Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	apostle_n	church_n	speak_v	2,823	5	4.8418	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A46647	Salmasius his dissection and confutation of the diabolical rebel Milton in his impious doctrines of falshood, maxims of policies, and destructive principles of hypocrisie, insolences, invectives, injustice, cruelties and calumnies, against His Gracious Soveraign King Charles I : made legible for the satisfaction of all loyal and obedient subjects, but by reason of the rigid inquisition after persons and presses by the late merciless tyrant Oliver Cromwel, durst not be sold publickly in this kingdom, under pain of imprisonment and other intollerable dammages.	Jane, Joseph, fl. 1600-1660.; Saumaise, Claude, 1588-1653.	1660 (1660)	Wing J451A; Wing S739_CANCELLED; ESTC R35159	253,024	288

the question in hand of setting vp Religion by the sword without the kings consent May an inferiour Christian Magistrate take Armes against his superior a Pagan to sett vp Religion Is he not as much a private man as our Saviour and his Apostles where the Civill power hath not given him a right And as a Civill right is not imaginable soe the pretence of a power from Religion is execrable and false which will not permitt an vsurpation vpon the Civill right There may be a King where there is noe Parliament and it is noe more lawfull for an inferiour Migistrate or to Parliament who are but private men in regard of the Prince whose deputies they are to take the sword to sett vp Religion against the King their soveraigne then for any private men and were not the libeller distracted betweene evidence of truth and his owne corrupt inclinations he would not instance in the name of Magistrates and Parliament that but the line before pretended the power of the people to doe the same thing by the doctrine and practice of all Protestant Churches and would make them more publique persons then their Saviour and his Apostles he thinkes his reviling language of Tyrany and bloody Bishopps and the King their pupill are irrefragable Arguments in the judgment of his pupills There is a large difference betweene forcing men by the sword to turne Presbiterians and defending them who willingly are soe But then it is impious to force men to be soe what those wretches did to the King for not being soe and for not consenting to impose it vpon the kingdome by a law the world knowes and the world is wittnes and they have robbed men of their possessions by the sword to sett vp this new Religion His charging Covetuousnes and ambition to be the events of Episcopacy is schismaticall malice for Episcopacie in the beginning of the Church was attended with povertie and persecution but the libeller will make Martirdome their ambition and wants their Covetuousnes He will have that English Episcopacie hath markes of schisme whether we looke at Apostolicke times or reformed Churches if he had shewed wherein it had deserved an answeare but we see what Apostolicke times he meanes that will not allow any Church of the world from the time of the Apostles til the present age because the Church of England is not vniversall therefore all Sectaries may pretend themselves the Church For the authoritie of Scripture he neede not take paines to prove it The Church of England claimes not power over other Churches but to correct Schismatickes within her selfe The exposition of Scripture may not be received from arrogant Sectaries against the judgment of the vniversall Church the King might very well reject such reasons as they which offered them had soe lately before disavowed and pretended themselves scandalized with the imputation of such opinions The greatest number of these pretended Reformers professed detestation of the opinion of lawfullnes in taking Armes against their Prince of the opinion of the vnlawfullnes of Episcopacy booke of Common prayer and Ceremonies and who now would dispute with such men maintaining these renounced opinions with such bloody vehemencie It is not for the King to defend the Church otherwise then the Church would be defended And what is the Church in the libellers sense nothing but the crew of John of Leydons saints and must the King follow them against the Church these are the Divill 's factours to sett vp an Idoll Religion These deceivers talke of the power of the keyes in whose power holy things are as if the keyes that Christ gave to his Disciples are transmitted to this distempered crew that pretend a power of their owne giving Their Blasphemous pretence of enthusiasmes hath been the wonder and scorne of wise men and that 's the spirit which must not be fettered with a negative voyce But may it not be fettered by the Parliaments negative voyce and why is it more fettered by the kings then theirs That which he calls Tyranicall and presumptuous in the king with the same breath justifies in the Parliament and yet complaines of Tyrany vpon the conscience Such consciences are senseles of Tyrany aswell as of sin having given themselves vp