of Parliament and that inviolably by the 42 of Edw. 3. enacting that if any statute be made to the contrary it shall be holden for none and consequently the Act of Parliament so called against that Priviledge of the Bishops was ipso facto null and void by robbing the King of his Negative voice of his power in the Militia by making Ordinances without him yea against him and so practically denying what they verbally swore that he was the only supreme Governour in all Causes and over all Persons By their electing new members warranted only by a counterfeit Seal By their taking upon them to create new Judges Justices and other Officers without the Kings consent For Laws and Liberties says J. Jenkins p. 146. have not the prevailing party in the two Houses destroyed above an hundred Acts of Parliament and in effect Magna Charta and Charta de Forestâ which are the Common Laws of the Land And p. 135. The Writ of Summons to this Parliament is the Basis and Foundation of the Parliament if the Foundation be destroyed the Parliament falls The Assembly of Parliament is for three purposes Rex est habiturus colloquium tractatum cum Praelatis Magnatibus Proceribus super arduis negotiis concernentibus 1. Nos 2. Defensionem Regni nostri 3. Defensionem Ecclesiae Anglicanae The King says the Writ intends to confer and treat with the Prelates Earls Barons about the arduous affairs relating to 1. our Royal self 2. the defence of our Realm 3. the defence of the Church of England This Parliament says the Judge hath overthrown this Foundation in all three parts 1. Nos Our Royal self the King they have chased away and imprisoned at Holmbey they have voted no Prelates and that a number of other Lords about forty in the City must not come to the House and about forty more are out of Town the conference and treaty is made void thereby for the King cannot consult and treat there with men removed from thence 2. The defence of our Realm that is gone they have made it their Kingdom not his for they have usurp'd all his Soveraignty 3. The defence of the Church of England that is gone By the Church of England must be understood necessarily that Church that at the Teste of the Writ was Ecclesia Anglicana they have destroyed that too So now these men would be called a Parliament having quashed and made nothing of the Writ whereby they were summoned and assembled If the Writ be made void the Process must be void also The House must needs fall where the Foundation is overthrown thus he And all this was done before those Members of Parliament that were Presbyterian were many of them imprisoned and others forcibly secluded by the violence of the Army So that 't is very wonderful how this Rector of Bramshot could be either so ignorant or so impudent as to utter such an assertion especially since in his own following words which it seems he fancied to be a proof of its Truth a very considerable Argument is suggested to evince it an egregious Falshood For quoth he They had voted the Kings Concessions a ground sufficient for the Houses to proceed on to settle the Nation and were willing to cast whatsoever they contended for upon a legal security Now in that very Treaty at the Isle of Wight the Presbyterian party wrested such Concessions from the King as did in their own nature subvert the Fundamental Government of this Kingdom as is evident from the speech of Mr. Pryn himself concerning those Concessions 3. Edit p. 38. wherein he confesses that the Kings of England have always held two swords in their hands the sword of Mars in time of War the sword of Justice in time of Peace And p. 37. he tells us that in those Concessions the King had wholly stript himself his Heirs and Successors for ever of all that power and interest which his Predecessors always enjoyed in the Militia Forces Forts Navy Magazines p. 36. not only of England but Ireland Wales Jersey Guernsey and Barwick too so as he and they can neither raise nor arm one man nor introduce any foreign Forces into any of them by vertue of any Commission Deputation or Authority without consent of both Houses of Parliament and that he had vested the sole power and disposition of the Militia Forts and Navy of all these in both Houses in such ample manner that they should never part with it to any King of England unless they pleased themselves A security says Mr. Pryn so grand and firm that none of our Ancestors ever demanded or enjoyed the like nor any other Kingdom whatsoever since the Creation for ought that I can find and such a self-denying condescension in the King to his people in this particular as no Age can Precedent Thus the sword of Mars which themselves confess the former Kings of England always held was insolently wrested out of the late Kings hands and consequently the Fundamental Government of the Nation subverted in this particular Besides some Parliaments says he p. 40. in former times have had the nomination of the Lord Chancellor some of the Lord Treasurer some of the great Justiciary or some few Judges of England only but never any Parliament of England claim'd or enjoy'd the nomination and appointment of any the great Officers Barons Judges or Treasurers places in Ireland nor yet of the Lord Warden of the Cinque-Ports Chancellors of the Exchequer and Dutchy Secretaries of State Master of the Rolls or Barons of the Exchequer of England yet all these the King for peace-sake hath parted with to us And p. 41. we have the disposal he might have added Horresco referens of all these Officers in England and Ireland both Military and Civil of his sword of War and Peace his Justice his Conscience his Purse his Treasury his Papers his publick Records his Cabinet his Great Seal more than ever we at first expected or desired Thus horridly was the sword of Justice also wrested out of his Majesties hands and consequently the Fundamental Government of the Nation subverted in that particular likewise Another Concession was that no Peer who should be after that Treaty made by the King his Heirs and Successors should sit or vote in the Parliament of England without consent of both Houses of Parliament which says Mr. Pryn p. 43. gives such an extraordinary new power to the House of Commons as they never formerly enjoyed nor pretended to By which provision p. 44. the Commons are made not only in some sence the Judges of Peers themselves which they could not try or judge before by the express letter of Magna Charta cap. 29. and the Common Law but even their very Creators too And if the House of Commons might justly be term'd any part of the Fundamental constitution of our Nation what was this but to subvert the Fundamental Government By other Concessions the Houses were enabled p. 45.
