only which had they been first known had made the entring into such sacred bond unlawful Filiucii Qu. m. tr 25. cap. 8. ratione materiae inhabilis ad producendam obligationem in regard of the matter being such to which an obligation could not be created Filiucius tels us that an Oath must be interpreted according to the nature of the act to which it is annexed because he who sweareth intendeth to swear only that which he promiseth in the same manner and under the same conditions as he promiseth We much doubt the truth of this which dependeth upon another question Whether an oath may not bind a man beyond his intention when he swears Undoubtedly an Oath may oblige a man beyond his private intention and in this we think all Protestant Casuists agree That other Rule therefore given by Casuists is better Juramenti obligatio est strictè Juris That an Oath must be strictly interpreted quoad materia verba permiserint as strictly as the matter and words will bear and thus Filiucius agrees at last and Suarez with him And it were a woful shame for us Christians to dispute this when Tully tels us Cicero de Offic. lib. 3. that an Oath must be kept in that sense sicut verbis concipitur more nostro Yet Divines here ordinarily distinguish betwixt spontaneous arbitrary Oaths and such as are by others imposed upon us and concerning each determine thus 1. That such Oaths as we voluntarily take must be interpreted ex ipsius jurantis mente by our selves best Judges of our own sense 2. But such as are imposed by others must be by us interpreted according to the sense of those that imposed them upon us Thus Dr. Sanderson rightly determineth and quoteth Augustine in the case Ep. 224 225. He adds this irrefragable reason Because the end of imposing Oaths upon others is to create or beget to the Imposers an assurance from him or those that take them that they will fulfil what they swear or promise which assurance none can have who imposeth an Oath upon another if he that takes the Oath have a Latitude of interpretation left unto him with a liberty to abound in his own sense § 4. Yet both these rules must be limited so that neither our private sense of our Spontaneous Oathes nor yet the sense of those that impose Oathes upon others must be other then will comport with the just signification of the words or phrases in the Oath Vow or Covenant for this were to destroy the simplicity necessary to every Oath and indeed not to interpret but to coin an Oath or new Obligation § 5. We must conclude then That the sense of the Covenant being at the will of others imposed upon us for their security that we would do as we there promised must be no other then what comporting with the significancy of the words in which it was conceived was the sense of the Lords and Commons then assembled in Parliament concerning it And from a strict Obligation to the performance of it in their sense we see nothing can discharge the soul unless some publick Declaration at the taking of it we say publick for otherwise there was a deliberate voluntary deceiving the expectation of those that imposed it and we think Augustine speaketh a great deal of reason when he tels us that Whosoever deceiveth the expectation of him to whom he swears can be no less then a perjured person Which passage Dr. Sanderson quoteth out of him § 6. Nor that Parliament being now extinct can we imagine how we should better conclude their sense then by considering the words themselves in which they expressed this obligation and taking a view so far as we can of their precedent and subsequent Acts or Ordinances The words of the Covenant so far as concerns our purpose are found in the 2d Article thus That we shall in like manner without respect of persons endeavour the extirpation of Popery and Prelacy i.e. Church-Government by Arch-Bishops Bishops their Chancellours and Commissaries Deans Deans and Chapters Archdeacons and all other Ecclesiastical Officers depending upon that Hierarchy Superstition Haeresie Schism Prophaness and whatsoever shall be found to be contrary to sound Doctrine and the power of Godliness lest we partake in other mens sins and thereby be in danger to receive of their plagues and that the Lord may be one and his Name one in these three Kingdoms § 7. The thing here Covenanted for is an Indeavour to extirpate Popery and Prelacy That we might the better understand what they meant by Prelacy they tell us It is the Government of the Church by Arch-Bishops Bishops their Chancellours Commissaries Deans Deans and Chapters Archdeacons and all other Ecclesiastical Officers depending upon that Hierarchy Certainly he that runs may read and here is no great need of an Interpreter We have not Covenanted against Bishops every Minister is a Bishop but against the Prelacy of Bishops but in regard that the Prelacy of Bishops is of several kinds there possibly may remain a question What Prelacy the Lords and Commons intended in the Covenant § 8. There is a 1 Prelacy of Jurisdiction and 2 a Prelacy of meer order The Prelacy of Jurisdiction is of two kinds for distinction sake we may call the first Pontifical the second Paternal The first is such a Prelacy where the single Prelate assumes to himself a sole power in Ordination and Jurisdiction and though it may be in a complement he cals in a Presbyter or two to his assistance yet it is ex abundanti what he judgeth not himself obliged to do It is not reasonable to imagine that the Parliament intended only the extirpation of this Prelacy Bilson de Gub. Eccl. cap. 13. for although Bilson and some others tell us that the Presbyters joyning with the Bishop in the imposing hands upon Presbyters was rather ad consensum than consecrationem Field of the Church l. 5. cap. 56. yet Dr. Field speaks more soberly and tels us There ought to be a concurrence of other Ministers hands as well as the Bishops in Ordinations they having an equal Ministry and power of order with him Nor had any such Prelacy as this ever any footing in England other then what the arrogance of some single persons gave it § 9. We call that a Paternal Prelacy where the Colledge of Presbyters hath a Prelate who must concur with them ordinarily in Ordinations and acts of Jurisdiction This say the most sober men was all the Prelacy which ever was allowed in the Church of England we are sure this is all for which there can be the least pretence of any divine or Apostolical authority § 10. The Prelate of meer order nothing differs from a continued Moderator having no more power than his brethren in Ordination or Jurisdiction but for order sake praesiding amongst them § 11. There being no question but that the Covenant is to be interpreted against the first the question only remains
several indeed supposed it that an Oath so directed and imposed doth not oblige against such a pretended imperfect legal establishment is we confess a piece of divinity the depth of which we cannot fathom nor yet believe that there is any truth in it If any of our Brethren in earnest think otherwise they should do well to bring forth their strong Reasons or to tell us what one Divine Ancient or Modern is of their minds till that time it is sufficient for us out of a reverence to the sacred Name of God to dissent from them in this notion proved as yet by no Scripture no reason nor any creditable authority § 39. For what some tell us that this Covenant was against Magna Charta the Petition of Right c. they appear to us scarce to have read either The latter saith not a word of the Government of the Church In the former there is only this general Article We have granted to God Magna Charta cap. 1. and by this our present Charter have confirmed for us and our heirs for ever That the Church of England shall be free and have all her whole Rights and Liberties inviolable And may she not be so though Prelacy by extirpated Are Archbishops and Bishops c. more concerned in Magna Charta than Abbots and Priors Yet what are become of their Liberties Was not the priviledge of Sanctuary of making Canons c. some of those Rights Yet are they not taken away by Act of Parliament Surely so may the Church-Governours mentioned in the Covenant CHAP. VII The Absolvers Plea from Schisme considered The nature of Schisme No guilt of Schisme by endeavouring to extirpate Prelacy Their Plea also from the supposed contradiction in the matter of the Covenant to the matter of former Oaths particularly the Coronation Oath the Oaths of Allegiance Supremacy and Canonical Obedience answered and found vain § 1. OUR Absolvers foreseeing these easie Answers to their afore-mentioned Pleas or at least being aware that if Prelacy be left to stand only upon a Parliamentary Foundation it will be liable to extirpation by succeeding Parliaments have not rested here but raised their Plea higher telling us That Episcopacy hath no Original but from the Apostles and looks very like an immediate institution of Christ's either preceptive and explicit or tacit and exemplary so that to abjure it runs us upon a Rock of Schism and dasheth us both in Opinion and practise against the judgment and custom of the Catholick Church in all places and ages till of later daies from the Apostles daies with whom we ought