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
of Covenanting The particle Such seems to carry it to the quality of the Covenant in respect of the matter covenanted which afterward is particularly and in its proper place excepted against But the words of the Covenant suggested by this exception to be false do relate unto the act of covenanting as we have now at last for the preservation of our Religion determined to enter into a not such a mutual and Solemn League and Covenant And the place of this exception is in the beginning of their exceptions unto the Preface which may be said to be no part of the Covenant and therefore admits not an exception to the quality of such a Covenant Moreover the next exception puts it out of doubt that these words relate to the act of Covenanting in which they profess they finde not in our Histories any footsteps of a sworn Covenant on any occasion whatsoever So that it seems to be the Act of covenanting by Oath which they cannot conceive to be a lawful proper and probable means to preserve Religion from ruine Surely then Sir the weather was very misty about Oxford and made their minds very muddy that they could not conceive entring into Covenants and Solemn Leagues dictated by the light of nature and directed by the Law of God pursued and practised by all Nations and by Israel in the cases of their Religion as the utmost of humane policy and highest of security to their priviledges endangered as a method detecting concealed enmity debarring fraud expressing affection engaging conscience and animating resolution to be a lawful proper and probable meanes of security If it be good and safe as to our Civil I hope it is no less probable in our Religious concernments If Sir I had been to deale with one single student I must have told him That he started this exception more like a Sophistical Disputant than a conscientious Dubitant Fourthly They could not believe the entring into this Covenant to be according to the commendable practice of these Kingdoms 4th Exception in the Oxford Reasons or the example of Gods people in other Nations for that they found not the least footstep in our Histories of a sworne Covenant ever entred into by the people of this Kingdom upon any occasion whatsoever nor could they readily remember any commendable example of the like done in any other Nation but are rather told by the Defenders of the Covenant that the world never saw the like before Whither Sir Answer will not prejudice carry men I cannot but wonder to finde the Masters Students c. of Oxford so much unacquainted with Histories as neither to finde in our own or other Histories a commendable example of Entring into Covenant I may not mind them of the Covenant made by the Nobles and people of Scotland among themselves and with Queen Elizabeth of England under and against the Papal might executed by the then Queen Regent nor of the Netherlands confederacy and Covenant These will not seem commendable in their sight now though so judged when England became their protection and encouraged nay defended them in them Let me therefore enquire whether they knew Israel to have been Gods people of another Nation and that they entered into Covenant in the time of the Judges in the dayes of Joash Josiah Hezekiak and Nehemiah in times of danger and defection in their Civil and Religious concernments And was their practice commendable 2. Did our Gentlemen of Oxford never finde any footsteps in our Histories concerning the Barons of Stamford Anno 1225. assembled not only without but against the Kings consent and covenanted each with other to demand the restitution of their Liberties whereupon a Parliament was holden at Northampton to give them satisfaction And again did they never finde in our Histories how in Anno 1258. they Assembled at Oxford agreed on Articles viz. The confirmation of the Charter de Foresta 2. The establishing of a Lord Chief Justice who might judge them by Law 3. The driving Aliens and Strangers out of England and the like and that they confederated by Oath and gave their hands and mutual faith one to the other Matth. Paris Hist Aug. p. 940 941 952 653. that they would not desist to prosecute their purpose for loss of money or Lands nor love nor hate no nor yet for life of them or theirs till they had cleared England of Strangers and procured laudable Laws And under this Covenant they brought the Kings Brother Richard King of Romans and Earle of Cornwall and caused him to sweare upon the Holy Gospels this formal Covenant Hear all men that I Richard Earle of Cornwal swear upon the Holy Gosples to be faithful and forward with you to Reforme the Kingdom of England hitherto by the counsel of wicked men so much deformed and I will be an effectual coadjutor to expell the Rebels and troublers out of the same Both these our Histories say were in the time and without the consent of King Henry the 3d. Not to trouble our Reader with the like in the time of King John King Richard the 2d and other Princes I must desire the Gentlemen of Oxford to tell us whether these were not people of England and these be not visible foot-marks of some Covenant of the people of England on some occasion And if they shall question whether they be commendable examples let them please to observe the commendable Epethite our Historian gives upon the last of these Covenanters calling them Angliae Republicae Zelatores But the defenders of the Covenant told them that the world never saw the like before I but they did not tell them that there are no footsteps of any Covenant made on any occasion whatsoever And if they had were the Masters and Students in Oxford resolved into such an implicite Faith as to believe an Enemy But I wonder these Masters of Reason had so little Reason as to conclude a general from the concession of a special Their Margent explaineth the concession of the defenders of the Covenant in these termes Such an Oath for matter persons and other circumstances the like hath not been in any Age or Oath we reade of in Sacred or humane Stories Know they not that there is a vast difference between the general form of an Oath or Covenant and those special Qualifications which may circumstance it and that a dissimilitude in the last will not conclude that there never was a Sworn Covenant on any occasion but sit verbum sat sapienti Thus Sir notwithstanding these learned Suggestions of the falsehood of the Preface and in it of the assertory part of the Covenant it yet continueth lawful because true and is our encouragement and assurance that the promissory part will be answerable For as in rational conclusions so I hope in Religious resolutions we shall find à veris vera sequuntur Subsectio Tertia The promissory part of the Covenant is in these six Articles I. THat we shall sincerely