to the Empire of hell The kings negative voyce could impose nothing yet these desperate hipocrites say they were compelled to implore the aide of Parliament to remove it from their consciences And if the ground of their warr were to take away his negative voyce their pretence of defensive force appeares noe other then violence and persecution which they soe hipocritically complaine of such tender consciences as feele not salshoods and Rebellion must be mercilesse destroyers of Religion and Government as these have proved The King had cause to seeke aide against Rebellion and oppression but that 's noe warrant for Traytours to linke themselves by conspira●…ies to performe it and the King might justly wonder at their confident boasting of Gods assistance as if they had the certaintie of some Revelation and flying to the Scotts succours while they were soe furnisht with provisions for warr And now after all the Libellers rayling at Episcopacie Copes surplisses he will not permitt Arch Presbiterie Classicall Provinciall and diocesine Presbitery claiming Lordly power and superintendencie to be imposed vpon them He●…res Babell confounded and they that were linkt in disloyaltie must part for Presbitery and independencie and will not see the evill spiritt that first combined them in Rebellion and now divides them to fight one against another A Determination by the best divines in Christendome in a full and free synod is he sayes an improbable way and every true Church hath wherewithall from heaven to be compleate and perfect within it selfe And why doth he tell vs that no Church denominated by a particular name bindes our faith or obedience and hath any Romanist affirmed more for their infallibilitie then he ascribes to every one of his Parlours and wherefore is English protestant a Schismaticall name as he affirmes and that the whole nation is not to be thought soe raw as to neede the helpe of other nations But what is the whole nation to every conventicle are theis seperaists the whole nation And why would he bind the Kinge to other reformed Churches If the primitive Christians had been of his opinion Generall Councells had been of litle vse the Disciples at Antioch needed not have sent to Jerusalem for advice in a question But these men thus shuffle and pretend the sufficiencie of a nation intend only the perfection of their Parlour congregations and allow noe sufficiencie in Church or nation that submits not to their insolent prescriptions He sayes the King accuses pietie with want of loyaltie because he sayes in vaine doe men hope to builde their pietie on the ruines of loyaltie The King rightly determines that pietie is but pretended where loyaltie is despised as such doe that thinke it safe to

the Masse booke prescribed prayer aswell as reject formes of Devotion because they were in the masse booke It was the Carnall feare of divines and Politicians that modelled the Leiturgie noe further of from the old masse least they should incense the people This hath been the conceite of Schismaticall Politicians though the lightnes of it be very apparent for it cannot be thought that the people would be more incensed by an alteration of the prayer then an alteration of the language and the taking away of the externall superstitions was more likely to incense the people as it did then any alteration of the Leiturgie and it had been very easie to have made any alteration in the Matter when the language was changed and in the time of Queene Elizabeth when no such feare could be pretended the demaunds of the schismatickes for abolishing the leiturgie were held frivolous and seditious The Libeller sayes good desires rightly conceived in the heart wholesome words will follow of themselves But wholesome words will beget good desires and how publique prayer in the congregation can be vsed vnles a leiturgie be admitted noe true Christian can finde a way That the prescription of a Leiturgie was not imposed nor practised by the first founders of the Church is an apparent falshood The Lords prayer and the prescriptions of the Apostles to make prayers for all men for Kings al in authoritie that we might leade a quiet life in all godlines and honestie and the many leiturgies yet extant convince all but willfull gainsayers and it had been in vaine for the Apo●…le to commaund the people to obey such as had the oversight of them if they had noe authoritie to prescribe things lawfull and honest and this Libeller that hath been florishing with autho●…tie of the reformed Churches h●…re condemnes them all who none excepted vse Leiturgies Without whose meaning the first founders of the Church precept and example how constantly the Priest puts on his gowne and surplisses soe constantly doth his prayer put on a servile yoke of Leiturgie It seemes the mention of gowne and surplesse are instede of Arguments to his well principled men and soe is yoke of Leiturgie though by his owne confession that yoke is not in the Leiturgie it selfe but only for the supposed want of precept or example