to keep communion in all things of so ancient tradition and universal observation In these words or to this sense they speak all § 2. It is very observable that if there were any truth in this Plea it would not only conclude all our Brethren of the Reformed Churches in France Holland Geneva Scotland N. England most parts of Germany Schismaticks For that is nothing with those with whom we have to do but it would also supersede all civil power 's thoughts for ever medling with the Government of the Church for fear of violating an Institution of Christ and the order of the whole Catholick Church and being posted up for Schismaticks § 3. But is it so indeed Or is this the noise of those who thunder thus because they cannot hope with any solid Arguments to do much let us a little consider these big phrases and see what they signifie The Papists have so enured us to this suffering under the reproach of Schismaticks for breaking off from the order of their Catholick Church that we begin not so much to regard the Charge or at least not to believe every one who calls out Schism and Schismaticks when they have nothing else to say § 4. Schism properly signifies a Rent or Breach which when it is from or in the community of a Church is very sinful both because against the Command of God directly and interpretatively but it must be from the Communion of a Church walking according to the Divine Rule otherwise if the Churches deviation especially be great there 's no great fear of any guilt by Schism in departing from it § 5. If indeed God by his Word hath any where appointed that the Government of his Universal Church shall be by Archbishops Bishops Archdeacons Chancellours Commissaries c. and the Church hath alwaies walked in that order we confess then that out Oath against it is Schismatical But we desire our Brethren to prove this § 6. Nay if God hath left the Church to its liberty to set up what Form of Government she pleases and the Universal Church hath at any time met in a perfect General Council and determined this inalterable Form or by an universal practise hath kept to such a Form there may be some colour to charge us but neither shall our Brethren prove this to us § 7. We challenge all the friends of Prelacy to make it good from any authentick Record that for three hundred years after Christ there were any such Creatures known in the Church of God as Archbishops Archdeacons Prebends Commissaries Chancellors Pope Stephen indeed in the 3 Century is called the chief Bishop of Rome in the fabulous decretal Epistles but Cyprian writing to him cals him no more than his Colleague In the 4 Century we read of Bishops Elders and Deacons Ambrose mentions them Dionisius and Optatus mention no more in this age Hierom in his Epistle to Nepotianus tels us l. de Dign Sacerdot that Bishops and Presbyters were the same only the latter were the younger men Ambrose tels us they had one and the same Ordination Indeed towards the end of the 4 Century which was 400 years after Christ they began to multiply Ecclesiastical Officers then came in Readers and Exorcists Subdeacons Archdeacons and Archbishops c. But we have already forsook the Order of the Church at that time when it was wofully declined from its Primitive Purity and shall be no more guilty of Schism in going a little further § 7. We said before that we find in Ecclesiastical story early mention of Bishops but not of such as ours were in England Our Bishops 1. Lay claim to a sole and single power in Ordination and Jurisdiction 2. They are not chosen by the People nor Clergy 3. They are attended with Deans and Prebends Archdeacons c. 4. They execute their power by Lay Chancellours Commissaries c. 5. They have used to exercise a power in depriving Ministers suspending silencing excommunicating for trivial cases not paying a Tythe Goose or Pig c. Let our Brethren shew us such an Episcopacy before Antichrist was up in his Throne if they can if not they vainly charge us with Schism in swearing to endeavour the extirpation of such a Prelacy for which is no foundation in the practise either of the Primitive or any Reformed Church § 8. We are further told how truly
it be so or no. So that he is under a necessity of sinning contracted by his own fault and upon supposition that he retains this conscience which he is bound to acquit himself of § 10. We presume this is the case of very few in truth If it be the case of any we are afraid that at the Great day they will find their Oath obliging notwithstanding the errour of their conscience If any onely pretend such a thing to get quit of their Oath Let not our soul enter into their secrets unto their Assemblies Let not our honour be united CHAP X. The Absolvers Plea against the Covenant as Impeditivum boni false and if true not conclusive according to Casuists § 1. VVE are now come to the last pretence for the unlawfulness of the Covenant as to the matter from which some would inferre the non-obligation of it Some late Absolvers have confidently told the world That none are bound to the Observance of Oaths further than till they see that their Observance would hinder some good which might accrue from the violation of them which being once laid down for a Principle it is but telling their Proselytes That their persisting in endeavours to extirpate the Government of the Church by Archbishops Bishops Deans Deans and Chapters Prebends Chancellours Commissaries Archdeacons will hinder the great good settlement order Communion with the Catholick Church c. and they have presently discharged all mens Soules as they think from the Obligation of the Covenant § 2. It were no dangerous matter we think to grant their Principle and to challenge all of them to instance in any one particular piece of good which the restoring of this Government would put us in possession of more than any other Government would do Is it conformity to the Apostolical or Primitive Church We challenge them all to prove any such Form of Government either in the Apostles times or for some hundred of years after Is it conformity with the Reformed Churches Are there any Bishops in the Churches of God in Scotland Holland France Are there any Archbishops or any single Persons challenging sole power in Ordination or Jurisdiction in any other Reformed Church whatsoever Are there any Deans Prebends Chancellours Commissaries Archdeacons c. to be found amongst them Indeed in the Popish Church there are no where else we think Is the good they talk of order suppression of Schism and errour Will not Presbytery do the same think we If not what hinders Certainly with the help of the civil powers it will without it Prelacy can do nothing § 3. If we may judge by what is past we have no great reason to promise our selves any such eminent Good by Prelacy Under that Government it was that so many godly learned and able Ministers were silenced suspended imprisoned banished so many thousands of godly people forced to leave their Countreys imprisoned hunted from one place to another they and their Families undone and all because they could not allow humane impositions in the worship of that God who is a Spirit and will be worshipped in spirit and truth who requires to be sanctified of them that draw nigh unto him Lev. 10.3 and hath revealed his wrath of old against the Jews for doing or allowing that in his Sanctuary which he commanded not This is the good England hath formerly had by them For Deans and Prebends all the good they did was to eat up the Fruits of the Land enjoying profits and great Revenues for no considerable Service at all § 4. But it must not be granted That our apprehending the observance of an Oath as hindring some good which might accrue by the violation will discharge us of our Obligation to observe it Indeed Gregor Sayrus resolves that every private person hath a power to commute an Oath for somthing better but Sylvester and others Greg. Sayri clavis reg l. 5. ca. 8. n. 15. oppose him and think the Pope must first determine the good to be better Soto Sanches Cajetan Panormitane Arragon and others do allow some cases wherein they say an Oath hindering some other good is void But they are all agreed in several limitations 1. It must be a greater good which is hindred 2. This greater good must be no otherwise attaineable than by the violation of the Oath For if we can keep our Oath and obtain the good too unquestionably we ought to do it 3. That melius bonum that greater good must be certain not doubtful and disputable and only possible 4. They all agree That the Oath thus irritated and made void must be only made to God For say they if it be made to our Brother also for his advantage much more if it be a Covenant made with him upon a valuable consideration his consent is necessary to the commutation before the Oath can be made void Now when our Absolvers shall have shewed us a good certainly greater than the peace of Conscience which may be had from the keeping of a lawful Oath and make it appear to us that this good can no other way be attained than by breaking our Covenant and that if we break it we may certainly be put into possession of it and lastly that all the people of Scotland and England mutually engaged in this Covenant have consented to the violation they shall have said somthing and till that time this Plea consists of nothing but aëry non-significant words § 5. To return to our eminent Dr. Sanderson He determines this case more like a Divine than some others Thus Juramentum non esse illicitum aut obligandi vim amittere praecisè ob hoc quod videatur esse impeditivum majoris boni De juram prom prael 3. §. 