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
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
never had these pieces of Religion for their ground or reason You see Sir that the first ground of these learned mens dissatisfaction as to the covenanted endeavor of Reformation of Religion in England in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government is clearly groundless supposing a change and suggesting a scandal not to be rupposed Let us try the strength of their second reason for this exception And that is They could not covenant this Reformation without wrong to themselves 2 Reason for this exception their consciences reputation and estates in bearing false witness against themselves and sundry other wayes swearing to endeavor to reform that as corrupt and vitious which they had by their personal subscription approved as agreeable to the Word of God and for which they had not been condemned of their own hearts nor convinced by their brethren that therein they did amiss 2. Which they are in conscience perswaded were not against the Word of God as they stand established by law 3. Which they believe to be in sundry respects much better more agreeable to the Word of God and pactice of the Catholick Church than that to be preserved in Scotland 4. To which all Clerks admitted to any Benefice are required to assent To these reasons Sir I should have answered 1. Credit is indeed a matter of concerment and Reputation is to be regarded and our Estate by all just prudent meanes duely preserved but they are not equivalent to the purity of Gospel administrations nor must be admitted barres to duy or stays from the endeavour of a necessary Reformation when called for 2. We are at a loss to understand their terms the establishment by Law is not expressed in the Covenant and many corruptions we have noted were exercised not established The endeavour of a Reformation of them though not them only was and is required and it is very doubtful how or where to find and prove an establishment by law to which they so much cleave yet I hope the defect in proof thereof will be no just demurre to the endeavour of a Reformation of what is really vitious and corrupt whether established or only exercised We must also entreat a comment on these words the practice of the Catholick Church It is well known that Rome doth engross and monopolize this Epithite nor can the Worship Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England admit it to be predicated of any so well as that for all reformed Churches do in their practice differ and I presume it will be hard to prove the agreement of the Primitive Churches in these particulars which were first derived from Apostate Rome and have ever since continued as the dregs of their Catholick practices not more to the grief of the Reformed Churches abroad and Non-conformists at home then joy and exultation of the Children of that Church as a plain evidence of their continued possession and encouragement to expect and endeavor a full recovery of England into her bosom But as to their Argument 3 The Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government might be vitious and corrupt notwithstanding their apprehension and assent to the contrary or the subscription of others required by the Law We well know that the Reformation of the Church in England was begun on more * Henry the 8th his discontent at the Pope Political than pious principles which did easily consent to a retaining of what was justly discharged in other Rerormed Churches embracing the administration of the Gospel in its simplicity for the sake of its naked self might consist with those Publick ends which did provoke it and Policy being the principle predominant in the first hath strugled against piety unto this last act and is not yet mastered and I presume the Scholars and Masters of Oxford will not plead an immunity from policy passion and prejudice when they are to pass judgment against their credits reputation and estates as in the case of this Covenant they apprehend they were to do and that these prirciples will provoke us to yield our own and exact from others an assent to things as agreeable to the Word of God which in themselves are vitious and corrupt no serious man or Christian can or will deny It is wel if we find this Reason stated under a more cautious vigilant and pious frame of spirit 4. But I must confess I wonder not so much to hear these Gentlemen to profess They had by their personal subscription approved the Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government of the Church of England as agreeable to the Word of God which might be an act of rashness an effect of ignorance an event of some distressed condition or distemper of mind fear of losing or hope of gaining preferment as to hear them say That this was enjoyned by law to them and all that were admitted to benefices That the Doctrine of the Church was to be assented unto I grant is by Law established but the assent to Worship Discipline and Government I observe not to be enjoyned by any full and formal Law I find indeed