for if there had been either of them as both are apparent there had been noe yoke in his judgment neither can that be a yoke in Religion which is not sinfull and sin there cannot be without breach of a law and if the Libeller could reduce Leiturgies within that compasse he neede not vse those beggerly negatives and if the vsing of Leiturgie by the Priest be a yoke doe not the peoples prayers that put on the Priests extemporary words put on a yoke of Leiturgie For are not his words asmuch yoke to them as the publique Leiturgie of the Church to him And it is evident that they who vse noe set formes in publique prayer direct them more to the hearers then to God studying for expressions of their owne parts while others that vse set formes have their affections more enlarged and not yoked to the search of words Set formes are not rigorously forbidden to any mans private infirmitie But they are rigorously forbidden if they are thrust out of the Church and every mans prayers and spirit imprisoned in the pinfold of set words hastily shuffled togeather by a man often times as defective in wholesome words as sound Devotion whose doses of vnprepared words and matter leade the people into imprecations rather then prayers these men that would confine all publique devotions to the sudden raptures of every vnlearned Levite seeke to shutt heaven at their pleasure though their hands are as short as their vnderstanding and the spiri●…t of vtterance as it respects our prayers is not exercised in words but in the affections which are vtterances to God What we may doe in the same forme of words is not soe much the question as whether Leiturgie may be forced as he forced it And why doth he say forced it meaning the King when it was established by his Predecessours with consent of Parliament which the Libeller soe much pretends to reverence And he may easily answeare his question that would have the forme of words vsed by every Minister to be forced vpon all congregations and we may justly vse the same words allwayes that containe pititions of all things necessary The Leiturgie comprehends not all truth And doth he thinke that all truth should be comprehended in prayer or that any benifitt or vse of sacred expressions is de●…ed vs vnles all the expressions of Scripture are conteined in publique prayer We have the full benifit of all sacred expressions if our nece●…ties are fully represented but his spirit of vtterance is the vse of varietie in expression as if there were a necessitie to vse all expressions to the same sense and he would have ws beleive that the benifitt of sacred expressions is barralled vp in the new tub men whose prayers not only want salt but are besmeared with prophanes Though God raigne downe new expressions into our hearts yet it is not fitt for the whole Church to be yoaked to the fancies of every Levite who often mistake Satanicall injection for the dew of heaven and he is much mistakē in his comparison of retaining the forme of wholesome words to reserved Manna but the loathers of this Manna of wholesome words are the true offspring of these murmerers that loathed the Celestiall Manna and bread of Angles because they had it all wayes accounting it a light foode in regard of their sensuall appetite as these men now thinke the formes of the Church light in regard of the ordinary vse of their owne parts which they would expose to the people and therefore if Leiturgies were Manna it selfe yet if whorded vp and enjoined they will be found sayes the Libeller like reserved Manna rather to breede wormes and stinke For the varietie of words though God have given vs plentie and that we ought not to be nigardly of them to him alone yet we finde long prayers and vaine repetitions condemned by God and we are commaunded when we come before him that our words be few and the questing of Scripture Phrase in prayers is now found wanting in leiturgies that was soe lately scorned by the libeller for the lipp worke of every Prelaticall leiturgist Sectaries prayers though dressed with varietie of words are accompained with a nigardly devotion wherein God cheifely requires vs to be copious this libeller is copious in blasphemy that wil have the word of God if whorded vp and injoyn'd to breed wormes stinke The libeller would have his scoffes received for Argument to vilifie the vse of sett formes brings in the famine of the seidge of Ierusalem whē the Priests brought still the same loaves of the shewbread not being able to procure new he would give