12. i. e. An Oath is not unlawful nor doth it lose its obligatory vertue precisely for this because it seems an obstacle to a greater good unless saith he other circumstances also concur as usually there do which either evince it unlawful or non-obliging He gives this reason because in all cases it is not true that every one is obliged to do what is best So that our Brethren must desert this Plea and find out somthing else to prove the Oath unlawful or non-obligatory And indeed to grant that the Prospect of a greater Good to be obtained by the violation of an Oath would discharge us from its observance is to open such a gap for all manner of perjury as all might creep out at and to take away all manner of security which either God could have of his Creatures or man of his Brother by any verbal obligation whatsoever But we have said enough to prove that nothing hath been said against the matter of the Covenant sufficient to prove it either unlawful or void and not obligatory CHAP. XI The Covenant cleared from any faults as to the Efficient Causes whether external or internal sufficient to make it void being once taken The Plea from the supposed unlawfulnesse of
unlawful and against the purity and simplicity of Gospel-worship and such against which we are highly engaged by the Oath of God which we have taken § 26. We humbly beseech your Honours to compassionate the many thousands of Souls in England who must be Sufferers to the undoing of their Persons their Wives and Children if these things be restored again amongst us We acknowledge our selves obliged if these things be established by your Act passively to obey and rather to seek our bread in a howling wilderness than any waies to contribute to the disturbance of civil Authority Prayers and Tears are our only weapons But oh let not the Cry of the Innocents be against the Parliament of England because God hath said he will hear their cry and help them If our Brethren think that no Government may be set up in the Church of God in England but the ancient Form and that the whole Nation is not concerned in the Covenant for which we plead and themselves be not personally engaged in it let them enjoy their humors But oh Let them not by your Honours be cloathed with power to suspend silence excommunicate deprive godly Ministers and people who are faithful Subjects to his Majesty and pray daily for him and for your Honours because they cannot comply with them in these things expresly contrary to the Oath of the Lord which is upon them § 27. We here lay at your Honours feet our Answers to their pitiful Pleas against us by which they would cajole us into Perjury If our Brethren have any more strong Arguments let them bring them forth only let us say with Dr. Featly Audiamus non phalerata sed fortia we have had enough gay words If notwithstanding all which hath been said our Brethren by misrepresentations to his Majesty or to your Honours shall obtain any power against us and shall make their old Furnace yet seven times hotter in which we yet trust his Sacred Majesty and your Honours will fail their expectations We know that the God whom we serve is able to deliver us But whether he shall please to do it or no we dare not deal falsly in our Covenant with him § 28. But give us leave to plead with your Honours as somtimes the Psalmist did with God Psal 30.9 What profit is there in our blood Suppose we should with our Wives and Families be driven from our Possessions and Countreys to seek our Bread in other Lands Suppose that the Prisons erected for Thieves and Murderers should be filled with Conscientious Christians lying there because they durst not forswear themselves what profit would his Sacred Majesty or your Honours have from the bloud of Innocents What pleasure in the ruine and undoing of so many thousand Souls only because in the matters of their God they differ from some mens sense What loss would his Sacred Majesty have by pleasing all the more sober part of his Subjects by a new unimposed Form of Prayer void of all offence by multiplying the Bishops of England so that they may be able to do their work by restraining them from their sole Jurisdiction not to be justified by any Scripture Reason Antiquity or the example of any Reformed Church § 28. We humbly leave our Groans before your Honours begging the Spirit of Wisdom and Government for every Soul in your great Assemblies professing our selves ready to hear any strong Arguments which our Brethren have yet to bring to prove the Covenant not obligatory and humbly desiring that in so Grave an Assembly where hitherto not obstreperous Clamours but Religion and Reason have ruled we may not be condemned for not doing that which we profess we dare not do because of that Bond wherewith at the Command of the Lords and Commons Assembled in the Parliament of England we are bound unto the Great and Holy God who hath said I will not hold him guiltless that takes my Name in vain CIPPUS Titulus Perjurium Carmen Steliteuticum Cromwellii Carmen Protrepticum Patriae O Faedus ô fides sacra O Nomen Numen Dei Rerum columna publicarum Tutela pacis militum concordia Regumque civiumque nuptialis arrha Et hostium studentium diversa par metus Quem nemo fecit irritum aut facturus est Te pactus ille victor ille dux ducum Dextrâ ter ad coelos levatâ Quid non patravit arduum Post haec sed idem conscio sub aethere Dextrâ ter in Scotos levata Rem gessit haud bonam benè 3. Septembris Et Imperavit Obiit diem suum An ideo Fortis Vafer lusit Deum Te sprevit a te spretus est Te rupit a te ruptus est Pessundedit te pessum est a te datus Cum stirpe totâ Oliva putris perfidus Cromwellius Infame nomen in futura secula Gentes per has exteras Injusta vota justus improbat Deus In vota justa seu vocetur Jupiter Seu Mahometes sive Belus Nebo Adest Jehova poscit ratam fidem Hinc Sedeciam cepit Assyrius levem Templumque mundi sedit in cineres decus Hoc fulminantem vertit Annibalem retro Nec pejeratus Jupiter lapis tulit Hoc Vngarorum fregit infidam manum Regnique florem Turca falce messuit Ducente Christo non suos contra suos Nec vis nec artes numen eludent sagax Quodcunque Christo teste pactum sanximus Missum per auras carpit irredux iter Et implet aures invocati Judicis Noctes diesque murmur aeternum ciens Ut nec subintrent bis ter horarum preces Ah! nequis in se vertat has Iras nocens Neu tam tremendo fulmini subdat caput An laedat idem reddat surdum Deum In pejerantes queis cubat sub pectore Alenda vulpes ipsa vel Clementia * III Decalogi Preceptum Diras minatur sed nec exorabilis Miseris supersunt vota felices probant Suscepta curis saepè sollicitos levant Neglecta rursus saepè securos premunt Sol ante liquidi jura dediscet poli Facemque nocti commodabit mutuam Nos quà m negemus Carolis pactam fidem Satis superque vidimus fraudes pias Vt Trojae Laomedonta perjurum luit Cromwellium sceleris insons Anglia Poenas tributo duodecennali dedit Tangamus Aras sanctius Plebs patres Profana regni si qua pars adhuc manet At nulla regni pars soluta foedere est Tenemur omnis Ordo Pastor Greges Et nasciturum spes in aureas genus Juremus omnes quod tamen juravimus Sacrae potentem Vindicem fidei Deum Qui regis uncti texit Augustum caput Semper daturos Caesari quae Caesaris Vt daturos esse quae Dei Deo THE CONTENTS CHAP. I. THE ancient and just reverence of Oaths evinced from the light of Nature the revelation of Scriptures the contempt of Perjury arguing Atheism worse than that of Pagans Page 1. CHAP. II. The