gratified by those Taxes which it ceased to be when Independents had the chief power of imposing them And yet we are told in the next lines that none more reverence their Liberties and value the native happiness of the Free-born Subjects of England than Presbyterians But what I pray Sir was in point of State-affairs the native happiness of English men that had so much happiness as to be born before Presbyterians began to domineer was it not that they were born subjects to a Soveraign to whom belonged the ordering of the Militia at all times a negative Voice in Parliament the Supreme power in Ecclesiasticals as well as Civils and members of that Nation where the only legal Form of Church-Government was by Archbishops Bishops Deans Archdeacons Chancellors Commissaries c. Where an excellent Liturgy was commanded to be used and no other Form of Divine Service permitted by Law Where the Ceremonies of the Surplice Cross in Baptism Kneeling at the Sacrament were for order and decencies-sake appointed by the Church-Governors and the use of them enjoyned by Law Is this the native happiness that Presbyterians valued Or does the man mean by native happiness their receiving the temper of their bodies from predominant choler phlegm or black melancholy and the complexion of their Souls from Heaven shall I say 't would puzzle S. Austin himself to determine I confess I am somewhat apt to believe that presbyterians Souls are rather ex traduce from the prolifical assimilating vertue of the Parents spirit which being immersed in Hyle and over-charged with ugly humors is so far from generating a Platonical Soul made up of Harmony that its off-spring does more resemble Galen's dull conceit of the essence of all Souls and is of so base an alloy that it little differs from a vicious malign temperament of body I confess I think none do more value this native happiness than these Free-born subjects of England but whether there are none that more reverence their Liberties let the world judge by their frequent meriting severe restraints for their seditious and schismatical breaches of the Laws of England by their paying arbitrary Taxes levied without consent of King Lords and Commons 't is an Argument good enough ad hominem by their swearing to submit their necks to the yoke of Scotch Discipline and Government not allowed of by any Law of this Realm was this to revere their Liberties or rather to prostitute them to the lusts of those men whose spirit breathed nothing more than contradiction both to mans Law and Christs Gospel to Civil constitutions and to the maxims of Christian Religion For whereas this Author p. 47. 57. talks of their true knowledge and sence of the nature of Christian Religion and that this makes a due civil Freedom exceeding precious to them 1. As I intimated before 't is not a due freedom from illegal Impositions that the Religion of these professing Christians makes so precious to them for to be inslaved to Presbyterian Impositions though illegal is very grateful to them but 't is a liberty from Episcopal Impositions and Royal Sanctions and such Taxations whether legal or illegal as are not designed for the advancement of their interest which they so highly value and therefore 't is manifest enough they plead for such a liberty as will enfeeble our English Monarchy 2. I much question whether their high valuation of freedom from illegal Taxes and their unwillingness to pay them can in reason proceed from any true knowledge and sence of the nature of Christian Religion For I desire to know of them whether at least in case our Laws do not expresly sorbid our payment of Taxes imposed by the King out of Parliament our Saviours precept Matth. 5. 42. Give to him that asketh and from him that would borrow of thee turn not away and his own practice Matth. 17. 27. paying tribute for himself and S. Peter merely lest he should offend the exactors who ought not to have demanded it of the children v. 26. that were all free but only of strangers I desire I say to know of them whether that precept and this practice do not oblige all English men that profess Christianity to pay Taxes quietly and patiently though levied by the King alone without Law 3. On this occasion I shall take leave to question whether these Free-born subjects had indeed a true knowledge and sense of the Nature of Christian Religion in other particulars as well as this for if they had would not their practice have been more conformable to it if at least that Axiom be true Voluntas necessario sequitur dictamen Intellectus practicum which those among them that do not Arminianize hold for a truth But whether their practises have been conform to the dictates of that Religion let any one who knows those dictates consider and judge impartially They speak such language as this Blessed are the meek Matth. 5. 5. who rather would suffer all injuries than revenge themselves Blessed are the peace-makers v. 9. Resist not evil Whosoever shall smite thee on the right cheek turn to him the other also v. 39. rather receive double wrong than revenge thine own griefs Love your enemies bless them that curse you do good to them that hate you and pray for them that despitefully use you and persecute you v. 44. Judge not that you be not judged Chap. 7. 1. be not curious or malicious to try out and condemn your neighbours faults for Hypocrites hide their own faults and seek not to amend them but are curious to reprove other mens Whatsoever you would that men should do unto you do you also unto them v. 12. Beware of false Prophets which come to you in sheeps clothing but inwardly they are ravening Wolves v. 15. Be you wise as Serpents and innocent as Doves Chap. 10. 16. not revenging much less doing wrong Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesars and unto God the things that are Gods Chap. 22. 21. The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses's seat All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe that observe and do Chap. 23. 2 3. Put up thy sword into his place the exercise of the sword is forbid to private persons for all that take the sword shall perish by the sword Chap. 26. 52. When you stand and pray forgive if you have any thing against any man that your Father also which is in Heaven may forgive your trespasses Mark 11. 25. Condemn not and you shall not be condemned Forgive and you shall be forgiven Luke 6. 37 c. If Presbyterian actions had been conformable to these and other Christian principles their Pamphlets would have been freer from railing and reviling their Sermons from inflaming mens spirits and kindling in them the fires of disloyal Jealousie their discourse from censorious judging and condemning their brethren and their understandings freer from pernicious errors than for ought appears by their pernicious actions they were They had neither run themselves into