something relating to Discipline in the ordering of Deacons and Priests Bishops and Archbishops and the Churches power about traditions and Rites or Ceremonies inserted into the 39. Articles but how or by what Law they are established 13. Eliz 12. I know not The Statute requiring Ministers assent doth not specifie the Articles particulary and the general Note whereby to know them laid down in the Statute is this Articles of Religion which ONLY concern the Confession of the true Christian Faith and Doctrine of the Sacraments This particle ONLY is in my judgment exclusive to Discipline and Government and how these came into the Articles I know not only I find the Epistle to His late Majesty before the * A Book supposed to have be on written by Mr. William Frynn Quench-Coal to charge corruption and forgery to have been acted about these Articles and earnestly implores justice against the Forgers and Obtruders thereof and untill the Legality of the Canons of 1603. and sence thereof be clearly asserted and fully vindicated from the * Necessity for Reformation p. 56 57 58 59. exceptions which are urged against them we must be at a loss for their establishment for if the King had not authority by vertue of the Statute pretended or the matter of them be repugnant to standing Statutes as is suggested the establishment of Worship Discipline and Government by law must abide very doubtful but the University of Oxford might make a Law unto themselves to which these Gentlemen might refer But 5. Whether established or exercised I think it very strange to see these learned men on serious thoughts to profess their own hearts did not condemn them nor had their brethren convinced their judgements they had done amiss by their personal subscription to approve the Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government of the Church of England to be agreeable to the Word of GOD but
viz. That Ancient form of Church-government under which our Religion was at first so orderly Oxford Commendation of Prelacy considered without violence or tumult and so happily reformed and hath since so long flourished with truth and peace to the honour and happiness of our own and envy and admiration of other Nations But Sir good wine needs no bush it is well if the Arguments be as cogent to the mind as this glorious description of Englands Church-government is captivating to the affections I hope Sir serious Casuists in stating their Scruples do not set a lustre on the object by glorious Epithites o engage the admiration of the vulgar But Sir 1. Antiquity may be no Argument of its glory verity or goodnesse these learned men know this is the loud and common cry of Pagans for their Idolatry and Papists for their Superstition and Papacy which will in point of Age appear the Elder Brother to Englands Prelacy Pope Gregory being before Austin the Monk the first Arch-bishop of Canterbury and yet is not owned as any addition to their glory or demonstration of their verity for as true Religion is first received so it is after corruption reformed by the Redeemed from the vain Conversation received by tradition from their fathers 2. Order is indeed very amiable in any Act but what they mean by the orderly proceeding of the first Reformation I know not sure I am that the precedency of the Laity unto the Clergy in a work of this nature in which they should have been Dictators was more just than regular And when I consider the first step of Reformation in the expulsion of the Popes Supremacy supported by all the Bishops unto a premunire to have sprung in Henery the eighth from discontent at the Popes dealing in the business of Queen Katharine rather than conscience of its sinfulness to have been steered by policy not piety to stand consistent with a retention and fiery inforcement of Popish Doctrine and Worship unto the persecution and burning of Tyndal Lambert and others and imposing of the six Articles in which I must confess Cranmer quit himself like a faithful Bishop but others I find not opposing And when I observe the Line which first ruled in Henery the eighth his dayes to be retained and run-through the Reformation of King Edward the sixth and was too much regarded in the time of Queen Elizabeth who both acted from a more pious principle had but their Counsellors captivated their policy and the little knowledge of those reforming dayes given them to see and set up in its lustre and power the square and right Rule of Reformation I cannot but say Gods power is much more manifest in the first Reformation of England than was mans order and yet what order was History witnesseth to have been though under yet without yea against the Bishops Foxe Acts and Monuments p. 959. The hundred and eighteen thousand eight hundred and forty pounds paid by the Bishops of the two Provinces Canterbury and York for their pardon from the praemunire doth proclaim their opposition at the first The thirty persons chosen out of the Parliament to consider and conclude Articles of Religion and Cranmer and Ridleys Politick plea against pious Prince Edward the sixth for the Mass of his Sister Mary and the after-conclusions in their Convocations do not speak much of forwardness at the last whilst in the one or in the other they went not any faster than driven by the Kings injunctions 3. No marvel that they who could not see in this Reformation any disorder could not hear any noise of tumults attend it and yet if I mistake not the Tarratantara-murmur of the Lincoln-shire and York-shire men in their rebellious holy pilgrimage headed by Dr. Makeree denominated Captain Cobler and abetted by many of the Clergy not that I find resisted or quieted by any Episcopal influence in the time of Henry the eighth and the like insurrections of Suffolk York-shire Oxford-shire Devon-shire Cornwal and other Counties against the Reformation by King Edward the sixth doth signifie unto me that the Reformation was not at first more preposterouss