concerning the two latter Whether together with the Popish Prelacy of sole and single Jurisdiction it was not the design of the Lords and Commons then assembled to oblige the people of England to extirpate also that Paternal Prelacy for which some plead yea both the name and thing of Prelacy though meerly respecting order in Ecclesiastical Conventions That we may make up a just judgement in the case let us take a view of their preceding and subsequent Acts. § 12. Anno 1641. They had by an Act wherein the King joyned with them taken from the Hierarchy all powers of inflicting Penalties Fines Amercements Imprisonments or any corporal punishment upon any of the Kings subjects for any matter or thing whatsoever as also all power of administring Oaths to any persons in any case belonging to Ecclesiastical cognisance In the year 1643. the Covenant is made and imposed in the terms before expressed In the year 1646. they first establish the Presbyterian Government for three years by their Ordinance which 1648. they renew again and make it sine Die In the year 1646. They by their Ordinance abolish the Name Title Stile and Dignity of all Bishops within the Kingdom of England and Dominion of Wales We must confess we should have been very inclinable to have judged that the sense of the Parliament imposing the Covenant was against all manner of Prelacy and that they designed no less than the engaging of the whole Nation upon the highest security imaginable to endeavour the total extirpation of all the kinds of it had we not been informed that at that time the scruple was made by some Members in Parliament and resolved with the consent of our Brethren in Scotland that it was only intended against Episcopacy as then established in England which gives us a Latitude for a Prelacy of meer order as a civil constitution § 13. In the mean time the Covenant apertly obligeth us against Arch-Bishops Deans Deans and Chapters Arch-Deacons Chancellors Commissaries c. there is no ambiguity in those terms And 2. Against all such exercise of Prelacy as is by any single person arrogating to himself sole and single Jurisdiction or sole and single power in Ordinations 3. Against all such exercise of Prelatical power as is taken away by the Statute of 17 Caroli for the taking away the High-Commission-Court As to all these the Parliaments sense is clear enough and can admit of no dispute Nor is this a rigid interpretation of the Covenant but as favourable as the words of it can bear or reason allow upon the view of what hath been already urged to evince the sense of the Imposers § 14. We conclude then That our solemn Covenant was the highest security wherein it was possible that the Eternal God could have us engaged to him or which the Lords and Commons then assembled in Parliament or our Brethren in Scotland could then take of us That we would in our Callings and Places endeavour to root out that Prelatical form and exercise of Church-Government which was exercised in England by Archbishops tyrannical Bishops their Chancellors Arch-Deacons Commissaries c. From which every reasonable Christian must conclude that if we fail in the performance by establishing that Government again or desiring the establishment of it by promoving owning or countenancing of what we have thus solemnly sworn to extirpate Not only our Brethren will have an Action in the case against us for the violation of our truth to them But the Righteous God will also have a just action against us for the irreverence shewed to his most Sacred Name And if ever any of our Brethren with whom we are engaged who possibly shall not be able so easily to obtain a discharge of their Consciences shall be brought into a suffering state by those whom we contrary to our solemn Oath shall help to set up they will doubtless have a just occasion to prefer a sad Bill of complaint against us to the just Judge of the whole Earth who useth to hear the cry of the Afflicted And whatsoever we may now think or talk in the distempers of our mind in the rantings of our foolish passions whensoever the day of Gods vengeance shall come upon us according to his Word Zech. 5.3 4. Or whensoever we shall have recovered our wits again and we can give our Consciences awaked out of sleep leave to speak freely to us it will be very hard to relieve them unless we can assign such an errour in the Covenant and that too as to the matter sworn as will be allowed by the Divine Law as a sufficient discharge as to our observance and leave us nothing to do but to humble our soules before the Lord for our taking of it It will therefore be the just concernment of every Soul bound in that sacred Bond to sit down and advisedly think before they resolve upon the violation of such an Oath whether there were any such errours And if those who think they have found them would avoid the Infamy which else will fall upon them they will stand concerned to set down these errours and publish them to the world in plain words of truth and soberness not in the insignificant figures of wanton Rhetorick wofully blurred too with foolish passion which may possible satisfie such as were before resolved to be satisfied and make a Bumble sufficient for the eyes of some silly souls and give the wiser sort of people opportunity to make themselves merry but can never stop the mouth or darken the light of a waky and well-informed Conscience CHAP. VI. The Absolvers pretended Errours in the Covenant examined in part The Covenant as to the matter of it so far as respecteth Prelacy not contrary to the Word of God The Plea of its contrariety to the Lawes of the Church or State examined and proved insufficient for the irritation of it § 1. VVE said before that whoso fancieth an escape for his soul from the obligation of the Covenant once taken must be put to the trouble to assign some errour sufficient to discharge him the sufficiency of which must be also judged by the Word of God because from that an Oath derives its Obligatory vertue That there may be such errours in Oaths that we have taken is granted whether in this Oath there be or no is the question If there be any we must find it either in the formal or material or efficient or final cause For we shall hardly find any in any appendant circumstance which will be of such force § 2. And verily there is a variety found out relating to the three latter Causes by such as have spent their time to seek them They have sought false witnesses against the Covenant to put it to death but we hope before we have done to prove not only that they have found none for their testimonies have neither agreed to the Propositions of the Covenant nor yet to the matters of fact relating to
Divine Providence nor yet each with other but also to discharge them from their useless employment in seeking knots in so even a rush by proving that none can be found so that they must be forced to cut this Gordian knot because it cannot be untied § 3. As to the material cause The matter of every Oath of Covenant being either necessary unlawful or indifferent And each of these again being possible or certain or impossible or uncertain If the matter of the Oath to which we are speaking be necessary as commanded us by the Word of God or indifferent where Gods Word hath left us at a liberty except it be impossible we are certainly bound to the performance of it by our Oath in the judgment of all Divines that we ever yet met with From whence every conscientious Christian by the way must needs conclude thus 1. If the Officers as to the external administration of the Church of Christ under the Gospel be so determined by the Word of God That no Church under Heaven nor any other powers can make any alteration in them but only ratifie and confirm what God hath there appointed Then unless we can find that Archbishops Bishops Deans Deans and Chapters Prebends Chancellors Commissaries Archdeacons are the Officers appointed by Gods Word for the Government of his Church we are most certainly obliged by our Oath to endeavour their extirpation The reason is because although we had not sworn yet we are bound as Christians to endeavour in our place and calling that the Church to which we belong have in it no Plants which are not of our Heavenly Fathers planting and according to our former rule what we are bound to do without an Oath we are much more having sworn obliged to 2. Suppose the Government of the Church be not so determined by the Word of God as to the external Administrators of it but it be in the power of the Magistrate or the Church to add some Officers not there mentioned or to chuse what Form they please yet we having sworn against this Form of Government and against these Officers we cannot set them up nor own them but must if they be imposed upon us suffer under them The reason is because the matter of the Oath was indifferent libera and Juramentum tollit libertatem we having sworn it is to us no longer free § 4. No one can challenge the Covenant as giving an uncertain sound at least not as to this Branch of it What we sware to was not the general will of another nor the unknown Rights Statutes and Priviledges of a Society yet many Oaths of that kind are judged lawful by Casuists and generally judged obligatory though not without some exceptions but the thing in this Oath is expressed Prelacy and the particular species of Prelacy set down as plainly as can be imagined so that there can be no escape for any soul that feareth an Oath § 5. It remaineth therefore that those who plead the non-obligation of this Oath and have set up this new trade of absolving souls from it must assert the matter of it unlawful either primarily or secondarily either in its own nature or in respect of some accident § 6. Dr. Sanderson tels us that an Oath as to the matter of it is unlawful in its own nature primarily when it is contrary to the Word of God Secondarily When it is contrary to the just Lawes of any community in which we are involved That an Oath may as to the matter of it be unlawful ex accidenti when it hinders some good or occasioneth some evil to our selves or to others when a man 's own Conscience judgeth it unlawful Others add when it is contradictory to it self or to some former Oaths c. § 7. But the Casuists generally agree that every unlawful Oath is not presently void if once taken it will be necessary therefore not only to examine whether the Covenant as to the matter of it were unlawful but whether it were so unlawful that it doth not now being taken oblige which unquestionably it