that any knowing Christian and least of all that any Minister of the Gospell could have had such a scruple sith neither it's notation nor the obvious use of the word as it is either in the Scripture which is full of it or as it is in ordinary speech and acception amongst men can give any rise for such a groundlesse scrupulous fancy 2. A doting about strifes of words produceth no profit but strife envy railings evill surmisings perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth even to the subverting of the hearers see 1 Tim. 6. 4 5. 2 Tim. 2. 14. let therfore the godly wise Christians and Ministers avoid such questions about words clear in themselves studying to shew themselves approved unto God c. 2 Tim. 2. 15. 3. Let such wordy Questionists remember that the pious and prudent contrivers of the Directory for the publike Worship of God throughout England Scotland and Ireland established by our Parliament in that part of it which directeth about the solemnization of Marriage they thought it meet that the persons to be married together should promise mutually to be faithfull unto one another In the Directory for the Ordination of Ministers it is Ordered that such as shall be ordained do declare a promise of faithfulnesse as well as of other duties in the exercise of their Ministery I do hence demand whether persons to be married or Ministers to be ordained should the one sort of them scruple the accomplishment of their marriage or the other sort scruple their Ordination because of the Engagement to be faithfull in their relative conditions and whether they should surcease rather therefrom upon a phantasticall conceit that the sense of the word faithfull may be strained to some insnaring afterwards I conclude therefore that as in Domestical and Ecclesiastical relations there is a requisitenesse of promising to be true and faithful so it ought to be likewise in the relation in the Common-wealth that there be an Engagement of faithfulnesse thereunto If any man be otherwise minded touching being faithfull in the mentioned relations in Family Church and Commonwealth surely he seemeth to give ground of just jealousie that he meaneth not fairly that I say no more VI Object There was a liberty granted and directed by Order of Parliament that Preachers in giving of the Covenant should explain it and accordingly the Preacher explained it in such sense as he apprehends stands not with his freedome of conscience to subscribe the Engagement Ans. 1. The liberty allowed and directed unto Preachers for explaining the Covenant ought to be understood of such explaining it as stood with the just and genuine sense of it as all rationall men will easily acknowledge If any Preachers took a liberty otherwise they did abuse their liberty yea it was a collusion and imposture in the Preacher whoever he was to put a sense thereon of his owne not agreeing thereto frustrating what in him lay the end of the Covenant and the taking of it 2. They that thus object do not speak out what the sense of the Preacher was that he gave of the Covenant inconsistent with the Engagement so as it cannot be expected that a full and satisfactory answer should be made thereto his sense being in the dark may be reputed an act of darknesse albeit confused and uncertain speech be of it in the streets at noon day 3. This Objection giveth occasion to suspect that some persons yea some who pretend for Presbytery but are loosly minded thereunto sith such do thus object do make an advantage to put the Covenant to their own sense to free themselves thereby from the sacred bonds of it in its own sense and meaning 4. Let such Objecters be pleased for the undeceiving themselves and their adherents plainly and punctually in their own consciences and conferences with their Associates answer these demands without any tergiversation for arguing their sincerity towards God and towards men about the Covenant 1. Whether the Covenant was not obligatory in its due sense and meaning in every article of it as well as in some branches of some of the Articles more specially affected 2. Whether there were not some main things primarily and other things subserviently covenanted And what those maine things and what the subservient things were that thus truth and faithfulnesse may be discerned hereabouts 3. Whether the chief ends of the Covenant were not Reformation and defence of Religion and the safety of the People 4. Whether the honour and happinesse of the King was absolutely covenanted albeit he should remain obstinate in his tyranny and in other unnaturall capitall crimes unto which God had appointed temporall death 5. Whether the grand Priviledge of Parliament unto which others are subservient be not that above forty members of the House of Commons acting freely in the House doe continue the being of the House of Parliament And consequently whether by vertue of the Covenant such House of Commons ought not to be acknowledged the Parliamentary supreme Power FINIS
are to be continued as also Courts of Justice and Judicature in a due way See Declaration Cause Lastly the Parliaments Declaration sheweth their just and well-grounded ends in the establishing the Common-wealth as now it is without King and Lords Let the Declaration it self be exactly skanned in its full and effectuall expressions and it may appeare it was not force on some without the Parliament doors but the force of right reason on the Members within the House which hath so declared How forcible are right words See Iob 6. 25. II. Assertion The second Assertion touching the Soveraign Power of the English Parliament is taken for granted not only by the Parliament themselves groundedly demonstrated in their Declaration above mentioned in the first Assertion and likewise in their exercise of supreme power in issuing out Commissions both to subordinate Magistrates for the doing of justice and to the Souldiery for defensive and offensive warres but also it is taken for granted by others rationall men in the Common-wealth who have acted by their Commissions and this from year to year of late whilest the King lived as well as this present year 1649. yea and there are many who have published their minds touching this matter This hath been done by Mr. Prynne though now an adversary hereunto in foure voluminous parts of one of his books with a large Appendix thereunto intituled The Soveraigne Power of Parliaments whither the Reader may be referred only I doe observe hereabouts That God the onely Law-giver and Soveraign King of Kings and all supreme powers having been graciously pleased to preserve unto us in England the substance of our Common-wealth hitherto surely he hath appointed and continued unto us the Law of Nature contained in the Decalogue to be our rule of life in our severall capacities of inferiority and superiority whether supreme or subordinate as well in Civill Government as in Church and Family yea to have a Magistracy to be keepers of both the Tables see Rom. 13. 