader Which also was thought convenient by the Nationall Assemblie of the Kirke of Scotland holden at ABERDENE Anno 1616. 2. Whether that Service Booke now discharged contayneth anie Innovation of Religion or anie thing contrarie to the Protestant Religion as yee alleadge wee doe not dispute now But we doe assuredlie belieue the pietie and sinceritie of his Majesties intention ever to haue beene and still constantlie to bee as it is graciouslie declared by his Majesties late PROCLAMATION And wee are certaynlie perswaded that his Majestie hath given order to discharge all the Actes of Counsell made anent the Canons and Service-Booke and are crediblie informed that They are discharged by Act of Counsell at Holie-Rood-House the fift of Julie last according to the order given by his Majestie Also wee see no such just cause of Feare as may import your alleadged Necessitie of Covenanting seeing his Majestie will not presse anie thing of that nature but in such a fayre and legall way as shall satisfie all his loving Subjectes and that hee neyther intendeth innovations in Religion nor Lawes
all which is to bee preferred to the good of particular persons Hence wee inferre that the Precept of Obedience to Superioures which prescrybeth an Act aedificatiue to all because it is an exercise of a moste eminent and necessarie vertue is more obligatorie and of greater moment than the Precept of eschewing Scandall causeleslie taken by some particular persons 50. Secondlie That the Praecept of Obedience to our Superioures is of greater Moment and consequentlie more obligatorie than the Precept of eschewing Scandall is evident by these reasons which are brought by our Divynes to show where-fore the fift Commaundement hath the first place in the second Table to wit first because it commeth nearest to the nature of Religion or Pietie commanded in the first Table whence as your owne Amesius noteth in his Medulla Lib. 2. Cap. 17. § 13. the honouring and obeying of Parents is called by prophane Authors Religion and Pietie Secondlie This Precept is the ground and sinewe sayeth Pareus in his Catecheticke explication of the fift Precept of the Obedience which is to bee given to all the rest of the Precepts of the second Table Two reasons are commonlie brought of this One is that all Societies oeconomicke Civill and Ecclesiasticall doe consist and are conserved by the submission or subjection of Inferioures to Superioures which beeing removed confusion necessarilie followeth The other is that the Obedience of this Precept maketh way to the Obedience of all the rest For our Superioures are set over vs to the ende that they may make vs to doe our duetie to all others And consequentlie our Obedience to them is a meane instituted by GOD to procure our Obedience to all the rest of the Precepts of the second Table Now would yee know what followeth out of this let your owne Amesius whose wordes are more gracious vnto you than ours tell you it Seeing sayth he Cap. citato § 6 humane societie hath the place of a foundation or ground in respect of other dueties of Justice and Charitie which are commanded in the second Table of the Law therefore these crymes which directlie procure the perturbation confusion and eversion of it are more grievous than the violations of the singular Praecepts Now we subsume the denying of Obedience to Superioures injoyning such thinges as in them-selues are lawfull and exdient directlie procureth the perturbation and confusion of humane societie And therefore it is a cryme greater than the violation of other particular Praecepts of the second Table For this cause Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria in his Epistle ad Novatum cited before declaring how much the vnitie of the Church which is most frequentlie marred by the disobedience of Inferioures to their Superioures ought to bee regarded sayeth that Martyrdome suffered for eschewing of Schisme is more glorious than Martyrdome suffered for eschewing Idolatrie 51. Thirdlie These offices or dueties which wee owe to others by way of Justice are more strictlie obligatorie than these which wee owe to them onelie by way of Charitie And consequentlie these Praecepts which prescrybe Dueties of Justice are of greater obligation than these which prescrybe Dueties of Charitie onelie But wee owe the duetie of Obedience to our Superiours by way of Justice and therefore it is more obligatorie than the duetie of eschewing Scandall causleslie taken which is a duetie onlie of Charitie The Major or first proposition of this Argument is cleare of it selfe as beeing a Maxime not onelie receaved by the Scholastickes and Popish Casuists but also by our Divynes See your owne Amesius in his Medulla Lib. 2. Cap. 16. § 58.59.60.61.62.63 where hee not onlie proponeth this Maxime