was if as some pretend it were contrary to the Word of God in this particular for no soul can be by an Oath bound to sin against God according to that known Rule Juramentum non potest esse vinculum iniquitatis § 8. But those who plead the Obligation of the Covenant upon this account null will easily understand that they will stand concerned to prove from the Word of God That God hath somewhere determined that either his Church Catholick or his particular Church in England should inalterably be governed by Archbishops Bishops Deans Deans and Chapters Prebends Chancellors Commissaries Arch-Deacons c. Which when they have done we will freely grant them that the Covenant in that Point doth not oblige But this is such a task as none we have met with durst undertake § 9. That therefore which they chiefly insist upon is that the matter of the Covenant was secondarily unlawful as contrary to the Lawes of the Church or State-communities in which we are involved where we have two things to do 1. To examine Whether what they say be truth And 2. To examine whether it be conclusive § 10. The Church is either Catholick and Universal or particular Either Entitive Ministerial or Organical When we speak of a Church supposed to be in a capacity to make Lawes obliging others we must understand an organnical representative Church either Catholick or National or Provincial § 11. The Catholick Church in this sense must consist of a due proportion of Members sent from all particular Churches in the world who meeting in a Synod shall determine or have determined such and such things and we do confess though we dare not assert such Lawes universally obliging to all Christian People to the worlds end that we have and should have a great reverence for such constitutions But we do not believe that ever any such an Assembly met upon the earth nor do we believe the world in a capacity to convene such an one we have indeed read of some Councils called General Councils but besides that we find no such Law made by them neither do we believe them to have been such Assemblies strictly considered § 12. They must therefore understand the National Church of England Which may be taken as we said before entitively or organically In the first sence The Church of England is the whole number of Christian people in England professing the Christian Faith But when we speak of a Church making Lawes we must not understand Church in this Notion but must understand it considered as organical and then their power of making Constitutions or Canons obligatory to others must be derived either from the Word of God or from the Civil Magistrate What power can be pretended from the Word of God must be bottomed upon Acts 15. From whence all that is possible to be concluded is this That particular Churches of
Christians have a power given them by the Word of God to chuse fitting Messengers which being so chosen and met together may consult and determine in some Ecclesiastical cases But certain it is there was never such a National Convention in England so that we need not enquire the matter of Fact nor the force and power of such decrees how far and in what cases they do oblige either present or future Generations § 13. The power which any Synod Convocation or Convention met at any time in England can pretend to have had must be either from the Pope before the Reformation in the time of King Hen. the 8th or by vertue of some Act of Parliament since that time § 14. Our Absolvers talk so much of the Church of England and the Lawes of the Church and Sons of the Church by which they mean the Hierarchy though it will be hard for them interpreting the Church in that notion to answer the Papists asking them where our Church was before Luther for I am sure we had no Protestant Prelacy before that time that it will not be amiss for us to take a view of the Church of England under this Notion and consider what power she had and from whom derived to make any Ecclesiastical Lawes that should be this day so obligatory that an Oath taken against them must be forthwith void § 15. We are indeed told by some Ecclesiastical Writers of King Lucius who about the year 170. was an Instrument of planting the Gospel in England and that he in stead of the Paganish Arch-Flamins and Flamins established 28 Archbishops and Bishops but the evidence of it is so feeble that we find few giving any credit to it much less was the Nation so early christianized so far as to have any Synod so full as to make Lawes obliging the whole Nation Nor indeed is there any Authentick Records of any considerable English Synod till near the year 600 then Pope Gregory sent over Augustine the Monk to convert the Brittains and he made hast in his work baptizing 10000 in a day This doubtless was the man who first founded Prelacy in England himself being the first Arch-Bishop in conformity to the Order of the Romish Church whence he came we know that it is said by some that when he came her found here one Archbishop and seven Bishops but no such thing appears in his Letters not are their Names or places of residence expressed § 16. This Augustine by Authority derived from the Pope appointeth Bishops calleth a Synod and enacteth Lawes c. From that time which was the year 586. to the year 1205. we have no Record of any Ecclesiastical Lawes made in England the Christians here were doubtless governed by the Popish Canon Law Although in that time there were 43 Archbishops of Canterbury if we may believe Chronologers yet have we no Record of any obligatory Canons were made by them § 17. Betwixt 1205. and 1414. were 14 Archbishops of Canterbury beginning with Steph. Langton and ending with H. Checkly these all made some Provincial Lawes which are gathered together and put into some method by Lindwood Within that time the Pope sending over two Legates Otho in the year 1226. 11 Hen. 3. and Othobonus in the year 1248. which was the 32 Hen. 3. They also each of them made parcels of Canons which were after collected by Johannes de Aton and were all the Lawes of the Church of England as they call it in force Nor do we read of any more done till the 25 Hen. 8. which was the year 1533. Till this time the Church of England was lost in the Popish rubbish according to our Brethrens sense of Church for the Prelates there was none other no not one § 18. In that year the Reformation of the Church was begun by Parliament who made an Act printed in our Statute Book forbidding any of the Clergy from that time to presume to attempt alledge claim or to put in ure any constitutions or Ordinances Provincial or Synodal or any other Canons or to enact promulge or execute any such Canons c. or assemble to enact them without the Kings Writ calling them together and the Kings Highness his consent ratifying them c. So that from that day no Laws made by the Church could oblige us unless K. Hen. 8. first called the Church-men together and then ratified what they Decreed § 19. As to all former Church-laws the Parliament in that Act gave power to K. Hen. 8. to call together 32 persons to review all old Canons and to collect a body of Canons out of them being not contrary to the Laws of God nor the Laws of the Land which when they had done K. Hen. 8. was to confirm them and immediatly upon the review of the old Canons they were all by than Act abrogated and nulled and so all Canons also after to be made contrary to the Laws of the Nation c. § 20. Before these 32 persons could be called and meet and finish their work K. Hen. 8. dieth The former Act not giving power to the King his Heirs and Successors to call the 32 persons K. Edw. 3 4 Ed. 6. cap. 11. did not do it till the Parliament meeting in the 3d and 4th year of his Reign by a new Act gave him also power with the advice of his Council within three years to name the 32 persons which his father should have named § 21. King Edw. the 6. by his Letters Patents bearing date at Westminster 11 Nov. in the 5th year of his Reign authorizeth the 32 Persons whose Names and Powers may be seen by the Copy of those Letters Patents prefixed to a Book called Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum They met and within the three years time reviewed all and compiled that Book called as aforesaid upon which according to the Statute 25 Hen. 8. The old Canon Lawes were utterly abrogated but before King Edward had confirmed this new Book he died So that there was no Lawes of the Church of England left in any force § 22. Q. Mary succeeds she revives the old Popish Canon Law Q. Eliz. after her reviveth the Reformation In her time several Injunctions and Canons were made After her time K. James summoned a Synod Anno 1603. which made 141 Canons but as Qu. Elizabeths to our knowledge were never confirmed so much as by the Royal assent so the latter were never yet confirmed by Act of Parliament by which alone we are told that our Consciences can be obliged is perfect Lawes § 23. It is observeable That in the Statute 25 Hen. 8. authorizing such Canons as should hereafter be made in Convocations assembled by the Kings Writ being first confirmed by the King It is not said by the Kings Majesty his Heirs or Successors though in other parts of the same Act those words are added It is very probable that the want of those words in the following part of the Act concerning his