than violent and tumultuous though not in the Authors yet in the opposition and reluctancy of its subjects occasioning this note to be left upon it Tantae molis erat Romanum evertere sedem Yet I must not by reason of the one or other deny it to have been happy but I desire freely to acknowledge that this Reformed Religion in the degree attained hath since happily flourished unto the honour of our own and envy of other Nations only I see not wherein this Government the extirpation of which is Covenanted to be endeavoured did either occasion or add unto the happiness and honour thereof I am sure it is noted by others and were I the first observe of it I durst undertake to make it good That Religion had sparkled and flourish'd with more honor and happiness in an higher degree of Reformation than it yet doth if not retarded and sometimes retrogaded by Englands Episcopal Prelates who have made it so much pompous unto sense and the Worlds admiration but so little powerful to the spirit But Sir I love not to recriminate or reproach things or persons I shall therefore pass this applause of our late Prelacy with this Request That the Masters and Scholars of Oxford or any other will please to tell us what there is in this Government so special and peculiar for its efficacie to the order and quiet of Reformation that may not be sound in another Form of Government for that only is of the essence and so must be the Emphasis of this Episcopacy Subsectio Septima The apprehension of the worth of this Government had Sir its full influence on the affections of these learned men they therefore profess themselves 1. Affected with grief and amazement to see it endeavoured to be extirpated without any reasons offered to their understanding for which it should be thought necessary or expedient so to do 2. Ranked with Popery Superstition Heresie and Profaness 3. Intimated to be some way or other contrary to sound Doctrine or the power of godliness Unto all this I shall say in brief 1. That if the constant struglings of this Government Their grounds of affection and amazement at Extirparion of Prelacy examined with the Civil power and encroachment on the Royal Authority in all Ages having not kept its bounds but hy exercising absolute independent Authority in their own Names and under their own Seals in a Legislative Declaration of what is Treason and by an Imperial power to prescribe Oaths to be sworne as in the Canons of 1640. the Bishops of both Provinces did presume to do if its innovation defence and propagation of erroneous Doctrines and Superstition if its suppression of Truth and true Religion by silencing suspending faithful Preachers if its violence irregularity and injustice in High Commission Censures banishing imprisoning confiscating stigmatizing
and invested with the same power of feeding and governing the Church of God with the Bishop and none other is an order distinct from and subject to the Bishop so to be ruled by him and not to exercise his Office but by the Bishops License and at his pleasure and that the Presbyter is bound to swear obedience to the Bishop as his Ordinary That certain particular Priests or Deacons shuld by Papal constitution and Princely indulgence without the counsel and common suffrages of the Colledge of Presbyters bespeaking their conset or consent of the common people The force of Prelacy covenanted against be constituted a Colledge or Cathedral Council to the Bishop to advise with him and rule under him by the name of Deans Deans and Chapters Arch-deacon and Prebends to Elect the Bishop in vacancy and hold Courts constitute Canons and exercise all Jurisdiction over all Churches and Ministers not being so much as chosen by them or having their consent much less commission so to do That any one Minister or Bishop doth stand charged with all the Congregations and Pastors of them in one County or many Counties making one Diocess and be by vertue of office bound to the inspection and pastoral Correction and Government of them and that the several Bishops of a Kingdom be themselves subject to one Metropolitan Church and Arch-bishop to whom they shall swear obedience and shall be subject to be by him overseen ordered and corrected sure if the Word of God conclude such superiority over the Church in one Kingdom it will conclude a Catholick superiority over the universal Church and advance the Pope as warrantably above the Arch-bishops as the Arch-bishops are above the Bishops and the Bishops above the Presbyters for these are not differences of kind but of degree nor is there pleaded for Divine Right or Apostolical Institution of the one in the Church of England what is not pleaded for the other by the Fathers of the Council of Trent and by Bellarmine that Cardinal Popes Champion Bellarm. de Clericis lib. 1.5 cap. 14. and who can deny a quatenus ad omne c Lastly That Bishops and Ministers of the Gospel may exercise their Office and Function by Vicegerents and Deputies Commissaries or Chancellours or that by any Apostolical direction they may and have authority to Commissionate any such or that the determination and disposal of Civil Affairs Matters of Marriage and Administrations belong to them that they must by themselves or joyning unto themselves Professors and Students of the Civil Law keep Courts on which Proctors Apparitros and the like are dependent and so judicially rule and govern in these cases This is the Form of Government these learned Casuists must think is if not of Divine Right by immediate precept from God yet established by the Apostles according to the mind and after the example of their Master Jesus Christ and that by vertue of their power and authority as deputed Governours of the Church or otherwise their thoughts are very vain and impertinent for not an Episcopal Government wherein all the Bishops Ministers of the Church within any City Country or Kingdom invested with equal authority and dignity being all