but also proveth it by two most evident examples The Minor is lykewyse cleare For first the duetie of Obedience which wee owe to the publicke Lawes of the Church and Kingdome belongeth to that Generall Justice which is called Justitia legalis For the legall justice as it is in Inferiours or Subjects it is a vertue inclyning them to the Obedience of all Lawes made for the benefite of the Common-wealth as Aristotle declareth in his 5 Booke of the Ethickes Cap. 1. Secondlie Debitum obedientiae the debt of Obedience which wee owe to our Superioures is not onlie debitum morale a debt or duetie vnto which wee are tyed by morall honestie and GOD'S commandement but also debitum legale or debitum justitiae quod viz. fundatur in proprio jure alterius a debt grounded vpon the true and proper right which our Superioures haue to exact this duetie of vs so that they may accuse vs of injurie and censure vs if wee performe it not There is great difference betwixt these two sorts of debt and the last is farre more obligatorie than the first As for example A man oweth moneys to the poore by a morall debt but to his creditor hee oweth them by a legall debt or debt of justice And therefore hee is more strictlie oblieged to pay his creditor than to giue almes Such-lyke by morall honestie and GOD'S precept also a man oweth to his neyghbour a pious carefulnesse to impede sinne in him by admonition instruction good example and by omission even of thinges lawfull when hee foreseeth that his neyghbour in respect of his weaknesse will bee scandalized by them But his neyghbour hath not such a right to exact these thinges of him neyther can hee haue action agaynst him for not performing of them as our lawfull Superioures haue for our due obedience In what sense the Administration of the SACRAMENTS in private places was thought indifferent in PEARTH ASSEMBLIE 52. In our Replye wee professed that wee can not abstayne presentlie from private Baptisme and private Communion beeing requyred to administrate these Sacraments to such persons as can not come or bee brought to the Church Hence first yee take occasion to object to vs that the state of the question concerning Pearth Articles is quyte altered in respect wee and our associates did ever before alleadge the question to bee of things indifferent but now we thinke them to bee so necessarie that altho the Generall Assemblie of the Church should discharge them wee behoved still to practise them Wee answere first that the Assemblie of Pearth hath determined nothing of the indifferencie or necessitie of these thinges Secondlie If anie who allowed these Articles did at that tyme in their discourses and speaches call them indifferent they meaned onlie that in the celebration of these Sacramentes the circumstances of place and tyme are thinges indifferent of their owne nature or which is all one that wee are not so tyed to the administration of them in the Church and at tymes appoynted for Sermon but wee may celebrate them in private houses and at other tymes But judicious and Learned men even then thought the denying of these Sacramentes to persons who can not come or bee brought to the Church to bee a restrayning of the meanes of grace altogether vnwarrandable by GOD'S word Whence yee may collect whether
or not they thought it to bee vnlawfull Thirdlie Yee haue no warrand from our Replye to say that wee would not abstayne from private Baptisme and Communion altho our Nationall Assemblie should discharge them For as wee are verie vnwilling to omit anie necessarie Duetie of our Calling so wee carrie a singular respect to lawfull Authoritie and to the Peace and Unitie of the Church abhorring Schisme as the verie Pest of the Church But of this wee shall speake heereafter in the thirteenth Duplye 53. Next yee say if wee haue the same judgement of Kneeling in the receaving of the Communion and of Feastivall dayes it commeth to passe among vs which hath beene incident to the Church in former ages that thinges haue beene first brought in as indifferent then vrged as necessarie Certaynlie Brethren none are so guiltie of this as your selues and your associates for yee haue now made some thinges to be esteemed necessarie by your followers which haue beene accounted indifferent not onlie since the Reformation but these fifteene hundreth yeares by-gone And in some other thinges which the auncient Church did wyselie forbid yee doe now make the Libertie and Puritie of the Gospell to consist As for vs wee stand as wee stood before and doe yet thinke Kneeling in the receaving of the Sacrament and the fiue Feastivall dayes to bee Rites indifferent in their owne nature but indeede verie profitable and edificatiue if Pastors would doe their duetie in making their people sensible of the lawfulnesse and expediencie of them 54. Wee are of the same judgement concerning Confirmation which CALVIN wryting vpon HEBR. 6. 