Majesties chusing the 32 persons to view the old Canons was the reason why King Edward did not do it King Hen. 8. being dead till a new Act was made to the same purpose to which latter Act K. Edw. 6. in his Letters Patents refers not to that of 25 Hen. 8. Nor is it yet determined whether a Kings confirmation of Canons makes them Law according to that Statute of 25 Hen. 8. supposing that K. Hen. 8. his Heirs and Successors as well as himself were intended in the Statute any longer than his Majesties Person lives who so ratifies and confirms them So that it is far from being so clear that we may adventure the violation of an Oath upon it that we have this day any Canons or constitutions Ecclesiastical of force either by the Lawes of God or of the Nation § 24. But admit this where shall we find any such Canon as this That the Government of the Church of God in England is and shall be by Archbishops Bishops Deans Deans and Chapters Prebends Chancellors Commissaries Arch-Deacons so that it shall be unlawful either for the People of England in their callings and places to endeavour the extirpation of that Form of Government or for the Lords and Commons assembled in the Parliament of England to move for or to Vote the alteration of it and to engage People against it by an Oath Somthing of this nature must be proved before the Covenant will be proved contrary to the Lawes of the Church of England and if such a Canon could be shewed it is no Law for it is contrary to the Fundamental Laws of the Nation giving power to the Parliaments of England to repeal or alter any Lawes Statutes c. And all Canons contrary to the Lawes and Statutes of the Nation are aforehand declared void and null by the Statute 25 Hen. 8. § 25. By what hath been said appears the vanity of their Plea who plead that the Covenant is null and void because against the Lawe of the Church Let us come now to consider whether they speak more sense or truth who pretend it is void because contrary to the just Lawes of the Nation § 26. It being apparent from the former discourse that there was no Canon-Law of England in any force at the time of the composing imposing and taking of the Covenant the question only lies concerning the civil Lawes of the Nation which according to the Statute 25 Hen. 8. must give all the obligatory vertue which any Ecclesiastical deliberations can have amongst us The Lawes of our Nation are usually distinguished into The Common Law and the Statute Law The first is not written and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 uncertain as may appear from the different senses of Judges in their Book-cases its matter and form is no other than the ancient Customs and Usages of the English Nation which having been retained for many years have been so familiarized with the People of the Nation that by a common consent they have passed and do pass for Law till they are cotrolled by Statute Our Statute Law is made up of the several Acts of about 260 Parliaments and yet is capable of daily augmentation § 27. If those who plead the Covenant contrary to the Lawes of the Nation mean The Common Law of England their sense is no more than this That by the constant usage of the Nation of England the Government of the Church in that Nation hath been by Arch-Bishops Bishops Deans Prebends Chancellours Commissaries c. and an Oath imposed by the Lords and Commons legally assembled in Parliament taken by the People tending to the destruction of that ancient usage is void and null yea though the King of England disliking the first imposing of it yet afterwards approveth his Subjects taking of it and himself joynes with them and also taketh it Yet neither will this evidence the matter of the Covenant contrary to Law For in the Covenant we have sworn to endeavour the extirpation c. The Law which must be contrary to this must say You shall not endeavour c. Now we appeal to all the Lawyers in England whether there be any piece of the Common Law of England which saies to the Lords and Commons assembled in a Legal Parliament or to the People of England concerning any custom or usage in the English Nation You shall not endeavour in your callings and places the extirpation and alteration of it If there be sure we are the Statute 25 Hen. 8.21 doth control it declaring a full power in the Parliament of England with his Majesties consent to dispense abrogate null diminish amplifie any Lawes c. But there can no such thing be alledged § 28. So that here 's no contrariety to the Common Law Here is only The Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament by his Majesties Writ legally taking notice that the external Form of Ecclesiastical Government amongst us according to a long usage of the Nation in the times of Popery viz. from about the year 600. till the time of reformation in the Reign of Hen. 8. and since that time after some regulation of it by Statutes was upon experience found at least very disconvenient to the reformed state of the Church amongst us and having power in them with the Kings consent to be afterwards had to abrogate null diminish or amplifie any English Lawes usages c. agreeing to extirpate this usage and swearing and causing the People of England to swear with them that they would in their callings and places endeavour to extirpate it Whether the King pleased to consent or no certainly they had power in their callings and places to endeavour such a thing The Covenant engageth no further We cannot understand any contrariety in this to the Common Law of England § 29. For the Statute-Law of England we shall only say this That the Statute-Law which must be contrary to the Covenant must speak to this effect The Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament upon a Legal Summons shall not swear themselves nor make others swear to endeavour the extirpation of Popery and Prelacy i. e. the Church-Government by Archbishops Bishops c. Where to find such a Law we cannot tell No nor yet such a Statute as positively determines That the Government of the Church in England is and shall be by Archbishops Bishops Deans Deans and Prebends Chancellors Commissaries c. It is true we often in the Statutes meet with these Names and we find the Statutes supposing them Ecclesiastical Officers and telling us That the Kings of England formerly founded this Church in Prelacy what kind of Prelacy and with what circumstances they say not but we are at a loss for any other save this implicit establishment by any Statute Law And we further believe that the Spiritual Lords before the time of K. Hen. the 8 would have taken it in foule scorn that any secular powers should have gone about by a civil Law to establish
that weakness no man being bound to do things contradictory which indeed were impossible at least in this case which we have before us And this seems a task reasonable for us considering that the Adversaries of the Covenant have arraigned it of this before the world and pronounced sentence against it § 2. I shall onely premise this That where a man by an Oath Vow Covenant obligeth himself unwarily to doe many things though afterwards he finds that two of these things are contradictory and the contradiction of them dischargeth his observance yet he will stand bound to doe the other thing contained in that bond An Oath may be unlawfull in some part and yet Obligatory unlawfull as to some part and yet obligatory as to other parts Dr. Sanderson de Jur. prom prael 3. sect 5. Aq. 22. q. 89. Aquinas of old and Dr. Sanderson tell us that in case a man hath sworn to things which he finds impossible to be performed yet he is obliged ad faciendum quantum potest to perform as much of it as he can So that those who would discharge people from the obligation of the Covenant as to the extirpation of Prelacy must shew us that there is something in the Covenant contradictory to that particular or else they say nothing to our purpose By reason of other allegations the first taking of the Covenant might be unlawfull but being taken as to this it will be found obliging § 3. Both for this and the other Branches of the Covenant we must confess our selves to have so much reverence for the Lords and Commons then assembled in Parliament for the Reverend Assembly of Divines for the Parliament and Church of Scotland for all those Ministers and judicious Christians in England who so freely took the Covenant that we are not easie to beleeve that an Oath upon mature deliberation could have been swallowed and imposed by them guilty of so palpable a fault as contradicting it self in any thing But as to this particular which is onely our concern to examine Those that plead this must produce another branch of the Covenant obliging us to preserve and maintain or at least not to oppose the Government of the Church in England by Prelacy of Arch-Bishops and Bishops Deans Deans and Chapters Prebends c. which for our part we cannot find but beleeve there is no such thing as not in the letter of it so neither by any just consequence to be concluded § 4. Whereas Doctor Featly assigns this seeming contradiction in that