danger rashly and unnecessarily at first nor afterwards by unlawful means preserved themselves from a legal Trial and the stroke of Justice for those misdemeanors But when resisting evil and those that offer it can be reconciled with not resisting it or them and with the suffering of real and much more pretended injuries When raising War against our Royal Soveraign and continuing it for several years can justly be interpreted making peace When the applying Curse ye Meroz yea curse ye bitterly the Inhabitants thereof Judg. 5. 23. to those that came not forth to fight against the King and his loyal subjects can consist with blessing and praying for those that are supposed despitefully to use and persecute us when Dove-like harmlesness and Wolfish cruelty cease to be contradictories when to wrest the power of the Militia out of the Kings hands and to deny him his Negative voice is to render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's when Covenanting against Prelacy and our Church-Discipline and Orders is all one with the observing and doing what our lawful Governours require when putting up our swords into their sheaths and loving doing good to and forgiving our enemies is compatible with reproaching their persons with ruining themselves and their Families with turning them out of their legal possessions with plundering their Goods sheathing swords into their bowels and spilling their innocent and loyal bloud then and not till then will Presbyterian practises be reconcileable with Christ's precepts and agreeable to that Religion which he taught the world and which as this Author well observes is not variable according to the will of man but indispensably binds every Soul and is grounded upon an unchangeable eternal Truth which if the English Independent J. Goodwin or Bucanan the Scotch Presbyterian had believed heretofore they had not made such an ugly Fanatick Apology as they did for subjects taking up Arms against and murdering their Soveraign De jure Regni P. 50 55. and if the Presbyterian professors of this Religion and of their own true knowledge and sense of the Nature of it had acted suitably to such a profession they had never thought it expedient to reduce his late Majesty to such dismal straits at the Isle of Wight where they constrained him to grant them so much liberty as miserably enfeebled the Monarchical and Legal power of the Kings of England whereby whatsoever he cants in the following lines of a King 's ruling over a free people Presbyterians have sufficiently taught us that they take more delight in making good Kings their slaves than in manifesting themselves to be good subjects To be a powerful Monarch says he p. 48. ever a free people is the freedom and glory of our Soveraign Lord above all the Potentates of the Earth The more disloyal creatures were those presbyterians who in that fatal Isle treated with such a Soveraign Lord and once powerful Monarch to such bad purposes as to despoil him of his Royal Freedom and Glory and by their imperious demands to dwindle this potent and glorious Monarchy into a slavish ignoble titular Kingship whence we may conjecture what a licentious treasonable liberty it is that such Free-born subjects breath after and how insolently they 'l again exercise it over our Soveraign Lord the King if by his Majesties connivence and indulgence they meet with the like opportune advantages of winding themselves by degrees into the like power From which premises I conclude that notwithstanding any thing produced here by this Author to the contrary this second Charge against the Presbyterians that they are Anti-Monarchical is a true accusation not a calumny The third Calumny as he calls it with which Presbyterians are loaded is the charge of Disobedience and Rebellion and this says our Author were a crying sin indeed But yet he thinks it necessary to speak something Apologetical at least to mitigate the business and remove prejudice and therefore p. 49. he tells us The Presbyterian party in England never engaged under a less Authority than that of both Houses of Parliament A. The word engaged is of dubious signification 1. Did they never engage that is subscribe the Engagement to be faithful to the Commonwealth as establisht without King or House of Lords under a less Authority than that of both Houses of Parliament 2. Did they never engage that is raise and foment jealousies against the King reproaches against the Bishops or preach Division Sedition and Schism instead of Union Loyalty and Obedience under a less Authority than that of both Houses of Parliament Nay 3. Did they never engage in fighting against the King under a less Authority than that of both Houses of Parliament Is he ignorant that two thirds and more of the Lords deserted that house because of those frequent Tumults which drave the King from London and that the major part of the House of Commons left that House also for the same reasons and that new men See Judge Jenkins his Lex Terrae p. 35. were chosen in their places against Law by the pretended warrant of a counterfeit Seal Is he Ignorant that his late Majesty in a Declaration 1642. occasioned by the Ordinance of the Lords and Commons for the assessing men a 20th part of their Estates hath these words Our good Subjects will no longer look upon these and the like results as upon the Counsels and Conclusions of both our houses of Parliament though all the world knows even that authority can never justify things unwarrantable by Law They well know how few of the persons trusted by them are present at their Consulations of above 500 not 80 and of the House of Peers not a fifth part that they who are present enjoy not the Priviledge and Freedome of Parliament but are besieged by an Army and awed by the same Tumults which drave us and their Fellow-members from thence to consent to what some few seditious schismatical persons among them do propose Is to fight under the banner of such a minor part of both Houses or of the superinduced major part illegally chosen to engage under no less Authority than that of both Houses of Parliament nay not only illegally but treasonably chosen for to counterfeit the great Seal and by such a Seal they were chosen is Treason by the 25 of Edw. 3. 4. Suppose they had engaged that is fought against the King under the Authority of both Houses legally called sitting in their full number and remaining free yet even then they had fought against their Soveraign upon no higher Authority than Subjects could give them which was none at all to that end for the two Houses though consisting of all three Estates Lords Spiritual Temporal and Commons are no more than Subjects whatsoever this Author insinuates to the contrary in the following Lines I have read says he that the Parliament of England hath several capacities and among the rest these two 1. That it represents the people as subjects and so it
Book is scarce exceeded by Knot 's Volume against Chillingworth In it several hypothetical majors are to be met with but the minors are either not mentioned or else presumed to be true without any attempt made to prove them so Now Zachary Crofton tells us in his Berith Anti-Baal p. 62. that Ifs are no proofs or demonstrations What good duty justice morality or religion may not be ruined if a mans fancied If be reason enough against it This way of disputing as apparently Jesuitical irrational Machiavellian barbarous The Rector of Bramshot thus proceeds with reverence to soveraign Majesty I crave leave to speak this word of truth and soberness Parturiunt Montes one would think some very sage and important Oracle should forthwith drop from the Pen of this Reverend Dictator In a knowing age quoth he flattery doth not really exalt or secure the Royal Prerogative Quid nascitur Such a Triobolary Truth as I believe there 's scarce any Presbyterian so simple as to be ignorant of it But there 's something suggested in it that I am afraid will one day be found a notorious and fatal falshood viz. that this hath been a knowing Age as to those parties who have opposed and sought against the Royal interest whereas I doubt 't is far easier to prove that in that respect it hath been either the most ignorant I mean of most grand concerning Truths or the most maliciously wicked profligated and debauched Age that ever Protestant England knew The Authority of Parliaments being depressed and undervalued is the more searched into and urged By Parliaments here 't is evident enough he means the two Houses in contradistinction yea opposition to the King But says Lex Terrae p. 80. The Lords and Commons make no more a Parliament by the Law of the Land than a Body without a Head makes a man for a Parliament is a body composed of a King their head Lords and Commons the members all three together make one body and that is the Parliament and none other The two Houses are not the Parliament but only parts thereof and by the abuse and misunderstanding of this word Parliament they have miserably deceived the people And his late Majesty in answer to their Declaration of May 19. 