4. compared with Exod. 19. 6. cap. 20. 1. 12. And therefore our transactions in England touching our Lawes and the executing of them areby lawfull commissioned persons of severall sorts otherwise the Law of Nature feemeth to fail and so consequently are lawfully administred by them Oh that all men fearing God amongst us specially such as have complied with the Parliament after the King his leaving the House and withdrawing from it would consider soberly and seriously hereof and so take heed of daring to think or speak or act against those in Authority lest they do incurre Gods fierce displeasure See Numb. 12. cap. 2 Pet. 2. 10. Psal. 2. 12. It is hard for any to kick against the pricks Acts 9. 5. and to resist the Ordinance of God Rom. 13. 2. III. Assertion The third Assertion That there is no just cause of refusing to subscribe the Engagement in regard of the present establishment of the Common-wealth of England without a King and House of Lords It may be argued as otherwise so from the rule of our own practice who doe professe our due respects to Parliaments viz. 1. It was not taken to be prejudiciall or dangerous to the Priviledges of Parliament that the Lords spirituall as they were stiled were cashiered and expelled out of the House of Lords albeit they had been called by Writ and had formerly and very antiently been esteemed and reputed Members of that House 2. It did not infringe the nature and being of the Parliament that the King after a time with-drew himself totally from the House 3. The Parliament did retain its perfect constitution and being when very many yea most of the Lords and when very many of the Commons with-drew themselves pretending to be a Parliament at Oxford sith a competent number remained still in the House 4. It is alledged out of approved Antiquaries that in case all the Lords after a due Summons should fail to appeare and sit in the House that their totall absence doth not nor cannot hinder or nullifie the due Parliamentary proceedings whereas it is destructive to the being of the Parliament if a competent number of Commons constituted to make up an House be absent sith the Commons are the Representatives of the people see Prynnes Soveraign Power of Parliament Part 1. Pag. 43. Edit. 2. 5. It is resolved and declared by the Parliament that the King had not a negative Vote These five particular instances being duely marked together with that which the Parliament hath declared March 17. 1648. as above may abundantly convince that according to this third Assertion there is no cause of just refusall to subscribe the Engagement to the Common-wealth of England as it is now established And so the first Argument justifying the faithfulnesse and conscionableness of the subscription is fully concluded II. REASON Because subscribing the Engagement hath its due consistency and agreement with the main scope and intention of former Oaths Protestations and Covenants prae-ingaged in nationally unto the supreme Power of England approved mostly on all hands so that as right reason did then require the taking of them in their just sense so doth the same reason now require to take the Engagement For the more effectuall arguing the case by this reason these Conclusions are to be opened and considered viz. 1 Conclusion It is presumed and taken for granted that the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance the Protestations and solemn Covenants were made of lawfull things lawfully and in the Lord according to the sacred and divine Rule Thou shalt sweare the Lord liveth in Truth in Iudgement and in Righteousnesse Ier. 4. 2. For otherwise there is an undoubted nullity of them ipse facto sith no man ought to perform what is irrationally sworn and is in it self unrighteous and unlawfull Of this sinfull nature have been the unlawfull and unrighteous Oaths and Subscriptions of many many Ministers in this Land in the times of prevailing Episcopacy and superstitious conformity for which things sake the Land mourneth Ier. 23. 10. And therefore the swearers of Canonicall obedience of the c. Oath and the Subscribers willingly ex animo to the Articles by Cannon required to be subscribed unto have cause to set themselves to sorrow godly so as they may evidence their repentance not to be repented of which will produce the effects of godly sorrow mentioned 2 Cor. 7. 11. for otherwise the Lord will not hold them guiltlesse that have taken his name in vain Exod. 20. 7. 2. Conclusion The main and chief scope and end of the oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance formerly and of the Protestation and Covenant lately and likewise of the Engagement at the present was and is the just safety and preservation of the Common-wealth of England against illegall and violent usurpations and attempts whether of Forreiners or Natives of any sort and condition of persons in what kind or notion soever as may appear by the Statutes Acts Declarations and orders