the first branch bindeth us to a Reformation of the Church according to the Word of God and the example of the best Reformed Churches The second branch bindeth us to the Extirpation of Schism as well as Prelacy And the third to preserve and defend his Majesties Person and Authority without any diminution of his just Power and Greatness and to preserve the Rights and Priviledges of Parliament and the Liberties of the Kingdom And then he tels us that Bilson Downham Armagh and others never answered by any have proved Episcopacy to be most conformable to the Word of God 2. That Prelacy is a means if not the only means to extirpate Schism And thirdly That the Government of Arch-Bishops and Bishops are comprised with the Rights and Liberties of the Church both in Magna Charta and in the Petition of Right the two great Records of English Liberties The answer to all this we think is very easie § 5. To the first what the Doctor meant by answering Bilson c. we cannot tell all the world knows there have been many have called their Writings Answers to them However Bilson's and the others Arguments have been answered many times over Besides that 't is one thing to say Episcopacy against which the Covenant is not directed is conformable to the Word of God Another thing to assert that our English Prelacy was If any will undertake to prove the latter The Government of the Church most conformable to the Word of God or direct us to any who hath pretended to a Scriptural proof of it we dare undertake he shall be answered or the Covenant by all sober men confessed null and voyd But this is an hard task § 6. Supposing Prelacy were a means to extirpate Schism which good effect of it we never yet saw yet if it were an unlawfull or inexpedient mean and there were better might be used and more agreeable to the Word of God we might as well swear against that means and for the extirpation of Schism as against the Spanish Inquisition if it were amongst us which yet will knock down Schism by as good Club-law as ever Prelacy did As to our case now the advancing of it will certainly make as great a Schism as ever was in any Church and those judged Schismaticks must live with it or else the most bloody persecution of innocent soules must follow that ever any Christian Nation knew The asserting of Prelacy as the onely means by the Doctor is not onely gratis dictum not proved at all but most falsly said witness the Church of Scotland which under Presbytery hath had fewer Schisms than we in England under Prelacy have had or are like to have § 7. For the last allegation It is true we have sworn to defend his Majesties Rights the Parliaments Priviledges and the Subjects Liberties But 1. Surely they must be judges we mean the King and Parliament both of their own Rights and Priviledges and also of our Liberties 2. They have also power to disclaim their Rights and give away our Liberties we being included in them And if they will please to give away or part with their own Rights and Priviledges and to disclaim for some of us some particular Liberties and then impose an Oath upon us for ought we know we are bound up by such Oath nor is there any contradiction to be found here Nor can we find the Government of the Church by Arch-Bishops Bishops Deans Deans and Chapters Prebends Chancellors Commissaries Archdeacons either in Magna Charta or the Petition of Right asserted as pieces of the Liberties of England Nor were they such Liberties Certain it is Dr. Layton Dr. Bastwick Mr. Prin and many others had no reason to judge so no more had any other person indeed witness the proceedings in the High Commission and Starchamber their frequent Excommunications of persons for not paying a tythe Goose See the Oath prefixed to Dr. Wrens and to Dr. Montagnes Articles c. not appearing at their Courts their Oath ex officio their Churchwardens Oath impossible to be kept by any that took it with many other things God be mercifull to the poor people of England if these horrid things be appurtenances to their Liberties If these be the things they have petitioned for in their desires so often renewed for the confirmation of Magna Charta and the Petition of Right But let those who make this Plea write out the words
and men as we have already shewed we do not understand what makes a Vow if it be not this that it is a promise to God as to the things of God When Abraham lifted up his hands to the most high God possessor of heaven and earth that he would take nothing from the King of Sodom Gen. 14.22 We beleeve he made a Vow and none but God could release him yet this was not purely in rebus Dei We think they have lost their common sense that say those do not vow that solemnly lift up their hands to God promising an endeavour to fulfil his Commandments 4. Nor doth it at all hinder that the Parliament first commanded it and then it was taken for on the Commanders part this still was a perfect Vow 2. On the peoples part it was still a Covenant with God as well as with men With God as to the things in it which concern Gods worship and glory immediately With men as to other things If the Command of the Parliament in a Critical notion hinder it as to those commanded from being strictly called a Vow it yet remains a Covenant with God confirmed by an Oath There are examples enough in Scripture of Magistrates commanding people to make and renew Covenants with God and of such spontaneous Covenants so that it is false that it was meerly an Oath before God it was a Covenant with God 5. 'T is false that he saith that a people can make a Covenant with God only two waies 1. In the Sacraments 2. Spontaneously They may be commanded by Magistrates to do it and do it in such obedience Nor have any power when it is done to release them as to what concerns God Ez. 10.3.5 There is a president of such a Covenant made with God at the command of Ezra 6. It is true we can do no action unwillingly but we may do somthing not freely spontaneously But suppose we have once whether spontaneously or no made a Covenant with God and confirmed it by oath we are bound by it and God only can release it for there is a debt accruing to God 7. The Parliament may indeed by rheir Act hinder others not engaged from engaging or at least forbear their obliging men yet free to engage But to say that any Act of men can discharge the debt already contracted to God is such Divinity as needs none to confute it § 17. We do therefore conclude that this Theologaster hath handled this weighty subject weakly and imperfectly enough as he prophesied p. 2. if nevertheless we having now discovered his failings any be provoked to handle it better and more like a divine we shall be willing to hear what he saith In the mean time we leave Mr. Russel to imitate the good example as he calls it of that holy and learned Doctor St. Augustine viz. to retract and publish his retractations least he have at the Great Day the guilt of more souls sins to answer for than his own A Postscript to the ingenuous Reader REader Least any should put a misinterpretation upon what we have said we have thought fit to let thee know that we have not seen our Papers since the third or fourth of October last since which time thou knowest is come out His Majesties gracious Declaration concerning Ecclesiastical affairs In reference to which we crave leave to add a few words that thou mayest know that we are none of those who desire it may not pass into an Act or think our selves by the Covenant obliged to hinder so good a work The Covenant obligeth us in our callings to endeavour a Reformation according to the Word of God c. 2. To endeavour the extirpation of Popery Prelacy i.e. The Church-government by Archbishops Bishops Archdeacons Deans Prebends Chancellors Commissaries We suppose none dreams us to have covenanted against names but things viz. exorbitances of power either practised by these men or with which they were invested There were two things in point of Discipline wherein as to practice at least the Administration of Church-Government here in England was heretofore apparently against Gods Word a third wherein it was against right reason 1. The first was That persons not ordained were trusted with the Keys of the Kingdom of heaven viz. Excommunication c. Such were Chancellours Commissaries c. 2. The second was That Prelates arrogated a sole power to themselves both in Ordination and in the Exercise of Jurisdiction 3. That which was against Reason and Conscience was that the Bishops charge was such as an Angel from heaven could not have discharged with a good conscience In matter of Worship two things call'd for Reformation 1. The frame of the Lyturgie against which there were sufficient exceptions 2. The imposed Ceremonies those we mean which were mystical and Sacramental How far his most Excellent Majesty hath taken care in these things is now evident to all and we are most humbly thankful to his Majesty for his endeavours in it and to our Brethren for their endeavours with his Majesty relating to it what his Majesty hath already done is a great evidence to us that if hereafter it shall be made appear to His Majesty that ought yet remains to be farther done in order to the fulfilling of the