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
expression of their affection only wishing it may have its dependance on right Reason yet confess petitioning is every mans liberty And for the fourth and fifth That they held their livelyhoods by such titles and were sworn to preserve the immunities liberties and profits of the same I only say they held them at the pleasure of the Parliament whose power is over the enjoyments of all persons and publick much more particular societies against whose Laws no Domestick Laws or Oaths could bind and so their plea in this amounts to no more than what might be said for the Monasteries and Abbies which I presume they will not say were wickedly demolished unless they prove Arch-bishops Bishops Deans Deans and Chapters to be built on a better foundation which I would not advise them to seek in the Statute of Carlile repeated in the 25. Edw. 3 d. in which they are conjoyned Their fifth exception is In respect of their Obligation by Oath and Duty to the King Oxford Reasons fifth Exception to the 2d Article of the Covenant and therein their dissatisfaction doth arise from the Oath of Supremacy Coronation Oath The benefit this Government brings unto the Kings Honour and Estate The â—greeableness of this Government to the Civil Constitution of the Kingdom Unto which I answer briefly That the Oath of Supremacy doth acknowledge the King to be the only Supreme Governour in all Ecclesiastical Causes and over all Ecclesiastical persons and that by the Oath of Supremacy and the protestation of the fifth of May they and we were bound to maintain the Kings Honour and Estate and Jurisdiction we freely grant but in swearing to endeavour the extirpation of this Government by Arch-bishops Bishops c. I see not the danger of disloyalty or injury to the King or double perjury to our selves or contradiction to the Parliaments declared and professed knowledge that the King is entrusted with the Ecclesiastical Laws as well as Temporal and therefore wish the nature of the Kings Supremacy may be well considered That the King is Supreme Head and Governour of the Subjects distributively or particularly considered no sober man will deny or that he is the Supream and Topmost Branch and Apex of all that Honour Power and Authority with which the Collective Body of the Nation the three Estates in Parliament Assembled in respect of which the Lords and Commons Methodiet Majestatis causa apply themselves unto Him under the Title of Our Soveraign Lord no Regular man will deny and that he is Supreme in all Exhibition and administration of Justice so that the Judges are by and from Him and in His Name and Authority and so all Submission Honour and Acquiescency in Judicial Proceedings is to Him no good Statist or Civilian will deny and that He is Supream Head and Governour in things Spiritual and Ecclesiastical Ratione objecti or circa Ecclesiam the Executive Administration about not in the Church within His Dominions in opposition to all Papal and Forraign Power no Free-born Subject Good Christian or Protestant will deny but that He is so Supream as to have in Himself sole Legislation to the Church in things Political but belonging to the Church such as is the publick National profession of Christian Faith in such a Form and Method of Articles such a National uniform and publick method and order of worship and such a National Discipline and Government of all the Churches within His Realm so as that the People in Parliament Assembled may not debate consult conclude concerning them and sedente Parliamâ—â—to put in execution by present supersedeas of former Acts and by present Votes and Orders of Restriction and Regulation as in other Affairs of the Nation I think no Loyal Subject Wise Politician Good Statesman or True-born English-man will affirm for that the Supremacy of the King is affixed by the power of Parliament and in all Writs of Summons they are called to consult the ardent Affairs of the Church no less than of the Civil State and the thirty nine Articles Form of Common Prayer and the Government of the Church lay claim to Acts of Parliament for their Civil Sanction and the Parliament in the Remonstrance of December 1641. owned and cited by these learned men do declare the King entrusted with the Ecclesiastical Law to regulate all the Members of the Church of England by such Rules of Order and Discipline as are established by Parliament and the very Statute enjoyning the Oath of Supremacy and the Admonition of Queen Elizabeth in Her Injunctions appointed by Statute to be the Exposition thereof doth oppose the King to the Pope and * That is to say under God to have the Sove aignty and Rule over all manner of persons born within her Majesties Dominions or Countries of what Estate soever Ecclesiastical or Temporal as no Forraign power shall or ought to have any superiority over them Admon Enacted to expound the Oath of Supremacy quinto Elizab. primo Forraign power not to the Parliament and makes Him the executor of all Jurisdiction Superiority and Preheminences by any Ecclesiastical power or authority which heretofore hath been and may be lawfully exercised which was always directed by power of the Parliament of England And I remember the Lord Chief Baron Bridgeman in his late learned Speech concerning the Kings Supremacy unto the late condemned Traytors at the Old Baily did declare the King to be Supream that is beyond the Coercive power of His people but not to have the Legislative power in His own Breast so as to Rule at His own Will and the known Estate of England is to be Ruled and the Coronation Oath binds the King accordingly in all Ecclesiastical and Civil Affairs by such Lawes quas populus elegerit as the people shall choose so that His Majesties Supremacy is not denied when His Prerogative amplified by the Statute of 1 Elizabethae Ca. 1. is contracted and abridged by the Statute of Caroli 17. Or when the Parliament do see good by their Votes Resolves Orders or imposed Oaths to alter or extirpate the Government which the King was empowred to execute and administer His Supremacy being purely executive and that subject to the Legislation of Parliament upon which account the Peoples Oath of maintaining the Honour Estate and Jurisdiction of the King may be voided as to this and that particular mode and thing and yet the Parliament not take upon them to absolve the People from that obedience they owe under God unto the King nor is the limitation of the exercise of Supremacy as to this or that particular and in this or that species inconsistent with or destructive to the Kings Supremacy rightly understood And on these Considerations let it be observed that the Kings Coronation Oath to grant keep and confirm the Laws Customes and Franchises granted to the Clergy by the glorious King Saint Edward and preserve to the Bishops their Churches all Canonical priviledges c. which
their former Protestation if rightly understood in sundry the most material Branches of it Unto this Sir I must say that I know not what did appear to them to have been the power of the imposers and challenged in former times only unto me and many others it did appear not to he the meer natural Power of the People preposterously and in a tumultuous manner assembled who yet do appear to have a power to impose on themselves an Oath and to whom I find Soveraignty it self to speak it with due Reverence in some measure subjected and its obligation superseded if not made void clearly barred from execution if but by the impossibility put thereon as it was in the case of Jonathans Rescue which I shall only report in the words of Bishop Hall Saul hath sworn Jonathans death the people contrarily swear his preservation Halls Contem. p. 1038. his Kingdom was not so absolute yet more absolute than Englands that he could run away with so unmerciful a justice their Oath which savoured of disobedience prevailed against his Oath which savoured of too much cruelty and so long as his heart was not false to his Oath he could not be sorry Jonathan should live I do not in any case justifie the preposterous and tumultuous Assemblings and Assumptions of the People whereby they lay on themselves Bonds which must not be broken and cannot well without much difficulty be kept yet I cannot but observe many times whereby the Vox populi is Vox Dei as in the very change of the Government of Israel on which Dr. Hall Notes It was Gods ancient purp se to raise up a King to his People Page 10.24 how doth he take occasion to do it by the unruly desires of Israel but blessed be God this was not the case of the Covenant the imposers did not assemble on their own heads and by violence and disorder assume unto themselves an unusual power