1642. and to that part of it wherein they complain that the Heads of the Malignant party have with much Art and Industry advised him to suffer divers unjust scandals and imputations upon the Parliament to be published in his Name has these words If we were guilty of that aspersion we must not only be active in raising the scandal but passive in the mischief begotten by that scandal We being an essential part of the Parliament And we hope the just defence of our self and our Authority and the necessary Vindication of our innocence and justice from the imputation laid on us by a major part then present of either or both Houses shall no more be called a scandal upon the Parliament than the opinion of such a part be reputed an Act of Parliament And we hope our good Subjects will not be long misled by that common expression in all the Declarations wherein they usurp the word Parliament and apply it to countenance any resolution or Vote some few have a mind to make by calling it the resolution of Parliament which can never be without our consent p. 5. Neither can the vote of either or both Houses make a greater alteration in the Laws of this Kingdom either by commanding or inhibiting any thing besides the known Rule of the Law than our single direction or mandate can do to which we do not ascribe the Authority And now let this Author search his Law-Books with the exactest diligence and skill he can and then let him tell us by what Law the two Houses abstracted from the King have any Parliamentary Authority Indeed his own following words do clearly enough imply that they have no such Authority For p. 51. 61. he is so inconsiderately bold as to assert that Concerning the utmost bounds and limits of Royal Prerogative and Parliamentary power the Law in deep wisdom chooses to keep silence for it always supposes union not division between King and Parliament Whence all that I shall conclude is that the power of a Parliament truly so called viz. King Lords Spiritual Temporal and Commons is not limited by Law and thence I gather either that some Acts of Parliament are no Laws or that that part of some Acts wherein 't is declared that any following statutes contrariant to such and such preceding statutes shall be utterly void is vain and ridiculous But 2. That the two Houses when they usurped the power of a Parliament as well as the name and acted in opposition to the King had no Law on their side to justifie their actings For if the Law always supposes union between King and Parliament it speaks nothing of the Rights and Priviledges of the two Houses in case of their division from and opposition to the King And 3. That the Kings power and prerogative is absolute and notwithstanding all Law of this Nation infinite for if the Law be silent and that in deep wisdom too as to the utmost bounds of the Royal Prerogative it hath very wisely lest it unbounded which latter conclusions and the first also are so prejudicial to the Presbyterian Interest and Party that I doubt they will conclude him either the veryest Fool if indeed he knew not that the Kings Prerogative was bounded by Law or the most Malignant Flatterer that this knowing Age hath brought forth His next Argument to evince Presbyterian Loyalty is that The subversion of the Fundamental Government of this Kingdom could never be effected till those Members of Parliament that were Presbyterian were many of them imprisoned others forcibly secluded by the violence of the Army and the rest thereupon withdrew from the House of Commons An assertion so notoriously false that it puts me in mind of the proverb in the late War that some men would not swear but they would lye basely The truth is the subversion of the Fundamental Government of this Kingdom both in Church and State was the great work of the Long-Parliament which they effected in the Church by overthrowing the Hierarchy and that Prelacy in which the Holy Church of England was founded Stat. of Carlisle 25 Edw. 1. recited 25 Edw. 3. in the State by passing and pressing upon the King that Bill against the Bishops sitting and voting in Parliament who were in all Parliaments either personally or by Proxy since we had any who were once of the States of Parliament and in the Act of Parliament 8 Eliz. c. 1. acknowledged one of the greatest States of this Realm all whose Liberties and Priviledges and consequently that of sitting in Parliament to which they ought to be summoned ex debito Justitiae Cookes Institut 4. c. 9. are confirmed to them by Magna Charta which was it self ratified by 32 Acts
so far from suffering themselves humbly peaceably and patiently to be trodden under foot that their Tongues were sharpned like Serpents Adders poyson was under their Lips stinging and poysoning the name and repute of the Army p. 16. calling them a Rebellious Army a generation of Vipers a Viperous brood c. And that on Sabbath-days and Fast-days in Preaching and Praying they still girded at the Parliament viz. the Independent majority as men that declined their Solemn League and Covenant hindred reformation minded nothing but their own Interest He tells us also p. 14. That the morning Lectures which they called the Ark of God in their frequent removals moneth after moneth from place to place were so modelled and constituted that in them a lamentable slaughter was made of the sweet affections of love kindness gentleness goodness patience each toward other p. 2. That that Ark of theirs seems frequently to be drawn by Bulls of Basan tossing and goring the Parliament and Army and their dissenting Brethren from day to day maliciously fomenting contentions strifes and divisions p. 3. That the London Ministers did by conjunction of Counsels and debates in Sion-Colledge London's nay England's distemper conceive sinful resolution to engage and tamper privately with chief Citizens in publick places as Common-Council-men c. and publickly in Pulpit and Press stirring up the people by all possible means under the pretence of the glory of God a blessed Reformation the keeping of the Covenant c. to set all together by the ears and raise a new War p. 18 19. From which premises I may for ought I see well enough conclude that this Author instead of pretending that Presbyterians suffered themselves rather to be trodden under foot than to comply with men of violence in changing the Government should in Truth and Justice have thus represented them That rather than they would comply with the men of violence when they presumed they were about to change the Government they endeavoured to prevent the being trodden under foot by them by imbittering mens spirits against them in their preachments and direful Prayers by sowing the seeds of contention and division and by inflaming mens minds to take Arms resist and destroy them and when notwithstanding all such English and Scotch endeavours Independents had effected the change of those small remains and parcels of the English Government which Presbyterian violence had left unchanged that Party generally did by degrees so far comply even with that change also that rather than they would be trodden under foot outlawed and sequestred they engaged to be faithful to the Commonwealth of England as then establisht by the men of violence without King or House of Lords it seems they who thus act are said in the Presbyterian dialect to suffer themselves to be trodden under foot And now judge whether