Ends of the Covenant He who under these Circumstances hath freely and honourably done this will not be wanting to it and we are not so hasty as to think Hierusalem can be built in a day The God of Heaven requite into His Majesties bosome a thousand fold that love and tenderness to His People which He hath in this shewed and we are fully assured that it will be no grief of heart to His Majesty that He hath thus far condescended As to the Common-Prayer we profess our selves not against a Lyturgy and we doubt not but His Majesty will appoint such persons to review our Lyturgie as will agree in one which shall not be liable to just exceptions till that time His Majesty grants a liberty But we can never be sufficiently thankful for the liberty His Majesty hath granted us in reference to the Oath of Canonical Obedience Subscription and the Ceremonies Though indeed His Majesty hath been pleased to deny something of this liberty to Cathedralls and to Colledges yet we doubt not but when His Majesty shall truly understand that the continuance of those Ceremonies in both those places makes the generality of sober and consciencious people never come at Cathedral Churches to attend the devotion which His Majesty hath there provided dayly for them and that were they abated and the Deans and Prebends enjoyned in person there to Expound Scripture Preach or Catechize or read Divinity Lectures there daily instead of meer doing that which every Child might do at home and that not by themselves neither but oft times by mean persons of no esteem with sober and good people His Majesty will quickly otherwise order things there and not suffer so great a
part of the Churches Revenue to be consumed in such a way as is not like to be much profitable while it is so little acceptable And when His Majesty shall truly understand by His faithful Ministers of State that the retaining the Ceremonies in Colledges makes many sober learned and consciencious young men leave the Universities at furthest as soon as they can but get a degree and many of His Subjects resolve against breeding their Children there as not thinking those Ceremonies lawful His Sacred Majesty who hath thus far expressed so great a tenderness to his People will as to these reserved Cases also further provide for them In the mean time though we must some of us profess our selves to be of the number of those who dare not submit our Children to an Education in our Universities under those circumstances yet we humbly submit to his Majesties pleasure So we may sit in our houses and worship God in peace according to his Will we shall be content to purchase that our liberty with the denial of our Children the liberty of ingenuous breeding or at least paying for it in some other places hoping that his Sacred Majesty will in time also take this thing into his mature deliberation But we must profess that if His most excellent Majesties gracious Declaration had in every tittle fully answered the utmost of our desires we should have yet seen a need of some such Discourses as these are for these Reasons 1. To recover to our God the due Reverence which the World hath had and ought to have for his Sacred Name The Violation of Oaths is in Scripture called A prophaning of the Name of the Lord Num. 30. 2. That the World may know that all the Divines in England are not so meanly versed in Divinity as to assert or believe those Principles concerning the dissolving the bonds of Oaths which some have lately vented amongst us and are we are sure to be justified by no Father School-man Casuist or Textuary that ever we heard of in the World 3. For the security of his Majesty and all Princes and Christian Magistrates for we believe that it will be evident to all that duly consider it that promisory Oaths from their Subjects will be of little use to establish their Thrones if once their People believe that they are discharged from their Oaths 1. If their Oaths were against The Laws of the Church Or 2. If they hinder greater good Or 3. If they sware through fear of losing their Estates else c. Or 4. For an evil end Or 5. That the same Power or a greater than that which commanded them to swear can in all Cases discharge them The Papist shall be free from the Oath of Supremacy by Principle because against the Laws of his Church and as soon as seditious Subjects can but perswade themselves that a greater good will come by Rebellion than by Obedience and that the maintaining of a Monarchical Government is finis turpis he shall plead his Oath of Allegiance was a forced Oath and there 's an end of his duty and his erroneous practice is justified by these erroneous Principles 4. Finally to say nothing of the Vindication of our selves from our Antagonists reproaches for the maintaining of humane Society and keeping the bonds of truth between man and man in their perfect strength Of what use as to this assertory and promisory Oaths are every one knows and we leave it to every reasonable Christian to judge of how little use they will be found to be if these Principles be once throughly drank in We shall only add that since we read his Majesties Declaration we are troubled that we have had any occasion so much as to mention His Majesties Declaration in Scotland though it was never in our secret thoughts to do it with any reflection upon his Majesty the sheets being some of them printed we could not blot out what was written what is said was in the simplicity of our hearts That paper was commonly exposed to sale without any check as we knew not the Circumstances of his Majesties first signing it so neither knew we of the Printing of it nor any thing but that it was free for any to buy or read it We are of the number of those we confess who cannon think our consciences discharged from the Covenant Our Brethren who have undertaken to absolve us continually alledge that the Covenant being taken without his Majesties consent is void There is a great shew in this Argument if 1. The Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament have not a power in any cases to require an Oath upon people except 2. His Majesty or his Successors at first dissenting did not afterwards consent In either of these Cases our Brethren know that Argument is of no value We not knowing the powers and priviledges of Parliament nor willing to dispute them though to engage us to swear we were told they had such a power were not willing to insist upon that Plea which must be made good by Presidents or Law principles not proper for Divines and therefore chose to mention the latter as sufficient to enervate that Argument for our Brethren whatever they say will not stand to justifie that Juramentum metu extortum non obligat we heartily wish our Brethren would insist upon that Plea no more they know they have a full answer to it Having good Reader thus far advertized thee we have nothing to say but only to pray that God would give thee a good understanding in all things and keep thee in awe of Oaths as knowing that when once as to the Religion of them thou hast got a mastery over thy Conscience nothing will remain sacred to thee and the strongest ligament of humane Society is broken And this we dare aver That he who feareth not an Oath but can take every slight pretence to quit himself of the bond of it can neither be a good Servant to God nor a good Subject to his Prince nor a good man to his Neighbour Blessed therefore is he who feareth alwaies though the simple pass on and are punished FINIS WE are credibly informed that when his late Majesty was Prisoner in the Isle of Wight he was under some fears that Violence should there be offered to his Sacred Person and he should be secretly murthered which fear was no other quà m qui poterat cadere in virum fortem prudentem considering the Principles and Complexion of the men in whose Custody he was Hereupon he sends for the Minister of the place to which Carisbrook Castle belonged by name Mr. Jeremiah French acquaints him with the danger apprehended and desired to know of him whether he would be willing to endeavour his rescue if such an attempt should be He told him yes he would willingly lose his life to preserve his Majesties only he desired his Majesty to direct what way he should serve him in His Majesty replied that the way he conceived as most probable to do the work was to prepare and engage the People before hand that if any such thing should be attempted by that part of the Army that was upon the place the People might rise to his rescue and to that end he advised to do no more but Preach the Covenant and press the Covenant upon the People Mr. French did so and thereupon was apprehended and brought up Prisoner to London and for some time endured very ill handling This Story we had not from Mr. French himself he living above 100 Miles from us but we had it from divers credible Witnesses to whom Mr. French told it many years before the return of His Majesty that now is to the possession of his Throne And by this it appears how fully His Majesty was perswaded that the Covenant was one of the greatest securities of his precious Life and that those of his Subjects would be most faithful to him who were most faithful to the Covenant