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
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
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
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 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
these learned men do cite is limited unto the Laws of the Land which the People in Parliament assembled shall choose according to which the King is bound to Rule for otherwise this Coronation Oath will not only bind the perpetuation of this Government by Prelacy but also to the Restitution of the Abbies and Monasteries demolished and the Popes Supremacy expelled all which were granted to the Clergy by the glorious King St. Edward 2. But admit we these learned men the sense they seem to put upon the Kings Supremacy methinks the modest expressions of the Covenant might have anticipated this exception it only binding us within our places and callings which might be by humble advice and supplication to the King by vertue of His Supream Authority to effect it to endeavour the extirpation of this Prelacy that is the Government by Arch-bishops Bishops Deans Deans and Chapters and the like but such was their affection to it that they could not desire nay they could not but beg of God that he would not suffer the King to assent thereunto which affection we must not think to abate untill their judgements be better inform'd 3. As to the benefit which did redound to the Crown by the Collation of Bishopricks and Deanaries by their first fruits and yearly tenths and profits in vacancies though some question the Kings propriety not in respect of the Law of the Land but of the Law of God I shall not insist on that only say That the constant enjoyment of the full possessions of them will make a much greater revenue and maintain to the King a greater Honour and Estate than the first fruits tenths and profits of vacancies although such vacancies as the Kings of England have by vertue of this Argument continued for the space of 5 10 15 20. or sometimes thirty years together taking the profits to themselves or bestowing them on their attendants and undoubtedly there is the same capacity to extirpate the whole Government as some Episcopal Seas and to enlarge the Revenues of the Crown by the Reversion of all the profits of the Government and the abolishment thereof as to continue so long vacancies moreover I would desire to know what is in this Argument more prevalent for Arch-bishops Bishops and their Cathedral Churches than for Abbots and Priors their Monasteries and houses 4. As to the agreeableness of this Government in the Church to the Civil constitution of the Kingdom I only say that I question whether the Lord Christ who declared his Kingdom not to be of this World will allow or do appoint the Governments of the World to be the square of Government in his Church and I confess I can hardly reconcile it to his Regal Power and Faithful Administration in his House and I must have a better Comment on the Text than I have yet met withall if it be not prohibited in these terms The Princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them and they are great and exercise authority upon them but it shall not be so among you but whosoever will be great among you let him be your M nister and whosoever will be Chief among you let him be your servant Matth. 20.25.29 27. Mark 10.42 43 44. Luke 22.23 24. The sense whereof made Pope Gregory write himself Servus Servorum Dei Whitehead and others refuse Coverdalle and many others decline their Bishopricks as having in them aliquid commune eum Antichristo I think the Clown his question to the Bishop of Cullen were worth considering What will become of the Bishops when the Dukes be damned Yet the agreeableness of Prelacy with Englands ill Government hath not been so obvious to others as these Gentlemen suppose the vigilant eye and strong hand wherewith in all Ages it hath been restrained these Petrae and Rupes Winchester and Rivallo in the time of King Henry the 3d. were judged very dangerous when they constrained a Covenant without and against the Kings consent to remove them as evil Counsellours Matthew Paris our old Historian notes Bishops to have ever been the Make-bates between the King and People screwing up the Kings Prerogative beyond thee onstitutions of the Kingdom and liberties yea safety of the Subjects and chargeth all the Wars Broiles Mischiefs and Evils of the Barons Wars to have sprung from and been acted by the Bishops And when ngKi Philip lay on his death-bed He charged His son If He would Rule by his Nobles He must keep his Bishops low The premuniries by which they have ever been awed and their late High Commission authorizing them to act any appellation provocation priviledge exemption proclamation law statute whatsoever notwithstanding and their bold Usurpation in their own name and authorities and under their own seals to issue forth Process Excommunications Censures and other Judgements and their Imperial Canons in 1640. do bespeak them prejudicial to the Civil Government and Constitution of the Kingdom and I think a private society should with very much of modesty affirm the agreeableness of this Government after the Parliament on mature deliberation and debate as most proper Judges Vote of the 10th of June had voted this Government to have been found by long experience very prejudicial to the Civil State of these Kingdoms Now Sir as to the so often Canted Aphorisme of King James No Bishop No King with which the Prelates and their Priests do too much strive to rivet their Government unto the Crown I must be free to say that it is more politick than pious and of no more warrant or authority than the Spaniards one universal Emperour and one Pope or universal Bishop and when the Scots loyal adherence to and advancement of His most Sacred Majesty unto the Ruine of their Kingdom Loss of their lives and Estates Exile and Imprisonment of their Nobles and Conquest of their Land together with the uncessant struglings of the Covenant Interest under Sequestration Imprisonments Banishments and death of many not ceasing till they had by Gods blessing effected the Happy and Honourable Restitution of King and Kingdom be well considered I hope these learned Masters and Scholars of Oxford will see some proceedings that may at least weaken their belief in this political Maxime We have seen Sir the strength of these learned exceptions unto the second Article of the Covenant the great eye-sore of our Age and find little or nothing therein to charge the matter thereof with falshood or injustice but that notwithstanding the grudging of proud and profane men it stands in this respect established they have herein been long and constrained me to stay too long in consideration of what they urge but as they so I shall be more brief and contracted in their following exceptions wherein they suggest many to be great ones but profess to take up with few which we must needs imagine not to be of the least weight Unto the third Article they except nothing as to the matter of the promise Subjectio quinta
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