of those in Supreme Authority that have required the people of the Land to submit unto the taking and subscribing of them 3. Conclusion It is taken for granted that the Parliament Party who ordered the Protestation first and the Covenant afterwards to be taken did apprehend and judge that the said Protestation and Covenant did not contradict the Oath of Supremacy and Allegiance neither yet did the Covenantiers understand any contrarinesse therein however the Malignant Cavaliers and Royalists might possibly think otherwise but rather that there was a legall consistency and agreement in their sense and meaning inasmuch as at the same time when occasion required there was a taking of the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance notwithstanding the taking of the Covenant as it is well known For it was not the person of Charles Stuart that was sworn unto but his Kingly legal Office to be administred by him according to Law for the safety of the people Because any mans person and therefore the Kings also being subject to such occasionall accidents and incident condition as may justly disfit and disable not only for governing but also from being preserred alive there is therefore no just reason of swearing fealty simply absolutely but in the Lord only according to Law Now there is the same reason of legall consistency and agreement with the Engagement and with the Protestation and Covenant as there was of the consistency and agreement of the Protestation and Covenant with the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance And albeit severall sorts of persons exercised the supreme power at severall times viz. The King before the Parliament was called The King Lords and Commons a space together after the first sitting of the Parliament The Commons alone at the present yet notwithstanding the safety of the Common-wealth was all along propounded and to be prosecuted and still is 4. Conclusion Every lawfull Oath Protestation Covenant and Engagement are undoubtedly sacred Obligations and ought to be kept and preserved inviolably For so God 1. Commandeth Levit. 19. 12. 2. Approveth Psal. 15. 4. 3. Threatneth otherwise Exod. 20. 7. 4. Yea and punisheth breaches when it is otherwise 2 Chron. 36. 13. Ezek. 17. 15. c. whence it followeth that Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance yea and the Protestation and the Covenant formerly taken have in the maine scope and end of them an obligatory force still even the safety of the Common-wealth as hath been already declared 5. Conclusion Subscribing the Engagement having it 's legall consistency and agreement with former Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance and also with the Protestation and Covenant doth engage to perform and fulfill what â—n the main of the said Oaths Protestation and Covenant was engaged even the approving truth and faithfulnesse to the Common-wealth whereas refusing to subscribe the Engagement argueth a breach at least a disposition unto the breach of those Oaths Protestation and Covenant These five Conclusions as they have been laid open are a sufficient way and means of making good our second reason Let us have grace whereby we may serve the Lord acceptably with reverence and godly fear For our God is a consuming fire Heh. 12. 28 29. III. REASON Because the profit and advantage of subscribing the Engagement may most probably by Gods blessing be much every way See this in some instances 1. Prevention of the ruine of the Common-wealth which may be occasioned and caused through disagreement and distance in point of just and requisite compliances For when a Kingdome is divided against it self it is brought to desolation and every City or house divided against it self shall not stand See Mat. 12. 25. It is a token of Gods great controversie when he setteth Egyptians against Egyptians to fight every one against his brother and every one against his neighbour City against City and Kingdome against Kingdome See Isa. 19. 2. It was a difficult and perplexed state of times in the Common-wealth of Israel when civill warres were betwixt David and the house of Saul 2 Sam. 2. 3. cap. but bettered more happy when matters were composed and a league made 2 Sam. 5. 1 2 3. And so it was an exceeding distempered state of times of late in England for some years together when their just Liberties were endeavoured by the Parliament and their Forces protesting and covenanting thereunto that then others of the Nation were up in arms for tyranny and protested for it But the most infinitely wise and gracious God having now been pleased to grant deliverance from Tyranny unto the Nation by the Parliament and their Forces why should not people come in and engage together as did the Israelites above mentioned 2 Sam. 5. 1 2 3. Oh that we of this Nation were affected as David was most probably on that occasion to say or sing heartily Psal. 133. 1. Behold how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity c. 2. Setled peace and prosperity which religiously affected Common-wealths-men ought to pray and seek for See Psal. 122. 6 7 8. is likest to be effected and promoted in the Common-wealth as otherwise so by mutuall engaging to be true and faithfull thereunto For hence good and speciall incouragement may be to the inhabitants to exercise husbandry trade merchandize building planting c. there being in such case oportunity to live quietly and peaceably without any disturbance and to enjoy the administration of Justice and Judgement as occasion shall require even as it fared with the flourishing Common-wealth of Israel at such times when they had rest in the dayes of the Judges albeit they then had no King see Iudg. 3. 11. 30. 3. Welfare of Church state which consisteth singularly in speciall united combinations of single Congregations in their Presbyteries and of Presbyteries combined in Synods lesser or greater see Acts 2. 47. Mat. 18. 17. 1 Tim. 4. 14. Acts 15. 2. 4. 6. c. shall be notably and effectually accomplished by such Engagement For thereby such as are Church-Officers and likewise such as are Church-members shall be disposed in their spirits and composed in their minds and hearts to thinke and act humbly and soberly as becometh members of the mysticall body whereof Christ Jesus is the head see Rom. 12. 3 4 5 6. 1 Cor. 1. 10. whereas when divisions do take place then unavoidable offences and scandalls are occasioned to the Churches very great damage Rom. 16. 17. Alas alas how can it be much expected that Presbytery shal be generally setled throughout England when so many as do pretend to affect and desire it are not only contrary minded to their brethren who should combine together in severall associations but do also walk contrary to the supreme power who are the Churches nursing Fathers and to whom it belongeth to establish and patronize Church Government see Rom. 13. 4. 4. Silencing the mouthes of ignorant and foolish prophane men who are corrupt and forward to be clamorously talkative