The power imposing this Covenant was a Parliament the Collective Body of the Kingdom Duly Summoned Regularly Elected and returned Rightly Constituted and Readily Embraced by King and Kingdom and animated with more than ordinary Parliamentary power by the Bill for their continuance against all Casualties so as not to be Prorogued Adjourned or Dissolved without their own consent And can any True-born English man in any measure acquainted with the constitution of this Kingdom or the Authority of the High Court of Parliament deny these to be a just and lawful Authority to resolve order and enjoyn yea and execute their Resolves Orders and Injunctions during the being of their power though not to establish Lawes to be executed when they were dissolved and gone Sir I cannot without sad thoughts remember the unhappy difference between His late Majesty and the late long Parliament which occasioned the unhappy opposition of the Peoples Liberty and the Kings Prerogative as I cannot but wish they had been acted so conjunctly that they might have seem'd to vulgar apprehension to have been but one so I cannot but judge it prudence that a period be put to the dispute thereof upon the now Happy Re-union of his most Sacred Majesty and these too long distracted Kingdomes I am clearly of opinion with Aristotle that Prince of Politians Aristot Polit. lib. 5. c. 10 11. That Regal Government is best established where the Princes and People do participate of it and that Theopompus the Spartan in transmitting some of his Prerogative to his Ephori Princes might well maintain the encrease of his Dominion whilst he made it longer by making it less I think therefore that the wisest men and best Subjects will rather think then assert a Prerogative in the King above His Parliament and I for my part should be content to find in the Parliament a sufficient power to impose an Oath on the Subject without the Kings consent rather than to assert their Superiority unto Him in all points and particulars And when Sir I consider the power even over and against their King in the Princes and the Collective Body of the People Recorded in Scripture as in making War Josh 22. Judg. 20. Changing the Government 1 Sam 8. Choosing and establishing not only their first but succeeding Kings though immediately appointed and sometimes anointed by God as in the case of David Solomon and Rehoboam and others in removing from the King Favourites and Counsellors as David was against the mind of Achish the King dismissed by the Princes of the Philistines 1 Sam. 29. in restraining the Kings purpose of destruction confirmed by an Oath once and again as in the case of Jonathan or of protection as in the case of Jeremiah the Prophet concerning whom Zedekiah the King said He is in your hands the King is not he that can do any thing against you Jer. 38.5 In these and the like cases Josephus tells us Joseph Antiq. Jud. lib. 4. cap. 18. the King might not do any thing without or against the sentence of the Senate or Congregation Methinks a divine defence may be well made for the power of the Parliament in this case acted and admitted though without and against the consent of the King And when I consider what is Dogmatically asserted by Polititians and no mean Lawyers in reference to the power of general Councils and Conventions of Kingdoms in general Foxe Acts and Monuments p. 616. as of Englands Parliaments in particular as in the Council of Basil against the Pope the whole Realm hath more Authority than the King The same asserted by Marius Salamonius who by many Arguments doth defend it De principatu lib. 1. p. 17 18. he was a Roman Lawyer and Philosopher Hollingshead and Vowel in their Description of England declare concerning the Parliament That this Court hath the most high and absolute power of the Realm and that not only without but against the King by it offenders are punished and corrupt Religion reformed or disannulled and that whatever the people of Rome might do centuriatis comitiis or tribunitiis Vot 1. cap. 1. p. 173. which I am sure was to impose an Oath the same is and may be done by Parliament unto which may be added what is spoken to the same effect and almost in the same words by Sir Thomas Smith Secretary of State to King Edward the sixth and Queen Elizabeth and a Doctor of the Law in his Common-wealth of England and Horne an Eminent Lawyer in Edward the first his Reign in his Mirrour of Justice cap. 1. p. 7 8 9. and Fortescue Lord Chancellor to Henry the sixth in his Book de Laud. Leg. Angl. cap. 9. and Bracton quoted by these learned men who certainly affirms more than they can approve Rex habet Superiorem Deum item legem per quam factus est Rex item curiaem suam viz. Comites Barones c. Et ideo si Rex fuerit sine fraeno debent ei fraenum imponere and above all the Soveraign Powers
he thus breaths against the Covenant Not to take advantage of the preposterous order in setting down the parts of this Covenant wherein he that runneth may read a double Solecism for in it the Church of Scotland precedeth the Church of England and the Liberty of the Subject is set before the Royal Prerogative and Imperial Dignity of the Prince Sir admit we this Is it not an high crime and bespeaks it not a sober serious spirit in Dr. Featly a Member of the Assembly of Divines who by a motion might have had this order inverted as easily as he obtained to have Prelacy specified in the second Article of the Covenant after it was past to pick a quarrel in the order of the words although we deny not That such a sacred and venerable evidence of fidelity is the Covenant that matter manner phrase and order ought to have as I presume they were been maturely advised yea I wish line and period word and syllable which might be the Printers Errata had been so scanned that a captious Momus might not find a Colon or Comma at which he might boggle and please his humour yet it is but a poor advantage from the punctilio's of order and honour to argue against matters of moment duties and exercises of Religion and by misplaced words to make an Oath or Solemn League illegal I but do I not run too fast he tells us he will not take the advantage an honest man is indeed as good as his word but I cannot trust him for his ninth Argument This Covenant is derogatory to the Honour of the Church and Kingdom of England Page 28. is thus proved The Church of Scotland is set before the Church of England I like not that mans grace that with the same breath will remit and retort an indiscretion yet Sir I cannot but enquire whether the preferring of the pompous gay-cloath'd Church of England before the poor Church of Scotland look not like a species of that impious partiality condemned by the Apostle James Chap. 2.1 2 3 4 5. Can we think this Dr. had the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ in respect of persons or was acted by such a spirit of contradiction No this language was spoken after he was dead 2. But these Solecisms are not to me so obvious I stand still and cannot read them though I read the Covenant with all observation and regard yet I confess I find the Church of Scotland set before the Church of England and the liberty of the Subject before the Prerogative of the King but they are propounded with Relation to different Acts the Reformed Religion of Scotland to be preserved of England to be Reformed I hope it is no Solecisme to put the factum before the fieri and to swear the preservation of good acquired before an endeavour to obtain the same or better or to prefix the pattern to what is to be thereunto confirmed when this Authors second thoughts had observed this salvo to his suggested * Page 29. Solecisme he grudges that Scotland should be propounded as a pattern of Reformation to England for which he had little Reason if venerable Beda speak true in that he reports That * Mira divinae factum constat dispensatione pietatis quod gens illa quae noverat scientiam divinae cognitionis libenter sine invidia populo Anglorum communicare curavit Bed Eccl. His Gen. Ang. l. 5. c. 23. that Nation did at first communicate the Science of Divine knowledge without grudge or envy unto the people of England I hope it is no Solecisme to propound them as a pattern of Reformation who have first obtained it and from whom Christianity it self was at first to us transmitted The second supposed Solecisme is no more visible than this first for if the liberty of the people be the end and excellency of the Prerogative of the King as all wise Statists and Politicians do affirm he sure will admit to be the first in intention and endeavour although the last in execution and enjoyment and the rather for that it is so directed and dictated by the Maxime of His late glorious