2. acknowledgeth To haue beene vndoubtedlie delyvered to the Church by the Apostles and with the same Author in the fourth booke of his Institut Cap. 19 § 14. wee wish That the vse of it were agayne restored so farre are we from that partiall dealing with the Articles of Pearth which yee object vnto vs. What hath moved our most Reverende Prelates to abstayne hitherto from the practising of it wee know not they can themselues best satisfie you in this poynt And wee modestlie judge that this omission hath proceeded from weyghtie regardable causes It was sufficient for vs to haue a care of our owne dueties in our particular stations But the vrging and pressing of that practise vpon the Bishops requyreth higher Authoritie than ours In the meane tyme ye know the Bishops never disclaymed the Authoritie of that Act of Pearth concerning Confirmation or of any other of these Acts as yee haue done who haue beene hitherto professed and avowed disobeyers of them all Wherefore wee wish you heereafter not to bring this omission of the Bishops in the matter of Confirmation as an Argument for that forbearance of Pearth Articles which yee requyre of vs for there is a great difference betwixt the omission of a duetie commanded by a Law and an avowed or professed yea sworne disobedience of the Law 55. Last of all whereas ye say that we by maintaining the necessitie of private Baptisme Cōmunion doe condemne the practise of this our Church frō the Reformatiō till Pearth Assemblie put no small guiltinesse vpon other Reformed Churches who vse not private Baptisme and Communion at all but abstayne from them as dangerous wee answere that wee haue in all modestie proponed our owne judgement concerning private Baptisme and private Communion neminem judicantes as CYPRIAN sayde of olde in consilio Carthag in praefat nor taking vpon vs to censure or condemne the practise eyther of this Church in tymes preceeding Pearth Assemblie or of other Reformed Churches Wee can not indeede denye but wee dissent from them and if this bee a condemning of them wee may no lesse justlie say to you that you condemne the Practise and Doctrine not onlie of our Reformers in the particulars mentioned before in this same DVPLYE but also of dyverse Reformed Churches and of the Ancient Church as wee declared in our sixt DEMAND and shall agayne speake of it in our sixt DVPLYE A DEFENCE OF OVR DOCTRINE and PRACTISE concerning the Celebration of BAPTISME and the LORD'S SVPPER in private places 56. Yee desire vs wyselie to consider whether the desire which our people haue of Baptisme and Communion in tyme of sicknesse bee not occasioned by prevayling of Poperie and through a superstitious conceat that people haue of these Sacraments as necessarie to salvation Wee are loath to come short of you in dueties of charitie espciallie in good wishes and therefore wee lykewyse wish you wyselie to consider whether the neglect of these Sacraments in the tyme of sicknesse which is in manie parts of the Kingdome proceede not from some want of a sufficient knowledge and due esteeme of the fruites of these High and Heavenlie mysteries 57. It is well that yee acknowledge that we minister these Sacraments in private as necessarie onelie by the necessitie of the commandement of GOD but with all yee conceaue that our people imagine or seeme to imagine them to bee so necessarie meanes as that GOD hath tyed his grace to them Wee desire you to judge charitablie of those who are vnknowne to you and with all wee declare that neyther wee doe teach our people nor doe they thinke for ought wee did ever know that Baptisme is so necessarie a meane vnto salvation that without it God can not or will not saue anie yea on the contrarie wee are confident that when Baptisme is earnestlie sought for or vnfeygnedlie desired and yet can not bee had the Prayers of the Parentes and of the Church are accepted by GOD in stead of the ordinarie meane the vse where-of is hindered by vnavoidable necessitie and so in this wee depart from the rigid tenet of Papistes On the other part wee lykewyse teach and accordinglie our people learne that BAPTISME is the ordinarie meane of our enterance into the CHVRCH and of our REGENERATION to the vse where-of GOD by His Commaundement hath tyed vs. 58. If the Commaundement of our SAVIOUR MATTH 28.19 Goe yee there-fore and teach all Nations baptizing them In the Name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holie Ghost tye not Parentes to seeke Baptisme to their Children and Pastors to administer when it is sought then haue wee no commaundement at all for baptizing of Infantes which is an Anabaptisticall absurditie But if Parentes and Pastors are tyed by this Commaundement then Parents ought to seeke Baptisme to their dying Children not baptized before for then or never and Pastors must accordinglie performe that Duetie then which is incumbent vpon them This is that which KING JAMES of blessed memorie in a Conference at Hampton-Court pag. 17 reporteth him-selfe to haue aunswered to a Scotish Minister whyle hee was in Scotland The Minister asked If hee thought Baptisme so necessarie that if it bee omitted the Chyld should bee damned No sayde the King but if you beeing called to baptize the Chyld though privatelie should refuse to come I thinke