of the same Order do by common Council govern the Church but this specifical Prelacy presuming it self to be an Hierarchy or holy Government and chief Priest-hood not to be gain-sayed without high profaness or with-stood and destroyed without sacriledge formally existing in Arch-bishops super our Princes to Bishops Bishops Soveraign Lords to all Ministers or Presbyters and enjoying the standing Cathedral Council and subordinate Judges Deans Arch-deacons Deans and Chapter and transmitting their power and Episcopal authority to Chancellours and Commissaries and so ruling with all state and pompous attendants not only mens profession of Religion but their propriety of civil enjoyments is Covenanted to be extirpated I hope Sir that these serious men would not cozen their own Consciences and cheat the World by their observation the Covenant would bind us against Episcopacy and Bishops in general and not take notice how it is limited to one particular kind and then Sir I must be free to tell them That the Divine Right or Apostolical Institution of this Episcopal Government is but a think so of no more value than a dream for I not only think but am sure the libraries of learning in all that famous Univesity will never lay us down this Form of Government in the Church of Ephesus though I should grant Timothy to be a Bishop therein Antioch Philippi Creet or the seven Churches of Asia supposing their Angels to have been Bishops in all which I deny not a Government by Bishops and those made by the Holy Ghost to whom I will presume to think had I then lived and been invested with that Ministerial authority I now by Gods grace enjoy poor simple I might have stood up as a Peer or at least Bishop Suffragan and if they give not some Scripture instance I think Ecclesiastical story will never prove the Apostles established this Form of Government in the Church or at least not by their Apostolical power and authority as deputed by Christ governours of the Church and I am sure not after the example nor according to the mind of Jesus Christ their Master it being directly inconsistent with the quality of this Kingdom and dictated parity of his Ministers Sir with Reverence may I speak it I think it had been very sutable to the learning and gravity of this learned Assembly to have laid down in this case of conscience some clear Reasons for their conjecture of this Divine Right and Apostolical Institution and Establishment And the rather for that Pope Nicholas hath affirmed Omnes sive Patriarchae cujuslibet apicem sive Metropolean primatus aut Episcopatuum Cathedras vel Eccl siarum sive cujuscunque ordinis dignitatem instituit Romana Ecclesia That Rome appointed all Ecclesiastical Dignities of Bishops Arch-bishops Deans Arch-deacons c. And Pope * Apud Gratian. Dist 22. cap. 1. Lucius and Clement with whom agreeth Peter Lombard and our own Historians That King Lucius instituted three Arch-bishopricks and * Distinct 80. lib. 4. dif 24. Brit Hist lib. 4. pag. 126. Polichro lib. 4. c. 16. fol. 163. Pagets Christianography Foxe saith 28. chief Priests called Flammens Acts and Monuments p. 96. Fol. 59 60. twenty five Bishopricks in the room and stead of the three Archflamens and twenty five flamens And that Devotus the Bishop of Winchester falling into the seat of the flamen thereof had all the possessions within twelve Miles cmopass containing thirty two Villages conferred on him and his Clergy And the Archbishops Bishops and Clergy of England in their Institution of a Christian man dedicated to Henry the eighth have told all the World It is out of all doubt that there is no mention made neither in the Scripture neither in the Writings of any authentical Doctor or Auctor of
Remonstrance they had declared to be so oppressive and dangerous if they will evade the influence compass and danger of the fourth Article of this Covenant in the first case I dare secure them from it in reference to the second 5. But the main thing which concerneth the Church of England is her foundation which if it be removed what shall the Righteous do And these serious Casuists do tell us That the holy Church of England was founded in the state of Prelacy within the Realm of England and they proved it by the Law for Gospel without doubt they had none to prove it that laying the Prophets and Apostles for the foundation and Christ an enemy to Prelacy the corner stone and in their Margin they cite the Statute of Carlile 25. Ed. 1. Recited 25. Ed 3. on which they profess They dare not by extirpation of Prelacy strike at the foundation of the Church which they are bound to uphold Truly Sir their care of the Church and its foundation is commendable but how comes it to pass that this Form of Government must be made the foundation of the Church without any danger of Schism by them to whom Scotlands making their Discipline and Government the mark of a true Church did seem so much tending to Schism Must the Government of England be a fundamental point of Religion the very esse of the Church and may not Scotland make her Government a note of distinction Turpe est doctori c. Sir we cannot deny the proofs cited and declaring the holy Church of England to be founded in the estate of Prelacy but I cannot but stand amazed to find men making Apologies propounding doubts professing a serious desire to have conscience satisfied so much to content themselves and cozen their Readers with plain fallacies such Sophisme as better beseems the Logick than Divinity Schools and common Halls than the Regent house Two things are to be explained What they mean by holy Church and what foundation this is to which the Statutes relate These learned men wel know that by holy Church in the acceptation of that Age and of those very Acts the Statute of Edward the first at Carlile and the Statute of Edward the third was meant the Pompous Popish Ecclesiastical State whereof Abbies and Priories were no small Members as in Magna Charta and other