Majesty declared at the passing of the Petition of Right The peoples liberty strengthens the Kings Prerogative and the Kings Prerogative is to defend the peoplâ—â— liberty I am sure more serious and publick Statesmen than he or I shall ever make have judged it a Solecisme in Parliaments to support the Kings Prerogative by supply of moneys before the oppressions and burdens of the people have been relieved and their liberties secured and I believe I could prove that this is not the first Covenant made in England preferring the Peoples liberty before the Kings Prerogative without which the King may Tyrannize over slaves not Rule over free-ment which last is and will be His greatest honour The second thing in respect of which the Covenant is blemished and reproached as to the manner of making it 2. The nature and name of the Covenant vindicated Oxford Reasons Sect. 2. pag. 3. relates unto the nature thereof and the name is the noration of its nature and it is called a Solemn League and Covenant against which the Masters and Scholars of Oxford do except stumbling at the name Covenant they were learned men and must a little stand on the propriety of words they therefore except against this denomination because imposed with a penalty which imposition say they is repugnant to the nature of a Covenant which being a contract implieth a voluntary mutual consent of the contracters whereunto men are to be induced by perswasion not compelled by power pactum est duorum pluriumve in idem placitum consensus To this Sir I grant that a Covenant in the strict acceptation of it must be an agreement by mutual consent yet I must enquire of these learned men whether the Magisterial imposing of absolute duty or actions otherwise indifferent by Superiours upon their Inferiours and that under a penalty may not be called a Covenant What think they of that injunction to Mankind in Adam Of the Tree of good and evil thou stalt not eat for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt die the death we read not of any stipulation in Adam And Divines tell us it was neither necessary nor proper he being bound to accept the conditions his Creatour would put upon him I am sure this is generally judged a Covenant and that we commonly call the Covenant of Works Again In the Primitive Times of the Church adult persons did answer certain queftions propounded as bredis credo abrenuncias abrenuncio 1 Pet. 3.21 Beza in Loc. to which the Apostle Peter is though to refer his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Beza renders Stipulatio bâ—nae conscientiae apud Deum and from this order Tertullian concludes Anima non lavatione sed responsione sancitur Do these learned men as the Anabaptists think the Covenant of Grace is not passed between God and
of Parliaments judiciously defended in our very case by that profound Lawyer Mr. William Prynne approved no less Loyal to and Zealous for the Kings Prerogative than Loving to the Peoples Liberties I see not how we can avoid this Conclusion That the Votes Orders and Ordinances of the Lords and Commons in Parliament even without or against the Kings personal command is to be obeyed and observed Lastly When I observe the Transactions of Parliament in the times of Vortiger Sigebert Ofred Beornerde Edwin and Edgar and other Saxon Kings Deo dictante annuente populo the power of Parliaments in the times of King John King Henry the third Richard the second and other Kings of England refusing to assemble at the Kings Call assembling without the Kings Writ establishing Laws correcting Vice and Misdemeanour executing Justice and entring into Oaths and Covenants without and against the Kings consent and when I observe in all Parliaments a power of regulating the Kings Court and Council of restraining limiting and enlarging the Kings power of Jurisdiction and Prerogative nay of making void or valid a Title unto the Succession to the Crown as in the times of Henry the eighth in case of his many marriages and that during the Session of Parliament all Laws are under covert at their feet to be by them established or destroyed and are by any Vote or Order superseded before a formal Repeal and that in all Ages and on all sides it is confessed and cannot be denied that the authority of Parliament is exercis'd in al Votes Orders and Ordinances of the two Houses unto the decision of present controversies upon Appeal from other Courts of Judicatory wherein they can and may authorize Examinations on Oath and make a final judgement unto the ease and relief of the Subject not otherwhere relievable unto the enforcement of any Act to be at present done and executed for the good of the Kingdom or any particular persons or society thereof without so much as desiring the Kings consent and concurrence and if this power should be denied what could the freuqency of Parliaments provided for by the old Law of King Alfred and after by the Statutes of 4. Ed. 3.4.36 Edw. 140. twice or at least once every year on this very ground that the people might receive right by holy judgment such was the judgment of Parliament deemed and that the mischiefs and grievances which daily happen might be redressed if need be on which account Proclamation was wont to be made in the open Palace before the breaking up of Parliament Whether there be any that have delivered a Petition to the Parliament and not received answer thereunto And this power removed what will avail the Triennial Parliaments conceded by His late Majesty or of what benefit was the continuation of this late long Parliament against all Casualties whatsoever that might fall out to dissolve them Can it be rationally imagined that their being should be continued and secured to sit within those Walls in Council and Debate without any power to order or execute the Emergent Affairs of the Nation These things well considered I s y I see not how the imposing an Oath can be an assuming or the people swearing an acknowledging of a greater power than hath in former times been challenged If these Gentlemen will consult our own Histories in the cases before touched they will find a power much greater not only challenged but assumed and exercised the which the season and present state of Affair do forbid me to recite in hopes that there will be no need to rip up our wounds newly healed and these generals may I hope sufficiently justifie the sufficiency of that authority which brought us into Covenant But these learned men suggest an inconsistency of this power with their former Protestation in sundry material Branches Methinks Sir they should have specified those Branches and the rather because material and many The Protestation contains not many Branches and those few seem to be fully conform to this Covenant in all the particulars and wherein they have supposed a contrariety we have before evidenced only a dissonancy at the most and that Ratione not Re in the manner of expression not the thing sworn they then protested to preserve the power and priviledges of Parliament and should not covenant any more nay scarce so much in this Oath for they herein promise to preserve the Rights and Priviledges which is something softer than power and I wonder they that then saw a power to be preserved could not now see a right I will only enquire whether they thought the Parliament had a power to impose that Oath and not a right to impose this There was no Act of Parliament nor Assent of the King to that I observe the King in His Messages to the Houses doth note it to be their own Protestation as if He had no hand in it nor consent unto it and if by power they should mean natural strength not political authority it hath been urged by many as their grievance and by these Gentlemen themselves in the foregoing Exceptions that they had too much of that It is the unhappiness of a scrupulous conscience to run it self on contradiction in actions as well as assertions to swear as lawfully called at one time but not to dare to swear an Oath containing the same matter though called by the same authority another time But that which was the greatest doubt with these learned men was Pag. ibid. 4. the King by His Proclamation Octob. 9.19 Carol. had expressely forbidden the entring into this Covenant it being in His power to make void the same That such an Interdict had been published by His late Majesty we cannot deny League Illegal p. 16. but not as Dr. Featly his ghost supposeth on pain of Treason for no Proclamation of the Kings of England did claim the formality of a Law so far as to fasten Treason on the non-observance of what is thereby enjoyned 2. I am not satisfied how regularly His Majesty did issue forth the said Proclamation which is not usually done but by the advice of His Council who are vailed by the Session of Parliament and all Proclamations then usually run by the Advice of the Lords and Commons in Parliament assembled and if at any time the Lords and Commons or either of them during their Sessions give out Orders not only relating to the Estate they represent but to any others the Subjects of this Realm it hath not been usual for the King by the Authority of His Proclamation to thwart oppose and void them and in a case of this nature a good observer may find the Parliament have judged the Kings opposing or taking notice of any thing by them debated or ordered before it is regularly propounded to Him by themselves to have been a breach of priviledge and so to have been acknowledged and as such retracted by His late Majesty the little pleasure I have