statuimus must not here again signifie abrogamus Let us as our Author proceeds further examine Are the persons that adhere to Prelacy more conscientious in duty to God and Man than those that affect Presbytery Are the former only sober just and godly and the latter vicious unrighteous profane A. Though I could speak something to these Questions from my own experience having lived both in Episcopal and Presbyterian Families and places and being acquainted with divers Persons Ministers and others of both perswasions yet because comparisons of this kind are odious I shall answer only in reference to the main thing in Question that there 's more reason of State for the pro ecting a drunken Royalist than a sober Rebel and yet I am fully perswaded that neither of them so remaining have holiness enough in this world to render them capable of happiness in the next Nor do I doubt but it may be as much the lot of some Traiterous spirits to be sober as 't is if this Author tell truth in the following lines of some that adhere to Prelacy to be loyal but whether I have not already said enough to prove that Presbyterian principles encline to Rebellion and the principles of English prelatists to Loyalty let all impartial Readers judge If this be not answer sufficient to those Quaeries I shall supply the defects of it with transcribing for this Authors sake a passage or two out of the writings of his fellow-Rebels The first shall be out of William Sedgwick's Leaves of the Tree of Life for the healing of the Nations p. 36. Of the two 't is more strange to see that the Presbyterian who the other day was opprest by the Bishop for his conscience in point of the Sabbath c. who could not long since live without the favour of the Bishop should now thrust out those under whom he lived for not taking the Covenant which is contrary to their conscience and shew less favour to them than he received from them and do that which he condemned in others and this upon weak and fleshly grounds admiring his own way which is to pray and preach longer and more than another to be strict in repetition on Sabbath-days and some such poor formal things to set up this as the power of Godliness and Reformation to the ruine of another who it may be is a man of more justice ability and wisdom more sobriety more stability more patience and constancy in suffering c. The other shall be out of J. Price's Clerico-Classicum p. 40. Have we not cause to judge better of many of the Prelatical party who being men of learning and conscience and never so violent against their opposers in Church and State as your selves you Presbyterian Ministers of London making no distunbances rents divisions Factions by Pulpit and Press as you do from day to day as all men observe that being conscious to themselves of the many Oaths Vows Covenants that they have made of subjection and obedience unto Bishops the then establisht Church Government Book of Common Prayer Homilies Canons c. cannot take the Solemn League and Covenant and rather chuse to lose their Livings and Livelihoods committing themselves Wives and Children to the mercy of God having no visible means of subsisting than to break the peace of their Consciences by taking an Oath Vow or Covenant contrary to all their former Oaths before satisfaction received than of you or some of you that presently turn'd Presbyterians cast away Episcopacy took the Covenant and having taken it turn it and wind it wring it and wrest it making it to look East and West North and South as your Interest works with King Parliament or Army or against them all And this says he is not my saying only but it is vox Populi the late King the Lords the Commons the City the Countrey the whole Kingdom observed it To these I shall add some passages of the like import out of Dr. Owen in his Mortification of Sin in Believers p. 29. There is indeed says he a broad light fallen upon the men of this generation and together therewith many spiritual
places and callings the preservation of the Reformed Religion in the Church of Scotland in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government Now the Scotch Author or Ladensium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his Postscript against Lysimachus Nicanor tells us p. 35. that Episcopacy is no way so opposite to the Discipline of any reformed Church as to that Discipline which many Assemblies and Parliaments have settled in Scotland and therefore he concludes thus p. 36. 37. we cannot dissemble any longer our hearty wishes that England would after the example of all the reformed Churches ridd themselves at last of their Bishops trouble as they did of old without any repentance to this day of their Abbots and Monks This says he we conceive would much increase the joy and prosperity of all the three Dominions Accordingly those Covenanters sware also to endeavour the reformation of Religion in the Kingdoms of England and Ireland in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government according to the word of God and the example of the best reformed Churches Now all the reformed Churches as the same Author affirms p. 35. cast out at first and to this day have carefully holden at the door even that kind of Episcopacy which their chief Divines seem'd not much to oppose Suitable whereunto is that which Presbyterians sware in the second Article of the Covenant viz. to endeavour the extirpation of Church-Government by Bishops as well as by Archbishops Chancellors Commissaries c. With what face therefore can this Author presume to tell us p. 19. 29. that the Form of Ecclesiastical Government by Parochial and Classical Presbyteries Provincial and National Assemblies is remote enough from the main cause of Presbytery especially since he affirms p. 24. 34. that one of his Majesties Kingdoms Scotland is Presbyterian by which sure he means not moderately Episcopal for p. 59. 69. that he may prove the Presbyterian Form of Government a. Fence against Heresies and Errors he instances in the Form of Ecclesiastical Policy and method of Discipline in the Church of Scotland which as there described is no otherwise than by Parochial and Classical Presbyteries Provincial and National Assemblies Now how injurious the Scotch Discipline which English Presbyterians have thus covenanted to introduce is to the civil magistrate how oppressive to the subject and pernicious to both Bishop Bramhall since Primate of Ireland hath abundantly manifested in his Fair warning for England to take heed of the Scotch Discipline or as 't is lately Printed of the Presbyterian Government In which treatise he endeavours to prove that their Discipline doth utterly overthrow the rights of Magistrates to convocate Synods to confirm their Acts to order Ecclesiastical Affairs and reform the Church within their Dominions that it robs the Magistrate of the last Appeal of his Subjects that it exempts the Ministers from due punishment that it subjects the supreme magistrate to their Censures that it robs him of his pardoning power as to some crimes of his civil power in order to Religion that it makes a monster of the Commonwealth is most prejudicial to the Parliament is oppressive to particular persons and hurtful to all orders of men that the Disciplinarians challenge this exorbitant power by Divine right The truth of these propositions he hath evinc'd out of their Books of Discipline and publick Records of their practice Since therefore the English Presbyterians have sworn to endeavour the preservation of this Discipline and Government in the Church of Scotland and to reform the Discipline and Government here in England according to the Example of the reformed Church in Scotland 't is but a piece of justice and reason that the King's Majesty should look upon them as persons owning those seditious Principles upon which such enormous Disciplinarian practices are grounded Some of which Principles are these 1. That their National Assemblies ought always to be retain'd in their own liberties of convening lawfully together p. 7. with power to the Kirk to appoint times and places 2. That they have power to abolish and abrogate all Statutes and Ordinances concerning Ecclesiastical matters that are found noysome and unprofitable and agree not with the time or are abused by the people and to make Rules and Constitutions for keeping good order in the Kirk p. 8. 