Grants of Kings which had then such influence on the Civil State as that no Act of Parliament could bind or be deemed valid without the ratifying censure of holy Church whose manner was by her authority to curse all that should not keep such Lawes as were agreed I wish the Masters and Scholars would speak out and tell us whether they think they are bound to uphold this holy Church or that the Church of Christ may not yea do not subsist in England now holy Church is driven out the Church simply Christian is very different from the pompous popish holy Church Again Sir the foundation mentioned in these Statutes is sutable to the Fabrick Foxe his Acts and Monuments p. 22. holy Churches viz. the temporal endowments whereby she was made so pompous the Lands Mannors and large Revenues given by the King or Nobles of the Land as the question occasioning the same doth plainly evidence which was Whether the exactions of the first fruits of Churches and Abbies and all Benefices in England and the profit of vacancies by Pope Clement were just and as the very words and scope of the Statute of 25. Edward 3d. doth plainly declare providing for the advousance and disposal of all Benefices and the profits thereof in manner as the founders that is first donors had established and so the Prelacy in which it was founded is an Independency as to Rome and a sole Power and Prerogative which England had free and within her self in respect of which in the very words of the Statutes themselves it is said The Bishop of Rome usurping the Seigniores of such Possessions and Benefices doth give and grant the same to Aliens which did not and Cardinals which might not dwel in England as if he had been Patron or Advowe of the said Benefices as he was not of right after the Law of England so that this Prelacy is purely Political and the foundation more profitable than pious could these learned men be so absurd as to make the very being of the Church to stand on such a foundation were there not Churches of Christ before Patrons Possessons and Presentations and may they not be when these large endowments are taken away from the places to which they are affixed This Prelacy will determine the Church of England by the fall of Monasteries to have been shaken in the foundation and by vertue of this Political Prelacy the Kings of England have given the possessions of Bishopricks to their Chancellours Treasurers Secretaries Kinsmen meer Lay-persons for increase of their means Pryns Catalogue of Testimonies for the parity of Presbyters and Bishops p. 16 17 18. and have kept the Episcopal and Archiepiscopal Seas void for 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 15 20. and sometimes 30. years together by what loadstone do these learned men think the holy Church did subsist when her Prelates her foundation in their sense was wanting or can they make us believe Denmark or Scotland have lost or the Reformed Churches never had the being of a Church of Christ because they never had or have expelled their Episcopal Prelacy Ecclesiastical Prelacy like the Petrae and Rupes as in the time of King Henery the third have ever been such swelling foundations to the Church and in the State that they have constrained the Kings and Parliament of England as of all other Nations in all Ages to exercise an high Prelacy over them by strict Laws and severe exactions to keep them within their bounds and at last to Covenant the extirpation thereof wherein the Oxford Reasons would make us believe we not only pull an old house about our ears but destroy the very Church if we have not wit enough to see how they would cosen us by the Law of man instead of the Law of God and a false gloss on fair words Having found so little weight in what is urged from the Government by Episcopacy of the estate of the Church of England we shall not expect much in what is incumbent upon themselves against their Covenanting to endeavour to extirpate this kind of Government yet that little we shall consider and it relates unto their personal capacities in their third exception or more publick Obigations in their fifth exception In reference to their personal capacities they say They are not satisfied how it can stand with justice ingenuity or humanity to require the extirpation of this Government Oxford Reasons third exception against extirpation of Prelacy unless it had been proved unlawful what Sir if it had been proved inexpedient it would have been consistent with Saint Pauls Justice Humanity and
signification yet by long and common appropriation as obvious to vulgar capacity to denote a special kind of government in the Church as tyranny in reference to the Common-wealth Yet it is restrained by a more particular denomination Hierarchy holy government by the order of holy high Priesthood as some do fancy and specifical description by its enumerated substantial parts Archbishops Bishops Deans Deans and Chapters in which it formally existed and separable adjuncts Commissaries Chancellors and other Officers depending thereupon so that these not in sensu composito that the removal of any one Officer might suffice but complexo the Government conaining all or any of these is the object sworne against appears to every unprejudiced Reader and so it squares with the Act expressed by the most significant word which could be devised viz. Extirpate which certainly every ordinary reader knoweth to amount unto more than mutation by dismembring some separable adjuncts thereupon dependent as Commissaries or Chancellors or by limitation and regulation which yet makes the Bishops holy hands essential to all acts of confirmation of Catechumenists or Ordination of Ministers or Jurisdiction in the Church though there be never so many grave learned and pious Presbyters and Pastors a few of whom may be his Lordships Council without any intrinsecal authority in themselves and without him whilst all men know to extirpate signifieth una cum stirpe