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-book with very little variation oâ— from the 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
and Archbishops of the essence and formality of the true Reformed Protestant Religion Will not the assertion thereof tend more to Schism than Scotlands supposed making their Discipline and Government the mark of a true Church As denying the Reformed Churches beyond the Sea to have attained to the true Reformed Protestant Religion which yet they handed over to us But what reason had these Gentlemen of Oxford to understand the Doctrine of the Church of England in such a latitude when the sence of it is limited by them who were then known to be Legislators and a power sufficient to prescribe an Oath unto which themselves subjected and were the best expositors thereof viz. the House of Commons who thus declared Whereas some doubts have been raised concerning the meaning of these words 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 This House doth declare that by these words was and is meant only the publick Doctrine professed in the said Church so far as it is opposite to Popery and Popish innovations And that the said words are not to be extended to the maintaining of any form of Worship Discipline and Government nor of any the Rites and Ceremonies of the said Church of England By which these Gentlemen might have understood 1. The Realm and Church of England were two different Subjects the one professing Doctrine in the other wherein also there was Doctrine tending to Popery and Popish Innovation 2. There were in the Doctrines professed by the Church of England some adjuncts of Rites Ceremonies Government or some special order of Worship which might need Reformation and were not view'd to be maintained So that according to this sence of them who prescribed both there is more of consistency than contradiction between the Protestation and Solemn League and Covenant So that the manifest perjury they feared hath not so much as a seeming ground And as for the supposed contradiction of this Branch of the Covenant unto the Oath of Supremacy it will on examination vanish as an apparition a thing which so seemed but cannot be so proved For if they will not hiss me out of their Schools I will grant them their Proposition in the Oath and assumption in the Statute by them quoted and yet find a way to avoid the conclusion because a meer non sequitur on their premises and this if they will have the Argument logically resolved by denying the consequence of their major Proposition for I will grant unto them that the Oath of Supremacy doth bind us to our power to assist and defend all Jurisdictions Priviledges Preheminences and Authorities granted and belonging to the Kings Highness his heirs and successors or united and annexed unto the Imperial Crown of this Realm And assume with them That the King had the whole power and Authority for Reformation Order and Correction of all manner of Errors Heresies Schisms c. and yet deny the sequel viz. That we may not endeavour in our places and callings to reform Religion For the defence of the Kings power is no way repugnant with the duty of our particular capacity I hope a Minister may by his preaching or a Divine by his disputation in the Schools endeavour the correction and Reformation of Error and Heresie Schism or Superstition and yet not intrench on his Majesties Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction and so interfer with their Oath of Supremacy Yea in reference to judicial and authoritative Correction and Reformation which we will suppose can only be done by the King mens endeavor may be in their places and callings by Counsel Proposal Remonstrance Petition Supplication and the like to procure His Majesties consent and authority to reform Religion in the Kingdom of England in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government and then Sir where is the Contradiction Yet Sir if I were to dispute with a single though Senior Sophister of Oxford I would deny both Propositions the major as to its sequel or consequence as before and the assumption as that which the Statute doth not prove viz. The whole power of Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction for Correction and Reformation is annexed to the King and Imperial Crown of this Realm For the power by that Statute is special and particular not general and universal as themselves have cited it is viz. such Jurisdictions Priviledges Superiorities and Preheminences Spiritual or Ecclesiastical as by any c. and as the Statute proceeds Spiritual or Ecclesiastical power or authority hath heretofore been or may lawfully be exercised or used for Visitation of any Ecclesiastical State or Persons and for Reformation c. So that the power given to the King is such a powor as Bishops Cardinals or Popes had used not such as Parliaments who ever retained a Jurisdicton in themselves over both Church and Crown enjoyed and exercised This power was purely executive not Legislative over persons and particular Societies not over the Kingdom and whole Realm I presume the Gentlemen of Oxford were not ignoront of the power and Legislative Authority which the Parliaments of England ever held over their Bishops and the Spiritual or Ecclesiastical estate of this Land tying them in all their administrations of Discipline and Government to the Customs and Statutes of this Realme as they may read at large in the Statute of the Submission of the Clergy 25. Hen. 8.19 wherein they confess many of their Canons and Constitutions be repugnant to the Laws and Statutes of this Realm whereby they did not only Restrain the exorbitancies and from time to time Reform the abuses of the Church but also extend the Prerogative and Jurisdiction of the King as in that Statute 1 Elizab. and Limit Restrain and Repeal it as in the case of this individual specifical power granted in the words of the Statute quoted by the Statute 17 Caroli entituled An Act for repeal of a branch of a Statute 10 Elizab. concerning Commissioners for causes Ecclesiastical which clause repealed is part of this very recited Paragraph and immediately annexed unto and dependent on this very grant of power and authority Nor are these Masters and Scholars of Oxford insensible that there is a vast difference between Executive and Legislative power and authority and that as no Ecclesiastical persons did ever enjoy however the Pope and his Bishops did contend for it so no King of England did ever pretend or lay claim unto the Legislative power further than allowed by Act of Parliaments who were ever Dictators of a general Reformation in the Land Church and Kingdom as at this time in the Reformation covenanted Nor can they be ignorant that it is very bad Logick from such Jurisdictions and Specifical Executive Authority to infer that the whole power of Reformation is so in the King that the Parliament may not propose or the people covenant in their places and callings to endeavor a Reformation