many westerne Churches in France Piedmont and Bohemia admitted not of Episcopacy among them and yet the doctrine and practice of these Churches published by themselves is that they had Bishopps continue them stil this the libeller might see in their own bookes If we might beleive what Papists have written of the Waldenses he findes in a booke written 400 yeares since that those Churches in Piedmont held the same doctrine since the time that Constantine with his mischeivous donations poysened Thus the exploded forgery of constantines donation is made authenticke to reproach the Church Sylvester and the whole Church This is the Schismaticall Charitie to the first Christian Emperour and the whole Church but the man might have remembred that Bishopps by his owne confession were long before the time of Constantine and if we beleive the waldenses themselves they had Bishopps in their Churches who held the same doctrine and Government and the antiquitie of the waldenses proves that they had Bishopps otherwise they had beē condemned by the ancient Church as Aerius was for if there had been any Churches differing from vniversal practice in the time of Constantine it is not imaginable that they had been vnobserved wee finde noe mention of their dissent but from the Papacie and that long after The famous Testimonie of St. Jerome whereto he reserrs the rest is farr from declaring openly that Bishopp and Presbiter are the same thing but the contrary is manifest in him sor what proose can there be drawne from saint Jerome that Bishopps Presbiters were the same thing who sajes that befor schisme by instigatiō of the devil entred into the Church that one said I am of Paul another of Apollo another of cephas al things were governed by the common counsel of the Presbiters and who will thinke that there were no dis●…t orders because things were governed by the commō counsel of Presbiters whē these schismes began and when things were soe gove●…ed were there not Apostles in the Church and superiour to Presbi●…ers St. Ierome affirmes that Bishopps rather by custome then ordainement of Christ were exalted above Presbiters St Ierome speakes of priviledges given to Bishopps above Presbiters by custome but he affirmes the power of ordination belonging to them and not to Presbiters Though St. Ierome make a difference betwixt the ordainment of Christ and the practice of the Apostles neither he nor any good Christian ever questioned the lawfullnes authoritie of such Custome of the Church in the times of the Apostles and this man that in this very Chapter said the King produced noe Scripture and that antiquitie was not of weight against it now gravely determines that interpretation of St. Ierome in his sense shal be received before intric●… stuffe tatled out of Timothy and Titus Thus this prophane hipocrite prostitutes Scripture where it contradicts their practises and St. Ierome shal be preferred before Scripture if he seeme to favour their sense and vilified beneath Esops falles if he dissent from them If it be farr beyound Court Element what is said by his Majest it is not above his owne the proper Element of this breaker is prophanes and impudence and heere againe he importunately obtrudes the Kings letter to the Pope which he makes a chiefe support of his Trayterous pretences but the authoritie of a gazet out of which he quotes it is too meane to rayse a scandall vpon a Prince in the judgment of any reasonable men and this man well knowes th●… fraude in publishing that false Copie of the Kings letter which he willfully passes by and the satisfaction which the King gave the Parliament and whole Kingdome vpon his returne out of Spaine the dissolving of those Treaties which occasioned that letter must stopp the mouth of all detractours to offer it as an argument of his Majest inclination to the Roman Religion The Libeller answeares his Majest argument to prove his sufferings out of conscience not Policie because his losses were more considerable then episcopacy with objecting hardning and blindnes being himselfe hardned to oppose all light of truth and shut his eyes against the cleerest demonstrations Where hath more faction and confusion ever been bredd then vnder the imparitie of his owne Monarchicall Government The king pretended not any Government could absolutely shut out faction but we may be sure those factions are most dangerous to all Governments whose principles are destructive to it and these factions were not bredd in the constitution of Monarchy but among the Enemies af it and the envious man sowed his tares while men slept and as he will not stand powling of the reformed Churches to know their numbers soe he wil hand over head affirme that the farr greater part in his Majest three kingdomes desired what they have now done to throw downe Episcopacie which hath as litle weight as truth the reformed Churches are not vilified one by another though each maintaine their severall formes of Government and his Majest is farr from vilifying those Churches but the Libeller vilifies himselfe and them that scoffs it their Archpresbitery classicall and Diocesine Presbitery and their Priest-led herodians blinde guides None but Lutherans retained Bishopps and therein convinces himselfe of his often repeated vntruths that all the reformed Churches rejected Episcopacy for the Novations Montanists having noe other Bishopps then such as were in every village is another of his falsities in adding the word every and it doth not prove that these heretickes had not Bishopps and Presbiters which Christians may