Hornes of it still towards you Yee farther insinuate that our Reasons are not solide and graue but velitations of such a sort as yee looked not for Let the judicious Reader pronounce his sentence of this onelie wee wish that yee had chosen rather to satisfie than to contemne our Reasons That which yee heere agayne adde concerning the change of Commissioners is answered in our fourth DVPLYE 8. To giue light to your former Discourse yee subjoyne a Distinction of Discipline into three members First yee saye It is taken for the Rule of Governement of the Church and Censure of Manners by Office-bearers appoynted by CHRIST and thus yee saye it is vnchangeable Secondlie For Constitutions of Councells and Actes of Parliament about matters of Religion And thus yee say it is alterable or constant according to the nature of particular Objectes Thirdlie For the ordering of Circumstances to bee observed in all actions Divine and Humane and so yee say it is variable First by these Distinctions the matter seemeth rather to bee obscured than cleared For ye doe not expresse in which of these senses the Discipline mentioned in the Negatiue Confession is to bee taken which was the poynt requyred of you 9. Secondlie Yee seeme by this Distinction to intangle your selues yet more For first if yee take the name of Discipline in anie one or anie two of these senses what say yee to these following wordes of your Dispute agaynst the English Popish Ceremonies Parte 4. Cap. 8. Sect. 8 The Bishop doeth but needleslie question what is meaned by the Discipline where-of the Oath speaketh For howsoever in Ecclesiasticall vse it signifieth often-tymes that Policie which standeth in the censuring of Manners yet in the Oath it must bee taken in the largest sense namelie for the whole Policie of the Church For 1. The whole Policie of this Church did at that tyme goe vnder the name of Discipline and those two Bookes wherein this Policie is contayned were called The Bookes of Discipline And without all doubt they who sware the Oath meaned by Discipline that whole Policie of the Church which is cōtayned in those Bookes 10. Secondly when that Little Confession was framed the Governmēt of the Church was onlie by Presbyters and not by Bishops and there-fore if yee thinke that the name of Discipline in that Confession comprehendeth vnder it the first part of your Distinction which as wee conceaue yee will not denye yee may easilie perceaue that wee are vrged by you to sweare and subscrybe agaynst our Consciences since wee thinke the Rule of the Governement of the Church which then was to bee changeable and that the Governement was lawfullie chaunged by following Assemblies and Parliamentes from Presbyters to Bishops 11. Thirdlie If these Constitutions of Councels concerning Objects alterable mentioned in the second member of your Distinction bee one and the same with ordering of variable Circumstances mentioned in the third member why haue yee distinguished the one from the other But if they bee different then yee graunt that Ecclesiasticke Constitutions may bee made concerning some alterable matters of Religion which are not bare Circumstances which is repugnant to your ordinarie Doctrine where-by yee mayntayne that nothing changeable is lest to the Determination of the Church in matters of Religion but onelie Circumstances of Actions Wee can not see howe yee can mayntayne this Doctrine and yet oppose the Determinations of the Church concerning Ceremonies which are indifferent 12. Wee had reason to inquyre your judgement concerning Rites or Ceremonies which are not of Divine Institution whether they bee lawfull or not though yee still shunne the declaring of it Since by your Covenant yee intende a reformation of Religion and a recovering of the Libertie and Puritie of the Gospell as yee speake if yee in your judgement condemne such Ceremonies as yee insinuate wee can not expect but that if yee obtayne your desires all such Rites shall bee expelled and condemned especiallie since by this your Late Covenant yee tye your selues to that Olde Covenant where-in yee disclayme and detest all Rites brought into the Church without the word of GOD. Now wee can not concurre with you for promoving