and excommunicating of the best of men for meer trifles things indifferent so judged by themselves at the least nay many times for opposing profaness and superstition yea for performing their duties in praying and preaching and the like evils which did attend it though I should say but accidentally by the corruption of Montague Laude Wren Pierce and their Companions be written in such sensible Acts and legible Characters that England might feel and the World read them I think there need not be much of Reason offered to shew not only the expediency but necessity of extirpation of a Government though in it self good yet capable of such enormities unlesse it be of an immediate and undoubted divine right But Sir Had not Oxford their numbers in Parliament and did they not trust them with their understandings or must a Parliament offer Reasons of the necessity and expediency of every Act they impose on the Subject before the Subject yield obedience and yet the Vote of the House of Commons past the 10th of June 1641. viz. That this Government hath been found by long experience to be a great impediment to the perfect reformation and growth of Religion and very prejudicial to the Civil State together with the learned Speeches of many Members in the House printed to offer Reason without as well as within doors might have laid something before the judgments of these Gentlemen I presume Sir the Subjects obedience must not in the judgment of this University be suspended untill the Reasons of State producing the resolution be known to and and apprehended by every person and society 2. If this Prelacy judged thus evil were but contemporary with Popery Superstition Heresie Schisme and Prophaness though we should presume it good I hope it may be ranked amongst its fellows and taken upon suspition it may be a grief but no wrong to stay an honest man found in company with Thieves when he hath cleared himself justice will let him go But Sir if this Prelatical Government be in the formality of it a plain and clear Papacy as the deriving it from Rome and its standing on no basis but the constitutions of the Church when Popish and institution of the Pope not Christ or any Christian Magistrate nor General Assembly of the Ministers of the Church of God in this Kingdom the owning of Anselme Archbishop of Canterbury Papam alterius mundi the content all Papists find in the same could they but continue it in dependance on Rome for Consecration and Investiture pure circumstances not of the essence of the Government and principally its springing from the same principles standing on the same Basis the indulgence of Princes and being supported by the self-same Arguments and Authorities which are urged by Bellarmine and the Council of Trent History of the Council of Trent Edit 3. p. 589 590. to p. 616. for the defence of the Papacy in all which respects it must needs appear that the difference between an universal Metropolitan or Diocesan Bishop is in degrees and limits not in kind for is there not the same reason for Arch-bishops over Bishops to receive their Oath of Obedience as for Juridical Bishops over Presbyters and so the same for Cardinals over Arch-bishops and Popes over Cardinals do suggest it to be and if it were the Foot-stool or Stirrup of the Papacy as Salmasius doth at large demonstrate in his Apparatus ad Papatum and as Beza doth affirm when he tells us Episcopi Papam pepererunt Beza Epist 79. I hope it can be no great wrong to ranck it with Popery which might be its proper name though through use of a larger signification And if Sir its Rule whereby to square it and Reason of sustentation be that which is not more openly Canted by some then indeed generally practised viz. No Ceremonies no Bishop whereby the Cross in Baptism the Altar the Surplice and other matters innovated into the worship of God the use of which how edifying soever to the Church of God is a formal Superstition it cannot be much abused to call Superstition its companion And if it have been found to indulge Heresie by publishing and printing cum priveligio all Heretical Notions and silencing the Pulpit and stopping the Press from all possibility of Confutation or if by innovation of Superstition into worship and obtrusion of Error in Doctrine on the souls of men it hath provoked Schism I hope there is no great cause of complaint for putting these together with it And if it have been approved a protection and promotion of Revels Church-ales Clerks-ales The seventy two Ministers of Somersetshire in their unanimous consent to the continuance of Revels Church-ales c. Sports and Pastimes on the Lords day so that its Deans and Chapters or other Colledge and Conventions have proved like unto Bishop Pierce his Septuagint in their Agreement against Justice Richardson's order for suppressing of these and the like profaness certified in a letter to the late Arch-bishop dated the fifth of November 1633. and suppressing all Ministers that refuse to stir up such licentiousness as did the visitations of the Arch-bishop of Canterbury Bishop Pierce and others it sure can be no great wrong to rank it with profaness and intimate it to have in it some contrariety to the power of godlinesse to which whatever some few very few Bishops might do the current of Episcopacy did never yield much countenance or speak much amity Sir in these and the like respects the extirpation hereof must be endeavoured by all that will not partake of other mens sins and I must be free to tell them that in their Parallel case propounded which yet will not square the alteration yea extirpation of the Civil Government of the City capable of such proximity unto Treason Murder Advltery Theft Cousenage and the like would be by all ingenuous men judged both just and reasonable but I insist too long in abatement of their affection who offer Arguments by which they were perswaded to adhere unto their object let us therefore weigh them severally Subsectio Octava This Preface being past they proceed to the Reasons why they cannot Covenant an endeavour to extirpate Prelacy that is to say The Government by Arch-Bishops Bishops their Chancellours or Commissaries Deans Deans and Chapters Arch-deacons and all other Ecclesiastical Officers depending on that Hierarchy And they propound five Reasons two relate unto the Government the third and fifth unto their own capacity and the fourth unto the estate of the Church according to this order I shall consider them And 1. Oxford first and second exception to the extirpation of Prelacy They tell us They are not satisfied how they can with a good conscience swear to extirpate Episcopal Government which say they we think to be if not Jure Divino in the strictest sense by express command yet of Apostolical institution that is to say was established in the Churches by the Apostles according to the mind
by a spirit of Prelacy will it not bespeak that Government prejudicial to the Civil State which condemneth Conventicles in acts of piety but admits Families the Subjects houses the places and natural affection to be the protection of Treasonable Seditious Conspiracies But they adde against this Article that it binds to suffering punishment by an arbitrary power without Law or Merit contrary to the liberty of the Subject declared for by the House of Commons Let us Sir but read the words of the Covenant and that will evidence a contradiction to the Parliaments Declaration of the same nature with those we have before observed the words are these That they may be brought to publick Tryal and receive condigne punishment as the degree of their offences shall deserve or the Supreme Judicatories of both Kingdoms respectively or others having power from them for that effect shall judge convenient If Sir condigne punishment on publick Tryal according to the degree of the offence be without law or merit and Judicatory Supream Judicatory be Arbitrary High Courts of Justice and their proceedings will be Just and Regular and the liberty of the Subject for I think them to be more Opposites than the Protestation and Solemn League and Covenant Unto the fifth Article of this Covenant Oxford Exceptions to the fifth Article of the Covenant they profess a readiness to confederate but they pretend to a double Remora 1. They do not see the happiness of such a blessed peace between the three Kingdoms Ireland being at War within it self To which I should have said no more than this Gentlemen where are your eyes and what obstructs your sight when you sware the Protestation you sware By all just and honourable wayes to endeavour to preserve the union and peace of the three Kingdoms of England Scotland and Ireland Was not Ireland then at War within it self Or have you forgotten that it was so or is not the Peace now concluded by both Parliaments and confirmed by this Covenant a greater happiness of settlement than was then obtained Sure some strong passion acted these learned men to make Mountains against the Covenant what were Mole-hills wssen they swore the Protestation But their second Remora is That no peace can be firm and well-grounded which is not bottomed on justice whose proper and adequate act is jus suum cuique unless the respective Authority Power and Liberty of King Parliament and Subject be preserved full and entire To this I should say no more then this Specifie the defect of this Covenant as to these particulars for I cannot read or understand if they be not all secured by the same Suggestions without plain Demonstration do proclaim jealousie and prejudice but make no Argument or good Apology against required duty Unto the sixth and last Article Oxford Exceptions