have though they live in Caves and deserts and its evident in story those heretickes had Bishopps That the Aerians were condemned for heretickes the Libeler well knowes and the King naming them soe meddles not with their particular heresies and it is too obscure to be seene that the King fastens that opinion touching Bishopps and Presbiters for their heresie Though the Clergie ought to minister the gospell if the people supply them not yet such temutie and contempt quickely becomes a Carkase indeede The Sectaries that place their greatenes in being the ringleaders of faction turne all Religion into a fantasme and knowing they could never by any judicious choise obtaine preferment in the Church professe the dislike of them and seeke their fortunes in seducing the multitude It s easily beleived that wealth may breede vices in the Clergie aswell as others but must they therefore be made poore and others rich by the robbery of them the Kings choise of Bishopps will convince the clamours of the Schismatickes and gives just cause to expect the evill consequences the King foretells of their removall That the function of Bishopps and Presbiters was not tyed to place though the exercise of it was by Ecclesiasticall constitution he hath been already told and that it was necessary the Apostolique power for the Government of the Church must descend to Bishopps there being noe others that ever pretended to it How the Church florisht

vnsetling the Religion established is just and necessary and it inferrs not that the most part of Protestants were against him because an active faction had surprized the strength of the Kingdome and necessitated him to seeke succours where he might have them the King never obtruded setlement of any thing new but defence against violence of what was established and Papists may fight for their King though Traytours pretend to the Protestant Religion for the ground of their quarrell That noe man ever thought that the King had learned that difference of perswasion in Religious matters may fall out where there is the samenes of dutie Alleagiance and subjection And the Libeller askes wherefore then such compulsion to the Puritans and Scotland about conformitie to the Leiturgie Doth the King say that those of different perswasions ought not to be better informed and sought to be gained to a right vnderstanding though there may be the samenes of alleagiance ought he not to seeke the samenes of perswasion in points of difference This is his common logicke and he askes wherefore then noe Bishopp noe King He might have answeared himselfe that there may not be the samenes of opinion touching alleagiance in differences of Religion though there may be and it s now plaine though formerly not believed that such as would have noe Bishopps would have noe King and had not the samenes of intention though the same dutie and obligation of alleagiance to their King as those of the contrary perswasion and that Episcopacy is agreeable to Monarchy the contrary not but Rebells catch at every shaddow and offer ●…very dreame for a truth and are as light in obtrudinge pretences as resolute to act their villanies either with or without them How diversified sects can be all protestants must be shewed by some doctrines that protestants yet vnderstand not and the medly of Papists and protestants in a religious cause is noe more disproportioninge of Religions then the mixing of those diversified sects which are noe more protestants then Papists Maskes and disguises were the foreprophesied garments of Sectaries and it is a sure signe that their errours are willfull not weake sparing noe falshoods whereby they may get power and confating their pretences by their practice They heretofore professed greate opposition to Papists for doctrines of Rebellion now they preach the same doctrines are angry that there are papists that disclaime them The ancient Christians held it a Religious cause to defend their King Countrey were mixed with Pagans in that cause and soe of late the protestants of France and they held it vnchristian to forsake that Religious cause vnder pretence of Religion and those pretences taken from Religion the letter to the Pope and evill Councellours are apparent to be nothing but vulgar cheates to enforce the King to consent to the Rebells demaunds and wrest hisscepter from him The sharpe afflictions of the Kingdome shew they were not inveterate diseases of Government but a suddaine pestilence and such as can beleive that the Tyrany of the present Masters are the lawes of Parliament deserve to be governed by a whip not by a scepter The Libellers reproofe of the peoples levitie prayse of popularitie are inconsistēt and his argument of reproach from dissenting to what the Parlian●… advised and his charging the Parliament for want of wisedome and integritie turne all his arguments to his owne shame and shew that it is not right but Rebellion he pleades for and that he esteemes neither Civill nor Philosophicall libertie which are confined to Government but confusion