this ende because such a judgement is playne contrarie to ours yea contrarie to the vniversall judgement and practise of the Auncient Kirke repugnant also to the judgement of the Protestant Churches and most famous Divynes therein as may appeare by the quotations on the margine But if yee bee of the same mynde with vs and thinke that there are some Rites of that kynde lawfull why doe you hide your mynde from vs and others since the acknowledgement and manifesting of this Trueth would bee no small advancement to your cause by removing this great offence Of Matrimoniall Benediction and God-fathers in Baptisme 13. As for solemne blessing of Marriage wee asked what warrand yee had for it by Praecept or Practise set downe in GOD'S word In your Answere yee insinuate that it is a blessing of the people cōmanded in the Law and more playnlie wee finde this set downe in the Dispute agaynst the English Popish Ceremonies PART 3. CAP. 2. SECT 10. Yet playne it is from Scripture it selfe that Matrimoniall Benediction ought to bee given by a Pastor for GOD hath commanded His Ministers to blesse His people NVM 6. First who ever before you did ground the necessitie of solemne blessing of Marriage vpon these words NVM 6.23 Speake vnto Aaron and vnto his sonnes saying On this wyse yee shall blesse the children of Israel saying vnto them The LORD blesse thee and keepe thee c. Learned Melanchton was not so well versed in Scriptures as to see this For hee sayeth in his Epistles Pag. 328. Yee see that the Rite of the Auncients is that the Brydegroome and Bryde are joyned before the Altar in the sight of GOD and with the incalling of GOD. Which custome vndoubtedlie hath beene ordained by the first Fathers that wee may consider that this conjunction was appoynted by GOD and is assisted by Him 14. Secondlie By this commandement of GOD to blesse the people NVM 6. eyther there is a necessitie layde vpon the Church to blesse Marriages solemnlie or not If yee say there is not a necessitie then there is no commandement of GOD there-anent for it is necessarie to obey GOD'S Commandement If yee say there is a necessitie what say yee then to your Friend Didoclaue who in his Altar of Damascus Pag. 866 affirmeth that neyther the presence of the Congregation nor blessing of the Minister is necessarie to this action And if yee dissent heere-in from him yee are holden to prooue your opinion by a necessarie consequence from holie Scripture which wee are perswaded yee are not able to doe 15. Thirdlie The Commaundement To blesse the people is no lesse if not more generall than that 1. COR. 14.40 Let all thinges bee done decentlie and in order on the which wordes both Auncient and Recent
our hand to anie thing which concerneth our due obedience to our Prince As for that which heere agayne yee alleadge of his Majesties Commissioner and wyse States-men as having receaved satisfaction from you wee referre you as before to our Answere made thereto in our first DVPLYE 9. To your third Question wee answere our assertion concerning the vnlawfulnesse of Subjects their resisting the Authoritie of free Monarchies by force of Armes even altho they were enemies to the Trueth and persecutors of the professors there-of can not in the judgement of anie reasonable man import that we haue the least suspition of our King that eyther hee shall change his Religion or shall fall vpon his religious and loyall Subjects with force of Armes Wee haue often declared in these our Disputes that wee are fullie perswaded of our King's Majesties constancie in profession of the true Religion and equitable disposition in mtnistration of justice And in testification heere-of we rest satisfied with his Majesties Proclamation agaynst which yee haue protested 10. To your fourth Question wee answere because that wee doe esteeme Subscription to your Covenant neyther to bee warrandable by GOD'S word nor to bee a convenient meane for pacification wee holde it our duetie both to with-holde our handes from it and to dehort our people from it 11. To your fift Question wee answere 1. Wee holde it a wrong supposition which yee make that the Prelates and their followers are labouring to introduce Poperie and to make a faction 2. Wee know our gracious King to bee so just and so wyse and so rype in yeares and experience that hee will not suffer anie of his Subjects to abuse his Majesties name in the execution of anie injustice 3. To make resistance by force of Armes agaynst the King's publicke standing Lawes and agaynst his Majesties publicke Proclamations is not in our judgement a convenient or lawfull way for defending of the Religion of the Liberties and Lawes of the Kingdome and of the Kings Authoritie but on the contrarie it bringeth Scandall vpon our profession See our Reasons in our second DVPLYE 