3. That Ecclesiastical Discipline ought to be exercised whether it be ratified by the civil magistrate or no p. 9 12. 4. That from the Kirk there is no reclamation nor appellation to any judge Civil or Ecclesiastical within the Realm p. 13. 5. That to their Discipline all the Estates within the Realm must be subject as well Rulers as they who are ruled p. 16. 6. That the Civil Magistrate cannot pardon any crime that was made capital by the judicial Law p. 12. 7. That matters of the Pulpit ought to be exempted from the judgment and correction of Princes p. 14. In proportion to which principles the Kirk p. 5. by their own Authority decreed the abolition of Bishops requiring them to resign their offices as not having any call from Gods word under pain of Excommunication and to desist from preaching till they had a new admission from the general Assembly They resolv'd also to dispose of their possessions as the Kings Patrimony in the next Assembly When they could not prevail to have their Book of Discipline ratifyed by the Civil Authority they obtruded it on the Church themselves p. 6. ordaining that all those who had born or did then bear any office in the Church should subscribe it under pain of excommunication By their own authority also p. 7. under the specious title of Jesus Christ King of Kings and Lord of Lords the only Monarch of this Church and under pretence of his prerogative Royal they erected their own Courts and Presbyteries in the most part of Scotland long before they were legally approv'd or receiv'd In their Assembly at Edenburgh 1647. they determined that nothing should be pass'd in the next Parliament till the Church was fully restored to its Patrimony yea says the Lord Primate p. 5. they arrived to that degree of sauciness Anno 1600. and reduced the Soveraign power to such contempt that 20 Presbyters no more at the highest sometimes but 13 sometimes but 7 or 8 dar'd to hold and maintain a general Assembly as they miscalled it after it was discharged by the King against his Authority an Insolence which never any Parliament durst attempt Anno 1582. they rejected Mongomery's appeal from themselves to King James as made to an incompetent Judge and proceeded violently against him notwithstanding the Kings prohibition p. 13. They who have a mind to see more instances of the like nature may read that Book of the Archbishop Now the Question must be 1. whether those English Presbyterians who have covenanted to endeavour the Preservation of the Discipline and Government of the Church of Scotland ought not to be look'd upon as persons approving those Principles and practices upon which that
of the Scotch Discipline and Government which so manifestly erects Imperium in Imperio may not justly be looked upon as men that would enervate Monarchy and render it too impotent in Scotland 2. Why they who swear to endeavour to bring the Churches of God in England Scotland and Ireland to Uniformity in Discipline and Church-Government and consequently to endeavour the Introduction of that Scotch Form of Church-Government into England may not justly be looked upon as men that would enervate Monarchy in England also and render it too impotent by setting up there also Imperium in Imperio 3. Why they who swear the extirpation of Prelacy that is Church-Government by Archbishops Bishops c. may not justly be look'd upon as men that would enervate the power of that Monarchy which esteems that Form of Church-Government as a very considerable support and strengthening to it Witness the Aphorism of that wise Monarch King James No Bishop no King the truth whereof King Charles found by sad experience * Dum Episcoporum Jurisdictionem invadunt Anarchae caveant Principes Scitè admodum monet Poeta Tunc tua res agitur paries cum proximus ardet ubi enim Episcoporum ditio expugnanda obsidetur ibidem proximè imo potissimè in Regum Principatus irruptio tentabitur S. Clara Apolog. Episc p. 20. 4. Why they who when they had power in their hands constrained our former Soveraign to grant such Propositions as left him only a titular Kingship may not justly be look'd upon as persons that would whensoever 't is in their power again enervate Monarchy and render it too impotent When he hath given a satisfactory answer to these Queries I may possibly trouble him with some more of the like import for I believe there are so many grounds of making this objection that in probability the only reason why this Author could find no other rise of it than what he mentions was because he would not seek it That which he is pleased to mention as the rise is That the Presbyterians were not willing 1. To come under any Yoke but that of the Laws of the Realm Or 2. To pay arbitrary Taxes levied without consent of Parliament To the 1. hoping that whatsoever this Authors words imply to the contrary they were willing to come under the Yoke of the Laws of God also at least such of them as they thought would not lie too heavy upon their Necks I answer 1. If they had been willing to come under the Yoke of the Laws of the Realm they would long ago have ceased to be Presbyterians that is shakers off of the yoke of Prelacy and Ceremonies establisht by those Laws 2. If they had been unwilling to come under any other yoke they would not have come under the yoke of the Covenant since it was not injoyned by any Law of the Realm 3. They have not shewed themselves willing to come under the yoke of the Oath of Supremacy imposed by Law since they have been far from a practical acknowledgment that the King of England is the only Supreme Governour of this Realm and all other his Dominions and Countries in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or Causes and that the reforming ordering corrrecting of them is by a Statute 1. Eliz. for ever united and annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm but on the contrary themselves usurpt the power of reforming ordering correcting them without yea against his consent and in so doing they enervated our Monarchy and rendred it too impotent in a chief part of its Prerogative nay too many of them are so far from acknowledging the Kings Supremacy in their actions that they refrain even from a verbal acknowledgment of it in their prayers for when they pray for the King they make a halt at the end of those words Defender of the Faith as if the confessing him Supreme Head in all Ecclesiastical causes and over all Ecclesiastical persons were either Error Heresie or a piece of Treason To the 2. I answer by demanding 1. Whether there be not as much if not more Law for the Kings imposing Taxes in some cases without the consent of Lords Temporal and Commons than there is for their imposing them without the Kings consent 2. Whether the King and his Privy Council are not more competent Judges of the exigency of times and cases in reference to such impositions than Presbyterian subjects 3. Whether any Law of the Land forbids the payment of Taxes imposed by the King without consent of the three Estates viz. Lords Spiritual Temporal and Commons 4. Whether it does not equally forbid the payment of Taxes imposed by the three Estates and much more by two only without the King 5. Whether Presbyterians