to the sixth Article of the Covenant being an Obligation of adherence to this Covenant against all opposition they say no more then what must be expected that untill they be satisfied in the Premises stated in the foregoing Articles of the Covenant they could not su scribe to this Conclusion which we must needs admit them hoping that a more cool serious survey of the Covenant second thoughts on their Exceptions thereunto may satisfie their consciences and lead them to bewail their unhappiness in throwing such stumbling blocks before their weak Brethren under the Name and Authority of a Famous and Learned University and for their groundless dissent and refusal of an enjoyed duty relating to the Honour of God Reformation and defenct of Religion Honour and Happiness of the King Peace and Safety of the Kingdoms in a Solemn League and Covenant which Sir we find notwithstanding these so much admired Exceptions approves it self lawful in respect of the matter therein sworn to be preserved or pursued and will the better stand under all defects and miscarriages in point of manner and form of making it which is the next thing to be considered Sectio quarta Proposition 4. The Form and Manner of making the Solemn Leagne and Covenant was good and allowable IN the Consideration of this Position I intend not to consider the Form constituting it an Oath which is evident and known to all to have been a Solemn Calling to God to witness and avenge the violation or neglect thereof in respect of which its obligation is established against whatever defects and miscarriages did attend the agitation thereof from which nevertheless I would desire it as much may be acquitted for it is pity so good matter should be blemished by the circumstances which attended it Nor shall I insist on an Historical Narration of the publick Assemblies in which it was taken the Solemnity thereof in respect of the quality of persons the Parliament both Lords and Commons the Commissioners of Scotland the Assembly of Divines making the first Assembly that entred into it nor the Order by Solemn Humiliation and Prayer and serious Instruction and Exhortation which attended it nor the universal alacrity joy and content of the most serious in England and Scotland which accompained this first Act of making the Covenant nor the after particular Solemnities both for number quality and disposition of persons and religious composed order in which it was taken in the City of London the several Counties and Congregations of England then which I may boldly say no publick Act ever passed by and among the people of England more solemnly or more religiously which though it be now darkned and despised doth set a lustre on this Covenant to abide under the greatest contempt and reproach cast upon it and will most strongly bind in the presence of God and men But my intentions are to defend those actions as good I do not say necessary and allowable which were and might be done without any sin or any debilitation of the Covenant against which I find the Exceptions of the Enemies to the Covenant most strongly bent that thereby they might represent it vile if not render it void and these are either 1. The order of the words 2. Nature of the thing 3. Authority which enjoyned it 4. Or the action and gesture of the body used in the swearing of this Covenant All which I humbly conceive will be found such as might well suit so solemn an Act as is a National Covenant yet I find some late opposition thereunto and in special by the Oxford Reasons and the League Illegal I shall briefly try their strength 1. Sir As to the order of the words I find Dr. 1. The order of the words vindicated against Dr. Featliey League Illegal Pag. 14. Featlies ghost in the League Illegal like some hellish fury representing the Dr. to have been a man so haughtily devoted to the punctilio's of order and honour as not to brook or keep his hands from tearing a List Catalogue or Register wherein they who were below him should be ranked above and named before him in sense whereof
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
and the exactions of furious Tyrants And I say it cannot avail unto the least voiding of the Covenant the matter whereof is found just lawful and possible for all Casuists have concluded Juramentum metu extortum doth bind And the Heathen have amplified the force of an Oath by Regulus his return to his Enemies to be slain when he had been forced to make it on which Cicero asserteth Temporibus illis jusjurandum valebat Sanderson de juram prael 5. Sect. 15. p. 126. then Oaths were binding And Doctor Sanderson hath concluded that an Oath made not only on light fear but a just and grievous fear Qualis est metus captivitatis amissionis omnium bonorum inmiae cruciatus quod est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ipsius mortis of imprisonment loss of goods yea most dreadful loss of life which all men must confess to be a most strait condition yet it binds unto performance for which he Renders many Reasons among which these two are of weight in our case * Videtur non posse honeste recusari quod fuit prudenter electum he chose what then seemed best and so it was an Act of will and * Quod ob certum finem promissum est a promittente debet praestaripostquam consecutas est suum finem he received the end proposed as the condition of his entring into that Covenant Moreover as I have before noted Zedekiah was besieged into the Oath made with the King of Babylon with the greatest force and fury imaginable yet the Prophet was not afraid to cry to the King Shall he break the Covenant and be delivered and both King and people perished by that breach of Covenant Sir I cannot without sad thoughts reflect on their sin and horrid wickedness by whom his most Sacred Majesty was reduced into those straits of condition nor shall I acquit them of indiscretion and overmuch boldness who being subjects could dare to take the advantage of a strait condition to put such terms on Majesty yet I dare not but adore the providence of God who bringeth good out of evil and maketh the rage of men to work unto his praise and many times by wayes to us preposterous effecteth his own holy purpose that did bring his most Sacred Majesty by these straits into this Sacred Bond which it is more than probable in an estate of liberty he had never subjected to and being now sworn they cannot they must not be slighted or violated but I hope his Majesty shall never want a good Angel to be his Monitor to pay the vows he made to God in the day of his distress Now Sir I say when I have considered the Covenant under these publick considerations and find such palpable engagements made by the people of England as a Kingdom and Political Body professing the Reformed Religion I cannot but adhere to my former conjecture that it looks something like a National Obligation nay the confluence of publick assent and authority by the people collectively and distributively considered and the access of Royal assent and concurrence the defect of which rendered it at first less acceptable to many leads my conjecture unto a full conclusion that it is a publick National Covenant binding all the persons of this Nation that swear or swear not personally and our posterity after us in their particular places and all that shall succeed into the publick places and politick capacities of this Kingdom to preserve and pursue the things therein promised so long as it remains a Kingdom under one King and in the profession of one Reformed Religion which I pray and hope will be till Jesus Christ shall come to judgment Give me leave Sir to enforce this with what I observed to be asserted by the Lord Chief Baron in his learned Speech unto the late condemned Traytors at the Old Baily You were bound to bear Allegiance to your King yea though you may not have taken the Oath of Allegiance your selves yet you were bound by the Recognition of King James and His Posterity made at His first coming to the Crown of this Realm by the whole Parliament being the whole collective body of the Kingdom Certainly they then and their posterities must needs be bound who themselves have universally by the appointment and authority of such who were entrusted for them engaged the Faith of the Nation though it had been sufficient if the Parliament in that publick capacity had only done it for I say still I see not how they can give away our Estates or take pardons in the name and to the security of the Nation if they may not in our name make Oaths Promises and Covenants to bind us and our succeeding Governors and Posterities in sense whereof I cannot but desire all that wish well to England to consider the Covenant the Solemn League and Covenant for