evellere to pluck up by the very root In this point if the words of the Oath were not sufficiently clear and the Lawyers rule Lex currit cum praxi may point us to a Comment The Petition opposed by the * Bishop Hall Remonstrant defended by Smectymnuus presented to the Parliament the debates many speeches and resolves in the Houses which preceded and produced the advice of the Assembly of Divines Ordinances of Parliament and Oath of His most Sacred Majesty as King of Great Britain in pursuit of the Covenant which ensued upon the swearing the same hath written this sense in such legible Characters that all may run and read it And although I would not require any thing more I can take nothing lesse because God alloweth no abatements in an Oath than what hath been sworn though it should appear good and profitable but not necessary necessitate precepti divini However others may flagge and faulter or fall off from the Covenant I must tell the assertors of the Presbyterial Government that if they have no conscience they are hedged into the observance of it on the account of Credit Reasons of the present judgment of the University of Oxford concerning the Solemn League and Covenant Sect. 7 p. 21. for the University of Oxford as with them combin'd to their reproach from the Jesuites and Sectaries hath charged it to be their property to swear one thing in their words and in their own sense to mean another to invent Oaths and Covenants for the Kingdom dispence vvith them vvhen they please swear and forswear as the wind turneth like a godly Presbyter which if any of them will dare to verifie they shall give me leave to mourn alone for their iniquity for by Gods grace my soul shall not enter into the secrets of an Art so sinful and shameful before God and men but study that Rule Be vvise as Serpents but innocent as Doves Courteous Reader I have held thee too long in the threshold I shall stay thee no longer save to tell thee if in any thing I seem indiscreet it is in venturing something of Answer to the Reasons of the University of Oxford which every simple Anti-covenanter and scurrilous Pamphleter not able by the least Casuistical consideration to discharge the Covenant do revive and run into as the Gordian knot never to be loosed and to which my Antagonist Dr. Gauden beaten out of his own Divinity doth retreat as to his impregnable Castle of confidence which may indeed savour something of arrogancy in any single opponent by whose over-matched weaknesse the cause may suffer Give me leave to tell thee the dread hereof hath smothered in silence what is now drawn out by the reputation of unansvverable Reasons they have received amongst the enemies of the Covenant I cannot live by an implicite faith but in a case of conscience must examine the considerations of the most learned Society General Councils are more authoritative and authentick than any single University yet they have erred and their errors have been detected by single persons And how foolish soever I may seem I have so much wit as to know Timidi ignavi nunquam erigent Trophaeum Honor attends not Dastards And again Trophaeum ferre me à forti viro pulchrum est sin autem vincar vinci à tali nullum est probrum It is an honor to Scanderbeg to beat not any shame to be beaten by the numerous Turks If I be vanquished by their more learned pens it can be to me no disgrace nor to truth any great dammage whilst my being over-poured in so good a cause will engage more able men who have any zeal for or conscience of the Oath of God which lieth on us our King and Kingdom to appear for the relief and defence thereof In expectation of which I cast my self on thy candor and ingenuity Zach. Crofton ΑÎΑΛΗΨΙΣ ΑÎΕΛΗΦΘΗ The Fastning of St Peter's Fetters OR The Solemn League and Covenant and its Conscience-binding Power Asserted and Vindicated c. in an Epistle to the Right Worshipful Sir Lawrence Bromfield Knight and Colonel in LONDON The PREFACE Right Worshipful IF without suspition of blasphemy and irreverence towards Sacred men and Sacred writ I may pursue Dr. John Gauden's Metaphor I cannot but tell you mens prophane neglect and contempt of the Covenant did not a little perplex me but that Solemn and Sacred Oaths should be deemed St. Peters Bonds and that Protestant Divines dreaming of an Apostolical Priority should by Popish Arguments attempt his Release to the Re-establishment of the Papatum alterius mundi as it was is and must be owned of Episcopacy in Lawn sleeves exercising Paternal Authority over their brethren as the peoples * Dr. John Ganden's Analysis of the Covenant p. 17. equals and inferiors because in black coats did much more afflict my spirit Sir in sence hereof I did send out my Analepsis after the Doctors Analysis and made bold to withstand St. Peter to his face for he was to be blamed and indeed condemned as * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word in Gal. 2.11 doth signifie and brought him back to prison it must be so esteemed with silence hearkning for his joyful songs under Christ his Masters yoke and in those holy Stocks and resolved submissively to wait on God to perfect the peace and purity of his Church in England and plead the quarrel of the Covenant but the Grating Files of some more willing than able to dismiss my prisoner have disturbed my rest Truly Sir I love St. Peter better in