12. To your sixt Question wee answere that in all free Monarchies there is nothing left to Subjectes in the case of persecution by their owne Soveraygne Princes but patient suffering with Prayers and Teares to GOD or fleeing from their wrath as wee haue at length proved in our second DVPLYE This doctrine did the people of Alexandria learne of their holie Bishop Athanasius as is evident by their owne wordes in their Protestation subjoyned to the Epistle of Athanasius ad vitam solitariam agentes If say they it bee the commandement of the Emperour that wee bee persecuted wee all are readie to suffer Martyrdome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tom. 1. Oper. Athanas pag. 868 Edit Paris 1627. As for the nature of the Government of this Kingdome of SCOTLAND reade the Booke of KING IAMES THE SIXT of Blessed Memorie entituled The true Lawe of free Monarchies and the Praeface of the first Booke of REGIAM MAIESTATEM where it is expresslie sayde of the KING of SCOTLAND that Hee hath no Superiour but the Creator of Heaven and Earth Ruler of all thinges This our Aunswere neyther proceedeth from Flatterie neyther from anie intention to stirre vp Princes agaynst their loyall Subjectes nor from anie ayme at other worldlie endes as yee doe vncharitablie judge but from our due Fidelitie to our KING from our true Loue to our Countrey and from our vpright Desire to the GLORIE of GOD and the Comfort of our owne Soules in the Day of our Accompts THE X. DVPLY ALTHO wee take you to bee of the number of those who penned the Late Covenant yet pardon vs to call your Glosses of it in question so long as yee doe not satisfie our Argumentes which prooue them to bee contrarie to the verie wordes of your Covenant Wee haue showne in our Replyes and nowe agayne in our fourth Duplye that the wordes of the Covenant importe a perpetuall adherence to the whole externall Policie of the Church as it was Anno 1581 and the remooving of Pearth Articles and Episcopacie as of thinges contrarie to the Libertie and Puritie of the Gospell Whence wee still inferre that these who haue sworne the Covenant are tyed by their Oath to vote agaynst Pearth Articles and Episcopacie and consequentlie can not without praejudice eyther dispute or giue out a decisiue sentence concerning them in the intended Assemblie 2. Yee saye Yee will not judge so vncharitable of vs as to thinke vs so corrupt that in our opinion since the tyme designed by vs no-thing hath entered into the Church beside Episcopacie and the Articles of Pearth which can bee praejudiciall to the Libertie and Puritie of the Gospell Wee are glad that altho yee judge vncharitablie of vs yet yee judge not so vncharitablie and altho yee thinke vs corrupt yet yee thinke vs not so corrupt as not to bee sensible of these thinges Wee tolde you our mynde before in our fourth DVPLY concerning these Abuses which yee thinke to haue beene occasioned by Pearth Articles and no we wee tell you that if Pearth Articles and Episcopacie for these their alleadged Consequentes bee alltogether remooved the benefite which yee thinke our Church may receaue by remooving of them shall not in anie measure aequall Her Great Losses THE XI DVPLY WEE complayned in our DEMAND of the vncharitablenesse of your Followers who calumniate vs as if wee were Favourers of Poperie And to showe howe vnjust this Calumnie is wee declared that wee are readie to sweare and subscrybe our Nationall Confession of Fayth ratified and registrated in Parliament to which Declaration wee haue nowe added our Oath which wee did sweare when wee receaved the Degree of Doctorate in Theologie and haue solemnlie agayne renewed it PAG. 15.16 In your Answere to that Demand yee slighted our Complaynt and did not so much as once mention it which made vs in our Replye to complayne also of you who haue showne your selues so vnwilling to giue vs that Testimonie of our Sinceritie in professing the Trueth which all who knowe vs thinke to bee due to vs. Wee exspected that in your second Aunswere to that Demaund this fault should haue beene amended But contrarie to our expectation wee perceaue not onelie that yee are insensible of the grievous injurie done to vs by the calumnious reportes of others but also that yee haue busied your owne wittes to enquyre as yee saye in matters to search and to trye our wayes and to expiscate what yee could agaynst vs by the vnfriendlie testimonie of some who perhaps are displeased with vs as Achab was with Micajah for the freedome of our Admonitions Charitie yee knowe thinketh no evill 1. COR. 13.5 and covereth a multitude of transgressions PROV 10.12 1. PET. 4.8 But vncharitable Inquisition and prying into other mens doinges not onelie discovereth those infirmities vnto which God will haue everie one of vs subject for humbling of vs