Sir as it was no little support and satisfaction to my spirit under the late contempt and horrid violations of the Covenant to observe they were the preposterous Acts of Self-created Powers and Usurpers on the Peoples consent as well as His Majesties Crown and therefore could not involve the Nation in the guilt of their perjury which our eyes have seen to fall upon their own heads so it is now the greatest perplexity in my jealousie that the Covenant is like to be slighted if not contradicted that the Nation is in danger to be plunged under the guilt and made liable to the punishment thereof by that Just God who will certainly avenge the quarrel of the Covenant which God forbid God forbid I say again God forbid To conclude Sir this Section lest you or any others should think this quality of the Solemn League and Covenant as Publick and National to be my own notion and private particular fancy give me leave to tell you and them I can produce more than 600. Ministers most of whom are yet living in the Kingdom of England who under their hands have testified their apprehensions thereof under the same notion Such as will please to take a strict view of this Cloud of Witnesses may at their leasure survey the Publick Testimonies to the Truths of Jesus Christ and to the Solemn League and Covenant and they shall find the same attested by the names of 52 Ministers of London 41 in the County Palatine of Lancaster 59 in the County Palatine of Chester 41 Ministers in the West Riding of the County of York who in their Title-page and throughout their Testimony do denominate it the National Covenant 39 in the County of Norfolk 82 in the County of Wilts 36 in the County of Stafford 69 in the County of Somerset which I presume may make a better Septuagint than Bishop Pierces Certificants of this County for Revels Clerks-ales and Church-ales on the Lords-day though they want three of the number 68 in the County of Northampton 71 in the County of Essex 43 in the County of Warwick 62 in the County of
Gloucester 57 in the County of Salop and 73 in the County of Devon who give their testimony and call it the Solemn League and Covenant of the three Kingdoms and in the sense of the National Obligation they give this testimony and thus plead We find the Covenant is antiquated and banished as intended to be of force during the time of our intestine Warres we confess we are amazed at this quirk we pray the Wars may cease for ever which yet there is fear may too soon be recalled by God Pag. 27. for this treacherous dealing in his Covenant but we believe no honest understanding heart can be perswaded the Covenant was intended as a Truce made with God for three or four years but we shall labour to stop this Gap with some few strong stakes cut out of the Covenant and so passing through the several Articles of the Covenant they advise those terms may be viewed constantly Pag. 28 29. all the dayes of our life our posterity the Lord may dwell in the midst of us and good of the Kingdoms whereupon they conclude these are not for a few years but for ever and affectionately cry out to the Nation Oh England turn not Harlot break not Covenant with thy God and the Lord keep England from this Covenant-breaking and his vengeance from his people Unto this give me leave to add this passage out of the Testimony of the York-shire Ministers It cannot be unknown to the Churches abroad Pag. 8. that all the three Kingdoms stand engaged by vertue of a Solemn League and Covenant sworn with hands lifted up to the most High God sincerely really and constantly by the grace of God to endeavour in our several places the Reformation of Religion in the Kingdoms of England and Ireland in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government according to the Word of God and example of the best Reformed Churches I shall Sir add but one more and it is that in which we have all the rest their 's being little else but a concurrence with this and that is the Testimony of the Ministers of our own City of London and they profess thus Pag. 26. In order to the Reformation and Defence of Religion within these three Kingdoms we shall never forget how solemnly and chearfully the Sacred League and Covenant was sworn with hands lifted up to the most High God wherein the three Kingdoms stand engaged joyntly and severally c. Yet we cannot but observe to the great grief of our heart that this Solemn Covenant of God hath been and is daily neglected slighted vilified reproached and opposed even by too many who have entred into it and endeavours have been used wholly to evade it and render it useless and that it hath been manifestly violated to the dishonour of God to the prejudice of a real Reformation the sadning of the hearts of Gods people and pulling down his dreadful judgments upon us and upon the whole Kingdom Sir I will say no more Pag. 28. but I pray God London Ministers may retain or recover their first love and Englands Watchmen may remember the loud Alarums they have sometimes sounded and the grounds thereof Sectio semptima Prop. 7. The Obligation of the Solemn League and Covenant is permanent and abiding never by any humane act or power to be absolved or discharged SIR By the permanency of the Obligation of the Covenant we mean the continuance of its Bond on the mind and consciences of men so that the Subjects thereof are and for ever will be bound to pursue and perform the things and matters therein promised nor is it in the power of any man or humane authority to release acquit or discharge them from the same but that when and howsoever the Solemn League and Covenant is slighted laid aside or violated by any the Subjects thereof they shall be liable unto the guilt and punishment of perjury in the breach thereof This permanency of obligation and impossibility of discharge doth spring from a double cause 1. The nature of an Oath which is a solemn and serious Appeal to and invocation of God as Witness and Avenger of the thing sworn and sincerity of the Subject swearing so as in case of dissimulation falshood or non-performance of the thing covenanted we shall be liable unto the guilt and punishment of perjury to be inflicted by the God who judgeth righteously And 2ly From the Manner and Form of the Covenant which is absolute and without a condition which might at any time fail and so cause a Cessation of the Bond of the Covenant thereupon dependent and is expressely exclusive to all manner of discharge or release by any humane Act or Power whatsoever by an express protest That this Covenant we make in the presence of Almighty God the Searcher of all hearts with a true intention to perform the same as we shall answer at that great day when the secrets of all hearts shall be disclosed and by a peculiar provision That we shall never suffer our selves directly or indirectly by whatsoever combination perswasion or terrour to be divided or withdrawn from this blessed union and conjunction whether to make defection to the contrary part or to give up our selves to a detestable neutrality in this cause which so much concerneth the Glory of God Good of the Kingdoms and Honour of the King but shall all the days of our lives zealously and constantly continue therein So that the matter of this Covenant being as I have before asserted good and lawful because just and possible if there were in the World any power or persons entrusted with that divine Prerogative to discharge the Obligation of an Oath we could not receive it because it is actually and expresly disclaimed We Sir live amongst Protestants who by their very profession do protest against all Papal Dispensations and Jesuitical Commutation thereupon dependent and therefore I need not stand to make any defence in this cause against the same which would be to suggest some Protestant Divines to be so Popishly affected as to have recourse to Rome for relief against St. Peters Restraint I presume Sir Englands Bishops would not be reputed Popish and other ways to discharge the Obligation of the Covenant we have none save the release of Superiors which alwayes must be in such cases and manner as are peculiar unto them and proper to their cognizance I am not insensible that some suppose to themselves and suggest to others a nullity or non-obliging force of the Covenant by reason that His late Majesty of glorious Memory did interdict the Act concerning which it is necessary to be enquired Whether by the Light of Nature Law of Nations or Rule of Scripture the Prince the Political Parent have such full compleat Parental Authority over His Kingdom collectively or distributively considered as by His interdict to make void the Oath they put upon themselves 2. Whether the Parliaments of England both or either House