Bonds than in the Popes Lordly Chair and was never yet reputed a Sceptick and therefore cannot now brook to have my Analepsis out-run and derided with an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a scornful escape from my due and diligent pursuit and therefore must once more make bold under your Worshipfull name 1 Sam. 18.23 to send this Ahimaaz after Cushi though on the same errand whereunto I am no little encouraged for that the * Book so called Doubts and Scruples concerning the taking the Solemn League and Covenant which are by the Doctor my Antagonist and his Nephew No-body commended to my consideration hath done me the honour to couple you with me and you the honour as to tell the world you abide as stedfast in the Covenant as they found you in their first assaults Noble Colonel I will not fear to be in my place your Second under so holy an Ensign as is the Solemn League and Covenant nor once doubt your courage in so good a cause which I wish may appear in Common-Council not Champian-Fields For Sir Tutius est contendere verbis Quam pugnare manu Sanctified words uttered from a sound mind may subdue prophaneness and settle His Majesties Throne in Righteousness and no way disturb the peace of these too long distracted Nations rather than which I desire never to put pen to paper Sir Since my answer to Dr. Gaudens Sense and Solution of the Covenant many Pamphlets have started into the world to raise a dust and make a noise in the streets that the Vulgar may think something may be said against the Covenant but when they come to be considered they appear like the Apples of Sodom or out-cries of affrighted women who cry Stop stop Hold hold but cannot stretch one hand whereby to hold or stay the pursuit The first of thse was John Rowland A Rejoynder to Mr. Rowland's Reply a right Sir John Suckling in his pretended Reply to the Anonymous Answer to the Doctor wherein more like a Sir John Country Curate than Rector of Footscray in Kent he answereth all matters of moment as to fact or notion as if to a Quis fuit hic sepultus in his Church-yard with I know not I cannot tell I have not read I have not the Book and the like meriting to himself Ignoramus Motto Per verbum Nescio Resolvitur omnis questio Yet he giveth Mr. Crofton the meanest dwarfe but in his monstrous eye the Goliath of the Covenanters a most capital Confutation Like a well-skill'd pick-pocket writing his name in such Capital Letters that men may run and read and sucklings stand still and gaze at them but throughout his whole Book medieth not with him or his Answer and therefore my Rejoynder to his Reply must be tht of Sir Thomas Moor to the silly Frier Tu bene cavisti ne te ulla occidere possit Litera nam tota est litera nulla tibi Thou tak'st good care the Letter kill thee not Thy skill is such thou know'st not B from Bot. But yet in fine by a Hocus-Pocus Postscript he conjured Mr. Crofton into a Synonimy with Anonymus and profoundly concluded Answer one answer all The next was a paper of the like stamp Mr. Russel's pischarge discharged but more immediately directed unto me yet not to any thing of my Arguments This was The Solemn League and Covenant discharged by John Russel of Chinkford in Essex This man pretends not onely to loosen but to annihilate St. Peters bonds and for his strength and skill was attested by John Gauden D. D. and yet he medleth not with one of those Arguments he pretendeth to discharge but starts a new notion which because it so well pleased the Doctor shall though not worth it come in its place to be considered I owe this man thanks for his good opinion of the modesty and perfection of my answer In his Epistle which he saith was onely defective in point of memory for that I did not remember the Kings concessions which were voted a ground of peace were with continuance of Episcopacy but by his leave I remembered it though my Argument led not to repeat it and though he seem to forget I remember the Concessions were to suspend Episcopacy and the Liturgy and admit Presbytery and the Directory for three years To him I say then Turpe est doctori cum culpa redarguit ipsum And wish him He so calls it himself in p. 8. who so minds my memory to look well to his Intellectuals For the last qualm of sadnesse made him half mad to rage and rave That Mr. Crofton had urged the Ligne de saint in France as the President of the Covenant who onely rescued the Covenant from the odium of that comparison cast upon it by the Doctor and that by the same Argument which himself granteth viz. That though the Ligne de saint were sinful in the matter yet it was lawful enough in the abstracted form of it And here also he rampantly braggeth that he could produce an hundred precedents to square with the conditions of the times when the Covenant was taken which considering the Religion professed the Kingdoms confederated the Reformation pursued the Authority directing it and the like if he find ten of his hundred I will go to Bedlam on condition he lie there till wise men discern the parallel The common out-cry of others is The like time was never seen but this was to ease his mind as himself professeth The third was the Spurious League Illegal The Bastardy of the League Illegal falsly fathered on Dr. Daniel Featly by the dignity of his name to deceive the world but the feature of it is every way unlike a man so acute and Logical as was this Doctor as is evident in its arguing idem per idem in the 8 and 11th Arguments generals from particulars Argument 8. pag. 26. its Contradiction to the Doctor who in his Epistle to the Parliament prefixed to his Dipper Dipt denominateth the two Houses Beauty and Bonds and owns the Commors as Legislators the Lords as Executors and determined their War A repairing the Temple with their Swords in their hands whom this Book pretending to be written the same year with that Epistle denyeth to be any Lawful Authority and denominateth fomenters of that unnatural civil War nay it is contradictory to it self affirming No people may make a Covenant in any case without the Kings consent in pag. 15. Arg. 3. and yet affirmeth that in sundry cases a people may covenant not onely without but against the consent and command of the King Page 20. unto which I might add an heap of Non-sence observable in it as That the Covenant is not a vertue for Aristotle saith Virtus est habitus Electivus pag. 26. This piece looking asquint at me is loaded with such railing language that it seems to have come from beneath and must be owned as Dr. Featly's Ghost raised by the circle