were not willing enough to pay arbitrary Taxes to the Presbyterian Lords Temporal and Commons though levied without the Kings consent and therefore without consent of Parliament and consequently whether that be not false which this Author tells us that they were not willing to pay Taxes levied without consent of Parliament 6. Whether in so doing they did not abundantly manifest that 't was not the arbitrariness of the Taxes but either their being imposed by the King or else their being imposed to such ends as did not serve the Presbyterian Interest that was the main reason of their quarrelling with and contending against those Imposition 'T is therefore too evident that the Presbyterians had a design to enervate our English Monarchy since though they refused not to pay arbitrary Taxes to some Lords Temporal and Commons levied without the Kings consent and on purpose to carry on a War against him yet they were unwilling to pay arbitrary Taxes to the King though levied for the defence of his person and Authority because levied without consent of Parliament Upon which pretence also their great Advocate Mr. Prynne would fain have perswaded them to deny the payment of the Assessments imposed by those powers that routed the Presbyterian Lords and Commons That Author in his Reasons why he would not pay Taxes viz. to the Independent Lords and Commons tells us p. 1. That by the Fundamental Laws and known Statutes of this Realm no Tax Tallage Aid Imposition Contribution Loan or Assessment whatsoever may or ought to be imposed or levied on the Free-men and people of this Realm of England but by the will and common assent of the Earls Barons Knights Burgesses Commons and whole Realm in a free and full Parliament by Act of Parliament all Taxes not so imposed and levied though for the common defence and profit of the Realm being unjust oppressive c. This is sound Doctrine it seems when Independents domineer but in the time of the Presbyterian Tyranny Taxes might be imposed and levied by some Lords Temporal and Commons only without Act of Parliament and yet not be accounted either unjust or oppressive or inconsistent with the Liberty of the Subject The reason was because Presbyterian ambition was cherish'd and
to make an Act of Parliament for raising of moneys and ordering the Militia though the King denied his Royal Assent which power was never challenged by nor granted to both Houses in any Kings reign before and takes away the Kings Negative voice as to those particulars To pass by other instances for I am quite weary of raking in such a stinking Dunghil these are enough to manifest what kind of creatures Presbyterians were in point of loyalty when they had power in their hands to be impunè disloyal and how willing to subvert the Fundamental Government of this Kingdom since by vertue of these propositions which they had the imperious confidence to tender to his sacred Majesty in that deplorable condition to which they had reduced him they denuded him of his Royal power and vested themselves with all the considerable parts of Soveraignty and when they had thus subverted the Fundamental Constitution of the English Monarchy and had pass'd that Vote which this Author mentions touching the Kings Concessions and were thereupon deprived by the Army of that power of imposing on his Majesty and the Kingdom which they had so Tyrannically abused these secluded and imprisoned Members wrote a Vindication of themselves from the Aspersions cast upon them by the Army in one passage of which Vindication p. 8 9. they give us reason enough to suspect that if their own prosperity had continued they would yet more unworthily have insulted over his Majesty and have taken such a cruel advantage of those great infelicities into which themselves had cast him as to tender and extort from him some more diminutions if possible of that little power and no greatness which the former had left him for say they by this Vote viz. that the Kings Concessions were a ground sufficient for the House to proceed upon to settle the Nation the House did not determine as we conceive the having no farther Treaty with his Majesty before a concluding and declaring of peace nor were the Houses so bound up thereby that they could not propose any thing farther wherein the Kings Answers were defective or from making any new Propositions for the better healing our breaches or more safe binding up a just and righteous peace It seems then those Lords and Commons had some more such signal testimonies in pickle of their Presbyterian loyalty some more demonstrations that when they took and imposed the Covenant they had no thoughts and intentions to diminish his Majesties just power and greatness It seems they had some clearer explications in their Budget of their meaning in those words in the preface to the Covenant Having before our eyes the honour and happiness of the Kings Majesties person and his posterity which words interpreted by their actions must signifie that they had it before their eyes only as a mark to shoot at But God deliver us for the time to come from the Presbyterian reserves of such a disloyal and corrupt majority wherein they abundantly manifested how tractable Scholars they were to Scotch Teachers and how able and willing to imitate yea transcend that ungodly pattern which they had set them who when the King had before granted them more than was fit for such persons to receive had the insolent confidence to ask moreover such things as 't was not fit for the King to give And thus the English Presbyterians by enlarging their desires as Hell fill'd up the measure of that Scorch iniquity which he that runs may read in his late Majesties large Declaration of the Tumults in Scotland printed Ann. 1638. Our Author proceeds thus In those times the Presbyterian Ministers of London in their publick Vindication thus declare themselves We profess before God Angels and Men that we verily believe that that which is so much feared to be now in agitation the taking away the life of the King in this present way of Trial is not only not agreeable to the word of God the principles of the Protestant Religion never yet stain'd with the least drop of the bloud of a King or the Fundamental Constitution and Government of this Kingdom but contrary to them as also to the Oath of Allegiance the Protestation of May 5. 1641. and the Solemn League and Covenant from all which or any of which Engagements we know not any Power on Earth able to absolve us or others To which I answer 1. Though the Presbyterian Ministers of London were granted not guilty of the death of the King yet they might be guilty of disobedience and rebellion against him which was the objection p. 48. 58. to which objection therefore this Apology is impertinent 2. Nor is the Apology at all satisfactory as to the taking away of the Kings life in some other way of Trial it being designed only against that present way of Trial for 't is only with that limiting specification that they vindicate themselves for they say that the taking away the Kings life in this present way of Trial is not agreeable to the word of God c. Whence all that I can conclude in reason is that they did not imagine it agreeable to the word of God or the principles of the Protestant Religion or the Fundamental Constitution of this Kingdom or the Oath of Allegiance Protestation Covenant to take away his life in that way of Trial viz. by that High Court of Justice set up by the Independent party but notwithstanding this they might deem it consistent with the word of God and the principles of the Protestant Religion c. to take away his life in a way of Trial appointed and modelled by the corrupt majority of the two Houses the Presbyterian Lords and Commons And if the Author of Clerico-Classicum deceive us not p. 35. of his Answer to the London-Ministers letter to the General and Council of War Jan. 18. 