and licence without limitts If this Libeller would be subject 〈◊〉 Magistrate and in the lawes as he professes why doth he Rebell against the Magistrate and the lawes and why doth he pretend the Parliaments Authoritie if he may breake that authoritie As indeede he doth alow that noe obligations of Government can hold him and by the same rule he pretends injury to be restrained in one thing he may in every thing and these Rebells like L●…r vsurpe above all 〈◊〉 Though men ought not to speake evill of diginties which are just yet nothing hinders to speake evill of those who in their dignities doe evill as oft as it is the truth Thē the Scripture vnnecessarily forbad to speake evil of dignities for we may not speake vntruth of any person if the Scripture meant noe more then not to slander in commaunding not to speake evill of the Ruler of the people St. Paul needlessely retracted his words of the high Priest It shewes how neere the spiritt of Lucifer these men are that pretend a right to practice whatever our Saviour or such as were inspired of God forbad vpon pretence of actions done by power extraordinary and yet there is no example of this speaking evill of dignities as the Libeller imagines nor of publique reproaches Though Kings were reproved i● was by such as had particular directions from God not by every wandring ●evite and they did not defame them to others And as his Maj we beleive was heard of God in mercy so he might without injury to the Prerogative of Christ pray to be made the head stone of the conrer according to that subordination which he held vnder God and Christ in ruling his people Vpon the ORDINANCE against the booke of COMMON PRAYER INnovations are generally more dangerous then old errours by how much peace is more desireable then broyles and combustions We have noe warrant to beleive such a condition in the Church of God that should allwayes be reforminge nor that the Christian Church had never lawfull Pastours nor any thing practised according to Christs institution till the present Sectaries revealed it to the wo●…ld We have found by experience that there is noe dotage equall to tha●… men have vpon their owne opinions nor any greater errours nor mischeifes more dangerous then such which are introduced by pragmaticall Reformers who would conforme the world to their fancies and innovation is oftner obtruded vnder the name of reformation then reformation is censured and opposed vnder the name of innovation The King sayes not that the removing of the Leiturgie was a thing plausible to the people as he falsely relates but sayes that after popular contempts offred to the booke and those that vsed it it must be crucified by an ordinance His Majest likens not the rejection of the booke to the crucifying of our Saviour but the carriage of the rejecters to the cursed Jewes who crucified our Saviour and these men that rejected the booke shewed as litle reverence to him that was to be prayed to by the formes in that booke as to the booke it selfe King Edw. 6. confesses to the Cornish Rebells it was noe other then the old masse booke done into English some few words expung'd which is very false though al that is in the old masse booke is not therefore to be rejected and these men may aswell make an Argument they may not pray at all because

a Title the constitution of that State being a Republique and their King noe other then a Consul of Rome or a Duke of venice The Decree in Rome is farr wide from the matter and what the Senate did against Nero was in vindication of their ancient power not acknowledging the Justice of his soveraigntie Though Theodosius decreed the law to be above the Emperour yet he decreed not any person to have power over the Emperour The law was above him in reguard it was his Rule but could not make any person or societie above him The law is the directive power to Kings but subject them not to any and it is a senseles deduction from the superioritie of the Rule to imagine an inferioritie of the Rulers to the people or a communitie in power by the Rule That Bracton or Cleta say the King is inferiour to the Court of Parliament is a manifest vntruth and Bracton sayes expressely the King hath not a superiour on earth to punish him and that only God is the avenger of his Actions soe farr were theis men from affirminge that he stands as liable to receive Iustice as the meanest of his subjects But this man thinkes that some of his Readers will believe that the name of an Author is sufficient Authoritie though he speake contrary to what he alleadges It is said in an ancient booke the King ought to be subject to the law by his oath Though the King be bound to performe the law by his oath is there any to judge him when all are his subjects and derive their power from him or is he subject to any person And who can judge another that is not subject to him Because Kings bound themselves to doe Justice therefore did they give other men power over them That the king permitted questions of his right to ordinary Iudicature is an vse