we must be directed how to think of him I would not have you think that I have been studying all this while to attribute a Pope-like power to my superiors to dispence with the bond of an Oath that is already put upon my conscience No indeed I rather think he is studying how to loosen a pair of tyring Irons But hath he no hole to creep out at and evade his Answer but thus expresly overthrow his own design yes When what was sworn is performed we are free-men unlesse the Superiour gets us into a new Bond. That is very true but what doth he infer This is all that I expect that the higher powers will not renew the Oath and Covenant and then that business is at an end But I doubt Sir he reckoned without his Host Hath he performed what he promised in the Covenant it was thought to be work for all the days of his life he is sure a quick Merchant or is he not rather so bad a Pay-master that he will not perform any thing further then he is constrained by being haled to prison like a Bankrupt he dreams forbearance is an acquittance and is ready to begin a new score of Covenants if any man be so mad as to trust him if he can be secured from any new Bond his conscience will never make him pay the old he had need to be quickned or otherwise he is resolved to be discharged But I believe second thoughts will make him to see he had need to pay for the old before he be trusted for new when he dreams the Tryal is ended the Suit is but beginning what though the Higher Power never renew the Covenant will that cancel the Bond given to God if he agree not with his Adversary quickly he will be cast into prison verily he must not come thence till he have paid the utmost Mite nor will it make a Plea to the least mitigation of damages to say Lord My Superiours did never require me to renew the Covenant His Majesty is like to have Loyal Subjects at Chinkeford where they are taught that their Allegiance being once performed if the King do not cause them daily to renew the Oath of Allegiance they are free to turn Rebels and Traytors for any thing they had sworn before This is an Essex much cheaper and more easily to be had than a Popes Bull if I be not by the imposer exacted and required to perform I am ipso facto released he shall never want Clients that can make such Releases yet you must note this he manageth with most earnestness and seriousness as reaching the very mystery and depth of the Covenant But Sir he hath Salvo's for his Distinction and Reasons for his Assertion What is pious good and lawful in the Covenant doth still bind per vim Praecepti but not per vim Juramenti and if he perform not the contents or intents of the same he is guilty of disobedience but not of perjury What a dull Buzzard am I How have I spent my time that never learned this Notion in Divinity before I had once a Tutour commended to me by Dr. Chappel and he makes me believe the soul might at the same time be under a double Bond to the same Act the single tye of the goodness and lawfulness of the Act and the Cords of an Oath or Covenant and that the last was the strictest Bond he tortured my conscience with the thoughts of a complicated sin in not doing a duty sworn to be done and the guilt of both disobedience and perjury I must sure leave him and take unto Mr Russel attested by Dr. Gauden he teacheth a smoother way to Hell for where we are under a Duty and an Oath to do it in not doing it I shall be but damned for the least sin the disobedience not the perjury 2. It was never yet denied that in a promissory Oath between private persons be to whom the promise was made if he will release he may release if he had for never directed us to read ever this had been an intelligent observation for it hath ever been denied that any man could release the Oath Dr. Saunderson denieth it and Grotius denieth it and I deny it and therefore they distinguish between the Ralaxation of the matter of the promise which is to them sui Juris and the Release of the Oath which is Gods proper interest I may remit my profit or benefit and yet not release an Oath by his leave Sir I do again deny That Abraham did release his servant that which he dreames of to be a Release was part of the very Indenture of the Covenant or Oath that the servant might see the matter of it in its Extent but spare me Sir what is all this to the purpose it is to be proved that the Solemn League and Covenant is such a promissory Oath it was indeed agreed concluded and consented unto by two Nations but yet it is not a reciprocal promise each unto other that they may at any time relax each to other the whole or any part of the conditions thereof but is a joynt Oath or Vow to God by mutual Agreement put on the Kingdoms of England and Scotland and then to follow his fancy God and God only is the Plantiff and no Higher Powers of either Kingdom but they as Members of the Kingdoms are Defendants whom God impleads to perform what they are bound to do His promise was to prove the Covenant to be of the nature of a promissory Oath which might be released and this I expected but I would have him take time enough to do it in I will expect his Resolution at Dooms-day when the Tryal shall be undoubtedly ended and the Judge will openly declare his sentence against all who have broken or shall break the Covenant though not renewed at the command of the Higher Powers This Gentleman tells the World That Mr. Crofton wonders at Dr. Gaudens Logick in arguing the evil of it from the unblest effects and consequences of the Covenant And I think Sir he had Reason for Event was never judged a Rule of Equity but the unblest effects reflected on the Covenant did only accompany it not sprung from it as its proper brood and natural issue by it procreated Shall wicked mens reluctancy to piety and order or perfidy and contempt of the Oath of God create evil effects accidental sequels to the Covenant and it be condemned Sir this man is sure half an Arminian and thinks Gods command to Adam to have been the cause of mans Fall Is he not rather half an heathen that in all Tumults Earth-quakes and Plagues of God upon them would cry out Christianos ad Leones as if they were the cause of all Let any of them specifie that evil in the Covenant which hath a natural tendency unto these unblest or let him speak out curst effects and I will damn it as an accursed thing But Sir Mr. Crofton did not so much wonder at the Drs. Logick in this Argument as at his little Reason or Religion in giving his Attestation to such an Irrational Atheological Wild and Wicked Discourse as this is whilst he fears the Covenanter is righteous over-much I would advise him to consider whether the next words do not suit his spirit as proper for his medition Eccles 7.71 Be not over-much wicked neither be thou foolish why shouldest thou dye before thy time For Sir if I can judge his words are the language of a Fool and his Arguments the Reasons of wickedness and such a Release of the Obligation of the Solemn League and Covenant must needs hasten his ruine CONCLUSION Honoured Sir I Will trouble you no further but leave these Positions unto your serious Consideration I have propounded them by way of Antithesis desirous to weigh what could be said against them I am Sir so sensible of the weight of an Oath the dread of Perjury especially on a Kingdom that I could not see this Nations tendency thereunto in silence if Sir I have any judgment in Christian Rules of safety one of the first debates in order to the establishment of this Kingdom and Restoration of this Church should be how far we are under and obliged by the Solemn League and Covenant I would not advance it above nor set it against Scripture but must be bold to say our Oaths being of matter consonant to Scripture are ready Dictators as well as Spurs unto our Duty and in things meerly humane morally good though not necessary the compass which should steer our course I must confess I cannot but be grieved to see some Transactions amongst us unto a contempt nay contradiction of the Covenant might but my poor weak papers provoke more able and serious Casuists in good earnest as before God and in the dread of an Oath to state and by right Religious Reason to resolve this case of conscience though in the Negative I had obtained my desire and if I know my own heart none shall be more ready then my self when convinced to fall down and worship and confess God is in them of a truth I must Sir beg your pardon wherein I appear too tedious the weight of the Argument the number and worth of the Antagonists speak something in Apology for me Sir I commend you to the guidance of Gods Holy Spirit and pray that you may be kept faithful and blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ FINIS