1648. Mr. Pryn allows of a capital proceeding against Emperors Kings and Princes in his Appendix to the fourth part of his Soveraign power of Parliaments p. 190. ad 194. It I am not deceived also a man called Mr. Christopher Love who I think deem'd himself a Minister of Jesus Christ I am sure he was a Presbyterian Minister of London did in a thing called a Sermon at Vxbridge Treaty justifie yea urge the taking away of the Kings life in as bad a way of Tryal for in that Sermon having spoken of the bloud-guiltiness of the King yea intimated unnaturalhorrible-bloud-guiltiness in him and thereby made him the troubler of England as Achan was of Israel he hath these words p. 32. 'T was the Lord that troubled Achan because he troubled Israel Oh that in this our State-Physicians would resemble God to cut off those from the Land who have distempered it melius est ut pereat unus quà m unitas Immedicabile vulnus Ense recidendum est but yet more plain p. 37. men who lye under the guilt of much innocent blood are not meet persons to be at peace with till all the
guilt of bloud be expiated and avenged either by the sword of the Law or by the Law of the sword Mr. Love says that Author will not say that the King was not guilty of much innocent bloud left he should contradict himself neither will he say that bloud-guiltiness can be expiated but by bloud lest he should contradict the Scriptures neither can he say but the King was cut off either by the sword of the Law or by the Law of the sword Whence I conclude that according to those Principles of Mr. Love the King 's being put to death in that way of Tryal was neither contrary to the word of God nor the Principles of the Protestant Religion c. but a work fit and expedient to be done and 't will be well for English Presbyterians if when the secrets of all hearts shall be laid open it be not revealed to the world that the main reason why they deprecated the putting the King to death in that way of Tryal was because he was not tryed and condemned by Presbyterians nor for their advantage but by those men who hated Presbytery and would not suffer it to domineer any longer For these very men could notwithstanding both the word of God and the principles of the English Protestant Religion notwithstanding the protestation and Solemn League and Covenant yea notwithstanding the Fundamental Constitution of this Kingdom and the Oath of Allegiance I say maugre all these obligations to the contrary if at least one of them be such an obligation these very men could join with the Presbyterian Lords and Commons in making War against the King and send an Army to shed his bloud in the high places of the Field and therefore if Presbyterians be Protestants and their Religion the Protestant Religion 't was not their Loyalty but the divine goodness and providence wonderfully interposing for the Kings safety that in so many battels kept the Protestant Religion from being stained with the bloud of a King especially as to Edge-Hill-fight if that be true which is affirmed in Fabian Philips his Veritas inconcussa p. 79. that Blague a villain in the Kings Army had a great pension allowed him that he might give notice in what part of the Field the King stood that they might the better know how to shoot at him who accordingly gave notice of it and if God had not had a greater care of his Anointed than of their Rebellious pretences that Bullet from the Earl of Essex his Canon which graz'd at the King's Heels as he was Kneeling at his prayers on the side of a bank had taken away his life and the Presbyterian Religion such as it is had been stained with the bloud of a King And though the Presbyterians as the Apology for Bishops sitting and voting in Parliament tells us p. 69. would excuse themselves that they never intended the Kings destruction yet that is a frivolous and foolish excuse For as Sir Walter Rawleigh says truly Our Law doth construe all levying War without the Kings Commission and all force raised to be intended for the death and destruction of the King not attending the sequel and so 't is judged upon good reason for every unlawful and ill action is supposed to be accompanied with an ill intent The Lord Cook as the Apologizer goes on p. 70. speaking fully of all kinds and degrees of Treason 3 Institut p. 12. saith Preparation by some overt act to depose the King or take the King by force and strong hand and to imprison him until he hath yielded to certain demands is a sufficient overt Act to prove the compassing and imagination of the death of the King For this upon the matter is to make the King a Subject and to despoil him of his Kingly office of Royal Government and so it was resolved by all the Judges of England Hill 1 Jac. Regis in the case of the Lord Cobham Lord Grey and Watson and Clark Seminary Priests and so it had been resolved by the Justices Hill 43 Eliz. in the case of the Earls of Essex and Southampton who intended to go to the Court where the Queen was and to have taken her into their power and to have removed divers of her Council and for that end did assemble a multitude of people which being raised to the end aforesaid was a sufficient overt Act for compassing the death of the Queen The Presbyterians says he did offend in this kind notoriously and therefore committed Treason manifestly for they imprisoned the King in divers places and at length in a remote place in the Isle of Wight and all this done by them who were for the most part Presbyterians out of their design to compel the King to yield to their projects to overthrow the Bishops and to take their Lands and their revenues From this we may judge how agreeable Presbyterian actions were to the Constitution and Law of this Kingdom and how manifest it is that they must in Law be reckoned King-killers as well as the Army and if the Law of the Nation damn them to such a guilt and punishment on earth there is no Gospel that I know of will save them from Hell without a repentance proportionable to their Crimes which for ought I see they are hitherto so far from thinking a duty that they rather go about to justifie their former actings by returning again as far as they dare to the same follies that ushered in their former war and at first embrued the Nation in bloud Nor do I believe that they who took away the Kings life in that way of Trial acted upon any more treasonable and rebellious Principles than are owned and taught by some Presbyterian writers of the first magnitude both French Scotch and English The truth whereof I doubt will be very evident to him that can get and will peruse these Presbyterian Scripts Buchanan's de jure regni apud Scotos Knox's Appellation Vindiciae contra Tyrannos by Junius Brutus supposed to be either Beza or Hottoman David Paraeus his Commentary on Rom. 13. burnt at London and Oxford in King James his reign for its seditious Maxims Goodman an intimate Friend as 't is said of John Knox's his book of the same nature and tendency Rutherford's Lex Rex I find in Bishop Bancroft's Dangerous Positions B. 1. Ch. 2. speaking of Calvin's reforming at Geneva these words Since which time as I suppose it hath been a principle with some of the chief Ministers of Geneva but contrary to the Judgment of all other reformed Churches for ought I know which have not addicted themselves to follow Geneva that if Kings and Princes refuse to reform Religion the inferiour Magistrates or people by direction of the Ministry might lawfully and ought if need required even by force and Arms to reform it themselves And Ch. 4. This Position is quoted out of Knox that the punishment of such crimes as touch the Majesty of God doth not appertain to Kings and