of Counsell not subjection all Courts being his Counsells for decision of controversies but it s a sorry inference that Counsellours in his affaires should have power over his person As the Parliaments right is circumscribed by lawes in regarde of the subject soe it cannot be imagined absolute over the king By what the Libeller hath said he might well conclude that kings are oblidged to doe justice but that the people or particular persons may judge their king by any law divine or humane he hath not offred a colour soe barren is he in an Argument which he calls over copious Who should better vnderstand their owne lawes and when they are transgressed then they who are governed by them and whose consent at first made them Certenly he might very wel have answeared himselfe that they which governed by such lawes and whose consent at first made them better vnderstand them and when they are transgressed then they that are governed and it is a course very agreable to these mens confusion that the suiter should teach the judge The Libeller askes who have more right to take knowledge of things done within a free nation then they within themselves And surely they will not be free long from destroying one another where that 's the libertie for there wil be as many Transgressours and as many lawes as there are opinions He goes about to answeare the taking the oath of Alleagiance and supreamacy And to this his answeare is very ready that these oaths were to his person invested with his Authoritie and his Authoritie was by the people given him conditionally vnder law and oath And if his Authoritie had been conditionall their oaths could not be absolute as they are This guift and condition they imagine were engraven in Seths Pillars and they have been long enquiringe for a Cabballisticke Rabbyn to finde out the Characters How the kings hereditary succession is become a conditionall guift must have better evidence then Aphorismes of confusion never law contained either the guift or condition nor was there ever such impudence before theis Traytours that avowed because they swore faith to their kings person invested with his Authoritie they might take away his Authoritie and not breake their oath And it were a prophane oath aswell as vaine that should be voyde at the will of the taker The kings oath added nothing to his right being only an obligation of his conscience noe condition annexed to his right and if he never tooke the oath his subjects obedience is noe whit diminished and a king by inheritance needes not admittance the death of his predecessour puts him in possession this is the knowne law of England The Couquerour tooke on oath at his Crowninge and other times that made noe condition to his Government There is not only reason but absolute necessitie for the avoyding of confusion ruine of mankinde that the subject be bound to the king though the kinge faile in his dutie for the destruction of Government is more sinfull and inconvenient to humane societie then any evill that can come by a kings misgovernment He proceedes to answeare objections touchinge the Covenant wherein we shall not much insist but to detect the shifts of Malefactours to elude the evidence of truth They were accused by the King and his partie to pretend libertie and reformation but to have noe other end then to make themselves greate and to destroy his person and Authoritie for which reason sayes the Libeller they added the third Article to preserve the Kings person and Authoritie in defence of Religion priviledge of Parliament and liberties of the Kingdome And to shew with what ingenuitie he dealt in seeking to avoyde that just accusation the Libeller tells vs that they added that cause for a shew only and they intended not to preserve the Kings person further then it might consist with their opinions touchinge Reformation extirpatinge of Prelacy preservinge liberties of Parliament and Kingdome and in this very clause they called the world to be wittnes with their consciences of their loyaltie and yet made the preservation of their Kings person and Authoritie arbitrary by their owne opinions and while this Libeller would have their Rebellion a defensive warr he forbeares not to tell the world that they resolved the Kings destruction to attaine their ends The sixth Article gives asmuch preservation and defence to all that enter into the league as to him And it seemes more for they have dealt with none of them as with him and he sayes if the Covenant were made absolute without respect to these superiour things it was an vnlawfull vow and not to be kept It is agreed that vnlawfull vowes are not to be made nor kept but it is an vnlawfull vow to destroy the Kinge in order to his supposed ends yet they feare not to vow the destruction of any that oppose them though the honour and innocence of the persons were without the reach of lawes and they will exempt neither callings nor integritie from their lawles Injustice and that appeared by his glosse vpon the fourth Article of the Covenant to bring